User talk:Cjeongbis

Dear Cjeongbis, I created a Wikipedia page for Haarlem Model United Nations, see www.hmun.nl. This is an organization run by high school students therefore the level of our article isn´t that high. I myself am a college student and would like to keep the page. I don´t know what´s wrong with it or what I should specifically change about it. I know you have made some changes to it and that you are interested in MUN. It´s highly important to us to have a Wikipedia page: participating students, parents, people who´d like to get to know what this event is can read about it. Sadly, I have no technical skills at all, so I was wondering if you could help me fix the page up a bit (like the citations). I know it´s a lot to ask you, but I´d be very thankful if you could. Thank you! -User: Liedxoxo (I don´t get the wikilanguage that well, so sorry for cluttering your page up)

I'd make a few recommendations for the Haarlem model united nations council article:

•Avoid cannibalizing text from the Model United Nations article, and don't cannibalize text and simply change “MUN” to “HMUN.” •If you are aiming to promote your the Haarlem Model United Nations Council Wikipedia isn't the place to do it (that's something for a website). •I would like to help, but in order to fix the article's citations, you're going to need to find reliable sources (ones not connected to the Haarlem Model United Nations Council), for example you should not use www.hmun.nl as a source (rather an External link).Cjeongbis (talk) 14:35, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! And yeah, I kind of did get it from MUN, but I figured they wouldn´t delete it completely (which they have three times) if I had a big article. I´m not actually promoting it: other mun conferences also have a page right. Is bestdelagate.com or a newspaper article about hmun a good source? I´m going to work on the page throughout the year, because it´s been busy with school. Could you please help me once I´ve found the right sources? Kind regards, User:Liedxoxo — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.92.113.43 (talk) 14:48, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Cannibalizing the text might actually get it deleted even more quickly. Some other conferences do, but I haven't seen anything yet which makes Haarlem model united nations council seem notable. Having an article does not constitute promotion in and of itself, but the way the article is written, the content, appears to be more promotional than informative (right now). Best Delegate and a newspaper article would be two good sources (hopefully complemented by others) so long as Haarlem model united nations council is the focus of the sources (rather than just being mentioned in passing). I can try to help you, though again, I'm not sure the article will meet notability requirements. Cjeongbis (talk) 14:55, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Cjeongbis, I included sources in "references", I hope it´s all right. Could you please help me to convert them to WP language? I think it will be able to take away the "warning signs" at the top of the page. I´ll try to improve it from here on as much as possible. Thanks again :) (Have you ever been a chair in a big conference?)

Just a heads up, sign your messages with four tildes (they're the squiggly signs that look like this: ~). I can try to help, though some of the supposed "references" you used aren't really acceptable (for example, links to searches of Haarlem Model United Nations). I would strongly recommend against removing the warnings at the top of the page just yet. My first time as a delegate I was assigned France in the Security Council and won Best Delegate, and my school (which I trained) won Best Delegation. I was the founder and unanimously-elected President of my high school's MUN program, and I also served as Secretary-General of two conferences, among many other MUN-related activities and accomplishments. Cjeongbis (talk) 18:11, 22 August 2014(UTC)

Wow! Sounds like you´re like super good at MUN! I´m not nearly as good as you, but I´m trying. Liedxoxo (talk)

I'm sure you're plenty good. And trying is what matters after all, that and passion, I suppose. Cjeongbis (talk) 18:17, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, This is my last comment, I promise. I tried to change the reference list, but it didn´t work that well. I can only see weird numbers now. Where did it go wrong? Liedxoxo (talk) 18:58, 22 August 2014 (UTC)User:LiedxoxoLiedxoxo (talk) 18:58, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am one of the Administrative Members of THIMUN O-MUN, and I believe that your exclusion of THIMUN from all of the MUN articles is completely wrong. THIMUN is an international MUN organization that has conferences all over the world. The fact that you exclude it shows a that you are biased towards US conference. Our organization is partnered with THIMUN in that we provide MUN opportunities for students around the world, who don't have traditional MUN opportunities. If you have any questions, e-mail me: [email protected] Time: 10:18 PST, 9/10/2014 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.69.132.74 (talk) 05:18, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have not excluded THIMUN. In fact, I added a reference to THIMUN for the page on the Haarlem Model United Nations. I'd appreciate your not telling me I'm biased towards U.S. conferences without providing anything to back that claim up. I'm guessing this was posted because you want me to add THIMUN for you to some article, however, telling me I have excluded it from articles (which is categorically false) and telling me I am biased on the basis of your previous false claim does not seem to be the way to achieve that. Certainly not the diplomatic way. Cjeongbis (talk) 10:02, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If it is THIMUN affiliated, it means that THIMUN is first, which therefore means you should add THIMUN to the article. THIMUN is the largest international MUN organization. It's affiliated conferences span multiple countries all around the world. It just seems weird how all the information right now is US based, any conference outside of US, is also affiliated with US conferences. YaleMUN, HarvardMUN. I'm just saying. There are a large number of students and teachers who feel like this omission is detrimental to MUN as a whole. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.69.132.74 (talk) 06:25, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I should note that the article does not belong to me, so there's no “you should” involved here. I should note too that not all of the information on Model UN is U.S.-based, as there is a large section on China and another tied to India (with multiple non-U.S.-affiliated conferences). I’d add further that if there is indeed “a large number of students and teachers” who feel devastated by THIMUN’s sparse, though not nonexistent, coverage on Wikipedia, I would think someone would have made an effort to correct that. If you are willing to start communicating diplomatically (as opposed to your current accusatory tone) and provide links to reliable sources (not produced by THIMUN, and preferably in English/with an English translation), I would be happy to help. I'd like end by noting that your attempts to blame me for THIMUN’s sparse coverage haven't built a lot of goodwill, and have lowered my previously high opinion of THIMUN. Cjeongbis (talk) 13:52, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there,

I hope that this is the right medium in which to do this, I'm rather new to Wikipedia. But I digress. In your objection to my edit with respect to high school rankings on the Best Delegate Wikipedia page, you cited lack of sourcing, and one-sidedness as reasons for removing said edit. It is my opinion that this reasoning is heavy-handed, and reflects a lack of desire to engage in the issues on your part. Your first claim is that it was not sourced- this is true, and I would be more than willing to cite the article posted on your website announcing the decision. Within the actual article is contained Best Delegate's rationale for the change, and within the comment section can be seen the fallout from the decision. You also claim that the edit was one sided; I fail to see how this is the case. In the first paragraph. I presented both sides of the argument, explaining Best Delegate's reasoning, as well as the reasoning of those who did not agree with them. In the second paragraph, I highlighted what is an obvious fact with respect to unfair comparisons between schools. Once again, I'd be more than willing to cite numerous articles on your website detailing the successes of Mira Costa, Horace Mann etc. relative to X local high school who share the same rankings space as them under the new system. In my opinion, a best case scenario would see you making your own changes to the entry so as to hopefully make it more appealing to you, and to foster something that is agreeable to both sides of the issue. Unfortunately, it seems to me that this is simply an attempt by Best Delegate to quiet dissent from a decision that caused much strife within their own community. The sign of a great organization (in Model U.N. nonetheless!) is the ability to listen to all sides of the issue, and simply deleting an entry that speaks to what was a significant rift in your committee does a disservice both to free speech, and to the reputation of your organization. Out of respect for yourself and Best Delegate, I'll not reinstate the edit until you have responded to what I have just written. Thanks! ----

Jdunn80

This is exactly the right medium, thanks for posting to my talk page!

Regarding my removal of your piece, when it comes to Model UN-related articles, there tends to be a fair amount of vandalism (and near vandalism) on pages, so the general policy has been to simply remove questionable content (rather than allowing it to build up). I was especially suspicious of what you wrote, because it was written in a one-sided manner and appeared to have been done by a new account without a user page (making me think the account had been quickly thrown up in order to make malicious edits before being abandoned).

I apologize if this created an impression that I had "a lack of desire to engage in the issues," as that was very much not my intention.

I'd also like to clarify that although I created the Best Delegate Wikipedia article and oversee it for vandalism (among other articles), I am not in any way affiliated with Best Delegate nor with any other Model UN business or organization. If I was, I would not have created the article, as that would go against Wikipedia's policies on conflict of interest.

I'd like to further clarify that I actually support the inclusion of a section on the controversy over rankings, as it is widely acknowledged, but unfortunately there really is not sufficient evidence of it (to be cited) for it to be described in anything but a very general (1-3 sentences) manner on the page.

As for the one-sidedness of your piece, I though that this was most clear. The piece is very subjective (if it was objective, I wouldn't be able to tell your opinion on the rankings change—but very much the opposite is true here). The piece focuses largely (just about entirely) on the negative response, painting it in a very bad light (which is all a matter of opinion, and again unsourced at that).

Lastly, I would like to emphasize again that I am not in any way affiliated with Best Delegate (and have no desire to shield the company from controversy). I very much agree with your words on freedom of expression and discourse and appreciate your diplomatic approach to this issue.Cjeongbis (talk) 17:16, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your feedback- I'll try to draft something that is more neutral, while acknowledging the discord caused by the decision to remove high school rankings. ---

• [1]
• [2]
• [www.ishthehague.nl/content/model-united-nations-haarlem]
• [3]

A tag has been placed on Chicago Model United Nations 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 an organized event (tour, function, meeting, party, etc.), but it does not 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 "Click here to 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. Vanjagenije (talk) 11:16, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Model United Nations may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 1 "[]"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• [[Rainn Wilson]], actor, best known for the character [[Dwight Schrute]] on the NBC's [The Office (U.S. TV series|’'the Office'']]<ref>http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/life/people/2010-11-18-rainn-wilson_N.htm?csp=34</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:36, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Calling an obviously good faith edit that was clearly summarized "vandalism" is unacceptable. --2601:1:9A00:AC00:5AB0:35FF:FE5D:A1F3 (talk) 15:35, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize if that was a good faith edit, but it appeared to be sneaky vandalism, as your edit summary was not accurate and your account appeared suspicious. When you unilaterally removed a large junk of the Model United Nations article, claiming to do so because several entries under popular culture were trivial, you removed several pieces which center on Model UN. I am going to reinstate those entries which you removed (I'll assume in error) which pertain strongly to Model UN and if there is still debate it can take place on the talk page. Cjeongbis (talk) 16:14, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The edit summary in your revert here was wrong. Vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content, in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. The edit you reverted was obviously not a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia as the edit was explained with a valid edit summary. You need to be more careful in what you call vandalism. -- GB fan 23:04, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize, but the user appeared to be committing an act of sneaky vandalism. They claimed to be removing entries under popular culture which they called "trivial" but some of which actually centered on Model UN. Based on their response I can now assume that they were merely overly passionate about removing trivial content and made a mistake. I'm sorry for all the trouble, but the Model United Nations article has been a fairly frequent target of vandalism and attempts at promotion. Cjeongbis (talk) 16:19, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have to say that if you did a bit of research then you'll find that cnki.net, the source that I used, is not some questionable source but the official Chinese database of all journals. As you can see and I quote, "China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), launched in 1988, is an electronic platform created to integrate significant Chinese knowledge-based information resources. As a result, CNKI is the most authoritative, comprehensive, and largest source of China-based information resources in the world, reflecting the latest developments in Chinese politics, economics, humanity and social science, science and technology." The source that I used is taken from here, and it's taken from the official school magazine, Foreign Affairs Review, published by China Foreign Affairs University in 1995. The article states that China Foreign Affairs University held its first Model UN activity in 1995 in order to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the United Nations, and that it is the first time any university in China had hosted MUN activity. Please use a translation service if you cannot understand the abstract.

Also, if you do care about the authenticity and reliability of the source, why keep adding back the deleted paragraphs? Could you please point out where in the original article of The Atlantic did the author mention that "Three national conferences, the Peking University National Model United Nations Conference for High School Students, the Fudan University International Model United Nations (FDUIMUN) conference, and the Weland Education Company’s WEMUN Expo are considered the most prestigious in China, drawing the country’s best high school delegates."? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hwhuangqifan (talk • contribs) 10:51, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I noticed that you reverted my edit here just by saying it promotional. I don't think it is. I assumed good faith and reverted your edit. The mean of adding it to list is just to combine all Model United Nations Conferences that take places all around world. Have a good day --A.Minkowiski ^{_Lets t@lk} 13:30, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A.Minkowiski, I reverted your edit because the List of Model United Nations conferences and Model United Nations articles are frequently loaded down with entries that shouldn't be included. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia of valuable information, not a business directory or a place for posting advertisements. In order to prevent those articles from being swamped by inconsequential information (the quantity of entries for new unsourced conferences is unbelievable), I usually remove those conferences which lack independent sources (say from bestdelegate.com or other reliable, fairly well-known news sites). I apologize if your conference is in fact a large conference of several hundred participants and would not be opposed to its inclusion, provided you can find a reliable source that attests to its significance. Thanks for being diplomatic and checking in here.Cjeongbis (talk) 19:04, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are not supposed to tell me again and again about What Wikipedia is not, I know and follow each policy. Yes, I've looked at the list and its loaded down, most of them are just local conferences that take place around school or college with not more that 100 delegations I guess. But anyway, good luck and Happy editing. --A.Minkowiski ^{_Lets t@lk} 19:44, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't mean any offense and hope you don't take what I said as me trying to lecture you, tell you you're wrong, or say that you don’t follow policy. As you noted, many of these are conferences not worthy of note and it would be helpful if your addition to the list had a source which confirmed that it was indeed notable. Again, I'm not trying to tell you what to do, I'd just appreciate your help in finding such a source as I am not familiar with the conference you added.Cjeongbis (talk) 19:52, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As I mentioned above, I'm Okay with what you said. But try not to quote same things, specially when someone is well established about policies. I always assume good faith. I would cite more sources there once I've bit more time to search out. Relax, and take sound breath... :) --A.Minkowiski ^{_Lets t@lk} 20:02, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

All right, thanks for the understanding!Cjeongbis (talk) 20:03, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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) 17:08, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Leader's Greetings!

Dear Cjeongbis,
A wise man said "man is the master of everything and decides everything". Reflecting the single-hearted unity of our editors, I have decided to send these Leader's Greetings to you – Cjeongbis – a masterful Wikipedian professing indomitable independence, creativity and consciousness in editing. May the popular masses and world progressive people enjoy your contributions next year, too! Finnusertop (talk | guestbook | contribs) 18:04, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Happy holidays on behalf of the North Korea working group, Cjeongbis!

Thanks for adding content to the Clark University article. Please note that the sources you're adding are improperly formatted: clicking on them don't lead anywhere. The basic problem is you're not including http:// before the www. For example, you've added www2.clarku.edu/athletics.cfm as a source (which leads nowhere); http://www2.clarku.edu/athletics.cfm goes to the web article. Please fix the sources you've recently added and also consider not continuing to submit "bare urls" - see WP:BAREURLS for reasons why. Thank you. Contributor321 (talk) 17:52, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for helping out as well. And sorry about the links—I habitually do the bare URLS without thinking—I'll fix those now.Cjeongbis (talk) 17:58, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge and Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like South East Asia, Japan/China or India etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. At some stage we hope to run some contests to benefit Asian content, a destubathon perhaps, aimed at reducing the stub count would be a good place to start, based on the current Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon which has produced near 200 articles in just three days. If you would like to see this happening for Asia, and see potential in this attracting more interest and editors for the country/countries you work on please sign up and being contributing to the challenge! This is a way we can target every country of Asia, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 01:29, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Cjeongbis. 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)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Merrill Gay 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 real person or group of people, but it 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 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. reddogsix (talk) 04:11, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article Merrill Gay has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable individual. Fails WP:POLITICIAN.

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. reddogsix (talk) 14:12, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Merrill Gay 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/Merrill Gay 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. reddogsix (talk) 04:06, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thankyou for your participation in the challenge series or/and contests. In November The Women in Red World Contest is being held to try to produce new articles for as many countries worldwide and occupations as possible. There will be over $4000 in prizes to win, including Amazon vouchers and paid subscriptions. If this would appeal to you and you think you'd be interested in contributing new articles on women during this month for your region or wherever please sign up in the participants section. The articles done may also count towards the ongoing challenge. If you're not interested in prize money yourself but are willing to participate and raise money to buy books about women for others to use, this is also fine. Help would also be appreciated in drawing up the lists of missing articles. If you think of any missing articles please add them to the sub lists by continent at Missing articles. Thankyou, and if taking part, good luck!♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:41, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

Hello, Cjeongbis. 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)[reply]

Hello, Cjeongbis. 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)[reply]

Hello, Cjeongbis. 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)[reply]

Dear Cjeongbis, I noticed your name was under the participants' list of WikiProject United Nations. I wanted to invite you to contribute to the advancement of this project. Here's how you can do so: 1. Select the latest CC BY SA publications for which no articles have been created yet available here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_United_Nations/Open_Access_text/Education_publications 2. Follow the instructions available here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Adding_open_license_text_to_Wikipedia 3. Add the text to Wikipedia (either by creating new articles or adding content to existing ones). Since these are available under CC BY SA, you can copy/paste content and/or edit if need be. 4. Attribute the text using the 'Free-content attribution' template in the 'Sources' section. 5. Add your contribution in the table here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_United_Nations/Open_Access_text/Education_publications Don't hesitate to reach out if you have any questions! Looking forward to working with you on enriching Wikipedia, one article at a time:)! C.recalde   — Preceding unsigned comment added by C.recalde (talk • contribs) 11:20, 7 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]