User talk:John Vandenberg

Archives

1 - 2004 — July 7, 2007 2 - July — Nov 25, 2007 3 - Nov 25, 2007 — March 6, 2008 4 - March 6 — June 1, 2008 5 - June 2 — Nov. 8, 2008 6 - Nov. 8 — Dec. 31, 2008 7 - Jan 1 — Apr. 13, 2009 8 - Apr. 13, 2009 — July 1, 2009 9 - July 1, 2009 — Dec. 3, 2009 10 - Dec 2, 2010 — Sept. 4, 2010 11 - Sept. 4, 2010 — Feb. 25, 2011 12 - Feb. 25, 2011 — Aug. 29 2011 13 - Aug. 29 2011 — Jan. 2 2012 14 - Jan. 2 2012 — Aug. 15 2012 15 - Aug. 15 2012 — April. 11 2014

lol--RealCyGuy (talk) 21:54, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Although I can see your message on the edit history of my talk page for some reason I can't see it on the talk page itself. Thanks for the thanks, and thanks for all your hard work too. It's my birthday today and although I always work I am not that self-centred I might have a little bit of fun. I do take Wikipedia very seriously but occasionally I take a light tone or throw in an odd anecdote just to stop people getting far too grumpy for what should be an enjoyable hobby. The articles should be serious but the talk should be friendly: that's my general approach. I see your hard work too and thank you for it: of course we will not always agree but that is why there is a discussion. Si Trew (talk) 00:13, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations on the birth of your son. Regards, -- Ohc ^¡digame! 01:51, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks mate. He is nearly two months old and all is well. What a ride! John Vandenberg ^(chat)

My congratulations as well. No wonder you are on Wikipedia so much, must be keeping you up at nights! Si Trew (talk) 03:29, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yo, John Vandenberg, I saw that you gave SimonTrew edit filter manager. Isn't that a bit bigger a deal as far as permissions go? Reading Wikipedia:Edit filter makes it seem like it's a pretty sensitive right; certainly a lot bigger a deal than rollback; it says that there has to be a period of discussion before it can be granted, that it needs to be granted only for explicit needs, etc etc. Anyway, I'm not really the type to make a big fuss over this or whatever, but maybe it's not a good right to be giving out when people haven't even asked for it? Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 05:27, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yea, I've removed it. I must have clicked the wrong thing when giving out rollback. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 06:32, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, okay, thanks! Not that I think he would abuse it or anything, but the forms must be obeyed. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 01:05, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Writ Keeper: Oh, on my talk page I suggested to JV it should be removed, I have no idea what it even is. I don't know if you or JV are admins, but I do not want to be an admin. I am a gnome. I just created the stub Black & Decker Workmate and will add a pic when it gets light (the birdies are awake and the cat is in so can't be long yet) I am using mine as my garden table in the absence of anything better also rather handy for working in the house and is a bit dirty with paint and my hole saw and stuff so it probably will make an apt piccy, you don't want one looking too new. Si Trew (talk) 03:12, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(@Writ Keeper: I assume JvB don't need a ping) I only just noticed the date on the original post. Perhaps it was a birthday present. How did you know?! Did the right ever get taken away? I've never used it – no idea what it is or what it's for. Si Trew (talk) 09:32, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The 'edit filter manager' right was removed, but you still have 'rollback' rights. I am sure you can use it wisely, if and when required, or when you are bored enough to read WP:ROLLBACK. You may have mentioned that it was your birthday, but I dont recall. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 10:59, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Uc-logo.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:32, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Australian Renewable Energy Agency at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 21:27, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The arbitration clarification request, either involving you, or in which you participated (Rich Farmbrough) has resulted in a clarification motion by the Arbitration Committee

The Clarification can be found at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Rich_Farmbrough#Clarifications_by_motion and the complete discussion can be found at Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Rich_Farmbrough#Clarification_request:_Rich_Farmbrough_.28April_2014.29 For the Arbitration Committee,--S Philbrick(Talk) 16:29, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello John, the time this nomination is taking is truly ridiculous, any idea on how to unstuck it? It seems any editor is allowed to boycott a nomination by replacing a sourced hook proposal with a piece of original research which will then be rejected. --Nemo 08:27, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Adding: the next thing going to happen is that the review will be questioned because the reviewer is "defined a disgrace". Remember, ALT7 is approved, someone could simply confirm that, - I could be construed as involved (I wasn't), otherwise I would do it, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:18, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On mobile & travelling atm so I cant do much. I suggest a new hook something like: that greek judge ... has ordered that a phrase in the Greek Wikipedia biography of Theodore K... be removed. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 10:47, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. Source? (I really was not involved.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:54, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

the judge may have ordered the article deleted. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 11:16, 22 April 2014 (UTC) http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/02/wikipedia-mounts-courtroom-defense-for-editor-sued-by-politician/[reply]

thank you, done --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:14, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi John Vandenberg, I'm sending you this message because you're one of about 300 users who have recently edited an article in the umbrella category of open educational resources (OER) (or open education). In evaluating several projects we've been working on (e.g. the WIKISOO course and WikiProject Open), my colleague Pete Forsyth and I have wondered who chooses to edit OER-related articles and why. Regardless of whether you've taken the WIKISOO course yourself - and/or never even heard the term OER before - we'd be extremely grateful for your participation in this brief, anonymous survey before 27 April. No personal data is being collected. If you have any ideas or questions, please get in touch. My talk page awaits. Thanks for your support! - Sara FB (talk) 20:43, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Has this been approved by the meta:Research Committee ? John Vandenberg ^(chat) 08:33, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Don't you know that philately will get you nowhere? [1] EEng (talk) 21:14, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On 28 April 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Australian Renewable Energy Agency, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that the Australian Renewable Energy Agency is helping fund construction of the southern hemisphere's largest solar power station? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Australian Renewable Energy Agency. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

I see the discussion was closed as "no consensus". T:WPMHA would work for me; does that work better for you? - Dank (push to talk) 17:13, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That would address the main issue I raised at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 April 22#T:WPMA. Thanks. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 22:27, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done, with a note at the link you just gave. - Dank (push to talk) 22:45, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

	Thanks
	Hello there. This is to say thank you for your support for NonFreeWiki; it is much appreciated. Green Giant supports NonFreeWiki (talk) 12:54, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can you move this Mera Tera Rishta Purana article history in Ye Hai Mohabbatein? Actually this article's title has been changed. 101.59.171.71 (talk) 15:31, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Done John Vandenberg ^(chat) 15:54, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Phineas Gage". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 23 May 2014.

The request for formal mediation concerning Phineas Gage, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

@John Vandenberg:

Thanks for more correct information on her, including a great photo. MerielGJones (talk) 21:28, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And thanks MerielGJones for cropping that photo and heavily revising the article. It is looking much better now. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 10:29, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:47, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:CAULmed.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:24, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Sharpville-massacre.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:26, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Stefan2, this file had a FUR, but it was removed by user:Sfan00 IMG because at the time the PD-ZA tag was consider sufficient. Now that URAA is being tackled, it would make sense to check the history of images for similar FUR removals before templating images which were uploaded to English Wikipedia in 2007, which means they have been subject to many non-free reviews already. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 06:18, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:NFC#UUI §7, that FUR doesn't address WP:NFCC#2 correctly. Therefore, just reinstating the old FUR is no option, as that FUR is insufficient. --Stefan2 (talk) 11:20, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but this situation is contrary to the policies you quote. The image I uploaded is an edition published long ago and of much lower quality - the commercial value of the photograph is not diminished by this low res, low quality edition of a image that is not replaceable for the massacre article - I see it is also on another article, and I have no opinion on its utility there. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 12:36, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:NFC#UUI §7, photos from press and photo agencies may not be used unless there is sourced critical discussion about the photo itself. This one is sourced to three different agencies. WP:NFC#UUI §7 does not say anything about the age of the photo. I am not sure why you are bringing WP:NFCC#1 in; WP:NFC#UUI §7 is only about WP:NFCC#2, and WP:NFCC#2 needs to be satisfied independently of WP:NFCC#1. --Stefan2 (talk) 13:40, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In your absence I've been making friends and influencing people [2]. Hope all is well. EEng (talk) 06:22, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Sharpville-massacre.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 11:21, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• John, how do you feel about Commons saying *screw the URAA*? This could be hosted a lot more safely there, assuming we have proof of first publication in SA. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:28, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • User:Crisco 1492, have you read c:Commons:Review of Precautionary principle? --Stefan2 (talk) 12:17, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • That and the changes to commons:Commons:URAA. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:01, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • Note that c:COM:URAA hasn't been updated with regard to c:Commons:Review of Precautionary principle. The things changed in c:Commons:Review of Precautionary principle also need to be taken into account. --Stefan2 (talk) 14:50, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • User:Crisco 1492, images like this can be really hard to determine ownership/publication. I did make a few calls last time this image went through the disputed FUR process, but didnt get to the bottom of it then, and doubt the situation has changed much (however I am sure that several additional corps would be now making dubious claims to rights they have on it.). John Vandenberg ^(chat) 12:27, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Only reasonably concrete thing to do would be to find a 1963 publication of the image.... but yeah, they are grabby. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:01, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi John, I may be wandering over to the wrong person but I'm going to try to focus on the article 2014 IPC Swimming European Championships this summer. Do you know if there are any attempts to grab some photos of this event. It would be great if we could have a Wikipedian from Eindhoven just to take a shot of the stadium with the logo, but it would be better to get some actual athlete shots. Any advice on this would be appreciated. FruitMonkey (talk) 23:37, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

G'day FruitMonkey. You're wandering in the roughly the right direction, but I can only try to refer you on, as Australia wont be going to that event. Probably the best people to ask are Wikimedia Netherlands, and I am guessing from wmnl:Contact/wmnl:Bestuur that user:Ronn is the best person to speak to. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 10:23, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Someone else to talk to is User:Effeietsanders, and/or try to email photographers in Category:Wikipedians in the Netherlands and c:Category:Wikipedians in the Netherlands. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 10:40, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you try nl:Wikipedia:Afbeelding_gewenst, the requests for images page. Poke User:FruitMonkey. effeietsanders 19:24, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Are you going? --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 11:24, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not this time for me. Are you? John Vandenberg ^(chat) 12:09, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. And catching up with relatives. Mostly the latter - but I'm hoping to meet up with a couple of Wikipedia critics, too. (I'm just deciding what to pack ). --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 12:25, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi John, I hope you and your people are doing fine. I've just read what is going on about the Superprotects rights on WO and then in Meta, and I thought my idea might be of some interest. I don't know if there can be a solution fighting against this kind of abusive position (which is not uncommon unfortunately...) but well you know the Catalan page/petition created in Meta (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_CAT/Members] was probably helpful in the creation of thorgs (there were also tags showing users' support), and then the Catalan thorg. Therefore, creating a page of people opposed to the Superprotects rights could act as some kind of pressure on Wikimedia, having people there gradually showing their discontent in a similar fashion. If you should need some help in translating and reaching other wikipedias if you should ever decide to do it, just let me know, I'll be glad to help! Take care and I wish you and your family a wonderful summertime! Claudi/Capsot (talk) 14:42, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

G'day Claudi, I am hoping this ends with WMF backing down, which they eventually did for meta:Community Logo/Reclaim the Logo. I hope the meta RFC provides a forum for discussions that allow the WMF to see how this will lead to losses of their volunteer workforce, and probably credible forks arising. I'll give the WMF board a few months to rectify this, as we did last time; if they don't, we'll need to get a bunch of the community together to design and build a better mouse trap. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 15:43, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Man, you're really optimistic, I hope you'll prove right! I tend to think that time usually plays against the ones who don't have the power: they get more divided, discuss a lot, some get tired, don't care anymore or get busy with new problems... but well let's hope some people in the Foundation will realize they will have more losses than gains if this thing goes on... Good luck! Wish you all the best! Claudi/Capsot (talk) 18:26, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You are being notified because you have participated in previous discussions on the same topic. Alsee (talk) 17:32, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any chance you could add a translation to Template:Contrib-id1 in the style of Template:Contrib-ta1, pretty please? Bazj (talk) 13:42, 16 October 2014 (UTC) [reply]

No worries, I'll take it to WT:WikiProject Indonesia. Bazj (talk) 12:46, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Australia and the world
Thank you for years of service, adding countless quality articles on literature and journals, in Australia and the world, creating disambiguations pages, caring about people, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:05, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Two years ago, you were the 288th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:16, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Four years ago, you were recipient no. 288 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:26, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Everyone misses you. EEng 06:29, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Seven years now, and yes, we miss you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:00, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Halloween!

---

Hello John Vandenberg:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
    – Have a good one John

Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Hi, I am somewhat concerned about your decision to issue me with an Eastern Europe alert template and to log this as a notification on the case page. As an administrator, you know that this alert was superfluous because I am active as an admin in this topic area and have issued many discretionary sanctions myself, which is apparent from how often my name appears as sanctioning admin in the log you edited. Because of this, I was already plainly aware of the existence of discretionary sanctions in this topic area, and your alert served no useful purpose that I can discern. Moreover, it is not clear why you chose to log this as a "notification" even though, as you must know, the procedure documented at WP:AC/DS#Awareness and alerts has replaced logged notifications with non-logged alerts. Could you explain why I should not consider this a disruptive issuing of alerts, which is subject to sanctions also per WP:AC/DS#Awareness and alerts? Thanks in advance,  Sandstein  12:26, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

While it is not strictly necessary to alert you, given that you have issued warnings to other people before, I felt it was necessary in these strange circumstances to make sure it is quite official-like to ensure you know that you are now subject to sanctions, which I thought was pretty clear from the section title and message that follows. I dont believe you have been issued with an alert in the last 12 months, so I believe it is not against procedure to issue with an alert. I'd be delighted if you could point me to the precise passage which is your basis for threatening to sanction me for alerting you. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 12:48, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:AC#Awareness and alerts, "any editor who issues alerts disruptively may be sanctioned". I believe that your issuing (and unneeded logging) of the alert was disruptive because, as you write above, you knew that it was not necessary to inform me about the existence of discretionary sanctions. It therefore appears that you used the alert procedure and the log entry not to actually inform me about discretionary sanctions, but that you misused the procedure to mark your disapproval of the speedy deletion I made, which you also commented on. That is not the purpose of alerts, and it is not how admins are expected to communicate with each other about disagreements concerning each other's actions. I'd like to ask you to acknowledge that you will not again use the alerts procedure in this manner, and to remove the out-of-process log entry. Regards,  Sandstein  13:02, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

May I ask how you're able to ask John to remove the discretionary sanctions, above, but elsewhere on Wikipedia, where you're the administrator issuing discretionary sanctions, you've said they cannot be revoked. Which is it ? Nick (talk) 13:36, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't about discretionary sanctions themselves (which by the way can be revoked, by way of an appeal), but about an alert that was logged contrary to a procedure adopted by the Committee specifically to, among other things, omit the need to log alerts on a page. The previous discussions you may remember were about notifications that used to be logged prior to the adoption of the procedure now in force.  Sandstein  13:41, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What part of "... I felt it was necessary ...", in my previous message above, didnt you understand? I believe it is necessary to ensure you're officially notified that it now applies to you and your administrative actions in this area. I do feel in these circumstances it is necessary to also log it on the case page log, but I am checking whether that is now forbidden; if it is, I will remove it. If you would prefer, I am happy to take this to ANI or A/R/A for review. Up to you. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 14:09, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you come spend your time somewhere where everyone's friendly and calm, like Talk:Phineas Gage? EEng (talk) 15:30, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"friendly and calm" hmm .. I go to Wikisource or Wikidata when I need a bit of that. :-) John Vandenberg ^(chat)

Loner-geek. How's the kid? And are we ever gonna get to you project we discussed 10 months ago? EEng (talk) 15:52, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've checked quite a few of the arbcase log pages, and see that admins are now logging these as 'warnings', which typically include the standard alert and a more specific comment; I can give many examples if you like. So, please consider yourself officially warned; I've updated the terminology in the arbcase log. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 15:49, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As you suggested, I have asked the Committee to review this matter at WP:ARCA#Clarification request and appeal: Discretionary sanctions alerts.  Sandstein  16:22, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

John Vandenberg: your "alert" and subsequent "warning" were not only both out of process (Sandstein has said everything necessary about the "alert" thing, and as for logged "warnings", the fact is we really don't do these any longer; the whole thing about the "alert" reform was to make problems about contentious or misapplied logged warnings go away). Your warning was also wrong and unjustified on its merits. Your entire objection to Sandstein's action was apparently based on the notion that there had been a prior AfD, which you thought barred later application of a CSD. However, Sandstein is obviously right in saying that the facts relevant to the CSD in question (authorship of a banned sock) weren't brought up in the AfD at all. It is common policy that an AfD keep cannot preclude later speedies on the basis of facts that the AfD didn't address and/or that weren't known at the time of the AfD, and about which the AfD therefore couldn't possibly create a consensus.

I strongly recommend you simply remove your warning from the log yourself. If you insist on letting it stand, you will have to make a case how Sandstein's administrative action constitutes a serious breach of expected standards of editorial behaviour – which, if I may add, will quite likely backfire against you (as would, obviously, any attempts by you to follow up on the warning by actually imposing a sanction in any further comparable case). Alternatively, I will add another note to the log myself, as a third and uninvolved administrator, marking your "warning" explicitly as out-of-process and as lacking consensus. Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:28, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I trust you have made yourself aware of the extensive history involving Sandstein and Russavia, which stretches back more than four years, and has included five blocks placed against Russavia's account by Sandstein, one of which involved talk page access being withdrawn, and the Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Russavia-Biophys case, where Sandstein was the filing party. I'm assuming the utmost good faith here, releasing that Sandstein has taken DS enforcement action many users, but his claim I remember Russavia only as an editor with whom I interacted in an admin capacity because of misconduct in the Eastern Europe topic area before they were apparently site-banned. I think I issued blocks or other sanctions against them a few years ago. is not an accurate reflection of his involvement with Russavia.

The deletion of Polandball probably should have raised, at the time, some concerns of involvement which could have been dealt with in 2012. Sandstein, who deleted Polandball, had previously blocked Russavia (under Arb Enforcement) and filed an Arbitration Case against Russavia. The closure itself isn't bad and it was a very finely balanced argument; it could easily have been closed as a Keep or No Consensus, but given the past history and simple human nature which could lead to unconscious decision making, it should have been closed either by another administrator, or another administrator confirming Sandstein's decision.

The deletion was possibly a little problematic, but the involvement of Sandstein in the deletion review is really well into being far too involved to consider their behaviour and comments as impartial and neutral. The comments today genuinely raise concerns of involvement, of battleground mentality and abuse of administrative tools to further some sort of dispute or vendetta. I've said previously but will repeat it again, I would never consider it appropriate to warn someone (or notify them, as it's being put) that they're open to being sanctioned when they open a Deletion Review to contest a deletion decision I took. It looks absolutely terrible, like administrators are running their own private little fiefdom, where editors, the serfs, dare not speak out when they think something is wrong.

We're here to service editors and provide content for readers, not fight with each other. The behaviour I've seen from some of my fellow administrators today makes me really sick and very worried for the future of a project that's already looking like it's at death's door. Nick (talk) 20:10, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Future Perfect at Sunrise, I suggest that you put forward your opinions at WP:ARCA, which Sandstein has chosen as the venue to discuss it. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 01:11, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've been under the weather for a few days, so haven't kept up with the goings on at this clarification request. An arb has requested that it be archived.I am preparing to do so, but I note the statement from @AGK: indicating that John Vandenberg needs to decide whether he wanted to caution and sanction Sandstein (it appears he did) or alert him. If it is the former, he should issue Sandstein with a hand-written caution (and delete the alert template, which he may not use for that purpose). If it is the latter, Sandstein is already aware per point II of the relevant procedure and he must not attempt to 're-alert' him.

In my archival, I include a brief summary of the disposition. Can you let me know whether you ended up with a caution and sanction or an alert? Or something else?--S Philbrick(Talk) 13:53, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

G'day Sphilbrick, it was a caution. While it did contain the alert template, which apparently is now strictly forbidden for warnings, it did include a hand-written note explaining the problem at hand. I couldnt delete the alert template from Sandstein's talk page as AGK requested and many arbs agreed with ... because Sandstein had already removed it .. I dont think anyone picked up on the fact I dont have a time machine and dont have any intention of getting into a fight with Sandstein on his WP:OWNTALK to re-add the text to his talk page and then remove some of the re-added text in order to comply with a bunch of arbs who are very fond of their new rules. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 14:23, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks --S Philbrick(Talk) 14:45, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The clarification request, initiated by Sandstein, and involving John Vandenberg, has been closed and archived here, For the arbitration committee --S Philbrick(Talk) 15:25, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya again Sphilbrick, I can't find the brief summary of the disposition..? John Vandenberg ^(chat) 15:56, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Because there are some templates on that page. the summary, which would normally be in the upper right, floated down to mid-section. However, I was just informed that I archived it tot he wrong location, so hold that thought while I update the location.--S Philbrick(Talk) 18:50, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Location updated, the brief summary will be easier to locate now)--S Philbrick(Talk) 18:53, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nicely done. Much appreciated. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 18:54, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The clarification request resulted in the arbitrators agreeing with the following advice by AGK:

"John Vandenberg needs to decide whether he wanted to caution and sanction Sandstein (it appears he did) or alert him. If it is the former, he should issue Sandstein with a hand-written caution (and delete the alert template, which he may not use for that purpose). If it is the latter, Sandstein is already aware per point II of the relevant procedure and he must not attempt to 're-alert' him. (...) I would remind him and all administrators generally that, before engaging in this process, you must take five minutes to update yourself on these changes. If you do not, you can be sanctioned by the committee, and given that this process is hardly in its infancy you are likely to find the committee exercises this right."

In the light of this, I'd like to ask you to either decide that you meant to issue an alert, and as a consequence that you undo all your messages and log entries regarding my admin actions concerning this matter. This would end the matter as far as I'm concerned. I advise you to do this because I consider these messages and log entries both procedurally mistaken and materially unfounded.
If on the other hand you decide that you meant to issue a sanction, please tell me (by way of the "hand-written caution" AGK refers to) which specific edits by me you consider to violate which Wikipedia rule of conduct, and on the basis of which arbitration remedy you mean to enact which sanction. This will allow me to appeal the sanction in a reasonably focused manner, and to consider whether I should ask for you to be sanctioned for the frivolous use of the discretionary sanctions procedure.
Thanks in advance for your prompt reply. I am also sending this to you per Wikipedia e-mail.  Sandstein  20:37, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Did you read the discussion above? John Vandenberg ^(chat) 20:56, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. And?  Sandstein  21:24, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well there is your answer. If you cant see it, let me know and I'll give a more detailed response tomorrow - its 4:30am here. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 21:37, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I see that the closing clerk wrote: "Vandenberg confirmed that a caution was intended and the alert template was removed." However, this is not very helpful: I can't see where you did confirm anything or where you issued the "hand-written caution" that AGK asked you to write. I therefore ask you again, one last time, to expressly confirm whether you intended or intend to issue an alert or a sanction, and, if a sanction, to state expressly which edits by me violated which conduct rule and on the basis of which remedy you intend to impose which sanction. Thanks,  Sandstein  21:45, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Because you have not responded to my request above, I have again seized the Arbitration Committee at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment#Amendment request: Eastern Europe, where you may make a statement.  Sandstein  19:36, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

		Happy Holiday Cheer
		Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user an Awesome Holiday and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings! Joys! Paine

		Season's Greetings and Good Wishes
		Best wishes for the season and the new year to you and your wonderful family. Hawkeye7 (talk) 02:57, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Divbegin has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.  Gadget850 ^talk 10:41, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is a courtesy notice to inform you that the amendment request in which you were named as a party has been closed and archived. The Committee decided to remove the logged entry from the case page, but felt that there was no further action needed. For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:38, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article International Journal of Hydrogen Energy has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No coverage in independent, reliable sources meeting WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. VQuakr (talk) 01:51, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 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/International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 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. VQuakr (talk) 04:43, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note the bananas. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:33, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This user was on the English Wikipedia's Arbitration Committee.

Hello. A policy regarding the removal of "advanced rights" (administrator, bureaucrat, etc.) was adopted by community consensus in 2013. According to this policy, the stewards are reviewing activity on wikis with no inactivity policy.

You meet the inactivity criteria (no edits and no log actions for 2 years) on the wiki listed above. Since that wiki does not have its own rights review process, the global one applies.

If you want to keep your rights, you should inform the community of the wiki about the fact that the stewards have sent you this information about your inactivity. If the community has a discussion about it and then wants you to keep your rights, please contact the stewards at m:Stewards' noticeboard, and link to the discussion of the local community, where they express their wish to continue to maintain the rights.

If you wish to resign your rights, you can reply here or request removal of your rights on Meta.

If there is no response at all after approximately one month, stewards will proceed to remove your administrator and/or bureaucrat rights. In ambiguous cases, stewards will evaluate the responses and will refer a decision back to the local community for their comment and review. If you have any questions, please contact the stewards. Rschen7754 19:22, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:American zoologist 41 6.jpg. However, there is a concern that the use of the image on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. Details of this problem, and which specific criteria that the image may not meet, can be obtained by going to the image description page. If you feel that this image does meet those criteria, please place a note on the image description or talk page explaining why. Do not remove the {{di-fails NFCC}} tag itself.

An administrator will review this file within a few days, and having considered the opinions placed on the image page, may delete it in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion or remove the tag entirely. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 15:26, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Hague justice portal logo.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 11:25, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Stefan2: this was caused by a good faith but very misguided edit by an anon removing the image from the article. Are you using a script? If so, which one, so it can be improved to identify the real problem for you.

Thx user:ChrisGualtieri for correcting the problem. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 21:46, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi John,

Over at WT:RFD I suggested that it would be nice to have "Special:Search" as something we could add to {{Rfd2}} nominations, since continually when trying to search for alternatives etc.

My rationale specifically for RfD is that I get hooked through the redirect to the very thing I don't want to see, i.e. its current target, rather than searching for other things that may possibly be retargets. This is made harder that the various quick search tools on the toolbar etc tend to jump through the link rather than did what they used to which was bring up Special:Search, but perhaps that is just me and YMMV, I don't use a skin or anything like that just Plain Old Wikipedia.

Even so, when looking for example {{R from title without diacritics}}, putting it in the search bar finds the title with the diacritics (the clever lot they are, but too clever) so that I can't find easily if the title exists without the diacritics, to make the R for it. I don't tend to make the R since patently the search engine has got better and no need to do so, but you see my point: it's hard to hunt for exact titles because the search engine guesses. Which is great for readers, not so good for gnomes who want to go to EXACTLY WHAT THEY TYPED not something NEARLY LIKE IT. (Not shouting there, emphasising.)

So I made the addition and put it at Module:PageLinks2. I think this is good to go, obviously we then can add "s" as the link into Rfd2 to get "Search" on the page links to the EXACT TITLE of the page to bring up Special:Search. I'd like your opinion and maybe review the code, since I've not been able to test it really because the whole chain is page protected, if you have any suggestions how I could test it to make sure it works.

I think this would be useful as an option on XfDs beyound RfD, but baby steps...

I should say also thanks for your hard work at Wikipedia. At least one editor notices it, but is terrible at saying thanks. That would be yours, sincerely Si Trew (talk) 09:34, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Sounds like a good idea. @Jackmcbarn: where did it disappear to? John Vandenberg ^(chat) 10:00, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Amy ideas on this one? It comes up second on my gsearch after WP:RFD. It doesn't work and doesn't look very good, but you're the expert with the modules, so I ask you first. I wouldn't even know how to get it deleted. but gsearch comes up with it as second.... a new one on me. Si Trew (talk) 04:06, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Si Trew, I dont understand the question/problem. Could you show me an example of the problem? John Vandenberg ^(chat) 03:23, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to explain more clearly. On my google search (I live in Hungary) WP:RFD comes up first but Module:RfD comes up second. That's a new one on me, and a surprise that it does. I am happy to sort oput the Lua or whatever at Module:RfD but I wondered if someone is trying to make it a replacement for WP:RFD without consensus- (I didn't mean you, I know you are always in good faith). I thought you may have some idea about it, that's all. (Deliberately have not cross linked so as not to confuse matters.) Si Trew (talk) 20:07, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What is the search term you are using Si Trew? 'wikipedia rfd'? John Vandenberg ^(chat) 08:34, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No. I try to find the exact link for you, but "Wikipedia Redirects for Discussion" comes up that way, I tend to use Mozilla. Hard for me to find you the exact link cos naturally it throws me through the redirect! Si Trew (talk) 09:03, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Actually it has changed overnight. I tried on Google and on Mozilla and now I get the DaB RFD about various organisations. This is trying to hit a moving target and perhaps we should forget it, unless I find a blunderbuss very quickly. Si Trew (talk) 09:07, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a liar. http://www.google.hu/search?q=WP:RFD&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&gws_rd=cr&ei=CaoCVZfrMsjWapPYgIgD from a Mozilla search which redirects through a Google search. What I am apparently doing in Greece, I don't know, can't even get out the house, front door lock broken. Si Trew (talk) 09:15, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like this is because RFD's now link to Module:RfD, as seen by the 85 links on https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:WhatLinksHere/Module:RfD&limit=85 , which means it is edging out other pages in the Google search ranking algorithm, but I doubt it will be able to replace WP:RFD any time soon, unless some truly nefarious search engine optimization is done. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 04:10, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi John! I just talked to s1991 on IRC today. He's looking to get in contact with you and get started on T74065. Can I find you somewhere on IRC? I'm 'halfak' in #wikimedia-research. --EpochFail (talk • contribs) 16:57, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am typically found in #pywikibot , but yesterday we had a network outage in my area. I've added some more microtasks to the task. Has s1991 completed a microtask? John Vandenberg ^(chat) 03:37, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Hague justice portal logo.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:32, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:American zoologist 41 6.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 12:03, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I'm resolving dabs on Peter Allens and came across Wikipedia:GLAM/State Library of New South Wales/Paralympics Workshop/History of athletes and staff. Now, I can't tell which PA you intend, but in any case, this looks like a stale draft. Views? --Dweller (talk) 15:44, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I can see you're not so active at the moment. I have too much respect for you to do anything without your say-so. Drop me a line when you're next in. You might need to remind me of this though - my memory is so bad I often don't fini --Dweller (talk) 20:54, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Dweller, that list was created from a Word doc posted by user:Tony.naar to the WP:HOPAU mailing list, containing 'Steelers' competitors in the tri-nation (Australia, USA, and Canada) match held in Sydney November 2013, so he is almost certainly not any of the people currently mentioned on the Peter Allen dab page and doesnt appear to have a bio yet, so I've updated that list so he is a redlink. I couldnt quickly see whether he is notable - I didnt see any Paralympic engagements in his careeer, so the tri-nation might have been his most prominent appearance, which might not be sufficient as wiki people tend to have higher notability requirements for disabled sports than the better funded and reported abled sports. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 03:39, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Smashing. Thank you! --Dweller (talk) 08:30, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, John Vandenberg,

The Editing team is asking for your help with VisualEditor. I am contacting you because you posted to a feedback page for VisualEditor. Please tell them what they need to change to make VisualEditor work well for you. The team has a list of top-priority problems, but they also want to hear about small problems. These problems may make editing less fun, take too much of your time, or be as annoying as a paper cut. The Editing team wants to hear about and try to fix these small things, too. 

You can share your thoughts by clicking this link. You may respond to this quick, simple, anonymous survey in your own language. If you take the survey, then you agree your responses may be used in accordance with these terms. This survey is powered by Qualtrics and their use of your information is governed by their privacy policy.

More information (including a translateable list of the questions) is posted on wiki at mw:VisualEditor/Survey 2015. If you have questions, or prefer to respond on-wiki, then please leave a message on the survey's talk page.

Unsubscribe from this list • Sign up for VisualEditor's multilingual newsletter • Translate the user guide

Thank you, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 15:56, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have mentioned you on my talk page, please check the last section of my talk. Thank you. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 02:13, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Looks messy! But the immediate problem has been resolved...? (i.e. do I need to understand this, or can I run awake screaming...) John Vandenberg ^(chat) 03:41, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Escalated, and likely failing to resolve if you saw WP:ARC. Actually I had made an error too, that I posted the "any longterm patterns of poor judgment" after 6 declines. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 03:56, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. Looks like the case might be accepted. Please ping me after the ArbCom request has been actioned one way or the other. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 00:30, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah—I thought I'd be true to what's in the doc. :-) Tony (talk) 08:34, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the criticisms of the mixed, confused genre in the "In focus" story. Tony (talk) 13:47, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia_talk:Be_bold#Proposed_summary_for_lead_re_.22Don.27t_be_offended_if_reverted.22. (I have no idea what these two are arguing about.) Also, have you visited the museums lately? EEng (talk) 01:30, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article A Graphics Language 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/A Graphics Language 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. ― Padenton|✉   16:29, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi John. Just wondering what this edit filter is supposed to be doing. From looking up the mentioned bug it appears to be trying to stopping new users from creating more than 2 other accounts, but a look at the log suggests that it's not catching the correct edits, nor is it set to disallow anything. Could you clarify what it's supposed to be doing or if it's still needed? Thanks, Sam Walton (talk) 21:48, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Samwalton9:, I believe it is still working; see abuse log entry for user:Mg_Thet. If you have further queries re this private filter, shoot me an email please. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 23:18, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am looking into using Etherpad for a sizable public purpose soon. You rolled back vandalism I noted to an etherpad of the WMF's a few months ago; is this something that can be generally done, and can you should me where? Whatever's in public I need to be able to see the version history of, and be able to revert it at the drop of a hat in case a user goes awry. Hope for the best but prepare for the worst... ResMar 22:41, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ah! Is the trick good use of the timeslider? ResMar 22:42, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot how I did it, but I remember hating the software intensely for a few minutes before figuring it out, and walking away still hating it, but a little less intensely. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 02:21, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the history. All the templates have now substituted at that page. Could you please help? Thanks. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:02, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I didnt notice that! I reverted, and reattempted to remove the page from Category:Pages with syntax highlighting errors, but my voodoo isnt good enough. :/ John Vandenberg ^(chat) 13:08, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. All's well that ends well. Thanks for the fix. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:20, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, you have previously indicated that you would be interested in attending Melbourne meetups. A meetup will be held on Wednesday August 12, 2015 6-8pm. Please check out Wikipedia:Meetup/Melbourne 29 for details and add your name to the list if you think you can attend. --Michael Billington (talk) 12:19, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! I'm dropping you this notice as you've indicated at Wikipedia:Meetup/Brisbane that you are interested in attending a Wiki meetup in Brisbane. Assuming significant interest, I'm organising an event for August 22 at the SLQ Café in South Brisbane, and we'd love for you to come along. A list of people interested in coming, and a discussion space has been created at Wikipedia:Meetup/Brisbane/8. Hope to see you there! Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 12:01, 4 August 2015 (UTC).[reply]

Template:WPJournalsCotW-Talk has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:39, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Admin request has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:35, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Admin request has been nominated for merging with Template:Admin help. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:01, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Span2 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Alakzi (talk) 20:09, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, as a user in the edit filter manager user group we wanted to let you know about the new wikipedia-en-editfilters mailing list. As part of our recent efforts to improve the use of edit filters on the English Wikipedia it has been established as a venue for internal discussion by edit filter managers regarding private filters (those only viewable by administrators and edit filter managers) and also as a means by which non-admins can ask questions about hidden filters that wouldn't be appropriate to discuss on-wiki. As an edit filter manager we encourage you to subscribe; the more users we have in the mailing list the more useful it will be to the community. If you subscribe we will send a short email to you through Wikipedia to confirm your subscription, but let us know if you'd prefer another method of verification. I'd also like to take the opportunity to invite you to contribute to the proposed guideline for edit filter use at WP:Edit filter/Draft and the associated talk page. Thank you! Sam Walton (talk) and MusikAnimal ^talk 18:22, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Much appreciated if you could provide an opinion, I am fairly certain this is PD-Australia (as it was a work issued by the Commonwealth Government.) but Norman Lindsay was still alive until 1969, so I'm wary about tagging it for commons immediately. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:20, 4 November 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) 12:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't edit-war. You boldly removed a piece of sourced text that had been in the article for well over a year. It reverted your edit, giving my reason. The usual convention on Wikipedia is that we then discuss it, not engage in another round of re-reversions. We use BRD, not BRRD. --RexxS (talk) 23:01, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

		Happy Australia Day!
		Happy Australia Day! I hope you use this day to celebrate everything that makes this country great! 220.253.139.83 (talk) 22:22, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

	Hawkeye7 RfA Appreciation award
	Thank you for participating in and supporting my RfA John. It was very much appreciated. All the best to you and your family. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:09, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

phab:T101590. Since I'm a project creator, I'm trying to clean up the backlog, so a quick response is welcome :). Greetings, Luke081515 12:31, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:IP range has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Izno (talk) 15:05, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:The-Lancet-2006-03-17-cover.gif. 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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:55, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kevin Benderman 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/Kevin Benderman 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. Bonewah (talk) 14:51, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for acknowledging my small contribution to the IBM Cambridge lab. It was part of a larger effort cleaning up and/or creating articles on the company's principle labs, historic and current. The subject indeed needs more folks to pitch in, especially surviving veterans of those facilities in the company's heyday as global computer leader while they are still with us. Yours, Wikiuser100 (talk) 14:46, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Surviving verterans is a somewhat odd way of putting it. Is working for IBM often fatal? EEng 15:17, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Wikiuser100: Thanks for the thanks re the thanking ... ;-)

Indeed. This period of history is incredibly hard to add to Wikipedia, with its sourcing requirements, as the details are usually only found in technical manuals that are seen as primary sources, and only people who were there at the time know the real details.

Unfortunately I am not a surviving veteran, being born too late.

My main interest in this area is the article IBM Type-III Library ('open source' before that was a thing) and software which was part of that catalogue. I had the fortune of collaborating with surviving veteran User:Spinality (Trevor Hanson) in 2006 on those topics. Feel free to drag me into any related articles that you are working on. ;-) John Vandenberg ^(chat) 02:54, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Lrr06.jpg. 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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:00, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

fixed. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 03:33, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi John, it's nice to meet you. I'm glad you came to the Jacob Appelbaum page. First of all, I love the quote on your User Page from Jefferson. On the issue of JA, I'm concerned about the POV-pushing of kencf0618, and I've done my best to try to balance-out the article, which was really an attack-piece not befitting Wikipedia. At this point, I'd like to suggest that the section addressing the defacing of his house be removed. Only one article in Germany mentions it: most legitimate news-media have ignored it. It's a crappy thing to be done (even if he's done what's been said he did), and why, I wonder, does kencf0618 need it to be up there? Thanks for your attention. QuelleChose1 (talk) 11:40, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I answered on the talk page about the specific issue of the graffiti. I wont have time to review the article history in order to determine who, if anyone, has been pushing a POV. If you want to make that accusation, best you make it on an admin board. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 14:35, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Did you know about Wikiversity Journal of Medicine? It is an open access, peer reviewed medical journal, with no publication charges. We welcome you to have a look. Feel free to participate.

You can participate in any one or more of the following ways:

• Publish an article to the journal.
• Sign up as a peer reviewer of potential upcoming articles. If you do not have expertise in these subjects, you can help in finding peer reviewers for current submissions.
• Sign up as an editor, and help out in open tasks.
• Outreach to potential contributors, with can include (but is not limited to) scholars and health professionals. In any mention of Wikiversity Journal of Medicine, there may be a reference to this Contribute-page. Example presentation about the journal.
• Add a post-publication review of an existing publication. If errors are found, there are guidelines for editing published works.
• Apply to become the treasurer of the journal
• Join the editorial board.
• Share your ideas of what the journal would be like in the future as separate Wikimedia project.
• Donate to Wikimedia Foundation.
• Translate journal pages into other languages. Wikiversity currently exists in the following other languages
  • Ceština, Deutsch, Español, Français, Italiano, 한국어, Português, Slovenšcina, Suomi, Svenska, Ελληνικά, Русский, العربية, 日本語
• Sign up to get emails related to the journal, which are sent to updateswijoumed.org. If you want to receive these emails too, state your interest at the talk page, or contact the Editor-in-chief at haggstrom.mikaelwikiversityjournal.org.
• Spread the word to anyone who could be interested or could benefit from it.

The future of this journal as a separate Wikimedia project is under discussion and the name can be changed suitably. Currently a voting for the same is underway. Please cast your vote in the name you find most suitable. We would be glad to receive further suggestions from you. It is also acceptable to mention your votes in the wide-reachwikiversityjournal.org email list. Please note that the voting closes on 16th August, 2016, unless protracted by consensus, due to any reason.

-from Diptanshu.D (talk · contribs · count) and others of the Editorial Board, Wikiversity Journal of Medicine.

Diptanshu^Talk 10:00, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:UTC with local time link has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:40, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, John Vandenberg. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

• Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
• A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.

Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:49, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi. You may be interested in participating in the African Destubathon which starts on October 15. Africa currently has over 37,000 stubs and badly needs a quality improvement editathon/contest to flesh out basic stubs. There are proposed substantial prizes to give to editors who do the most articles, and planned smaller prizes for doing to most destubs for each of the 53 African countries, so should be enjoyable! So it would be a good chance to win something for improving stubs on African sportspeople, including footballers, athletes, Olympians and Paralympians etc, particularly female ones, but also male. Even if contests aren't your thing we would be grateful if you could consider destubbing a few African articles during the drive to help the cause and help reduce the massive 37,000 + stub count, of which many are rated high importance (think Regions of countries etc). If you're interested in competing or just loosely contributing a few expanded articles on African Paralympians, Olympians and committees etc, please add your name to the Contestants/participants section. Diversity of work from a lot of people will make this that bit more special. Thanks. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:13, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article RDF query language 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/RDF query language 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. Yaron K. (talk) 20:59, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article New Zealand men's national wheelchair basketball team has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:NOTSTATSBOOK

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 20:43, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Come along, if you are passing by Brisbane! Kerry (talk) 04:02, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article Australian Financial Services Licence has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

apparent dicdef

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. DGG ( talk ) 05:14, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi John Vandenberg.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of facts. Since you had some involvement with the List of facts redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. heather walls (talk) 01:23, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, John Vandenberg. 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. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Template:CC-BY. Since you had some involvement with the Template:CC-BY redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 09:42, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on AsiaNet 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 organization or company, 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. CNMall41 (talk) 21:48, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article AsiaNet 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/AsiaNet 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. CNMall41 (talk) 22:16, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Administrator changes

NinjaRobotPirate • Schwede66 • K6ka • Ealdgyth • Ferret • Cyberpower678 • Mz7 • Primefac • Dodger67

Briangotts • JeremyA • BU Rob13

Guideline and policy news

• A discussion to workshop proposals to amend the administrator inactivity policy at Wikipedia talk:Administrators has been in process since late December 2016.
• Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2016 closed with no consensus for implementing Pending changes level 2 with new criteria for use.
• Following an RfC, an activity requirement is now in place for bots and bot operators.

Technical news

• When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
• Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
• The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee released a response to the Wikimedia Foundation's statement on paid editing and outing.

Obituaries

• JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.

13:38, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

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

No indication or evidence of Wikipedia:Notability. Also lacks information include where it was published and who the publisher was.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. PKT(alk) 22:47, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, John Vandenberg! Thank you again for supporting the Sustainability Initiative, which aims at reducing the environmental impact of the Wikimedia movement. Over the past two years, more than 200 Wikipedians from all over the world have come together to push the Wikimedia movement towards greater sustainability.

What's new?

We are writing you this message because there is great news: The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has finally passed a resolution stating that the Foundation is committed to seeking ways to reduce the impact of its activities on the environment. Also, we have created a cool logo and found a nice name for the project which you can see on the right :-)

What's next?

Currently, we are working with Wikimedia Foundation staff to make sustainability a key priority for the selection of a new location for Wikimedia servers in Singapore. Also, we have presented the Wikimedia Foundation with a green energy roadmap to have all Wikimedia servers run on renewable energy by 2019.

Please help!

Let's keep this project moving forward – and there are several ways in which you can help:

• Ask other Wikipedians to sign the project page as well – this way we can show the Wikimedia Foundation that this is an issue that the community really cares about.
• Talk to Wikimedians you know about the importance of reducing the environmental impact of the Wikimedia movement.
• Improve and translate the project page on Meta.

If you have any questions, you can contact us on on Meta. Again, thank you very much for your support! --Aubrey and Gnom (talk) 22:13, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Jamesjpk. I wanted to let you know that the Wikiproject Spoken Wikipedia, has been tagged with a semi-active tag. I am messaging you about this because you are listed under the wiki-project's list of active participants. Please contribute to the WikiProject if you want to keep it alive! I hope that it becomes active again! Jamesjpk (talk) 22:25, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just noticed that you reverted my edit of many years ago, which corrected the spelling of her first name to include the accent. Not sure I understand your comments. Do we require a consensus for every friggin' correction now? Her first name is correctly spelled "Céline", no matter what the majority of Wiki-illiterates decides. "Pelé" and "José Bautista" include the same accent; "Lech Wałęsa" includes a whole lot more accents ... so why is "Céline Dion" an exception? Smratguy (talk) 20:46, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I believe we discussed this seven years ago at User talk:John Vandenberg/Archive_10#Céline Dion. I dont recall touching that article since then.

John Vandenberg ^(chat) 04:51, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This agreement was made September 16th 2009. He edited for six days and then left, only to return this month and apparently ignoring the mentoring agreement. I found him fat Talk:Exodus. Weirdly talk page now shows no blocks in the block log, I'm not sure why. I found them though.[3] Doug Weller talk 17:12, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

hi John. i did not ignore the mentorship agreement, but after some time editing the articles we discussed i took time off for 8 years. i thought we have finished with mentorship. i have not been involved in any edit wars since i came back. i have not reverted any edits by other editors, but discussing edits on talk pages and getting a third opinion. i thought i am in good standing to edit articles, as long as i keep respectable and follow Wikipedia etiquette. i am trying to make a fresh start. hope it is possible. thank you Igor Berger (talk) 19:19, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

John,, I'm happy for you to decide, but please look at my comments on his talk page. Thanks.Doug Weller talk 20:36, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Given the comments there by other editors and his comment on the cancer that he thinks is spreading on Wikipedia along with what seems to be a statement he's leaving, I've reblocked, telling him he can appeal to the community that both banned and unblocked him. If you disagree, feel free to unblock. Doug Weller talk 11:52, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

His return was without my knowledge, and he never did very much once unblocked.

I would have recommended he continue with improvement of some low profile articles, such as those listed last time. The same redlinks still exist, not touched.

But alas, he returned to the same grounds. I've no intention to unblock if he doesnt want to do some serious content creation work.

Igor, if you want to be unblocked, you need to agree once more to work primarily on specific per-arranged areas for a while. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 04:46, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So reports of your death really were exaggerated! EEng 05:03, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In February of 2016 the Wikimedia foundation started sending information to all of the websites we link to that allow the owner of the website (or someone who hacks the website, or law enforcement with a search warrant / subpoena) to figure out what Wikipedia page the user was reading when they clicked on the external link.

The WMF is not bound by Wikipedia RfCs, but we can use an advisory-only RfC to decide what information, if any, we want to send to websites we link to and then put in a request to the WMF. I have posted such an advisory-only RfC, which may be found here:

Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#RfC: Wikimedia referrer policy

Please comment so that we can determine the consensus of the Wikipedia community on this matter. --Guy Macon (talk) 21:33, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article Indonesian Small Islands Directory has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence of notability

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. Fram (talk) 08:47, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

More notable than most little Indonesian scrappy stubs - even a recent BBC item re the numbers etc JarrahTree 05:19, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Roads of Jakarta has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 04:48, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there,

The Anti-Harassment Tools team is seeking input about building User Page (or category) blocking feature.

We’re inviting you to join the discussion because you voted or commented in the 2015 Community Wishlist Survey about Enhanced per-user / per-article protection / blocking.

You can leave comments on this discussion page or send an email to the Anti-Harassment Tools team.

For the Anti-Harassment Tools team SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 23:01, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please let us know if you wish to opt-out of all massmessage mailings from the Anti-harassment tools team.

Some years ago you wrote User talk:Dchmelik#Curriculum vitae, but there's an off-topic comment in that section... did you make that while not logged in, for some reason, or was it anonymous spam I can delete?--dchmelik (t|c) 04:05, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

this; no that isnt me! ;-) John Vandenberg ^(chat) 05:54, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you are in or near Brisbane, please join us on Sunday 10 December 2017 any time from noon to 4pm at The Edge at the State Library of Queensland. For more details and to sign up, please go to the meetup page. See you there! Kerry (talk) 21:56, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, John Vandenberg. 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]

If you are in or near Brisbane, please join us on Saturday 13 January 2018 any time from noon to 4pm at The Edge at the State Library of Queensland. For more details and to sign up, please go to the meetup page. See you there! Kerry (talk) 05:45, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for all of your contributions to Wikipedia!Kimmecca (talk) 13:54, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WPJournalsCotW-Article has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Lojbanist ^{remove cattle from stage} 02:47, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello :-) The Anti-Harassment Tools team at the Wikimedia Foundation will start building these granular blocking tools in a few weeks and we've asked WMF designer Alex Hollender to help us make some wireframes so the tools are intuitive to MediaWiki users.

We have a first draft of how we think this tool should work. You can read the full proposed implementation here but here are the significant parts:

• Granular blocks (page, category, namespace, and file uploading) will be built on top of Special:Block. These blocks will function as if they were regular blocks and allow for the same options, but only take effect on specific pages.
• We will add a new checkbox for "Block this user from the whole site" which will be checked by default. When it is unchecked the admin will be able to specify which pages, categories, and/or namespaces the user should be blocked from editing.
• Granular blocks can be combined and/or overlap. (For example, a user could be simultaneously blocked from editing the articles Rain, Thunder, Lightning, and all pages inside the Category:Weather.)
• Only one block is set at a time, to adjust what the user is blocked from the administrator would have to modify the existing block.
• Block logs should display information about the granular block
• When a blocked user attempts to edit an applicable page, they should see a block warning message which include information on their block (reason, expiration, what they are blocked from, etc.)
• If a category is provided, the blocked user cannot edit either the category page itself and all pages within the category.
• If the File: namespace is blocked, the user should not be allowed to upload files.

We like this direction because it builds on top of the existing block system, both a technical and usability wise. Before we get too far along with designs and development we'd like to hear from you about our prosposal:

1. What do you think of the proposed implementation?
2. We believe this should be an expansion of Special:Block, but it has been suggested that this be a new special page. What are your thoughts?
3. Should uploading files be combined with a File namespace block, or as a separate option? (For example, if combined, when a user is blocked from the File namespace, they would neither be able to edit any existing pages in the File namespace nor upload new files.)
4. Should there be a maximum number of things to be blocked from? Or should we leave it up to admin discretion?

We appreciate your feedback on this project's talk page or by email. For the Anti-Harassment Tools team, SPoore (WMF) (talk) , Trust and Safety Specialist, Community health initiative (talk) 20:54, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My poem is bad but my apology for the bad links is sincere!

.

Hi, I've just made a doodle poll to vote on the best date for the next Wikimeetup in Melbourne (Beer Deluxe, Fed Square). Would be great to see you there. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 12:23, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Date of next Melbourne meetup decided:

• When: 6-8pm, Sunday 8 July 2018
• Where: Beer DeLuxe, Flinders St

T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 01:26, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! Your adminship status at Wikisource is up for renewal. Please weigh in on the discussion if you would like to maintain this status. Cheers! bd2412 T 22:33, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads-up. I would have missed it. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 10:46, 11 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Template:WikiProject Central African Republic requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion because it is an unused duplicate of another template, or a hard-coded instance of another template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is not actually the same as the other template noted, please consider putting a note on the template's page explaining how this one is different so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{substituted}}</noinclude>).

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 deleted 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. Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 21:46, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome

Ten years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:53, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The links generated by Template:IPC profile, a template you created, no longer work. All the examples on the documentation page come back as 404 links, as do other uses. Please fix this.--Auric talk 14:31, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, John Vandenberg. 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]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect ArticleFirst. Since you had some involvement with the ArticleFirst redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. UnitedStatesian (talk) 15:24, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article Extension studies has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unclear what the subject of this article is as it is not properly identified. Term may be better off as a Wiktionary redirect.

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. Steel1943 (talk) 05:16, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article SAI Global has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication of notability, no significant coverage in reliable third-party sources. The best I found is this discussion of their debt, but that's not enough.

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. Huon (talk) 18:35, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators must secure their accounts The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised. Use strong, unique passwords for your Wikipedia account and associated email Change your password now if your Wikipedia account password or email password is reused on another website, exposed, or weak Enable two-factor authentication now for improved security

View additional information

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:59, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion has started about wrapper templates of {{Link language}}. You may be interested in participating because you participated in a related previous discussion. Retro (talk | contribs) 03:12, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article LocalLabs 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/LocalLabs until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 22:47, 23 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Organizations based in Nigeria together with the subcats using 'organis/zations' have been nominated for possible renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. As you created at least one of the categories concerned, you are most welcome to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Oculi (talk) 21:17, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Funding agencies. Since you had some involvement with the Funding agencies redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 22:27, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

	Happy Adminship	from the Birthday Committee
	Wishing John Vandenberg a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! -- Mjs1991 (talk) 09:44, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Terence James O'Dwyer 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/Terence James O'Dwyer (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. SL93 (talk) 01:47, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Established policy provides for removal of the administrative permissions of users who have not made any edits or logged actions in the preceding twelve months. Because you have been inactive, your administrative permissions will be removed if you do not return to activity within the next month.

Inactive administrators are encouraged to rejoin the project in earnest rather than to make token edits to avoid loss of administrative permissions. Resources and support for reengaging with the project are available at Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/administrators. If you do not intend to rejoin the project in the foreseeable future, please consider voluntarily resigning your administrative permissions by making a request at the bureaucrats' noticeboard.

Thank you for your past contributions to the project. — JJMC89 bot 00:08, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Established policy provides for removal of the administrative permissions of users who have not made any edits or logged actions in the preceding twelve months. Because you have been inactive, your administrative permissions will be removed if you do not return to activity within the next several days.

Inactive administrators are encouraged to rejoin the project in earnest rather than to make token edits to avoid loss of administrative permissions. Resources and support for reengaging with the project are available at Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/administrators. If you do not intend to rejoin the project in the foreseeable future, please consider voluntarily resigning your administrative permissions by making a request at the bureaucrats' noticeboard.

Thank you for your past contributions to the project. — JJMC89 bot 00:02, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Established policy provides for removal of the administrative permissions of users who have not made any edits or logged actions in the preceding twelve months. Because you have been inactive, your administrative permissions have been removed.

Subject to certain time limits and other restrictions, your administrative permissions may be returned upon request at WP:BN.

Thank you for your past contributions to the project. — xaosflux ^Talk 00:05, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Pakistaniat 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/Pakistaniat until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Störm (talk) 19:41, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi John Vandenberg! I am Galendalia and I have revived the WikiProject for Spoken Wikipedia. I noticed that you signed up at some point to be a participant and as I am reviving this project, one of my tasks is to get the participant list in order. Would you please go to the Participants List and add your name and language(s) you speak? If you are already there and do not want to be, please move yourself to the inactive list at the bottom of the page. If you want to remain, please put remain next to your name (this way you are not moved). If I do not see anything from you by May 30, 2020, I will move you to the inactive participant list. It would also be great if you would be willing to join the task force for Pronunciation that would be awesome, as there are troublesome words we run into. Thank you for considering joining us. If you decide to leave, I will be sad to see you leave as so many people have done a great job on the recordings and any work you have done makes a significant difference. Galendalia (talk · contribs) (sent via Mass Message. This is a message that is one time, so no unsubscribe link is provided.)

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia at 11:42, 16 May 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Hello John Vandenberg! I hope this message finds you well and healthy! I am working this weekend on the Spoken Wikipedia project pages to get them in line with other projects. I just wanted to inform you in advance that some pages may be created. deleted, moved, or otherwise. If you have any questions, please feel free to post them on my talk page.
Thanks, Galendalia (talk) 16:24, 23 May 2020 (UTC) WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia Coordinator[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect NHJ. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 June 16#NHJ until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:22, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Section link base-scw,c has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. TheImaCow (talk) 11:07, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Section link base has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. --Trialpears (talk) 19:19, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article News aktuell has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Article makes no claim to notability of the subject. No evidence of WP:ORG. Only ref points to primary source (company website).

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. Darren-M talk 11:11, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Bundelkhand University Logo.gif. 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) 17:29, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:17, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Athenäum 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/Athenäum until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Boleyn (talk) 13:31, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:David Ray Griffin § Description and interests. Thank you. Roy McCoy (talk) 01:12, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Eight years!

miss you --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:18, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:IPC profile has been nominated for merging with Template:IPC athlete. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Fram (talk) 08:41, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline nor the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (awards) requirement. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar; almost all hits for Seetal are for some place (hotel/resort). If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page here in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back through WP:ECHO or by leaving a note at User talk:Piotrus. Thank you.

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. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:48, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Morai. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 April 23#Morai until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 20:36, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Montreal 24heures 01 11 mars 2005.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) 18:28, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 01:51, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Institute for Armenian Research 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/Institute for Armenian Research until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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.

JBchrch talk 15:10, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Nine years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:51, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Aunacable.gif. 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) 18:10, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:05, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to determine if the article Acta Entomologica Musei Nationalis Pragae is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Acta Entomologica Musei Nationalis Pragae until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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.

Perfektsionist (talk) 22:00, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The article Azad Azerbaijan TV has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication of notability, fails NORG and GNG.

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. - Kevo³²⁷ (talk) 08:49, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect MOS:CAPTION and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 7#MOS:CAPTION until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. George Ho (talk) 08:38, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Steve Keen, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Global economic crisis. 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) 09:19, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I just came across an edit of yours here on WP. How are you going? I'm doing fine, but beginning to struggle a bit at 83. --Bduke (talk) 10:47, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OMG so nice to hear from you Brian. I am already starting to struggle at 45, or maybe it is just I've lost familiarity with all the tools & bots that hang around here somewhere. No idea how you do it at 83, but I am thankful that you are still at it. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 10:58, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Great to hear from you! I am not doing that well, but I think I am not doing that badly either. As someone who started using computers in late 1960, I am still amazed at how easy it has become since then. --Bduke (talk) 11:04, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Antônio Ferreira Cesarino Júnior requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

G11 - Unambiguous promotion of a person - article is a resume - lists education in dot points, career. Would need a fundamental re-write to be encyclopaedic. Tagged as promotional for 13 years without improvement.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria 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 deleted 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. MaxnaCarta (talk) 10:45, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, ParaMatildas, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:49, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Alexander Tille has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

not notible

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. Strangers Dancing (talk) 01:19, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, John Vandenberg. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Chris Troutman (talk) 17:41, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ten years ago, you were found precious. That's what you are, always. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:26, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 00:26, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Cinephile (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a disambiguation page which either

• disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic);
• disambiguates zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
• is an orphaned redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" that does not target a disambiguation page or page that has a disambiguation-like function.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

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 deleted 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. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:15, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year!

John Vandenberg,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. See this for background context.
— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 21:51, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 21:51, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Community of Science has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

uninformative with outdated information and includes multiple sources and references that are not independent of the subject and are archived versions of the subject’s website

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.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 09:00, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article International Security Research and Intelligence Agency has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Cannot find any independent sources apart from some listings.

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. Randykitty (talk) 08:59, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/delsort.js, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/delsort.js and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/delsort.js during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. –Novem Linguae (talk) 14:54, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WikiProject Paralympics has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 10:15, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WPJournalsCotW has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:57, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WPJournalsCotW-Usertalk has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:57, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Its now at User:John Vandenberg/WikiProject Deletion sorting/delsort*js* Spartaz ^Humbug! 20:00, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Thai people of Karen descent has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:57, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Azerbaijani numismatists has been nominated for splitting. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 12:18, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]