User talk:Wingspeed

Greetings,

Thanks for fixing up the article as you've done. If you think of anything else I can add content about, let me know and I'll try to gather some references and write it up, and you would be welcome to help me again with the formatting.

Also, I started the Wat Nong Pah Pong article, but it's pretty short and definitely needs some work if you're interested.

Lastly, anything you can think of to do about the "peacock terms" label on Ajahn Chah's article?

Thanks again

Annatanama (talk) 14:59, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Thanks for correcting the syntax of the article. Good job!

In my user page you can see what I think of the subject.

Welcome again to Wikipedia.

Cesar Tort 23:58, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And this year I abandoned a battle here... —Cesar Tort 16:18, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the compliments! Anything you need... just ask. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 18:25, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I came across Re-write of 'Buddhism & Christianity', seemingly a fork of Buddhism and Christianity. Such articles should not be created in the article namespace. Rewrite/temp pages should be kept in the user namespace, and i'd suggets you move it to your own user space. --Soman (talk) 13:37, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Soman. I'm most grateful to you for drawing this to my attention. Not sure what's happened here. If you look at my user page you'll maybe see how I thought I had in fact created it as just a personal sandbox page. But sounds like it isn't as simple as that. I suspect the key word the significance of which I'm missing is namespace. It has some important technical significance of which I'm ignorant? Have looked at the fork page you've linked to, but am still none the wiser.

Could you tell me how you came across the page? I certainly didn't create it as part of the article itself, and when I go to the article it doesn't connect to this page. Have now put the User page template on each of my personal pages, but don't know if this"ll suffice to resolve the issue. Would be grateful for your help; because if I've goofed I certainly don't want to repeat the error. Regards Wingspeed (talk) 14:40, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I came across the page by clicking 'random article'. I've moved it now, to User:Wingspeed/Re-write of 'Buddhism & Christianity'. When creating temp pages, just add 'User:Wingspeed/' ahead of the name of the page. --Soman (talk) 14:46, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, take care, --Soman (talk) 14:56, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Sorry about overwriting your cleanup of the interview links, I must have missed a simultaneous edit warning somehow. The caption issue was just the unencyclopaedic tone, which isn't a caption rule, it's just a general Wikipedia rule. If you want to read up on captions, though, there's WP:CAPTION.

I'm also upset by the great man's death (when I saw the edits coming in on Sunday night, I really hoped it was just a false rumour, or a joke he'd thrown out in a live show that afternoon), but this isn't a reason to bend the rules for tone or external links. People are coming here to find out about Ken, and we should present the best Wikipedia article we can. --McGeddon (talk) 14:13, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the news, and kudos for your work on the article over the past couple of days - you've dug out some good material. --McGeddon (talk) 15:00, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Glad to be of help.--Funandtrvl (talk) 00:18, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wingspeed. You recently posted the following definition on Stress (biological): Stress is the consequence of the failure to adapt to change, specifically the inability to respond appropriately to emotional or physical threats to the organism, actual or imagined. Although I admire quoting Selye as the original source, his definition is a bit out of date and does not match contemporary thinking on stress. The need to adapt to change has been de-emphasized as a major issue in the experience of stress. In fact, the Holmes and Rahe Scale, which primarily measures adaptation, is now recognized as a poor measure of stress. Perhaps we could move this definition under the coverage of Selye's theory and use a more current definition for the lead sentence? --Jcbutler (talk) 13:46, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings Wingspeed - thanks for your note. In retrospect/with hindsight, or now that you point it out, so many journalists in one place does indeed seem a bit top-heavy. That said, I think that the name of the award, i.e. "Journalist of the Year", should be included somewhere in the intro., with the in-text ref. to the Fisk page, as that New Statesman ref. doesn't mention it by name. UK-based readers may know that the top award is so-named, but most people reading the article are probably not living in the UK (mindless stats.). And many thanks for that titbit/tidbit 'bout him considering himself an anarchist. His many enemies will, of course, have taken that for granted already, but I shall now have to re-read all his stuff to see if I can find any damning evidence. Mind you, with the mess we're in, it's enough to make anyone an anarchist... Look forward to crossing swords meeting up with you elsewhere here at Wikipedia. Regards,

Now you've gorn 'n' done it! What on earth in this world made you think I was writin' from Down Under? Intrigued regards, --Technopat (talk) 20:53, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings again. Thanks for the re-insert. As for that other bit..., nah, the truth is much more boring mundane. Mind you, what is truth...? Be seeing ya. --Technopat (talk) 14:30, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about the revert, I just thought more could be added to the caption and the deletion was premature. Iamwisesun (talk) 20:31, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you believe there is no neutrality issue in that article, please explain at its talk page. I have, months earlier, tried to solicit ideas on how to fairly present the Tibet sovereignty debate in the article, which no one has responded to. Thanks. Ngchen (talk) 22:56, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I had considered after watching an enthusiastic serial category creator create a vast number of categories relating to death that a death project and even portal might be an idea ( i mean out there in the real word there are encyclpoedias of death and dying but...) and I have been trawling around the mess of the articles about death etc to see if it was really worth it and found you editing good ole heathcote's (micronation indeed) art! well done about heathcote, but do you think a project would help? any ideas would be appreciated - and i am writing from down under if that is any help SatuSuro 08:05, 28 October 2008 (UTC) I have an unfortunate link (20+ years apart in age?) where the late Paul Ableman and Heathcote Williams got confused in my mind and one of them was a friend of a friend of whom, some other time not now SatuSuro 08:36, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry is my question insufficiently out of left field, too vague, offensive or simply not interesting? SatuSuro 23:38, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh no, not at all. Please forgive me; simply got side-tracked. How embarrassing. I've been particularly busy today and Death, the Article, like the real thing, is daunting. It's great to hear from you, and I'm flattered that you should think to consult me in the first place. Rather than delay further in replying, I'll go back over the Death mess as soon as I can & get back to you. Just occurred to me today: not on Skype, are you? I only twigged the possibilities of WP a few months ago, & it's literally today I realised editing corners may be cut by use of VOIP. Good to hear from Oz. My brother & ex-wife have been there for decades. Are you, by any chance, a Frestonia old lag? Again: forgive me for this tardy response. Regards Wingspeed (talk) 01:10, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No need to apologise - my message might have seemed a bit odd my connection to williams and ableman (whichever) were through a writer who i knew who died last year who had said one of her parents had a friendship with one or the other i cannot remember which now - and the subsequent need for my trying to piece together a frgmented conversation memory from 1979 or so has strained my intelligibility here - sorry not on skype at present - Sorry also frestonia is not in my vocab - will try to explain further again soon SatuSuro 14:57, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

About to have a break a month or longer - will get back in the new year about the death project idea - sorry to have bothered SatuSuro 14:27, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: 'Hey, hey, whoa! I appreciate what you're doing, but we need to talk about so many radical edits to intro & structure! It's having the effect of leaving very POV assertions bereft of supporting citations, etc. Which leave the article a prey to its enemies. Please contact urgently. Assuming you get this message. Wingspeed.'

I don't know much/enough about Wikip - and was just trying to make 'World in Action' read "better". If it's not doing that or if the little bits I've altered or re-positioned are going to lead to other problems, please get going on your delete button and I'm sorry if I've caused problems. I do know that I should have done my Wikip homework first!81.251.184.69 (talk) 21:25, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wingspeed. Just to inform you that I added Alfred Barry to the List of King's College London alumni after consulting several sources including Encyclopædia Britannica and the Australisn Dictionary of Biography, in addition to his wikipedia entry which referred to him as having studies at KCL up until the article was edited 10 days ago when this was changed to King's College School. The problem is that many sources, particularly those which predate 1897, blur the distinction between KCL and KCS, but by no means do I intend to mislead. I just hope to make the list as clear, comprehensive, and well referenced as I am able to, but I acknowledge that there may be errors in the list and I hope that I, and the wikipedia community, can put this right over time. Regards, Flaming Ferrari (talk) 01:20, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I will remove him from the list. I am just busy trying to establish the truth of the mater, which is rather more difficult than it would sound! Flaming Ferrari (talk) 01:42, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

... for your help at the move discussion at talk:14th Dalai Lama. You got the ball rolling on the amended proposal, which has done the project a good turn in terms of accuracy. Cheers!Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 20:40, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Wingspeed. You have new messages at Talk:Harold Pinter.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Jezhotwells (talk) 02:33, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for responding so quickly to my {{fact}} tag at Anti-psychiatry:[1]. I have to admit, though, that I'm not satisfied. The reference does not appear to mention the naming of psychiatry at all, let alone that it was named in 1808. The Oxford English Dictionary only dates the word to 1828:

1828 N. Amer. Rev. Oct. 328 Psychiatry or treatment of the diseases of the mind.

and not again until 1886. Harper dates it (without reference) to 1846:[2].

Did I just miss something in the source article?

CRGreathouse (t |c) 16:55, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Phew! You had me worried there. Absolutely no excuse for not having scrutinized properly the source cited by both the Psychiatry article & the one on Riel himself. Exactly the sort of thing that gets WP a bad name. Your vigilance is exactly the sort of thing to get it, in due course, a good name. I shall be more cautious in future.

Was doubly worried because I'm in the middle of moving & my library is all boxed up in storage. Relieved to say I've been able to find seemingly four reliable sources. They include the British Journal of Psychiatry and a German monograph. Shall remove the embarrassing YouNameIt ref pronto. Thank you again for spotting this. Regards Wingspeed (talk) 20:20, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the sources! I didn't doubt your claim, but I wanted a good source to read -- and for the article, of course. :) Yes, you're quite right about the OED: that's only the first English use. But at least I tried to verify it myself!

CRGreathouse (t | c) 00:21, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. I've done a fair bit of work on Tibet in my time but His Holiness is one of the most important! The Bald One ^{White cat} 18:37, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments on my talk page.

I simply think that discussing the Irgun on Rahm Emanuel's page opens a host of complex side-issues that are best left to the page on Irgun. I'm really not sure why simply referring to the Irgun, rather than labeling is a terrorist organization or an outlaw organization or whatever is precisely anti-semitic; lots of people in my grandparent's generation debated the comaprative merits of Haganah and Irgun and nobody thought they were anti-semitic. MarkBernstein (talk) 00:17, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Would welcome your input at Talk:harold Pinter#Mediation. Jezhotwells(talk) 02:15, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Who Wrote Shakespeare.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:57, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for that. Have now, I hope, rectified the omission & added the file to article on the Shakespeare authorship question. Wingspeed (talk) 23:23, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you delete the titles of the obituaries, and why did you change the dates to the European format? Is there some Wikipedia protocol you are following, or was this just your taste? I don't care much about the dates, but I think the names of the articles/obituaries help people decide whether to read the listing, since they might have already read it but not remember where, or read it reprinted somewhere. I think the titles are useful. Rosencomet (talk) 16:21, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits to this article indicate that you are familiar with the Bridge Circle. Please e-mail me if you wish to discuss. Marshall46 (talk) 17:20, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I notice you previous expressed an opinion on the Talk:Tony Blair page 'Regarding the war crimes accusation'. Would you consider revisiting the page as the dispute has reared its ugly head again, with the objector insisting there was never a consensus on the issue. It's at the bottom of the page. Thanks. 2writer (talk) 18:59, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your edits to the Emotional Freedom Technique article. Are you interested in improving energy meridian based therapy articles? (such as EFT, TFT, TAT,... If you are, please join the following project: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals/Energy_Medicine_&_Energy_Psychology OpinionPerson (talk) 22:35, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, OpinionPerson, for your kind invitation. I lack, however, the diligent focus on the broad field which you yourself so evidently display. My skills, such as they are, are chiefly stylistic (I am a professional editor) and I feel it"s sensible to limit my attention for the time being to EFT. Should that change in the future, which hopefully it may, then I will of course take up your invitation. Regards Wingspeed (talk) 23:11, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to contribute. I am still working through the article to simplify the references, but go right ahead. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:52, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've been through the article once. It still needs a lot more work, and I've left comments that can be seen from the edit screen. By all means, please dig in. I need a rest! -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:16, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: [3]. Isn't Newseek a reliable source? They seem to have a serious approach to compiling their list. Anyway, I have copyedited that sentence to ease the "hype" and make it look like NPOV info on similar rankings in the articles on Lolita and Ulysses (novel). Garik 11 (talk) 19:51, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Anarchy17cover.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Damiens.rf 11:14, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see no redundancy of lack of clarity in "language [linking to vernacular], and lexicon." They are two separate things of which Orwell's terms have become a part of linguistically. To be perfectly frank, without meaning to be uncivil, there's clarity in language, and then there's dumbing it down. And on a minor note, "of the" Spanish civil war seems more grammatically and aesthetically correct than "in the". Sir Richardson (talk) 22:52, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You changed "headquarters...is" to "headquarters...are" in the Google article. Headquarters is singular so "is" is correct. Also, the word "located" is essential in this context because the word "is" alone is quite vague (as Bill Clinton famously pointed out). I'm changing this back. --Coolcaesar (talk) 20:50, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Headquarters is not necessarily singular. My dictionary tells me it may be either. Clearly, as the 's' implies, it was originally always plural. Which in this context is, I feel, more appropriate. Chacun, though, à son goût :) Wingspeed (talk) 15:23, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I, iBendiscuss, would like to invite you to join WikiProject:Google!

you saw a problem with Ken Robinson's page. why dont you rectify it yourself? dont forget that the credibility of someone's ideas is measurable in part by the commissions they attract. leaving a huge dirty mark about it being advertising is unworthy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.6.216.249 (talk) 01:54, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Wingspeed, I was wondering if you could answer my question. Friend of mine would like to use a wikipedia logo for his professional web site. Do you think there is any way to get a permission to use it or any other way such as direct link you could recommend? Thanks!--Jeunesbarbara (talk) 08:00, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed that P. was one of WSC's Staff.

His prowess apparent at Elm Park. Such recorded in the OSA. archive. From the look of it, he was never the same after having taken part in an "all night" ramble with the Field Club! jlt. Hon Sec OSA 79.72.254.70 (talk) 12:35, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated this for deletion here. Maurreen (talk) 18:12, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please forgive me for not responding earlier. Been away, & only just seen your message, for which many thanks. Am relieved, for a whole string of reasons, to see the misleading article in question appears to have been deleted, thanks largely no doubt to your efforts. Wingspeed (talk) 00:23, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

		Civility Award
		I hereby award this Barnstar for your civility and grace in accepting an edit to your work on Compassion, and for not biting me for said change. Nutiketaiel (talk) 11:53, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, as someone who has done valuable work on this article, I would like to let you know that this is a a featured artcile candidate, discussion at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Harold Pinter/archive1. Cheers. Jezhotwells (talk) 16:43, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there, as a recent editor of Nominative determinism I'm letting you know if you're not watching the page that an anonymous IP editor is intent on consistently deleting content from it, so if you're up to it, it'd be great if you could monitor any changes on that page to minimize this vandal's impact. Cheers! JesseRafe (talk) 23:48, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Removing original research is *not* vandalism. Please refer to WP:NOTVAND. 89.100.150.198 (talk) 00:07, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The point of James Bevel's inclusion in the Tolstoy lead is that he, Dr. King, and Gandhi all had the experience of being profoundly affected by Tolstoy's books, and it was the three of them who, combined, produced the major social movements of the 20th century. Thus Tolstoy's work reverberated throughout the decades, and those movements continue to make a daily impact on society and civilization. You can't historically include King in that sentence without including Bevel. Bevel's incest case, which was on appeal when he died, occurred when he was a much older man, he was only 30 when the Civil Rights Movement effectively ended in 1966 and 31 when he and King continued their work in the anti-war movement. Randy Kryn 11:28, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:New View Over Atlantis.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) 02:21, 23 August 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) 13:49, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Wingspeed. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Autogeddon cover.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) 18:08, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Illuminatus NT poster.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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:43, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Makbed poster.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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:56, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:SF Theatre of Liverpool poster.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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:36, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Adrian mitchell 1965. 2008.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. 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. Jon Kolbert (talk) 23:12, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:10, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wingspeed,

I saw your work on articles related to anarchism and wanted to say hello, as I work in the topic area too. If you haven't already, you might want to watch our noticeboard for Wikipedia's coverage of anarchism, which is a great place to ask questions, collaborate, discuss style/structure precedent, and stay informed about content related to anarchism. Take a look for yourself!

And if you're looking for other juicy places to edit, consider expanding a stub, adopting a cleanup category, or participating in one of our current formal discussions.

Feel free to say hi on my talk page and let me know if these links were helpful (or at least interesting). Hope to see you around. czar 02:43, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:41, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there Wingspeed,

You made the above edit to include my father (Revd Donald Aird) in the Strand school entry. Thank you for doing that, I wondered how you knew him and his connection to the Society of Christians and Jews.

Best wishes

Nick Aird — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nick Aird (talk • contribs) 11:28, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wingspeed. Would you take a look at Similarities between Pyrrhonism and Buddhism? It seems to be an argumentative essay about a fringe perspective on Nagarjuna's thought. I don't feel qualified to weigh in, and my one attempt (in 2020) to tone it down was promptly reversed by a jealous guardian. Things seem to have calmed down a bit. — ℜob C. alias ALAROB 19:24, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]