User talk:Alkari

Hello, Alkari, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for your contributions; I hope you like it here and decide to stay. We're glad to have you in our community! Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• If you haven't already, drop by the new user log and tell others a bit about yourself.
• Always sign your posts on talk pages with ~~~~ so others will know who left which comments.
• The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
• Our policies, guidelines, and simplified ruleset
• How to edit a page and write a great article
• The Wikipedia tutorial and picture tutorial
• The handy Manual of Style
• And finally, remember to be bold in updating pages!

I hope you enjoy editing and being a Wikipedian. Although we all make mistakes, please keep in mind what Wikipedia is not. If you have any questions or concerns, don't hesitate to see the help pages or add a question to the village pump. The Community Portal can also be very useful.

Happy editing!

–Sango123 22:59, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you need help with anything or simply wish to say hello. :)

Template:S-ptd has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Waltham, The Duke of 14:11, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can see more about this here. The vote is not expected to be a thriller or anything; the Project only wishes to get rid of a redundant template.

Basically, I am afraid you should visit the Project's talk page more often; there are several issues that need to be dealt with. Right now it seems to be forgotten by almost all members of the Project.

Also, there is a working version of the /Guidelines subpage at User:The Duke of Waltham/SBS and any input, either a good idea or a simple comment, would be greatly appreciated.

Have a nice day.

Waltham, The Duke of

Many thanks for notifying me about the TfD; I have voted in favor of deletion. I'm afraid I haven't yet looked at the working page, but I shall do so at my earliest opportunity. Alkari 23:19, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article List of younger sons of marquesses in the peerages of the British Isles, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Black Falcon ^(Talk) 00:18, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article List of younger sons of dukes in the peerages of the British Isles, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Black Falcon ^(Talk) 17:11, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The summer has passed (unless you live in the Southern Hemisphere), and for most people holidays are over. Therefore, it is time for work again. Not that work ever stops in Wikipedia, but I believe we can at last get over the stage when slow progress can be taken for granted. Like yourself, most members of WikiProject Succession Box Standardization have been away during most of the summer (and some of you have been away for much longer); this lack of contributors has almost led SBS activity to a standstill.

A couple of members have stayed, however, and things have greatly improved in the project. There is a renovated and functional main page; the talk page has organised archives and a dedicated page for archived proposals; the Guidelines page is in a very good shape and I am preparing a further set of guidelines to be proposed for adoption by the project and incorporation into the page; the Documentation page has been again updated and a potential restructuring is being planned; the Templates list is the operations centre for the ongoing removal of antiquated and redundant templates. The Offices page is the only one that has yet to be improved, but there is a proposal for that one as well. Even a new SBS navbox has been created and added to the project's pages, easing navigation between the different parts of the WikiProject, while shortcuts have been created for the three most basic pages.

And the project itself is not the only thing that has been improved; the headers system has been cleared up and rationalised during the last six months, and a new parameter system is being inserted into templates like s-new and s-vac in order to successfully adapt succession boxes to more tricky cases of succession without large, clumsy cells or redundant reasoning. S-hou has also been improved and /doc pages have been added to most of the headers' pages, as well as to many proper succession templates' ones.

Despite all these breakthroughs that have made SBS a better, more functional and more user-friendly WikiProject, things move excruciatingly slowly as far as the adoption of proposals and correction/improvement of succession boxes in the mainspace are concerned. As has been mentioned, this is due to the utter absence of all but two of its members. I completely understand that a few of them might be unwilling to resume work in SBS, and some of them might even have left Wikipedia altogether. However, we are certain that there are people intent to continue improving Wikipedia's succession boxes and helping others to do so as well. If you are one of them, please return. And even if you cannot help at the moment, but want to contribute at a later time, please let us know by renewing your membership. You can do that very easily by removing the asterisk next to your name in the member list in SBS's main page. The deadline is 31 October; members that do not renew their memberships until 23:59 of that day will be removed from the list, as these members will be assumed to have left the project for good.

SBS is a project highly capable of doing some serious work in Wikipedia. These potentials are seriously undermined by the unavailability of helpful hands. I hope you shall consider this message seriously before taking any decisions.

Thank you for your time. Waltham, The Duke of 14:28, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You really keep to yourself, don't you? It is somewhat uncomfortable leaving an SBS reminder under another, but... Well, if I minded about such things, progress would not be as great. Alas, I have to be a little pressing at times, no matter how much I might hate myself for it. The problem is that participation in WikiProjects is on a purely voluntary basis, so it is both highly impolite and extremely insensitive for me to be taking such steps, but... Well, call me eccentric and it's settled (I hope).

To the subject: as always, there is a severe activity deficiency in the project—too much to do, and nobody to do it. I am not as much concerned about the editing progress, as this is supposed to be done by all editors. No, I am more worried about the guidelines and the templates, where there are still many things to be taken care of, numerous holes to be closed, countless loose ends to be tied up, immeasurable improvements to be made. In four words: decisions to be made. All I am asking for is a helping hand once in a while: add the SBS page to your watchlist (if you have not done so until now), and vote in the polls; as the majority of the proposals are rather uncontroversial, polls usually suffice for business to move on. If, of course, there is the slightest disagreement (succession boxes are rather straightforward, after all), more discussion can take place, until consensus is reached in the good old Wikipedia way. The fact is that the entire process will not take up more than a few minutes of your valuable time in any given day—and it is a rare event indeed to see more than two or three proposals submitted in a week. Actually, that speed would be ideal, as things right now move at much slower rates.

If we are to note any progress, we need participation. If you are interested enough to have signed up, I am not asking for much, am I? After all, aren't we all here because we are trying to make a difference? Waltham, The Duke of 22:25, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

P.S.: Ever heard of hard spaces? They are required in many cases by the Manual of Style, but most editors seem to ignore them entirely. There is an initiative attempting to change this situation; click here if you are interested. – Waltham

Hi. If you would like to request usurpation of an account on Arabic Wikipedia, you should submit a request here. --Meno25 (talk) 11:23, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the advice; I have tried to follow your instructions, but I had some difficulty as I do not read Arabic. If I've done things wrongly, please let me know and I'll do my best to fix it. Alkari (?), 29 August 2008, 03:21 UTC

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom/Article title. DrKiernan (talk) 09:02, 18 March 2010 (UTC) (Using {{Please see}})[reply]

Wowsers, I must be over exhausted. Thanks for catching my blunder. GoodDay (talk) 22:42, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You really need to change your signature. By moving the time, it is messing up programs that expect a standard format. This is why the requested move you listed did not list correctly. I suspect that this will also mess up the bots that archive project and talk page discussions. Vegaswikian (talk) 07:20, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies. I hadn't realized my signature was causing problems; certainly that was not my intention. However, I'm not very happy with the default date format – I find having the time separated from the (UTC) label confusing and inelegant. While I'm willing to change the signature if necessary, do you know of an alternative remedy? Alkari (?), 11 December 2011, 22:45 UTC

Hello please can you fix the colors on Serbian flag since its not good here is the real color version http://flagspot.net/flags/rs.html Drax90 (talk) 17:27, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that File:Flag of Serbia.svg is already using the RGB colors specified at FOTW (although the images on the FOTW page, curiously enough, are not). Unless there's a source to indicate that FOTW is wrong, I'm inclined to leave the colors as they are—but if I've misunderstood your request, I apologize. Let me know if there's anything else I can do to help. Alkari (?), 3 April 2012, 07:35 UTC

actually the FOTW is right color scheme for the flag Drax90 (talk) 11:47, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a bit confused—are you talking about the colors listed in the table, or the colors used in the FOTW images? As far as I can tell, the latter have no official standing, but please correct me if I'm mistaken. Alkari (?), 3 April 2012, 20:59 UTC

the FOTW Drax90 (talk) 06:11, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean the FOTW images or the FOTW color-scheme table? Alkari (?), 4 April 2012, 23:22 UTC

Also can you create an alternate version of republika srpska flag,with its coat of arms in the center? Drax90 (talk) 16:56, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be happy to do that, although it may be a day or two before it's ready. Am I correct that you're thinking of something like File:Standard of the President of the National Assembly of Srpska (1995-2007).svg, but in proportions of 1:2? Alkari (?), 4 April 2012, 23:22 UTC

Serbia flag colors listed from the FOTW images and as for RS precisely those proportions and that coat of arms Drax90 (talk) 14:26, 5 April 2012 (UTC) Please notice me when you make it ;) Drax90 (talk) 14:27, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's been brought to my attention that File:Flag of the Republic of Serbian Krajina 1991-1995.svg is equivalent to the Republika Srpska flag you requested—will that file be adequate for your purposes? Alkari (?), 12 April 2012, 00:34 UTC

can you create the other separately because of the colors there is a slight difference between the 2 flags Drax90 (talk) 15:46, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I see that you are the last editor to have touched File:Flag of the Philippines.svg. I've just been looking at the Flag of the Philippines article and I'm just about to question the description and image of the current flag on the talk page there. I'll specifically question the colors on the flag there. I believe that the colors on the flag should match what is specified in this Philippine government document and, to my eye at least, they do not. Could you please take a look at this? I could give it a shot, but I'm pretty ham handed when it comes to graphical editing -- especially as regards fine differences in shades of colors. Thanks. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 12:21, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See the side box half way down this article [1]: "Scottish Royal titles". Also opening paragraph here [2]. 81.152.63.163 (talk) 09:10, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've looked further at this, and you appear to be correct as regards the Duke of Cambridge – I apologize for being overly hasty to revert. As for the Dukes of York and Gloucester, I don't believe it's usual to use their Scottish subsidiary titles in preference to their higher ones (the Court Circular, e.g., doesn't seem to do so, although I haven't looked very extensively). That's not to say it isn't occasionally done, of course; if you could direct me to a source indicating that this is standard usage, I'd appreciate it. Many thanks! Alkari (?), 27 August 2012, 09:43 UTC

"9th September 2009

BUCKINGHAM PALACE:

The Duke of York, Earl of Inverness, Special Representative for International Trade and Investment, this morning visited Lifescan, Beechwood Park North, Inverness, and was received by Her Majesty's Lord-Lieutenant of Inverness (Donald Cameron of Lochiel).

His Royal Highness, Special Representative for International Trade and Investment, afterwards visited Orion Group, Castle Heather, Inverness."

Obtained using Court Circular search function. A "Scottish subsidiary title" is only ever "subsidiary" outwith Scotland. Just ask the Lord Lyon! 217.43.209.84 (talk) 08:34, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi, I left a message for you at your commons-talk-page--SirHarryCane (talk) 23:56, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Alkari, {{Members of the House of Commons}} - could you improve it? --Rezonansowy (talk • contribs) 23:03, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I may do so, although I don't promise swift progress. For what it's worth, I think the idea of the template is a good one – it's just clearly not ready for use in article space yet. I'll leave a message here if and when I'm able to work on it. Alkari (?), 8 December 2013, 23:09 UTC

Hi. I hope I made it easier. I found conflicting sources about the Respect Party, and some names, so you should probably check the lists. Some names may need formatting, as well. Cheers! —PC-XT+ 11:17, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I figured out I had forgotten to account for the by-elections. It should probably still be checked, though. —PC-XT+ 11:55, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks guys for your commitment! --Rezonansowy (talk • contribs) 12:48, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

PC-XT: Thanks very much for all your work here! It looks as though nearly everything is complete now (there are a couple of ex-Conservative, Labour and Lib Dem MPs who now sit as independents, which I'll deal with shortly), and it shouldn't be too hard to keep the template up to date with by-elections, defections etc. in the future. It's been a pleasure collaborating with you on this! Alkari (?), 10 December 2013, 22:44 UTC

Glad I helped! I'll probably let you guys add it to articles and keep it up to date, as you are more knowledgeable about it, but I'll keep it on my watchlist for a while, just in case. Cheers! —PC-XT+ 02:18, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there, I need to ask a request from a graphic designer mainly one who's done some work on NSDAP logos and such.

I've found a rare flag called the Reichsbund der Korperbehinderten ( Image here ) and wondering if you can make it into a PNG file (and maybe send it via email). Why I can't do it myself is because I have no graphic design skill whatsoever.

Unlike images like the Reichsadler (which are svg see-through images) I cannot find an image for the rare eagle in the image. It'd be brilliant if you or someone could create one.

If you can't (or don't want to) then do you know anyone who I could ask?

Cheers. S. Swift.

P.S. hopefully anything I've mentioned here doesn't violate copyrights

--101.173.213.80 (talk) 10:02, 26 December 2014 (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) 13:58, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain about Robert Halfon? I think you meant he doesn't have a secretarial post (or portfolio), I never claimed he was Secretary of State. Being a Cabinet member he would have to fit into this order of precedence somewhere around here? Slightnostalgia (talk) 16:36, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for bringing this up! This spot in the order of precedence is specifically for people holding the office of Secretary of State, which as far as I can tell Halfon doesn't. As a Privy Counsellor (like all Cabinet members) he does have a place slightly lower; it doesn't appear as though there's a specific position in the order of precedence for a Minister without Portfolio. But if it looks like I've made any error here, please do set me straight. Thanks again! Alkari (?), 9 June 2016, 19:21 UTC

Seems rather unfair, doesn't it? Slightnostalgia (talk) 12:00, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Alkari. 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]

Hello, Alkari. 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]

You say you fixed dashes on the list of participants in the coronation procession...this is invisible to me.What was changed in the dashes?12.144.5.2 (talk) 19:36, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There were a fair number of hyphens in date ranges (e.g. 1936-1952) which I changed to en-dashes (1936–1952) per the manual of style (see MOS:DASH). Unfortunately the difference is near-impossible to see in the edit window, but should hopefully be apparent in the article itself. Alkari (?), 27 January 2018, 19:44 UTC

This is not a difference I'm aware of on my keyboard!12.144.5.2 (talk) 19:59, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Alkari. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 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, Alkari. 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) 00:07, 19 November 2019 (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) 01:33, 24 November 2020 (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) 00:14, 23 November 2021 (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) 00:34, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of eldest sons of earls in the peerages of Britain and Ireland 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/List of eldest sons of earls in the peerages of Britain and Ireland 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 until the discussion has finished.

GoldenBootWizard276 (talk) 05:59, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:29, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:14, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]