User talk:Jonpatterns

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Jonpatterns. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

To read-

• Introduction
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• How to write a great article
• Editor's index to Wikipedia

Read-

• The five pillars of Wikipedia

Enjoy editing, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! -- Trevj (talk) 08:26, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Creative Micro Designs, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages C64 and C128 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pfaff, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hole (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of taxes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Goods (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:11, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• - e.g. villages ([[Kinsale#Transition towns|Kinsale]]), neighbourhoods of cities ([[Portobello]]], Edinburgh), through council districts ([[Penwith]]) to cities and city boroughs ([[Brixton]]). <

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:31, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jonpatterns. I saw your note on Fractional Reserve Banking talk. I suggest you review the history of the article and talk page and archives. The problem has not been a lack of other editors attempting to engage in talk and policy-based editing there. Please have a look if you wish. SPECIFICO talk 13:25, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Eco-industrial development, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Closed loop (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:54, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Zero-sum game, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page William Simmons (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:53, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Amazon Coin, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Android and Kindle (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:53, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time.
Please read the comments left by the reviewer on your submission. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Draft:RepRisk.
• To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page.

Thank you for your
contributions to Wikipedia!

• Please remember to link to the submission!

• You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

JustBerry (talk) 20:51, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Jonpatterns, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! JustBerry (talk) 20:51, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Special economic zone, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page DTA (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:51, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this discussion, I created a watchlist so we can get a good look at the current project activity. Here's the last 250 edits. Viriditas (talk) 12:29, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Viriditas: great stuff, it may be worth getting the 'popular pages' for the project - if it doesn't already (Wikipedia:Lists_of_popular_pages_by_WikiProject). Jonpatterns (talk) 13:34, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, that's an excellent suggestion! More later... Viriditas (talk) 01:18, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Update: as you may or may not know, Toolserver is down, and many accounts are either migrated or in the process of being migrated to the new labs server. The "popular pages" list was, I believe once updated by this tool. It is not yet clear to me if this tool is still in use. However, a similar tool maintained by a bot run by User:Kaldari, appears to be active. I have made a request about using it here. Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 03:42, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the update, not sure want is happening with User talk:Mr.Z-man, who set up the stats for the economics project. (PS - I haven't forgotten your question regard the Anti-war, but I need to spend a little time to think about that.) Jonpatterns (talk) 08:54, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the importance scale, I'm still having a problem with the scope, so I'm staying focused on that now for the moment. I stopped using the importance scale many years ago, and several large projects have deprecated the parameter and phased out its usage. It certainly gives editors busywork, but results in little benefit. The way to proceed is to organize by topic, and to figure out the scope from there. Any ideas on how you would change the current scope if you could? At present, the scope says it is focused on anti-war movements and ideologies, but it's so much more than that. Does that scope best describe what editors are currently doing? Viriditas (talk) 11:01, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Viriditas: I take your point about the 'importance scale' making a lot of work for little return. Although I find it interesting to look at the statistics. I guess it only becomes useful if there or a few editors willing to work on what ever the scale indicates. Regarding the scope, it does say articles relating to anti-war movements and ideologies - not just those things in themselves. It would be useful to have example which do fall under those categories, and compare to examples which should be included - but which aren't covered by that scope. Jonpatterns (talk) 09:27, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It would be helpful if you could identify the top 10-30 articles that are essential for understanding the topic of antiwar. That would help narrow the scope. In addition, a list of key concepts would be instructive. Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 22:30, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Intersectionality, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Domination. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jonpatterns.

Can you assist us by giving your opinion on the matter of inclusion/removal of Antisemitism, Anti-Masonry, and Islamophobia? Rainbowforpeace is not budging on the issue and neither am I, so we need a third opinion (hopefully more) to determine consensus. Could you please help? Thank you. Gstridsigne (talk) 10:50, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you were in the past an active contributor to WP:ECONOMICS. At the moment it seems rather inactive. Would you want to help me to make it more active again? NotYetAnotherEconomist (talk) 19:57, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

NotYetAnotherEconomist Yes I can help in a limited way. What have you in mind? Jonpatterns (talk) 22:10, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh great. One thing we want to do is to make the main page more accesible. Is should become easier to coordinate what to do and how to do it. The current draft is here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Economics/Redesign NotYetAnotherEconomist (talk) 00:38, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jonpatterns, I'm looking for some help with a new draft that I'm proposing to update the Blackboard Inc. article's History section and add in a new Mergers and acquisitions section. Having noticed you made a helpful edit to the article earlier this year, I was wondering if you would be interested to take a look at my suggestions? I should note, I'm working for Blackboard Inc. to propose these changes, but as an editor with a financial conflict of interest, I will not be making any direct edits to the article. Instead, I would be very grateful if you could review my proposed changes and make them in the live article, if they look ok.

Here is the full draft of the History and Mergers and acquisitions I'm proposing in my user space, and here's a diff between the live version and my draft History section, so that you can see the changes I'm proposing. Let me know if you have any questions or comments! Thanks in advance. 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 15:02, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, just a quick note to let you know that another editor has responded to my request and I'm all set now. Thanks, 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 12:38, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the AllMusic page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jonpatterns,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged New Economy movement for deletion, because it's too short to identify the subject of the article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. One life to live (talk) 17:51, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Eusko, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Blind and Traders. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Promoting Enduring Peace, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Environmental. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:58, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount and can lead to a block, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection.
Redirect warring over Capitalist Mode of Production and Capitalism. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:59, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Robert McClenon: hence, I brought it to wikipedia:third opinion. Jonpatterns (talk) 20:01, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Barthélemy de Laffemas

added a link pointing to Gobelins

Kevin Carson

added a link pointing to Mutualism

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:58, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the thanks! aoxiang翱翔^(user)(talk) 14:34, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I see you are a member of Wikipedia:WikiProject Economics, can you review the edits made to the labour economics article from 22 March to 25 March? Some(but not all) of the old material was unsourced, however the neoclassical perspective is more widespread in economics courses than the older labour theory of value, the article therefore ought to give a balanced view of the different theories. Lbertolotti (talk) 23:28, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Lbertolotti: Thanks for the notification. The second part of the new lede appears to be obscure, Labour economics being a combination of Labour and Nature? I will need to check refs to confirm. Having had a brief over look of the changes, I think some/most of the new material can be kept but some of the old article needs to be brought back and referenced - as you say it is important to get a balanced article that reflects the broad understanding of the subject. Note, I have recently had a disagreement with the editor making the changes. Therefore, it would be better for another editor to review the changes. Labour economics diff March 22 -> March 26

Jonpatterns (talk) 04:10, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think the ideal would be:

1. Labour theory of value: concept and history

2. Neoclassical theory of labour and an explanation of why LTV is no longer used by economists

3. Information economics: expand this section with classic references on the field

4. Personnel economics: someone needs to check the old references

5. Criticisms

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the History of economic thought page, your edit caused a cite error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jonpatterns. You have new messages at Stifle's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I saw you revert a edit of his. as well as you are a member of wikiproject economics , you may interested to look up his whole edits in recent weeks in order to check whatever his merging articles is rude or not. Matthew_hk tc 09:31, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Matthew hk: Thanks for the comment. I'm going to bear in mind that Hendrick 99 hasn't always use the correct merge procedure. I don't want to review the editor's recent weeks updates at the moment, in case it may come across as a personal attack. Other users will pick up any specific problems. Jonpatterns (talk) 11:48, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Capdown

added a link pointing to Dub

Doug Casey

added a link pointing to Equity

Household Name Records

added a link pointing to Dub

Kevin Carson

added a link pointing to Counterpunch

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See also reference to this removed. See talk:Systems theory BillWhiten (talk) 07:33, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Timtrent was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:RepRisk and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Fiddle Faddle 21:33, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In case you did not know Wikipedia is not a reliable source for sourcing articles on Wikipedia as you seem to have thought on adding that link to Venus Projects page. Also there is no connection to Venus Project ideas and the information you are adding to that page about Sharing economy. You can not add non-sourced information to an encyclopedia. I hope you understand this now. If you start reverting for no reason in essence you may be edit warring which is something you do not want to do. Thanks Earl King Jr. (talk) 04:16, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Earl King Jr.: Thanks for the message. I am aware that wikipedia is not a reliable source. I referred to Venus Project being on the the Sharing Economy article to show that another editor thinks there is a link between the two subjects. In my opinion there is a link, the link is they treat property relations in a non-conventional way. Another article worthing linking to is Gift economy. An improvement to the Venus Project article would be more details about the project and its proposed resource-based economy.Jonpatterns (talk) 15:24, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion there is a link, the link is they treat property relations in a non-conventional way. Another article worthing linking to is Gift economy. An improvement to the Venus Project article would be more details about the project and its proposed resource-based economy. That is your opinion and not a reliable source. Also it has zero to do with a gift economy. The problem with improving Venus projects article is that they are not particularly notable with little being written about them. Also, resource based economy ideas are not orginal with Fresco. I doubt much of anything he did was original at least except for a few failed inventions and so forth. Mostly he has tried to garner up money and has done very little in the real world that I am aware of except for media speculation things. Earl King Jr. (talk) 03:23, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Earl King Jr.:Thanks for the reply. I did not think my opinion was a reliable source. There is a link, how tenuous is debatable. What are resource based economy ideas, and who had similar ideas before? Jonpatterns (talk) 12:46, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Google or search will tell you. Do a search on Thermoeconomics and also Technocracy Movement, also the physiocrats Earl King Jr. (talk) 03:51, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You might find this history of biophysical economics interesting also [1] it kind of gives an overview of the subject. Earl King Jr. (talk) 03:02, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

hey you thank you for disambiguating the results of my wiki-insomnia the other night. Usually I run back through and do it myself with Dabsolver, but you beat the bot to the punch! I never even got notified! In case you were wondering what all that was about with the table, I find the current layout a bit boring and was nerdifying a bit over the fact that the pictures were not lining up with their respective sections. But apparently there is some wierdness about the way wikipedia handles css and I'll have to look into it some more some other time. I think some of the documentation is out of date. But anyway, I eventually decided to leave well enough alone for the time being. I saw you resized that one image, by the way -- I made it bigger on purpose because I think that ribbon-like effect is kinda boring and I'd like to address it, but eh. We don't have to argue about this. Let's see if I can even get what I want to do to work, and then perhaps we'll talk :) I did solve a similar problem on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palace_in_Otwock_Wielki kinda, I thought, but there was more text there to work with. Elinruby (talk) 07:57, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Elinruby: thanks, that coffee was very nice. Regarding the pictures, I agree that the layout is a bit boring at the moment. The reason is because the article was too long, someone trimmed the text but left all the pictures. I made the pictures small as a work in progress. Probably some of the pictures will have to go. Alternatively, the 'gallery style' could be used, like you did on 'Palace in Otwock Wielki'.

The article needs re-balancing, organizing better and perhaps shortening. I have attempted to fix the table you created, ending up with just the frst paragraph in the table see my sandbox. Jonpatterns (talk) 10:08, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Jonpatterns: yeah it was a hot mess. I was kept thinking, someone is going to come onto this page and say what the hell. I really shoud have started it in the sandbox to begin with, but I have done tables before and I actually do speak css, and it looked like a trivial problem to begin with. I am not against pictures -- pictures are good --- they just shouldn't be screens and screens from their sections, not that it is quite that bad. I saw one example I rather liked but wasn't feeling ambitious enough to try last night, but I can't finc it just now. This here, though, appears to be a group of people having the sort of problems I was having. Possibly is is useful https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help_talk:Table.I will go look at your sandbox in a bit; I am on another advernture just now. Elinruby (talk) 10:36, 10 April 2015 (UTC) @Jonpatterns: hey, I see you got that caption working on that ship picture, what was the problem there? Elinruby (talk) 10:42, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Elinruby: When using an image without <gallery> you need to add the |thumb| option - to add the frame and caption. Inside of <gallery> you only need the filename and caption.Jonpatterns (talk) 11:07, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jade Tree (record label), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lifetime. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:25, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Defiance Records

added a link pointing to Never Surrender

Ninja Tune

added a link pointing to Dobie

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is no difference between "merge" and "redirect" when the original article contains no reliably sourced material to merge. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 11:40, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@TheRedPenOfDoom:So why not use the Wikipedia:Proposed_mergers. This will allow more editors to consider the issue.Jonpatterns (talk) 11:56, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you edit tendentiously over a period and are a single purpose editor as your record shows you will be subject to being blocked. Read talk page histories if you have an interest but stop editing information for your groups and making it a showcase of their Faq's material and a format for your pov. You can be blocked from editing for tendentious behavior and it appears you are edit warring or trying to edit war information without consensus on Zeitgeist and Venus Project etc type of article. Earl King Jr. (talk) 08:53, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Earl King Jr.:I have not acted tendentiously over a period and neither am I single purpose editor. All I appear guilty of is having a different opinion to you. Regarding the Zeitgeist you are the one that is editing without discussing first. For the second time accusations without proof will be seen as a personal attack. Jonpatterns (talk) 09:40, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bowers Group, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Test equipment. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:47, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Industrial and provident society page, your edit caused a URL error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:24, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your interest in the caregiver articles. Those articles get a fair amount of traffic and I am sure that some of it is from people who are dealing with family changes. I wish that they could be better, along with the set of articles on nursing, physical therapy, and basic nutrition. I appreciate the article sorting you have done. Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:20, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Bluerasberry: That was a lovely cup of coffee, thanks. I am studying economics which plays apart in many areas of life. One problem may be that caregiving doesn't seem to fit easily into any WikiProject. Is there a place anywhere that lists improvements that could be made to this collection of articles? Jonpatterns (talk) 16:15, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jonpatterns No. If I had to choose a place then I suppose it would be either the talk page for caregiver or Template:Care navbox. We do not have wiki-vocabulary to describe all the articles within a category which is too small to be a wikiproject, except to maybe call it a "task force" and discuss it on a sub-project page of a wikiproject. If there were enough suggestions then I could come up with a place to put them, but for only a few suggestions, it would make sense to post them in a usual way like on an article talk page than in some extraordinary new way.

I participate in WikiProject Medicine but this does not quite fit in there. I might call caregiving "alternative medicine", but WP:ALTMED includes things like energy healing and that is not the same as caregiving, home therapy, and home nursing. It it tough to know how to organize change.

I could say more if you were really interested in this topic, but for casual collaboration if you get a small idea, ping me anytime. Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:26, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jonpatterns,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Simmons Pet Food for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Ormr2014 (talk) 22:51, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Ormr2014: a company with US$1 billion revenue is not notable? I'll add some more links that may help. Jonpatterns (talk) 22:54, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Jonpatterns: You're right. I was mistaken and have removed my nomination. I apologize for the hastiness. Ormr2014 (talk) 22:59, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Africa for Africa

added a link pointing to Day by Day

Finance (No.2) Act 2010

added a link pointing to 2010 United Kingdom Budget

Finance Act 2010

added a link pointing to 2010 United Kingdom Budget

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:17, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jonpatterns! I saw your message on Earl King Jr's user_talk page and I just wanted to let you know that his removal of a message from the zeitgeist talk page appears to be justified under WP:NOTFORUM. Thanks for all your hard work in helping to build an encyclopedia! :-) OnlyInYourMind^(talk) 07:46, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@OnlyInYourMind: Hi, thanks for the comment. If you look at the removed comment, the first half of it was off topic. The first is about how bias may creep into Wikipedia, and how sources should be weighted. The second half was directly related to article discussion, how to characterise the Zeitgeist film.

If the comment was off topic, why not reply stating that. It looks using a collapse box is standard practice. Rather it seems part of a larger behaviour of Earl King Jr.'s to accuse editors with different opinions of bias and using single purpose accounts (SAG), rather than assume good faith. While the work Earl King Jr. is generally good, and sometimes SAGs have been involved, his attitude to other editors creates a hostile, non constructive, environment. It may be because he lacks the knowledge of how to check a users history when determining whether to use good faith.Jonpatterns (talk) 08:29, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes he does appear combative. Not sure how to get this article back on track to cooperative characterizing of the topic. I have no experience with disruptive editors. OnlyInYourMind^(talk) 08:45, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@OnlyInYourMind:Any edit to the article that is potentially controversial will have to be discussed on the talk page. If editors persist in editing the article without engaging on the talk page, record these events. If editors make personal attacks, again record these events. If the behaviour continues use the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard, it is good practice to discuss problems with the user before hand.Jonpatterns (talk) 09:12, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Here, your input is appreciated Lbertolotti (talk) 21:37, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Lbertolotti: Thanks for the message. Do you mean in general or did you have something specific in mind? Jonpatterns (talk) 22:19, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the issues listed on the talk page.Lbertolotti (talk) 22:26, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ideally I think the best way to handle it would be to have an article on anti-Intersex discrimination. However I think that linking to the Intersex page and a section on discrimination is a good start. Thanks for being a thoughtful editor :) -Rainbowofpeace (talk) 09:41, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Rainbowofpeace: I agree that a separate article would be the way to go, especially as currently the information is spread about different sections and articles. I may look into that when I have more time.Jonpatterns (talk) 09:54, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

IRT your "who?" tag on a page. Discuss-Dubious (t/c) 18:55, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've also tried to find solutions to problematic editors. I guess the WP:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard is the best place to start. Unless you have something else in mind? OnlyInYourMind^(talk) 20:46, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@OnlyInYourMind: thanks for the message. I've had a problem with an editor on that page. They do not engage with making the article neutral and reflecting what the sources says. Instead they accuse editors of being biased single purpose account, but then go on and insert there own bias into the article, regardless of what the sources say. Also, reverting any new edit to the article. The problem is that proving they are inserting their bias into the article and they are not engaging in meaningful discussion would means watching the article over time, and recording the order of events and discussion - as they also have an annoying habit of commenting later on discussions, after they have edited the article to their own pleasing! This can give the appearance of some engagement in debate, when really they are patrolling the article. Frankly, I haven't got the time. Jonpatterns (talk) 23:11, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Talk pages are really not a good place to agitate negatively about other editors. I suggest you use caution with building a case and assuming you are right calling other editors this and that. This could boomerang. Earl King Jr. (talk) 00:51, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please watch what you're reverting? At the Hey Violet article, you said "Restore removed information", but you actually ended up removing a lot of helpful and sourced content that had been added to the article from that wholesale revert. Kokoro20 (talk) 00:34, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Kokoro20: Thanks for the heads up, I may have restored the wrong version. Someone had removed information from the top of the article. Jonpatterns (talk) 09:08, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for welcoming me, I look forward to working with you and wiki colleagues Phd.dr.candidate (talk) 16:36, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hey your edits in that article are great though one thing could be clarified... it alludes to Israeli involvement in unnamed illicit activities... could we be more specific since that section repeatedly mentions 9/11? Batvette (talk) 22:25, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Batvette: Thanks for the message. I've not seen the film, and I'm unsure. I've started a discussion on the talk page to see what people think.Jonpatterns (talk) 23:17, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Earl_King_Jr.

Since you have been involved in the past with some of this dispute, perhaps you would like to include your opinion. Grammar'sLittleHelper (talk) 17:45, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Zeitgeist (film series) and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted in most arbitration pages please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.

Thanks, Robert McClenon (talk) 21:11, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jonpatterns, the Zeitgeist (film series) arbitration case request, which you were listed as a party to, has been declined. For the Arbitration Committee, L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 06:06, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

You have been trouted for: having a trout.Jonpatterns (talk) 15:04, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion here might interest you: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Long_term_pattern_of_POV_edits_and_edit_warring_by_User:Jimjilin

I don't know enough to comment on the thread. Jonpatterns (talk) 07:28, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How do I send you an email? Dbprell (talk) 22:35, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Dbprell:Why do you need to contact me by email? Jonpatterns (talk) 09:21, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited European Innovation Academy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ECTS. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:58, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Being reviewed does not confer academic notability. One ref is insufficient. Capitalismojo (talk) 19:40, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Capitalismojo: thanks for the message.Jonpatterns (talk) 19:46, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'll give you some time to look for notability (as will I). It is worthwhile to review WP:ACADEMIC for academic notability guidelines. Basically it means leading academic in a field, editor of academic journal, holder of endowed chair etc.. Good luck! Capitalismojo (talk) 19:49, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Capitalismojo: Thanks for the link to WP:ACADEMIC it will help to decide whether or not Steven Rosefielde is notable.Jonpatterns (talk) 20:07, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Red Bull GmbH page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:25, 18 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) 14:23, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm Kudpung. Jonpatterns, thanks for creating Natty King!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. This article may not meet our notability guidelines per WP:BAND and might shortly be tagged for deletion. PLease find more reliable, in-depth, 3rd party sources.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:50, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Natty King, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Saint Thomas Parish. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:25, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Douglas C. Waller, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Free Press. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:08, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 3D Bomb Alley, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 3D glasses. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:27, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Copyright Term Extension Act into Criticism of The Walt Disney Company. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 15:39, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

KRS-One (album)

added a link pointing to O.C.

Rappaz R. N. Dainja

added a link pointing to O.C.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 16:11, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nigerian Export Promotion Council, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Aba. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:30, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing—Vitalik Buterin —has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 16:30, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! — LlywelynII 13:28, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Local ownership import substituting

added a link pointing to Exit

Local purchasing

added a link pointing to Exit

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:22, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Paul Singer (businessman)". 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 7 June 2016.

The request for formal mediation concerning Paul Singer (businessman), 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.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

First Milk (company)

added a link pointing to Paisley

Lick Me I'm Delicious

added a link pointing to Edible

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:45, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Web of Science indexed, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides 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. Randykitty (talk) 12:11, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Scopus indexed, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides 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. Randykitty (talk) 15:50, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please be advised that the Central Solar Reserve Bank of Accompong has been an active and a notable state institution since 2014. The fact that the LUMI is scheduled for circulation in late 2016 does does preclude or exclude the current activities of the institution which is crucial for our current government. Furthermore, there has been no illegal activities involving this institution whatsoever. It is a very important component of Accompong's climate change initiative. Sadly, a small faction which is opposed to the Government's current developmental policy and climate change initiative has used Facebook and other social medias to create negative publicity against the government. We have taken legal actions in this regard, however, Ripoff Report does not remove postings after they have been posted, and our discussions with Facebook are ongoing. We kindly request that you take no actions against the entry involving the Central Solar Reserve Bank of Accompong. As a micro-state with limited resources we do not have the ability to constantly be on top of your postings, talks and/or requests, however we shall certainly seek to comply with the procedures of Wikipedia.

Hello John

Is there a protocol to effect updates? You had modified my update. Curious... Anoop Bungay (talk) 01:03, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Anoop Bungay: I've left a welcome message on your talkpage that has some resources on how Wikipedia works. Your addition read like an advert. Wikipedia aims for neutral coverage of notable topics, often third party references are required to support claims made in the articles. Jonpatterns (talk) 09:44, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you John;

Sorry to be a bore; I wonder if I might get your help in modifying the Canadian section? I will read up on the material you suggested and make a draft and then ask you to critique same? Further; you mentioned an interesting point: 3rd party references are required to support claims. While the changes I made might not have met the WP standards; the claims made in my edit are "true" and can be substantiated by 3rd party objective evidence. On a personal point, I find it further interesting that "newspaper articles" are considered a good source of third party reference material since the all of the news paper articles in the Canada section fail to identify MortgageQuote Canada Corp. as the first Peer-to-Peer lending company in Canada; we started the same year Lending Club started (2006).

Finally, on a personal note, you might appreciate (give your residency in UK), that not only is our firm first in Canada, since 2008 our ISO 9001:2015 quality management system auditors and certifying body is none other than the British Standards Institute (BSI Group); the global leader in excellence in business. BSI Group provides 3rd party authentication of the fact that our firm is certified to a quality management system.

Having said the foregoing, it would be really nice to get your help in effecting our goal of updating the Canadian Peer-to-Peer lending section; once I confirm that I have read the startup material.

Your thoughts?

Anoop Bungay (talk) 15:45, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Anoop Bungay:What classifies as a reliable third party source is slightly 'quirky'. Newspapers can be reliable, though obviously not always. You may find WP:ORG helpful. I can not promise to review your work, but I may well do so when and if you update the Peer to peer article. Jonpatterns (talk) 16:14, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Draft:PASHA Insurance 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/Draft:PASHA Insurance 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. Prymshbmg (talk) 07:33, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of LocalWikis 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 LocalWikis 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. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 16:45, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Getronics, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page APAC. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Notability: this appears to be the same copy as in the article PRODed and deleted earlier this month. Significant RS coverage still cannot be found.

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. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:58, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jonpatterns. 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]

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks Wesborden (talk) 00:30, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you were quick to add back Category:Pioneers of music genres to The Wild Bunch (sound system), but the category is currently up for deletion anyway. Please vote at this CfD if you don't want it removed. --Ilovetopaint (talk) 11:16, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ilovetopaint: The edit note said removed Category:Pioneers of music genres using HotCat unclear what they pioneered, so it was made clear what they pioneered. It did not say category is potentially being retired, thanks for the heads up on the vote.Jonpatterns (talk) 11:48, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jon. You obviously meant to comply with copyright attribution in your creation edit summary at National Indigenous Congress, which is great. Please just note for future reference that in order to comply with our copyright licenses, you actually must provide a hyperlink to the source article in the edit summary, which for a translation of a Wikipedia article from another language is provided through an interlanguage link – [[:es:Exact name of Spanish Article]]. Please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and Wikipedia:Translation#How to translate. You do not need to anything now as I have fixed the attribution in this edit. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:33, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Emo pop was removed because emo pop was removed as a fusion genre, so I removed it from the subgenres category. Dekai Averett (talk) 04:49, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Dekai Averett:Thanks for the heads up. I missed the discussion on the talkpage - a note in the edit comment can be useful. Jonpatterns (talk) 07:29, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jonpatterns. 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]

		The Special Barnstar
		Thank you for reviewing one of my articles, your contributions are appreciated! Plantlady223 (talk) 23:00, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jonpatterns,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Van Elle for deletion, because it seems to be inappropriate for a variety of reasons. For more details please see the notice on the article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

SamHolt6 (talk) 18:08, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating Nicolas Wöhrl, Jonpatterns!

Wikipedia editor Boleyn just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

This has been tagged for 2 issues.

To reply, leave a comment on Boleyn's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Boleyn (talk) 20:42, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#MazaCoin.

Smallbones_(smalltalk) 16:06, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:53, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Jonpatterns: Hello, we met briefly over the Sibelius (scorewriter) reversions of all my edits to this page by the editor Chrissymad. Thank you for your contribution to the discussion, and your subsequent reinstatement of my edits, which although subsequently re-reverted, were later reinstated by SarekOfVulcan and the original reverter hasn't so far tried to undo this. I see this editor is now also taking the scalpel to my main article as above, which has taken many months to research and write, and is deleting entire sections, such as Early Life, alongside clearly relevant and notable citations, including a full-page article in a notable newspaper, which is entirely about my subject. His entire discography along with all mention of his 35 recording credits has also been erased without trace. Would you mind taking a look at these reversions and giving a second opinion? As acknowledged on my User page, I was aware that my article may be criticised as too long for the perceived relative importance of my subject, but what I had been hoping for was helpful feedback so that I could carry out fixes myself. It is clear to me that there is an assumption by Chrissymad of bad faith on my part, since I was accused, without evidence, of being paid to write the article. Not only is this allegation without foundation, it appears to be a violation of Wikipedia:Assume good faith. I should mention, I have also run this issue past SarekOfVulcan (who reinstated my Sibelius edits after Chrissymad reverted them again after you had reinstated them) for an opinion. Best wishes. Chrisdevelop (talk) 00:31, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Chrisdevelop: Hi, thanks for the message. Unfortunately, I haven't got any time at the moment to review edits on the Derek Williams draft. You could try and engage Chrissymad on the talkpage of the draft. Another possibility is to work on the article in your own user space (User:Chrisdevelop/Derek Williams (musician)))- where other users should not do unwanted edits.

Finally, there is the possibility of just publishing the article directly to main space (Derek Williams (musician)) if you think it meets Wikipedia's standards- there is no requirement for editors to get drafts approved first. Jonpatterns (talk) 08:39, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jonpatterns. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, NAPS team, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:

1. edit the page
2. remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
3. save the page

Also, be sure to explain why you think the article should be kept in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you don't do so, it may be deleted later anyway.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:32, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Module:Key people has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the module's entry on the Templates for discussion page. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 19:58, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

History of High Speed 2 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Kier

Smart motorway (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Kier

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article Consolidated Fund Act 1992 has been proposed for deletion. The proposed deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

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. - Rat Cat12 (talk) 21:30, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Transnational Institute, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Susan George (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Real bills doctrine, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Greenback (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jonpatterns. 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]

I was wondering why on the page of Transnational_Institute you removed the text: "world-wide fellowship of scholar-activists: researchers, writers, scholars, journalists and documentary makers^[1]. These days it publishes research papers, books and organises seminars and debates." as it seems to add content on the history of the organisation. Can't make it out from the edit summary either. thanks Webmind (talk) 11:47, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Webmind: Thanks for your message. I have responded on the article's talk page, see Talk:Transnational_Institute; as the discussion may be of interest to other editors. Jonpatterns (talk) 13:24, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Jonpatterns: ping ping. Jonpatterns (talk) 14:30, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article List of books on the European Union has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:LISTN. In addition, only one book appears to have an article. This list is far from complete but it is hard to see how it can ever be complete. It has been unsourced since creation in June 2015.

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. Just Chilling (talk) 19:21, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hellos I've seen you around in various social centre related places, i was wondering if you had any interest to help get WikiProject Squatting going again? Cheers! Mujinga (talk) 20:19, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Mujinga: Thanks for the message. I don't know much about the topic but I'm willing to help out where I can. Jonpatterns (talk) 13:45, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

awesome! i'm working on some navbox templates currently, your thoughts would be welcome! and for the rest, see what you find, i've started using rater so i'm trying to get the articles assessed and add new ones Mujinga (talk) 16:15, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infoshops has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Mujinga (talk) 21:32, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Mujinga: thanks, I've commented in flavour to overturn to no consensus. Jonpatterns (talk) 13:38, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hola, Template:Infoshops got deleted - a bad decision in my opinion so I requested a review. Mujinga (talk) 12:33, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Other Stuff Exists. Since you had some involvement with the Other Stuff Exists redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. –xeno^talk 18:08, 28 September 2019 (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) 00:13, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:24, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hellos do you happen to know how to make tables stretch across the whole page? I've re-split the table at Self-managed social centres in the United Kingdom into current and former projects but somehow the new tables are horizontally shrunken. All the best for 2020! Mujinga (talk) 20:11, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Mujinga: A table's width can be fixed using style options after the table's header symbol {|, for example fix to 100%:

style="width: 100%;"

The default is for table to expand depending on the width of the cells' contents until the table reaches 100% than text in the cells will start wrapping on to the next line.

More info at Help:Table#Width,_height

Happy new year! Jonpatterns (talk) 12:12, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that! I was trawling through the help but somehow didn't find anything. Those tables look much better now. Mujinga (talk) 10:45, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jonpatterns! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Including an artist's real name in an article (when it's claimed they do not the name in the public sphere), has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Liam Watson (record producer), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Madness (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:18, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Jonpatterns! Hope you are doing well.

I have a few questions regarding wikipedia pages and I hope I can discuss them with you. If it is possible,please contact me at goryushkiin@gmail.com

Best Artyom — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.176.9.249 (talk) 12:19, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Teahousefor question on Wikipedia. Jonpatterns (talk) 19:31, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Milky Wimpshake requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician that 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 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. Tagishsimon (talk) 17:56, 15 November 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) 02:29, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya seasons greetings, just wanted to notify you of two squatting-related discussions which might be of interest, at Talk:Squatting#Moldova and Talk:Autonomous_social_center#Requested_move_10_November_2020. Cheers! Mujinga (talk) 14:05, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Mujinga: Thanks for the heads up, I'll have a look. Seasonal greetings :-) Jonpatterns (talk) 17:16, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The debate has now moved on to Talk:Squatting#Kibera_/_Smith and Talk:Squatting#MacSimoin, they might be easier access points. Same root problem though. Anyhoo in more fun news, do you have any suggestions for WP:SQUAT in 2021? Cheers! Mujinga (talk) 16:09, 4 January 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) 00:33, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Heya - reaching out after a year since I last did! I am a bit concerned that a specific user/editor is vandalising a page I keep a close eye on. I’m still finding my way with everything on here so don’t want to point the finger too hastily. I suspect the person editing may even be the subject of the page, or someone very close to them - but that’s just a hunch. I wish it was simpler to understand how to flag something for others to review and tell me if I’m being too precious about the page editing! Any thoughts from you? Chausettes (talk) 19:20, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Simmons Foods 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/Simmons Foods 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.

HighKing⁺⁺ 13:03, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lee Groves 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/Lee Groves (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 until the discussion has finished.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:23, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jonpatterns. Thank you for creating CNews (Russian magazine). User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for the article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 14:31, 1 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) 01:10, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jonpatterns, I meant to kick the WP:SQUAT year off by linking some questions I put at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Squatting then I forgot to do it! Are you any good with template documentation? In any case, hope 2023 is treating you well and see you around, cheers Mujinga (talk) 13:39, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mujinga: thanks for the message. Sorry the late reply, happy 2023! Do you have any outstanding questions about template documentation? Jonpatterns (talk) 11:24, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hellos! I think the templates are now good, they needed documentation before and Grimes2 gave me a hand. But feel free to take a look if you have the inclination, they're listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Squatting#Templates. Cheers! Mujinga (talk) 13:24, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:小霸王公司标志.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) 02:42, 26 July 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) 00:34, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:27, 23 October 2024 (UTC) [reply]

Hello,

I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.

Take the survey here.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 00:39, 13 November 2024 (UTC) [reply]