Lionelt

Thank you for the barnstar. AgeOfPlantagenet (talk) 10:12, 17 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

 

On 24 May 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Sister Jean, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a bobblehead of Sister Jean, the chaplain for the Loyola Ramblers men's basketball team, sold for more than $300 on eBay? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Sister Jean. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Sister Jean), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:52, 24 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

  Hello! Your submission of Joice Hasselmann at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 00:02, 31 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Lionelt, please return to this nomination as soon as possible; there are issues that you need to address. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:49, 21 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

  Hello! Your submission of National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 21:52, 4 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I promoted the hook, and then realized it was over 200 characters. I piped the link. If you want to do it another way, please let me know. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 23:10, 5 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

I just came across the editor with 4 reverts on the article, left him a note, and blocked him for 24 hours per WP:3RR. I'm sorry if you feel I reverted to the WP:WRONGVERSION. I'm sure there will be a discussion on the talk page as to which version is the right version going forward. Andrevan@ 01:08, 9 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

3RR is a bright-line rule. The user's only edits are violating 3RR. The user may request unblock if they wish. Andrevan@ 01:18, 9 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

I didn't block him under the 1RR or special edit warring discretionary sanctions, just the regular 3RR. Andrevan@ 01:28, 9 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

• The only way you get to 4 reverts is by counting 2 consecutive edits as separate reverts. But they're not separate, they count as a single revert which you'd know if you had any business being an administrator. Even worse, the article is under 1RR. 1RR is the bright line; so you managed the right outcome only by being wrong twice! Realistically you have two options - resign or be forced out. The former saves our time and your dignity. 192.40.95.30 (talk) 01:37, 9 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

 

On 10 June 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that at oral argument in NIFLA v. Becerra, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan questioned whether a California law was "gerrymandered" in order to discriminate against crisis pregnancy centers? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 11:12, 10 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

 

Hello. Your account has been granted the "massmessage-sender" user right, allowing you to send messages to multiple users at once. A few important things to note:

• Messages should only be sent to groups of users who are likely to be interested in the topic.
• For regular mailings such as those for WikiProjects, localized events, or newsletters, users should be informed of how they can unsubscribe from future mailings.
• The mass messaging tool should never be used for canvassing with the intention of influencing the outcome of discussions.

For more information, refer to the guidance for use. If you do not want mass message sender rights anymore, just let me or any other administrator know and we will remove it. Thank you and happy editing! — xaosflux ^Talk 13:26, 11 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi Lionelt, just wanted to give you a few special notes and tips on this.

• You should create a "test" mailing list with just yourself and maybe 1 other person on it, and use it to test your mailings.

  After sending a mailing, check if any layout on the talk page has been broken, especially when replying to that section, or creating another section. (This could be caused by bad or mismatched html tags for example).

• If you want to help at WT:MMS and send mailings for others, that is great - but take care that anything you send on their behalf is appropriate.

  Certainly check the page and even do a test to yourself if you are not sure.

  Check their recipient list, especially checking how was it created? (E.g. anything opted in to is generally safe, a load of project participants that signed up are usually as well -- a list that was only edited by the requester, and its not clear where the recipients came from- this is suspect).

  Consider adding a html comment at the end of the message, like <!-- Message requested by User:Username at WT:MMS-->

• Be sure there is a timestamp in the message, normally near the bottom - these are used by archiving bots.

Best regards, — xaosflux ^Talk 13:32, 11 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

 

June 2018

FROM THE EDITOR

The Right Stuff Returns

By Lionelt

Fellow members, I'm pleased to announce the return of the newsletter of WikiProject Conservatism. And considering the recent downsizing at The Signpost the timing could not be better. The Right Stuff will help keep you apprised of what's happening in conservatism at Wikipedia and in the world. The Right Stuff welcomes submissions including position pieces, instructional articles, or short essays addressing important conservatism-related issues. Post submissions here.

Add the Project Discussion page to your watchlist for the latest updates at WikiProject Conservatism Watch (Discuss this story)

---

ARBITRATION REPORT

Russian Agents Editing at American Politics?

By Lionelt

After a series of unfortunate events largely self-created, bureaucrat and admin Andrevan was the subject of an Arbitration case for conduct unbecoming. Prior to the case getting underway Andrevan resigned as bureaucrat and admin. A widely discussed incident was when he suggested that some editors he described as "pro-Trump" were paid Russian agents. This resulted in a number of editors from varied quarters denouncing the allegations and voicing support for veteran editors including Winkelvi and the notorious MONGO.

Editors who faced Enforcement action include SPECIFICO (no action), Factchecker atyourservice (three month topic ban ARBAPDS), Netoholic (no action) and Anythingyouwant (indef topic ban ARBAPDS). (Discuss this story)

IN THE MEDIA

Breitbart Versus Wikipedia

By Lionelt

Breitbart News, in response to Facebook's decision to use Wikipedia as a source to fight fake news, has declared war on our beloved pedia. The article in Haaretz describes the Facebook arrangement as Wikipedia's "greatest test in years" as well as a "massive threat" to the encyclopedia that anyone can edit. Breitbart's targeting of Wikipedia has resulted in an "epic battle" with respect to editing at the Breitbart article. The article has also recently experienced a dramatic increase in traffic with 50,000 visitors according to Haaretz. There is no love lost between Breitbart and Wikipedia where editors at the Reliable Sources Noticeboard have criticized the news websites unreliability and have compared it to The Daily Mail. (Discuss this story)

---

DISCUSSION REPORT

Liberty and Trump and Avi, Oh my!

By Lionelt

 

President Donald Trump Speaks at Liberty University Commencement Ceremony

There are several open discussions at the Project:

• There is an RFC regarding Liberty University and its relationship to President Trump; see discussion
• Activist and commentator Avi Yemini is listed at AFD; see discussion

Recently closed discussions include Anti-abortion movements which was not renamed, and an RFC at Trump–Russia dossier. (Discuss this story)

WPConservatism

Newsroom

Discuss a story

Unsubscribe

Suggestions

Delivered: 11:12, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Good job with this!!!!! Glad to have it back. --Chlorineer (talk) 13:47, 12 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

This is great! Kudos! CsikosLo (talk) 14:49, 12 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi Lionelt, I published the article in my sandbox. Thanks!--Biografix (talk) 14:59, 14 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi, Could you explain why you reverted my edit? You did not leave an edit summary. –dlthewave ☎ 12:41, 16 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

 

On 17 June 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Destiny Herndon-De La Rosa, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Destiny Herndon-De La Rosa's feminist group New Wave Feminists was removed as a partner of the 2017 Women's March after organizers discovered the group was pro-life? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Destiny Herndon-De La Rosa. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Destiny Herndon-De La Rosa), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:01, 17 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

It seems pretty absurd as an Australian to rank a not-particularly-influential, if long-serving Australian Cabinet minister as "high importance" in the scheme of international conservative politics on the basis that they were Father of the House (a little-known courtesy title) - but if you want to do strange things, I'm not going to stop you. The Drover's Wife (talk) 11:45, 23 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the link! It's far far more user friendly than the default alert. I've made a couple of changes - mostly minor grammars tweak which I hope you won't object to, plus added a link to explain what 1RR is as I had to look up what that meant. 人族 (talk) 04:55, 24 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

[1] - no. I voluntarily agreed not to edit the article Donald Trump for one week. This does not apply to the talk page, nor does it apply to the Presidency of Donald Trump article.Volunteer Marek (talk) 08:51, 26 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hello. I'm currently reviewing this nomination, and partly due to concerns raised by FallingGravity, I've struck both of the hooks. As you were involved in the nomination, your feedback and immediate response is appreciated. Thanks. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 00:48, 28 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Would you care to join this discussion? Some seem to believe that conservatism began in 1776 and want more of the Founding Fathers in the article. They oppose the 1932 cutoff. --GHcool (talk) 22:51, 28 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

 

July 2018

DISCUSSION REPORT

WikiProject Conservatism Comes Under Fire

By Lionelt

WikiProject Conservatism was a topic of discussion at the Administrators' Noticeboard/Incident (AN/I). Objective3000 started a thread where he expressed concern regarding the number of RFC notices posted on the Discussion page suggesting that such notices "could result in swaying consensus by selective notification." Several editors participated in the relatively abbreviated six hour discussion. The assertion that the project is a "club for conservatives" was countered by editors listing examples of users who "profess no political persuasion." It was also noted that notification of WikiProjects regarding ongoing discussions is explicitly permitted by the WP:Canvassing guideline.

At one point the discussion segued to feedback about The Right Stuff. Member SPECIFICO wrote: "One thing I enjoy about the Conservatism Project is the handy newsletter that members receive on our talk pages." Atsme praised the newsletter as "first-class entertainment...BIGLY...first-class...nothing even comes close...it's amazing." Some good-natured sarcasm was offered with Objective3000 observing, "Well, they got the color right" and MrX's followup, "Wow. Yellow is the new red."

Admin Oshwah closed the thread with the result "definitely not an issue for ANI" and directing editors to the project Discussion page for any further discussion. Editor's note: originally the design and color of The Right Stuff was chosen to mimic an old, paper newspaper.

Add the Project Discussion page to your watchlist for the "latest RFCs" at WikiProject Conservatism Watch (Discuss this story)

---

ARTICLES REPORT

Margaret Thatcher Makes History Again

By Lionelt

Margaret Thatcher is the first article promoted at the new WikiProject Conservatism A-Class review. Congratulations to Neveselbert. A-Class is a quality rating which is ranked higher than GA (Good article) but the criteria are not as rigorous as FA (Featured article). WikiProject Conservatism is one of only two WikiProjects offering A-Class review, the other being WikiProject Military History. Nominate your article here. (Discuss this story)

RECENT RESEARCH

Research About AN/I

By Lionelt

Reprinted in part from the April 26, 2018 issue of The Signpost; written by Zarasophos

Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. There is more info on Phabricator and on MediaWiki.org.

Out of over one hundred questioned editors, only twenty-seven (27%) are happy with the way reports of conflicts between editors are handled on the Administrators' Incident Noticeboard (AN/I), according to a recent survey . The survey also found that dissatisfaction has varied reasons including "defensive cliques" and biased administrators as well as fear of a "boomerang effect" due to a lacking rule for scope on AN/I reports. The survey also included an analysis of available quantitative data about AN/I. Some notable takeaways:

• 53% avoided making a report due to fearing it would not be handled appropriately
• "Otherwise 'popular' users often avoid heavy sanctions for issues that would get new editors banned."
• "Discussions need to be clerked to keep them from raising more problems than they solve."

In the wake of Zarasophos' article editors discussed the AN/I survey at The Signpost and also at AN/I. Ironically a portion of the AN/I thread was hatted due to "off-topic sniping." To follow-up the problems identified by the research project the Wikimedia Foundation Anti-Harassment Tools team and Support and Safety team initiated a discussion. You can express your thoughts and ideas here.

(Discuss this story)

WPConservatism

Newsroom

Discuss a story

Unsubscribe

Archives

Suggestions

Delivered: 09:27, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Lionel. See [2]. That can't be right. Some misclick? I tried the message delivery talkpage, but it asked me to take it to you. Bishonen | talk 10:48, 9 July 2018 (UTC).Reply

That was a test. Sometimes I do a test run before the live mailing. This time around the pie chart wasn't previewing correctly in the mass message preview screen so I tested it. – Lionel^(talk) 10:56, 9 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

  Hello! Your submission of Joice Hasselmann at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 19:38, 9 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi,

I really appreciate what you do with the newsletter. Just a suggestion though, unfortunately "The Right Stuff" is also the name of The Right Stuff (blog), a white supremacist blog, so it might be wise to perhaps considering changing the name as some people may try to draw connections.

Really unfortunate that this kind of stuff happens.

Marquis de Faux (talk) 22:56, 9 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your support. Yeah, I recently became aware of the blog. Our The Right Stuff newsletter was founded before the white supremacist blog. As to changing the name, I'm not inclined to capitulate to white supremacists particularly since I'm Black. I'm of the opinion that the phrase "the right stuff" should be "reclaimed" (as they say in multicultural studies). – Lionel^(talk) 01:58, 10 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

Ironically, I came here with the same comment, but a thread already exists :-). I think it would be difficult to reclaim the name, given the present-day concerns that the GOP can be perceived as too welcoming to the fringe element. Just today I saw this article: Self-described Nazis and white supremacists are running as Republicans across the country. The GOP is terrified..

I respect your decision to keep the name, but I always think of blog when I see the newsletter. I was thinking of subscribing, but can't bring myself to. Just some reader feedback. K.e.coffman (talk) 05:17, 10 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

We should propose a panel about being a minority editing community and difficulty experiences in creating neutral content.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 18:59, 20 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

Given the recent discussion at ANI perhaps we roundtable panel at the WikiConference would be good to have. Perhaps it should be titled "#RESIST : An editors round table"

The primary topic of editing relating to current events in the United States since November 2016, with sub-topic discussions on notability of new subjects/articles from reliable sources with a bias against the present federal government administration, and the reaction of the editing community to individual editors seeking to improve content which is not left of center, and Neutrality in editing within the WP:ARBAPDS sphere of articles.

@Lionelt: Thoughts?--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 03:30, 27 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

 

The article Battle For America has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This is literally just a listing for a propaganda film.

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. Calton | Talk 05:25, 21 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

 

The article The Hope and the Change has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This is literally just a listing for a propaganda film.

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. Calton | Talk 05:27, 21 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

 

The article Torchbearer (documentary) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This just a listing for a propaganda film, one which its creator is using to promote it https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Wesley_Craig&diff=prev&oldid=850058571

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. Calton | Talk 05:28, 21 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Battle For America 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/Battle For America 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. - MrX 🖋 10:34, 24 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Torchbearer (documentary) 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/Torchbearer (documentary) 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. Calton | Talk 11:18, 24 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Hope and the Change 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/The Hope and the Change 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. Tyw7  (🗣️ Talk • ✍️ Contributions) Please ping me if you had replied 11:34, 24 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Free Speech Fairness Act 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/Free Speech Fairness Act 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. –dlthewave ☎ 16:27, 24 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

There's an issue at Political activity of the Knights of Columbus and Knights of Columbus regarding the use of scare quotes around culture of life. Since you weighed in before on the topic, I thought you might be so kind as to do so again. We got two third opinions, but one user is ignoring the consensus. --BrianCUA (talk) 02:54, 25 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

  There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Black Kite (talk) 13:15, 25 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

Just for ease of finding it, the thread is Possible political POV pushing onto the Main Page using DYK. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 17:34, 25 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hello. I wanted to give you a heads up that I mentioned you in a dispute on the edit warring notice board. --BrianCUA (talk) 14:22, 25 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

I notice that someone else slightly changed your comment on the Steve King talk page, here. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 21:17, 27 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

Someone has marked Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/LioneltBot 2 as needing your input. Please visit that page to reply to the requests. Thanks! AnomieBOT⚡ 03:56, 27 August 2018 (UTC) To opt out of these notifications, place {{bots|optout=operatorassistanceneeded}} anywhere on this page.Reply

I read your section on "Snooganssnoogans"'s talk page. Snooganssnoogans has also used similar language against other WP users. For example, here. 74.109.177.105 (talk) 23:09, 2 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

 

Category:Conservatism by issue, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. wumbolo ^^^ 20:02, 19 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

  Wikipedia:WikiProject Outlines/Drafts/Outline of conservatism, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Outlines/Drafts/Outline of conservatism (2nd nomination) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:WikiProject Outlines/Drafts/Outline of conservatism during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. UnitedStatesian (talk) 17:54, 2 March 2019 (UTC)Reply

 Template:Herman Cain series has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Walk Like an Egyptian (talk) 23:16, 13 March 2019 (UTC)Reply

 Template:Gerald R. Molen has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. --woodensuperman 16:00, 18 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Lionelt: Could use your vote on a RFC on the Reagan talk page. Thanks.Rja13ww33 (talk) 18:15, 21 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hello Lionelt! This message is to inform you that due to editing inactivity, your access to AutoWikiBrowser may be temporarily removed. If you do not resume editing within the next week, your username will be removed from the CheckPage. This is purely for routine maintenance and is not indicative of wrongdoing on your part. You may regain access at any time by simply requesting it at WP:PERM/AWB. Thank you! — MusikBot II ^talk 17:04, 1 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:American College of Pediatricians (emblem).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:24, 19 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

 

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Encourage. Since you had some involvement with the Encourage redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 05:24, 21 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

Discussion withdrawn, disregard. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 05:28, 21 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

 

A tag has been placed on Milan Kordestani, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

• It appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, such as at articles for deletion. (See section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) If a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.
• It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Praxidicae (talk) 21:06, 10 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

 

A tag has been placed on Category:American conservative people requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_January_21#Category:American_conservatives. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 11:41, 1 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Witherspoon logo.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. HapHaxion _{(talk / contribs)} 22:44, 29 June 2020 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:An Inconsistent Truth poster.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:05, 25 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

 Template:Herman Cain series has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:02, 15 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

 Template:CNSV Incubator has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Tom (LT) (talk) 07:43, 24 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

 Template:CNSV Incubate has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:51, 9 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

 Template:TRS Footer has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:09, 22 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

  An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Kristin J. Tremba and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 March 31#Kristin J. Tremba until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Unbh (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

 Template:Bernard Nathanson has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 17:28, 30 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:WhetherYouLikeItOrNot.ogv. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:28, 13 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

 Template:Conservatism Collab has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 13:13, 13 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

 Template:Conservatism Collab-For has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 13:13, 13 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

 Template:Conservatism Collab-Ad has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 13:13, 13 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

 

Category:Anti-abortion organizations in Denmark has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Estopedist1 (talk) 07:40, 18 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

 

A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 1 § Category:WikiProject X members on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Qwerfjkltalk 09:36, 2 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Southern Adventist University has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:05, 6 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

  The redirect The Conservatism Portal has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 January 20 § The Conservatism Portal until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 18:29, 20 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

 

Category:Images of Dick Cheney has been nominated for splitting. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 16:29, 27 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

 Template:WPRYT Uw-banner has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. 2603:8001:4542:28FB:D1A0:7BBB:E6CF:5C27 (talk) 07:14, 21 February 2024 (UTC) (actual talk)Reply

 Template:WPRYT Request has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:46, 22 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

 

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Gaymarchwash.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. 廣九直通車 (talk) 09:14, 18 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

 

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Cottrell2.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. 廣九直通車 (talk) 09:25, 18 August 2024 (UTC)Reply