Momotaro

I am currently merging this into a unified login. --Momotaro (talk) 14:44, 12 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Your SUL request was done at th wiki. --Lerdsuwa (talk) 02:47, 24 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thank you! --Momotaro (talk) 13:55, 30 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

Why create multiple redirects for place names? Surely they already exist? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peter Robinson Scott (talk • contribs) 12:51, 13 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

I created the redirects because "redirects are cheap", and because I wanted to fix some red links from WP:WikiProject_Red_Link_Recovery/Punctuation. Certainly I could change the links in the individual articles, but creating a redirect will avoid the problem for the future. If someone again links to Newport (Rhode Island) instead of Newport, Rhode Island, the link will work.

However, if a redirect would be a very unlikely target, or plainly wrong, I will not create it and change the link instead. --Momotaro (talk) 13:01, 13 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

 

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

Proposed for deletion as WP:DICDEF.

While all 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. Tyrenon (talk) 07:38, 15 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hey all :).

I'm dropping you a note because you've been involved in dealing with feedback from the Article Feedback Tool. To get a better handle on the overall quality of comments now that the tool has become a more established part of the reader experience, we're undertaking a round of hand coding - basically, taking a sample of feedback and marking each piece as inappropriate, helpful, so on - and would like anyone interested in improving the tool to participate :).

You can code as many or as few pieces of feedback as you want: this page should explain how to use the system, and there is a demo here. Once you're comfortable with the task, just drop me an email at okeyes wikimedia.org and I'll set you up with an account :).

If you'd like to chat with us about the research, or want live tutoring on the software, there will be an office hours session on Monday 17 December at 23:00 UTC in #wikimedia-office ^connect. Hope to see some of you there! Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 23:20, 14 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:49, 23 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Exact couple 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/Exact couple 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.  Sandstein  20:54, 4 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Back in year 2008, you edited the page Weierstrass p; you virtually created that page. I'm afraid I'm not sure about its accuracy. Could you have a look at Talk:Weierstrass p#Cleanup? Thanks. --Teika kazura (talk) 22:46, 2 August 2017 (UTC)Reply