User talk:VersedFenrir

Archives

User:Sn0wflake/ArchivedTalk01, which includes messages from 16 July 2004 to 24 July 2005. Statistics for this archive are as follows: positive interaction (30) general comments (22) cricticism (6) negative interaction (4) adminship nominations (1)

User:Sn0wflake/ArchivedTalk02, which includes messages from 26 July 2005 to 13 December 2005. Statistics for this archive are as follows: positive interaction (49) general comments (12) cricticism (2) negative interaction (3) barnstars (2) long-standing conflicts resolved (1) conflicts I was dragged into unintentionally (1)

User:Sn0wflake/ArchivedTalk03, 32kb long

Re: Something different

Hi Sn0wflake - I must admit that this isn't really an area that I'm that well versed in dealing with, but I've made a note of it at WP:AN/I (probably better to have a comment there left by an outsider than one of the parties directly involved anyway) - feel free to comment on it, though. Trouble is it doesn't really count as vandalism - the editor seems to have a point to a very minor extent, but is definitely being overly zealous and highly un-civil about pursuing it. It almost qualifies for a Disputes Resolution issue, except that this seems to cover a wide number of pages and not be restricted to just the one instance. Grutness...wha? 23:30, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Any chance of getting some help...

...with a certain anonymous editor? Two week ban is up and instantly it's the same tired stuff in Photoshopping, the Abandonware related articles (including making unencyclopedic changes to the disambiguation page for HOTU) and so on. Just thought I'd put the bug in your ear. Thanks for your time!

70.94.32.98 06:34, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Followup

FYI, I have posted additional evidence at your ANI thread. --Elonka 23:30, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Since the ANI thread has been archived, I am responding to your question here. The way that Wikipedia works, Checkuser is not appropriate in this case. Checkuser is not to prove sockpuppetry, it's only a tool to be used in ambiguous cases. Look at the table at the top of WP:RFCU, you'll see what I mean. The proper way to prove sockpuppetry here was for me to post my evidence to ANI, which I did, but no one seemed interested in it.  :/ Do you think I should re-open the thread, to present more evidence? --Elonka 21:31, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I have compiled a list of the various anon IPs that he's been using to harass me over the last year. If he's willing to take the current block to heart and stop the harassment, I'm willing to consider the matter closed. But if he starts up again, I guess I'll have to get more aggressive about bringing out the evidence. --Elonka 21:52, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Are you following the discussion at User talk:216.165.158.7 ? --Elonka 17:05, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

You may wish to participate at this new ANI thread. FYI, --Elonka 01:04, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. BTW, do you use email? I tried the link but it doesn't seem to be activated. I could send you a list of the IPs is you'd like to take a look. --Elonka 02:14, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Sent, thanks.  :) --Elonka 02:33, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Hello

Got it, thanks for the tip. -- Logical Defense

PNT

Hello! Sure, not a prob :) -Yupik 07:21, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Opeth

Opeth is progressive metal, there is no debating it, however I'll compromise by leaving the genre intact in exchange for fixing some poor grammar. Grevvvvv 18:33, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

You don't?

If you "don't mean to sound disrespectful," you have remarkably poor control of your tone. Bishonen | talk 21:31, 21 April 2007 (UTC).

Content question

Hey Mark, new user to Wiki, and I had a few questions. I edited around two dozen pages, most with link additions to recent interviews with Modern Fix Magazine. I noticed most of my edits, aside from Heartless Bastards and Juggaknots were removed with a ‘spam’ mark.

At this point I would just like to make clear, I’m not upset about my edit retractions. In fact, it’s good to know the site is so well monitored. Obviously, the majority of my posts didn’t meet Wiki’s criteria for relevance, which is why I’m reaching out to you to get a more clear definition of what is allowed. I feel I could justify every edit & external link I made as not spam, but again, honestly a bit unsure on what is allowed, and what is considered spam. Bottom line, really like the site and its purpose, and just want to get MY head clear with the rules and not waste you or anybody else’s time.

For instance, the In Flames edit. This was a link to the interview, which was is also linked on the bands official site (http://www.inflames.com/main.html), and contained information that I as a fan hadn’t read about (like the part about how Anders, the vocalist, hates his live Tokyo Showdown album). Another edit I was unsure about was my A-Trak entry, an external link to his first cover feature in a printed magazine. Anyways, let me know when ya can. Thanks! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dronester (talk • contribs) 22:23, 21 April 2007 (UTC).

RE: Content Question

Thanks for the quick reply and constructive comments, you've been very helpful —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dronester (talk • contribs) 00:59, 22 April 2007 (UTC).

Issue?

What issue do you have with a very simple sentence that may save thousands of personhours of article formatting cleanup time? PS: Edit summaries like "wtf?" are not particularly helpful or civil... — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 05:59, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

D'oh! I totally didn't even notice that it was in there twice. The edits by someone else, I think Grutness, after your concisifying of the sentence moved it, and it looked like it'd been deleted when I skimmed the changes too fast, so I "restored" it. Gaaahhh... Sorry I bit your ankle here. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 02:50, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Disambiguation (when to)

Quick questions, the page for Daryl Palumbo links to geometry when referencing Palumbo's side project of the same name. This seems like a perfect time to edit the geometry disambiguation page with the reference to the band, and correctly point the original reference to that page.... right? Dronester 00:12, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Regarding an editor who is impersonating other editors

Hello Snowflake, recently I noticed that User:SilvaStorm made this edit to User talk:.NERGAL. Apparently SilvaStorm was impersonating an administrator and furthermore signed his fake ban message with my name. I have since replaced the signature on that message with an unsigned tag displaying his name. After looking through SilvaStorm's edit history I noticed that he has history of not following wiki guidelines/policies and he knows how to sign his name on messages, thus his fake ban message was done intentionally. I would have warned him myself of his actions but realized that an administrator could more effectively deal with the problem. --Leon Sword 03:54, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Ban notice?

Hi Mark, please do not worry about this situation - me and User:.NERGAL are actually friends. Recently he has had quite a few of his edits reverted and files deleted by User:Leon Sword, who has basically been picking on him. All I did was joke that he had been banned by making that message from Leon Sword, but .NERGAL knew it wasn't real as he could still edit pages and the fact that Leon Sword isn't an admin. If you look at this edit, you will see that .NERGAL changed the "preceding unsigned comment" signature back to my one, which he obviously wouldn't do if he thought it was for real. So please don't consider this 'disruptive behaviour', as neither me nor .NERGAL meant anything by it. -- SilvaStorm

Nope, that makes perfect sense, I too would be annoyed if someone was impersonating me! Regards. -- SilvaStorm

Help, hes lying

Hello, the perso who commmented above me is lying, he is tormenting me. Look at my talk and hes edited it. I have No idea who this person is and I am felling like my own page does not belong to me, please do something about this. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by .NERGAL (talk • contribs) 08:32, 2 May 2007 (UTC).

What are you talking about?! I was saving you from getting into trouble with admins. You can't just blank your talk page, you have to archive it. Sn0wflake, I am friends with this .NERGAL so he is either joking around, or is angry at me... -- SilvaStorm

I have, thanks for understanding. -- SilvaStorm

MotR

Hello, just wondering why was the Max on the Rox article reverted back to an old version? Diamon 10:23, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

• Yes, you are right about Kai Hahto's genre, but I mean the whole Max on the Rox page was reverted to an older stub version. Just see this compare page: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Max_on_the_Rox&diff=128572162&oldid=128442128

Is it okay for you, if I change it back to what it was, but keep the "...well known heavy metal musician." there? Diamon 13:40, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Question on an edit

Hey man, since you are my go-to sys0p i have a question on my edit for Trustkill, as you can see from the before and after I took out a lot of text but geez, the whole thing read like a press release and was OBVIOUSLY written by someone in the company. Was my edit correct, or should it be reverted back? I don't want to make something worse, i guess i would think that removing the bias, however the amount, is a good thing. I dunno. Let me know, thanks Dronester 05:36, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks. I just wanted to be sure. I definitely tried to pry any useful information but it was such a hyped press release, my guess is that it came from an already-written bio. All the info outside of that text chunk was pulled from their wiki guts, so it was mostly repetitive info anyways. Thanks again for the quick response. Dronester 21:21, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Goldmark

Goldmark coins (½, 1, 5 and 20 Mark)

Some Mark(s) Datys ah Deutsches Geld for you.

Sorry for wasting your time. Your name sounds Ashkenazim.--DanielMrakic 20:43, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of NO$GBA

NO$GBA, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that NO$GBA satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NO$GBA and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of NO$GBA during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. TTN 02:06, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

interested in the Portuguese-speaking world

Hi. I'm Beth, known on Wikipedia as Learnportuguese. I am very interested in the Portuguese language and the Portuguese-speaking world. The whole concept of saudade is fascinating. If you want, chek out my user page and talk page and put a watch on both. I have very interesting discussions there. You are very welcome to contribute. :-) learnportuguese (talk) 16:08, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

What happened to "Francis"

I've been creating pages for defunct Saskatchewan ridings, and I noticed that you deleted the previous content posted at "Francis (electoral district)". Was it just vandalism or was there any valid content there? Thanks. Jwkozak91 (talk) 04:35, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Lufia II (game screenshot 01).jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Lufia II (game screenshot 01).jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NanohaA'sYuri^{Talk, My master} 23:14, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Re: Hello

Thanks Mark - yup, I'm still plugging away, but understandably I work more on actual editing of articles rather than trying to work behind the scenes. My health's not too bad now, but I think it's as well for me to avoid the stress of the bureaucracy for the time being at least. It's also given me a chance to step back and reassess things (including by Wikiholism!). Good to see you back, even if it's just for a visit! Grutness...wha? 07:44, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of NO$GBA

I have nominated NO$GBA, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NO$GBA (2nd nomination). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 21:05, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Pop metal

You did not even contact me when you unfairly deleted the pop metal article. You didn't even give the article a chance and there was no reason to delete it. I'm sorry if I'm coming off rude here, but why did you do this? Rockgenre (talk) 04:19, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

What an asshole-like move: Rockgenre creates an article FROM SCRATCH and provides accurate references and sources and it gets deleted? Because of what?--Greg D. Barnes (talk) 06:04, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

"irregaldess of whether one source for some reason called it pop metal" you say "irregaldess", why would you deny a legit source? And might I add that you didn't even set it up for nomination and set up a debate for it. It's merely your POV that the term always means hair metal. Pop metal does not always mean hair metal, Source>opinion. The Runaways, Ted Nugent, and the Black Album are examples I have to back this up. I do intend to recreate the article in the future and if you do want it deleted at least set up a discussion for it and have it nominated instead of having your lone editorial opinion. I am truly very sorry if I'm being rude here, but you didn't even get the opinions of others editors before you deleted it.Rockgenre (talk) 23:31, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

hallo from Uwe Kils

can you please vote again on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Uwe_Kils_(3rd_nomination). Best wishes Uwe Kils 13:32, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Sn0wflake! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 3 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 944 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

1. Lana Lane - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
2. Sam Totman - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
3. Supla - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 07:02, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Church of Reality

Hi there. Back in 2005 you discussed this article at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Church of Reality. The article has since been recreated, and I have re-nominated it for deletion. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Church of Reality (2nd nomination). Robofish (talk) 01:32, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Universal Migrator Part 2: Flight of the Migrator, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Time reversal (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) 08:56, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

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)

Nomination of Soulburn for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Soulburn 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/Soulburn 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. gidonb (talk) 20:31, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protection

Hello, Sn0wflake. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

• Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
• A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.

Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:49, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

A new user right for New Page Patrollers

Hi VersedFenrir.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Sn0wflake. 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. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Sn0wflake. 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)

Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 01:30, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter - February 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Administrator changes

NinjaRobotPirate • Schwede66 • K6ka • Ealdgyth • Ferret • Cyberpower678 • Mz7 • Primefac • Dodger67

Briangotts • JeremyA • BU Rob13

Guideline and policy news

• A discussion to workshop proposals to amend the administrator inactivity policy at Wikipedia talk:Administrators has been in process since late December 2016.
• Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2016 closed with no consensus for implementing Pending changes level 2 with new criteria for use.
• Following an RfC, an activity requirement is now in place for bots and bot operators.

Technical news

• When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
• Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
• The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee released a response to the Wikimedia Foundation's statement on paid editing and outing.

Obituaries

• JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.

---

Discuss this newsletter • Subscribe • Archive

13:37, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Bassist-stub

Template:Bassist-stub has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 01:20, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Sn0wflake. 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)

Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time, and that you have not been inactive from administrative tasks for a five year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. Further, following a community discussion in March of 2018, administrators suspended for inactivity who have not had any logged administrative activity for five years will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. — JJMC89 bot 00:05, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Sn0wflake. 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)

ArbCom 2019 special circular

Administrators must secure their accounts The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised. Use strong, unique passwords for your Wikipedia account and associated email Change your password now if your Wikipedia account password or email password is reused on another website, exposed, or weak Enable two-factor authentication now for improved security

View additional information

Why have I received this message? All administrators are receiving it. What prompted you to send this message? Recently, several Wikipedia admin accounts were compromised. The admin accounts were desysopped on an emergency basis. In the past, the Committee often resysopped admin accounts as a matter of course once the admin was back in control of their account. The committee has updated its guidelines. Admins may now be required to undergo a fresh Request for Adminship (RfA) after losing control of their account. What do I need to do? Only to follow the instructions in this message. Check that your password is unique (not reused across sites). Check that your password is strong (not simple or guessable). Enable Two-factor authentication (2FA), if you can, to create a second hurdle for attackers. How can I find out more about two-factor authentication (2FA)? You can find out more about 2FA at m:2FA.

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:41, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:04, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Administrators will no longer be autopatrolled

A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

How we will see unregistered users

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:12, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

New administrator activity requirement

The administrator policy has been updated with new activity requirements following a successful Request for Comment.

Beginning January 1, 2023, administrators who meet one or both of the following criteria may be desysopped for inactivity if they have:

1. Made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least a 12-month period OR
2. Made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period

Administrators at risk for being desysopped under these criteria will continue to be notified ahead of time. Thank you for your continued work.

22:53, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Established policy provides for the removal of the administrative permissions of users who have made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period. Your administrative permissions will be removed if you do not return to the required activity level before the beginning of January 2023.

Inactive administrators are encouraged to engage with the project in earnest rather than to make token edits to avoid loss of administrative permissions. Resources and support for re-engaging with the project are available at Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/administrators. If you do not intend to re-engage with the project in the foreseeable future, please consider voluntarily resigning your administrative permissions by making a request at the bureaucrats' noticeboard.

Thank you for your past contributions to the project. — JJMC89 bot 08:47, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:26, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Imminent suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Established policy provides for the removal of the administrative permissions of users who have made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period. Your administrative permissions will be removed if you do not return to the required activity level before the beginning of January 2023.

Inactive administrators are encouraged to engage with the project in earnest rather than to make token edits to avoid loss of administrative permissions. Resources and support for re-engaging with the project are available at Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/administrators. If you do not intend to re-engage with the project in the foreseeable future, please consider voluntarily resigning your administrative permissions by making a request at the bureaucrats' noticeboard.

Thank you for your past contributions to the project. — JJMC89 bot 00:58, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

• Done. --VF (talk) 10:04, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Soma Cruz (Castlevania character).gif

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Soma Cruz (Castlevania character).gif. 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) 02:37, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Mach Five for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mach Five 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/Mach Five 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.

NotAGenious (talk) 16:14, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

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) 00:21, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Pick tapping for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Pick tapping 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/Pick tapping 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.

Mac Dreamstate (talk) 22:21, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Soma Cruz for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Soma Cruz 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/Soma Cruz (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.

ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:06, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

Administrative permissions and inactivity reminder

This is a reminder that established policy provides for removal of the administrative permissions of users who have made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period. You are receiving this annual reminder since you have averaged less than 50 edits per year over the last 5 years.

Inactive administrators are encouraged to reengage with the project in earnest rather than to make token edits to avoid loss of administrative permissions. Resources and support for reengaging with the project are available at Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/administrators. If you do not intend to be engaged with the project in the foreseeable future, please consider voluntarily resigning your administrative permissions by making a request at the bureaucrats' noticeboard.

Thank you for your past contributions to the project. — JJMC89 bot 00:20, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

I Have Lost... moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, I Have Lost..., is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Dan arndt (talk) 05:45, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of I Have Lost...

The article I Have Lost... has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:NALBUM, lacks any reliable independent sources or references. Has been tagged as such since March 2018, without any improvements/referencing.

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. Dan arndt (talk) 03:31, 15 February 2024 (UTC)