Thanks for cleaning up the elections box. However, I think that the names as presented in the boxes should reflect the names as recorded on the ballot and in the official records. Right now Mr. McGhee's name is so-formatted, but the other three are not. If I were to revise the election data boxes to reflect the formal ballot names, would that be acceptable? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.50.196.127 (talk) 22:06, 20 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the question. The general policy on Wikipedia is to use common names (for example, see WP:COMMONNAME, which relates to page titles). Election results aren't treated any differently, in my experience. See Sedgefield (UK Parliament constituency), for example, where Tony Blair is called Tony Blair not Anthony Charles Lynton Blair, despite the latter being the name that appeared on the ballot and in the official records. I'd therefore suggest bringing Mr. McGhee's name into line. --Lincolnite (talk) 23:04, 20 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 17:42, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you tell me why you undid the edit concerning nominee Edward C. DuMont? The former Chief Judge did not take senior status. The edit was intended to correct that inaccuracy. Thank you. (Bondgirlbook (talk) 21:30, 11 July 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks for the message. You are quite right that the article contained an inaccuracy that you corrected and I mistakenly uncorrected (I've since edited the article and it's now correct). I was too quick to reverse your edit, which initially struck me as questionable because of the mid-sentence reference which appeared to replicate the existing ref - I obviously didn't read it closely enough. Apologies. --Lincolnite (talk) 19:02, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I plan to bring Demographics of the Supreme Court of the United States‎ up to featured status over the next few weeks. I have great respect for your editorial judgment, and would appreciate your opinion of the article, particularly the tone of the section covering sexual orientation. Cheers! bd2412 T 15:20, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, BD2412. Thanks for the kind words and the vote of confidence. I've taken a look and made a few edits to the section in question. The evidence that I've read on the topic tends to consider Murphy a more likely candidate than Cardozo so I've altered the ordering accordingly. I've also added some quotes from Murdoch and Price (which I happened to have on the bookshelf in front of me). I think the article as a whole is in really good shape and, with a few more tweaks, should make a great featured article. Good luck with it! --Lincolnite (talk) 16:42, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! The section is much improved. bd2412 T 17:53, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

		The Minor Barnstar
		Thanks for cleaning up after me! :) Hekerui (talk) 07:51, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Haha. Thanks. --Lincolnite (talk) 13:24, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your quick intervention. There may be further discussion concerning this and your comments/opinion would be welcome. Please see:

• Talk:Jeremy Karpen
• User talk:ConcentratedAllPurposeCleaner

Cheers, --Kudpung (talk) 01:30, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you write a biography over new state legislator in NC ? 92.252.45.18 (talk) 10:32, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done. See Marcus Brandon.--Lincolnite (talk) 05:52, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

During the next month I plan on creating pages for the newly elected members of the MGA. I could use your help. Pls respond here as to whether or not you wish to create pages and if so, which newly elected legislators you wish to take. Thanks «Marylandstater» ^«reply» 12:21, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi Marylandstater. I'll happily take care of Mary Washington (D-43), Luke Clippinger (D-46) and Bonnie Cullison (D-19). Thanks. --Lincolnite (talk) 18:20, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks, I will do the remainder House members and hold them in my sandbox until the start of session. I will also be updating the list of current members at that time. I will also get images of all new members that first week of the 2011 session. «Marylandstater» ^«reply» 13:36, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Done: Mary L. Washington, Luke Clippinger and Bonnie Cullison. --Lincolnite (talk) 22:20, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for using the nomination process for this article as opposed to just; this is not the first article of a politician I've made that has had its notability challenged. In the Jaime Herrera case, it was a very hasty proposed delete because the user who proposed it either did not read through the article or know the WP:POLITICIAN criteria; mods ruled Herrera was clearly notable. On Elizabeth Scott, I've addressed concerns of others that it was not notable, citing the criteria. It is apparent you have read through the criteria thoughtfully and still find this article wanting. I think this is a result of different readings of the same criteria, which leave room for discretion on the part of users. More thoughts on the discussion for the proposed deletion. Peace, Wikibojopayne (talk) 00:06, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

While disappointed by the deletion, I have appreciated your civil tone throughout the deletion process. I'll see you around the politics pages! Peace, Wikibojopayne (talk) 00:09, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking care of my misplaced tag. Frankly, I can't remember what my rationale was. I think I was more focused on culling out people with poorly referenced military history. But with these two tags in mind, I'm going back to look for more corrections.--S. Rich (talk) 19:14, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Glad to help. --Lincolnite (talk) 20:02, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My auto completion played tricks on me, how annoying! Hekerui (talk) 06:26, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you help me and overhaul that article ? Marco Frank (talk) 18:07, 1 December 2010 (UTC) Can you repair that article, that someoneelse speeddeleted. The article was not my best but it is still a stub and Gail Shibley was a first LGBT state holder in Oregon. Marco Frank (talk) 18:19, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also article and biography David Berger needs more content. User:Lectonar deleted that biogaphy of German theologian and author. 92.252.55.66 (talk) 00:57, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. If you can, please consider completing this article with standard biographocal information (age, place & date of birth, education,family background, etc.) otherwise it tends to read more like political propoganda. Please remember to update any tenses according to upcoming developments. Thanks.--Kudpung (talk) 03:19, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I must admit to being totally confounded by your post. Perhaps you could explain further...? -- (A confused) Lincolnite (talk) 03:26, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Prop 8 results has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Mhiji 19:10, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:LincolnChapelQuad.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 20:07, 8 January 2011 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:07, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's good practice to check the style of similar articles when making edits. "Assembly District" appears to be a proper noun and should be capitalized, rather than lowercased.

• The succession boxes for Sheldon Silver, Ronald Canestrari, Brian Kolb, Daniel Losquadro, Fred Thiele, L. Dean Murray, Steven Englebright, Alfred C. Graf, etc., etc., etc. all capitalize "Assembly District".
• The New York Times capitalizes "Assembly District"
• The Assembly website capitalizes "Assembly District"

-- DanielPenfield (talk) 14:57, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As a contributor to this article, you may be interested to know it has been nominated for deletion. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tony Page. Robofish (talk) 01:31, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I just double-checked the quote on James Clark McReynolds in Abraham's book; "...when there is a Hebrew abroad" is the correct citation. "Abroad" is being used to mean "around", "in wide circulation", or "about" (rather than "outside the country"). A valid, if no longer common, use of the word. Magidin (talk) 02:56, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for checking and for the heads-up. It struck me as a very likely typo (abroad/aboard is the kind of typo that one sees all the time on Wikipedia) and the ref pointed to a book that I happen not to own. Interesting use of the word. I've added some hidden text to the article so that no one else makes the mistake I did! Thanks again --Lincolnite (talk) 05:14, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I removed the prod tag you placed on Randy Camacho and opened an AfD, as there was a malformed AfD nomination on that article almost 3 months ago and I just wanted to be sure we are within policy. The discussion is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Randy Camacho (2nd nomination). Cheers! —KuyaBriBri^Talk 06:56, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kathryn Hens-Greco 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/Kathryn Hens-Greco 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 good 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 template from the top of the article.--DThomsen8 (talk) 12:22, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Liberty Dollar piece is now neutral. Either improve it or leave it alone. Don't abuse Wiki by deleting it again. It shows your bias, not mine. Don Williams (talk) 16:13, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Jeremy Karpen, which you proposed for deletion, because I think that this article should not be deleted from Wikipedia. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! -- DanielKlotz (talk · contribs) 02:53, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not fasley accuse of vandalism the article contains citations and links testifying to his porn career . Said citations were formatted correctly by a wiki admin. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.113.183.92 (talk) 19:27, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See my reply on the article's talk page. This all comes down to WP:BLP. --Lincolnite (talk) 21:35, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of response has more to do with being busy, but based on your note, I won't object to the tag being removed. Edward321 (talk) 00:40, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Lincolnite! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

The committee assignments of U.S. Congressmen are very important information. I made some adjustments on Solomon Ortiz.--Jerzeykydd (talk) 21:29, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The proper term for a judge of the Court of Appeals is circuit judge. If you review Chapter 3 of Title 28 of the U.S. Code, it clearly, throughout the Chapter, refers to these judges as Circuit Judges. My usage in the article was therefore correct. Safiel (talk) 03:19, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Ian Ollis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page East London (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) 10:43, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Bruce Harris, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page JD (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) 10:49, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and changed the map; everything's up-to-date now. As an FYI, if you ever want to update the map on your own, download the SVG file, open it up in any text editor, and search for the congressional district you want to change (e.g., Suzanne Bonamici from Oregon's 1st congressional district would be found under "OR_1"). Once you're on the district you want, change the value in the corresponding "fill:#xxxxxx" to what you want (for reference, Democratic support would be "fill:#193ABE" and Republican support would be "fill:#A20303"). You can then re-upload the file on the map's page on the Wikimedia Commons. Thanks for the heads-up, Xnux 06:27, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Great. Thanks. --Lincolnite (talk) 16:48, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Aloha Lincolnite! My apologies for not being familiar with the protocols and processes of posting in Wikipedia. I am a member of Heather's campaign staff, and we wanted to at some meat to the Personal section, so I was asked to delete what was there in the interim while Heather wrote up what she thought she would want there. Thee was very well done, and she certainly appreciates your hard work and helping to get the word out about her! It was not my intent to in any way offend or dismiss the GREAT work you did.

If possible I'd like to continue to talk about her wikipage offline. You can e-mail me at psavasta @ gmail Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.175.73.92 (talk) 14:06, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi and thanks for your message. I'd recommend you start by reading Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide because you need to be very careful editing an article about someone with whom you're affiliated. Remember that Wikipedia isn't a campaign website and the information here isn't supposed to present people in the best possible light; it's meant to be fair, accurate and complete. --Lincolnite (talk) 14:35, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the prod you added to this article. Please see my explanation on the article's talk page. If you feel Meister is not notable, definitely take it to AfD. Thanks. - SummerPhD (talk) 00:32, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Sir Alan headshot.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. SuperMarioMan 23:01, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just so you know, Category:LGBT appointed officials in the United States is already a subcategory of Category:LGBT politicians from the United States — so a person such as Jim Roth doesn't get filed in both of those categories simultaneously, but rather he only belongs in the more specific one. Thanks. Bearcat (talk) 18:19, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Andrew McLean (American politician) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Terry Morrison

Justin Chenette (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Terry Morrison

Matt Moonen (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Terry Morrison

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:22, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article Association of Christian Democratic Students has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No independent references and no substantial claim of notability

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Deb (talk) 20:37, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

	The Editor's Barnstar
	Nice work on Kelvin Atkinson. Bearian (talk) 20:21, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Oxford Law Society 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/Oxford Law Society 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.

Not sure why you reverted my edit, FJC Bio shows that Caproni has received her commission and I have restored my edit to the page. Safiel (talk) 15:41, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, apologies for that. I was on an iPad and fat fingers meant I accidentally rolled back two edits within the space of a few seconds. I thought I'd only rolled back one (which I corrected immediately). It was only when I saw your message that I realised I'd done it twice. Apologies again. Lincolnite (talk) 20:22, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your upload of File:Barnet and Camden shown within London.PNG or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 12:57, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Another one of your uploads, File:Bexley and Bromley shown within London.PNG, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 13:14, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Another one of your uploads, File:Brent and Harrow shown within London.PNG, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:09, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Another one of your uploads, File:City and East shown within London.PNG, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:43, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You do understand that there are two distinct State Representative seats in the Washington State House of Representatives, Position #1 and Position #2, in each Legislative District, don't you? Washington is one of only 10 states with multi-member districts, so it is different than 80% of states in that stating a district in the State House of Representatives does NOT precisely state which seat a person occupies. The 43rd Legislative District, State Representative, Pos. 1, is different than 43rd Legislative District, State Representative, Pos. 2. Thus, by deleting that information you are making the reader LESS informed. The "|state_house" language works in most states, but not in Washington. Also, you just needlessly deleted all of the information about successors, predecessors, dates of service, link to the district at hand, etc.Champ68 (talk) 21:24, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia and your comments. I'd urge you to read two Wikipedia policies:

• WP:GOODFAITH
• MOS:INFOBOX, specifically the following sentences:

  When considering any aspect of infobox design, keep in mind the purpose of an infobox: to summarize key facts that appear in the article. The less information it contains, the more effectively it serves that purpose, allowing readers to identify key facts at a glance.

It seems clear that whether a state rep served a district in Pos. 1 or Pos. 2 is not a key fact and does not belong in an infobox. That is not to say that it doesn't belong in the main body of the article. As to the information about successors, predecessors, etc., those are key facts and I apologize for deleting them. I've just corrected my mistake. Thanks again for your contributions to Wikipedia! Lincolnite (talk) 15:25, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

But Pos. 1 and Pos. 2 have different lines of succession. Cal Anderson's predecessor in the State House was Janice Niemi and his successor was Pat Thibaudeau, yet his contemporary in the State House in the 43rd LD, Jesse Wineberry, in Pos. 2, was preceded by William L. “Bill” Burns and, strangely, also succeeded by Pat Thibaudeau (people were moved around after the 1991 redistricting process). Denoting that there are two unique seats for each Legislative District clarifies what might otherwise be seen as confusing.Champ68 (talk) 22:33, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Oxford college has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:19, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The sentence that I added accurately overviews the well cited section that it introduces, so I am confused by your labeling it as unsourced and failing to be NPOV. Regardless of how you labeled it, it is clear that you find the sentence to be objectionable. Would you add an overview sentence for that section that is to your liking? 216.66.5.54 (talk) 14:01, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message. Sections in Wikipedia articles do not need to have overview sentences per the Manual of Style. That section reads just fine without one, IMHO. Lincolnite (talk) 14:36, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you've rolled back my edit to the Jared Polis page for not having an Neutral Point of View and a possible violation of a biography of a living person. I referenced my edit. It was covered by at least three publications. His statements are on public record. It is of a news worthy nature. What he said was controversial. Including it in the encyclopedia shouldn't be. Can you comment on why you rolled back this edit? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mahatter (talk • contribs) 15:35, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comment. There were two elements of your contribution that led me to revert it:

1. The source: thefire.org is the website of a pressure group rather than a reliable, independent source. See WP:BLPSOURCES. An alternative reference would be an article like this from The Fort Collins Coloradoan, a reliable newspaper
2. The wording: "Polis [...] stated that students are guilty of sexual assault" does not display an impartial tone per WP:IMPARTIAL. A more impartial set of words would be similar to those used by the Coloradoan: Polis stated that "public universities should be able to use lower standards of evidence when deciding to expel students accused of sexual assault"

Hope that all makes sense. -- Lincolnite (talk) 17:29, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your feedback. I've made a second attempt at describing the event. I've used the Coloradoan as the primary source for the first sentence which describes the event factually and in a neutral POV. Here I've included Polis' controversial quote - the event. In the second sentence I've included a summary of the responses and sited the sources. Hopefully this is acceptable. Thanks again for your review and suggestions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mahatter (talk • contribs) 19:26, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

• On the Dan Johnston (politician) page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:04, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:38, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Barack Obama presidential campaign 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/Barack Obama presidential campaign 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. CatcherStorm ^talk 03:47, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:American politics/party colors/Whig/row has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 12:30, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:American politics/party colors/Whig has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 12:31, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

1. Adjust number of entries and days at Last unpatrolled
2. Editor-focused central editing dashboard
3. "Hide trusted users" checkbox option on watchlists and related/recent changes (RC) pages
4. Real-Time Recent Changes App for Android
5. Shortcut for patrollers to last changes list

Further, there are more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis)

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Note: You received this message because you have transcluded {{User wikipedia/RC Patrol}} (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.

Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 01:11, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Oxford college has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox residential college. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 17:26, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm working on a study of political motivations and how they affect editing. I'd like to ask you to take a survey. The survey should take 5 minutes. Your survey responses will be kept private. Our project is documented at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Wikipedia_%2B_Politics.

Survey Link: http://uchicago.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_9S3JByWf57fXEkR?Q_DL=56np5HpEZWkMlr7_9S3JByWf57fXEkR_MLRP_cCKzMRXFuHLUlTL&Q_CHL=gl

I am asking you to participate in this study because you are a frequent editor of pages on Wikipedia that are of political interest. We would like to learn about your experiences in dealing with editors of different political orientations.

Sincere thanks for your help! Porteclefs (talk) 22:57, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your upload to Wikipedia:

• File:CA Assembly district 46.jpg

You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of the image because the source is incomplete. Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact Web page where you found the image, rather than only giving the source domain, search engine, pinboard, aggregator, or the URL of the image file itself. Please update the image description with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page or me at my talk page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:50, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your upload to Wikipedia:

• File:CA Assembly district 8.gif

You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of the image because the source is incomplete. Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact Web page where you found the image, rather than only giving the source domain, search engine, pinboard, aggregator, or the URL of the image file itself. Please update the image description with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page or me at my talk page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:51, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tony Miller (Kentucky) 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/Tony Miller (Kentucky) 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. GPL93 (talk) 19:06, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:CA Assembly district 8.gif has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Superseded by File:California AD-08 (2011).svg which is way cleaner and easier to read.

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 files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 13:59, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:CA Assembly district 46.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Superseded by File:California AD-46 (2011).svg which is way cleaner and easier to read.

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 files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 14:00, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 07:22, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I do not understand why the last 3 edits were removed on this page? They were not promotional and were merely clarifying a number of incorrect statements initially made under your edits. I appreciate my initial edits circa June may have not been in line with guidelines, but I have now familiarised myself with the guidelines. Removing the inaccurate figure of £3,500 is surely in line with Wikipedia's rules as edits made for the sake of accuracy and clarity?

I have also been accused of "blanking" when in reality I have actually just been removing very minor pieces of inaccurate content. Could you please let me know what the issue is with the previous edits?

I also do not understand why lists of previous contributors were removed from The Parliamentary Review page. Bigflamingo (talk) 08:41, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have responded on your talk page. Lincolnite (talk) 10:06, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:15, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of LGBT state supreme court justices in the United States, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page WSKG.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:01, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:New York City Council districts has been nominated for merging with Template:New York City Council. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. HugoHelp (talk) 18:58, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Bruce Hanna cropped.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.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:01, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]