User talk:Demiurge

Archives

1 (November 2004 – March 2006) 2 (March – August 2006) 3 (September – October 2006) 4 (November – December 2006)

• I suggested that you broaden your editing to include some less controversial subjects, and to adopt a less confrontational tone in order to avoid possibly being mistaken for a troll — you're really not helping yourself here. Demiurge 20:41, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are wrong. Before revert me again please see " The Soviet military encyclopedia ", http://www.uniforminsignia.net/, http://www.fas.org/irp/world/russia/fbis/Acronyms.html, http://armor.kiev.ua/army/index.html, http://www.100megsfree4.com/rusgeneral/table.htm and many others sites and books about this. I am Major of Aviation in the Soviet Army and I am from Moscow,Russia. Believe me please I know better about Russian and Soviet military ranks than you.--Cariso 18:35, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please Stop,Stop,Stop revert me. Read more about Russia and military ranks.--Cariso 19:24, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• I prefer to read Wikipedia:Long term abuse/Roitr actually. Demiurge 19:31, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I not Roitr and even if I am Roitr you cannot ignore set of sites and official books about it.--Cariso 20:56, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Liam Boyle told me personally that the reason he wears contrasting socks was to underline his non-conformist attitudes.Ryannus 19:41, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Could you do me a favour and have a quick read of WP:V? Thanks! Demiurge 19:43, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• I will be formally interviewing him for my website, after that, you will see. Will this suffice?{{
  • Not unless your website is a reliable source — see WP:NOR. Demiurge 19:46, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Got an eye on him. Stopped for now. Kaisershatner 17:19, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Maybe he noticed my WP:AIV report and it scared him off, thanks anyway. Demiurge 17:21, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, when I read the article, a question strikes me. What was it exactly that Haughey/Blaney were charged with in the trial? The article says that they went on trial on May 28 and that it collapsed. Do you know?

Also, you changed the intro from "import arms for use by the IRA" to "import arms for the IRA". The difference, in my mind, is that importing arms for, means that the IRA asked them to do it, (and could be also written as import arms ON BEHALF OF the IRA). "For the use of" is more benign and means that it was intendeded that IRA members would use them. I don't know which it is, I am just pointing out how it might be interpreted by readers.--Rye1967 23:56, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• CAIN says that the offence was "conspiracy to illegally import arms". It's illegal under the Firearms Act for anyone to import firearms into the country without a license from the Minister for Defence. So they would most likely have been charged under this law (or an updated version of it) — the case hinged on whether Jim Gibbons had authorised the importation. Feel free to change the intro back if you want, I thought my changes would simplify the sentence a little. Demiurge 09:32, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Somethingoranother is an obvious "sock" and "troller". I don't know of whom, but to my knowledge of WP, socks can be reverted. MelForbes 16:15, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• It's still possible that it's just a new user who doesn't really understand how we reach consensus here. I agree that the edit-warring and repeated appeals to a (nonexistent) consensus are becoming disruptive, but if they revert again I'll report them for 3RR. Demiurge 16:25, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Mel that this is likely somebody's sock. His confusion over when he made edits in vio of 3RR suggests that he may making edits from multiple accounts and accidentally conducted some of his edit-warring from the "wrong" account. Oh, the tangled webs we weave, etc. Anyhow, I'm going to start noting the names and IPs of other, similarly provocative edits and can file a RFCU when I have enough info. Dppowell 21:02, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He claims that he has made edits on other pages, and the only one he has "probs" with is the Ireland page. Well I cannot see any other pages that he has edited. He must be editing under a different name and therefore the sock of some other user. MelForbes 01:14, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The band are signed by Mercury Records and are included in the list. Please remove this tag and stop causing a nuisance by requesting the article be speedily deleted. Please. Ryannus 17:29, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• If you want to contest the speedy deletion, put your reasoning on Talk:Red Organ Serpent Sound, not here. Being signed to a record label isn't proof of notability under WP:MUSIC. Demiurge 17:31, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Was that a template you used on User:Somethingoranother's page? I hadn't seen that warning before, could you let me know the template code? Dppowell 20:55, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• It's the {{removewarn}} template, from WP:UTTM. Demiurge 00:01, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Restore my page, there were several people using that page, it wasn't an indulgence on my part. Ronnierosenthal 21:48, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• I can't restore your article, because I'm not an administrator. If you want the article restored, you can request a deletion review at WP:DRV. (But they'll probably turn you down because the article was an attack page about someone non-notable. Please don't use Wikipedia as a way to make fun of your friends/enemies.) Demiurge 23:59, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For spotting the location of the vandalism on the Main Page on December 24, 2006 and thereafter attempting to eliminate it, I hereby award you the RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar. -- tariqabjotu 15:53, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just sent you an email - you've got press attention! If you didn't get it, please email me on [email protected] and I'll forward you a copy - David Gerard 13:18, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you remove everything I just added on the Scangers page? There was no reason for you to do this as my contributions were accurate and I do not believe they were harming anyone. I have added my contributions again and am asking you to please not remove my contributions pointlessly in the future. Thanks, Igorndhaswog.

• Please read WP:V and WP:CITE. All contributions to Wikipedia should be properly cited; uncited edits are liable to be removed at any time. The Scanger article has been overrun with uncited rubbish in the past, and these days I'm making an effort to keep it clean. Thank you. Demiurge 00:28, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't consider my revision vandalism. I'm an old boy of DCP and i think that is just the sort of discussion that past pupils would appreciate. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Smith w (talk • contribs) 11:57, 31 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Hi! Just to say, I really liked you article on Met Éireann. Nicely written, good information. Rgds, - Trident13 16:43, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On January 2, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Met Éireann, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! ++Larbot - run by User:Lar - t/c 14:28, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Kewl! Well done, Demi :-) - Alison^✍ 17:37, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cheers :) Demiurge 19:02, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the Erik Bornmann AFD] for my recent posts on it. It was extended as I had had an unfair block during most of its duration. I am asking all non-SPA contributors to this discussion to review my comments (admittedly lengthy, but important to the context/situation of this AFD). You seemed to be the only one who was willing to go into the file history to discover that relevant material had, in fact, been in the article before the SPAs took it out (over and over). That's all for now, but please read my posts and accompanying links and reconsider your position.Skookum1 04:46, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be a concentrated effort at the moment to change the reference to County Londonderry to County Derry on this page by several anon users (some of which are the same users). I have received emails to this effect which I reproduced on a talk page [1]. If you could assist in keeping and eye on this and helping out it would be appreciated. Ben W Bell talk 13:18, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Added to my watchlist, I'll keep an eye on it. Demiurge 13:41, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Demiurge, I am Logica, but do not have access to my account. I am working on it. 88.107.5.213 15:45, 5 January 2007 (UTC) (User:Logica)[reply]

• And thanks for warning Schomberg - there's just no need for this kind of thing. I don't understand why questioning whether graffiti on a wall can be used to describe the "reaction" in the UK provokes such a blatently uncalled for attack. They can't scare people off like that. 88.107.35.169 21:34, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just added a "citations needed" template to Athy. I see that you are the one who added the pronunciation to the article, and I hope that you can locate a verifiable source for that. I actually am more interested in the pronunciation than in anything else about the article: I'm singing Johnny I Hardly Knew Ye in chorus and and knowing the proper pronunciation of Athy would be very helpful. Dfeuer 10:03, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:41, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:44, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have renamed this article to Irish diplomatic missions, as per other (70+) similar articles which list each country's diplomatic network. Categorisation added. If you would like to rewrite the article so it is ordered in the same way as other lists that would be great, but entirely your call. Later I would like to start a Wikiproject to get some consistency amongst the list with a consensus amongst other Wikipedians. Kransky 07:21, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:21, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just saw your complaint about NPA. I cannot believe an administrator behaved in that way when it was a blatent, and offensive, insult. I'm getting really disillusioned with enforcement of these "policies". Please keep a record of anything else Vintage does wrong. Logoistic 20:41, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 17:29, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I'm Ral315, editor-in-chief of the Wikipedia Signpost. It appears that you have not edited in at least three weeks. To avoid spamming your talk page any further, should you be on leave, your name has been removed from the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to continue receiving the spamlist, please leave a note on my talk page to that effect, and I will restore your name, and keep you on the list indefinitely. Ralbot 08:33, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The mediation process is ending in two days - you have two days to have you final say and 1. show any proof that Volunteer is a rank and 2. leave your final vote in coming to a consensus here. Thank you.--Vintagekits 22:46, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		I hereby award you this barnstar for your exemplary deletion of that "Unlikely Fetish". It was a genuine hoax: the creation and deletion was reported in the Yale Daily. With your level-headed deletion, you have demonstrated the integrity of wikipedia to the public. Danski14 01:14, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I knew the vandalizer personally from High School, and I can assure you he will never vandalize again. A Wikipedian at Yale submitted this [2] criticizing his actions. Danski14 01:14, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey - where did you go? We miss you! - Alison^✍ 19:16, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seconded! Stu ^{’Bout ye!} 11:04, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good spot, but I'm way ahead of you with the sockpuppetry. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 14:42, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I'm slightly behind thinking about it, although I've gathered enough evidence to merit a block now though. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 16:55, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Demi - it's lovely to see you back on here, even if only for a day! - Alison^☺ 06:21, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And well spotted with the Rostov guy - edit style and usual suspect articles marks them as definitely being RMS. Blocked now by someone else - Alison^☺ 06:51, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it seems he hasn't learned anything from all the previous times he's tried the same thing. Anyway I've been quite busy over the past months so I don't have much time for editing Wikipedia, but I'll still drop in from time to time. Congratulations on the adminship by the way! Demiurge 17:09, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I imagine Robert is less than impressed, though :) Do drop back in when you get the chance - Alison^☺ 21:44, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Demi. Our mutual friend has been bad-mouthing you on meta-wiki. I've left a comment - Alison^☺ 05:11, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But I was busy preparing the latest block request, thanks. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 21:00, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yet you consider the insipid (I know - I used to work on it) www.connemara-tourism.org one relevant enough to leave there? I have been developing Connemara.net for 11 years and would say it is a fair link where it is. There is a page on Connemara, and external links are allowed, so what's the problem? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ralph Lavelle (talk • contribs)

• Please read WP:EL: "You should avoid linking to a website that you own, maintain or represent, even if the guidelines otherwise imply that it should be linked". It is inappropriate for you to add links to your own site to Wikipedia. (I've also removed the connemara-tourism link, as it doesn't seem to be an official site.) Demiurge 13:01, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When you removed it, how did you know that it was owned or maintained by me? Also, I can't see how that rule is meaningful, since all I have to do is create a extra account and add my site in so it doesn't appear to be submitted by me, or ask a friend who has a wikipedia account to consider adding it?

Since you're obviously interested in Connemara, and a regular Wikipedia editor, and chance you could add Connemara.net yourself? There is no other website out there with more information on the area - that's why I originally created it, and that's the way it still is. At the moment there are no external links on the page - that's pretty ridiculous.

Ralph Lavelle —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ralph Lavelle (talk • contribs)

• Yeah, I took a second look at your website and it does seem to have a fair bit of useful information, so I added it back in. In future, it's probably best to suggest external links to your own sites on the article's talk page rather than adding them in yourself, as suggested in WP:EL. (I didn't know the site was owned by you when you initially added it, but your only contributions at the time were adding this link to several different articles.) Demiurge 12:26, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

... largely featuring yourself. Discussion here. - Alison ☺ 22:29, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• I had a read of that, I think User:JzG is right and it's best to apply the "revert, block, ignore" principle rather than giving a banned troll the attention he craves. With that in mind, I'm not going to comment there myself. Demiurge 12:17, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Good call. Just thought you should be aware of it. I count 4 active socks right now, BTW - Alison ☺ 16:10, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You blanked the page. You don't blank redirects (or any main namespace articles for that matter), you take them to WP:RFD. If you think it should be deleted, that's where you should go --Closedmouth 15:52, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Fine, we'll do it the long way then. Please don't reinsert vandalism or hoaxes in future. Demiurge 15:59, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's how it goes --Closedmouth 16:44, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you a Joe Duffy fanboy? You 'righted' several accurate statements about him that I made a few months back, but you're happy to leave the abuse up on the John Waters article.

Internets Police! Where are youuuuu!!!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 89.100.51.244 (talk) 20:59, 14 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

From my brief experience with the RMS puppet show, I'm of the mind we need to make an WP:LTA page for him ... whaddya think? I'd have asked Alison, but she's on Wikibreak. Figured I'd ask you and anyone else who's had major dealings with him--who else should I bounce this off of, or you think this is a go?Blueboy96 02:24, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, I think that's an excellent idea. There's enough evidence about the place here and it would be an ideal contact place to pool evidence, etc. It's a perennial topic on WP:ANI where the guy has recently had the audacity to start trolling/complaining. I've some evidence here & there are numerous RfCs and CSNs about the place. Go for it! - Alison ☺ 03:28, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Alie ... I was going to bounce this off you first, but figured you were on Wikibreak and wouldn't respond. The thing that surprises me, though, is that even though he seems to hate Irish people, he speaks Gaelic very well.Blueboy96 04:41, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He doesn't speak Irish very well at all. Just stuff he finds on the 'net here and there. Creep. Ugh! :( - Alison ☺ 04:54, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/[email protected]
• Category:[email protected]
• Category:[email protected]

- Alison ☺ 05:55, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am interested in knowing whether or not there could be a posibility of the

Please elaborate on your inverted logic in stating that an edited image of myself for use on my own user page should be deleted from Wikipedia. Who exactly is it an attack on? Hardly Pat Kenny this time? Thank you. Spaingy 19:06, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't vandalise the St. Macartans page - please see discussion page before making any further edits. Thank you.

Look, I know you like the image of being the great big anti-vandal around here, but please, please do not continue your butchering of the St. Macartans article. I will report you if this keeps up. 137.191.228.131 12:47, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sir: You may find it of interest that anonymous user number 217.59.51.67, whose vandalism you reverted in the "Gerry Adams" article on 17 Oct. 2006 ("Fresh murder question raised"), has an IP address that has been traced by software designed by Mr. Virgil Griffith to the Vatican. The software is called Virgil Griffith's Wikipedia Scanner, available at http://wikiscanner.virgil.gr/

I found out about Mr. Griffith via the article, "Credibility of Wikipedia Takes a Dive After Wired Expose: Online encyclopedia outed as bias tool of intelligence agencies, corporations by new Wikipedia Scanner database" by Paul Joseph Watson at www.prisonplanet.com on 14 August 2007.

I went to http://wikiscanner.virgil.gr/ and clicked on the Vatican City data. The "Gerry Adams" article caught my eye, and that's how I found your edit of last 17 Oct.

Just thought you might like to know. Writtenright 01:00, 15 August 2007 (UTC)Writtenright[reply]

Addendum of 15 Aug 2007. This very edit is noted in a BBC article of today entitled "Wikipedia 'shows CIA page edits'", by Jonathan Fildes, in which the Vatican edit of 17 Oct. 2006 to the Gerry Adams article is specifically mentioned. You can read it at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6947532.stm Writtenright 23:22, 15 August 2007 (UTC)Writtenright[reply]

'The article has been marked as unreferenced for several months, yet not one single acceptable source has been provided, and there are no signs of any. Therefore I have removed the uncited information from the article, in accordance with the WP:CITE policy. Please do not readd this information without sourcing it. Demiurge 14:38, 17 November 2006 (UTC)' On the scanger article. Why are you obsessed with this kinda stuff??

137.191.228.131 10:10, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thought you'd find this interesting since your edit I did a search:

http://quibble.typepad.com/spuriosity/tall_tales/index.html Cheers SeanMack 14:54, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello - I see you've participated in the TalkPage discussion at Lough Neagh. I have created a table of the different contributors and their views/arguments about the geographical description to be applied. I am proposing that, if there is a clear consensus then the article is modified to reflect the consensus amongst editors. I am notifying each of the people I've identified as having been interested of this fresh opportunity to reach a consensus and settle this matter. Wikipedia has a policy on canvassing, please do not breach it with actions that are, or could be seen as being, partisan. PR^talk 07:20, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Demiurge, I agree Scanger didn't need the tags.. but instead of noting them as "spurious" (which is a slightly pointed way of saying "unnecessary"), just say why you're removing them - I'm sure you appreciate how this keeps things nice between editors. Cheers, Deiz talk 14:55, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you ever want a cool, and mean-looking barnstar? Well, if that's the case, this is real eye candy for you. You got it and you can give it to anyone who fight against vandals. Have a fun day 1() 20:33, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What the hell are you up to this time?! Spaingy 00:37, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

a biography page relating to conor phillips was deleted on 25 September 2007. i would like to know why?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dkirwan114 (talk • contribs) 13:50, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you now, or have you ever, been a resident of San Francisco? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ovinomancer (talk • contribs) 08:12, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Constitutional autochthony. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Constitutional autochthony. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:06, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Demiurge! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 2 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 271 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

1. Robert Sands (artist) - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
2. Gerry Collins (broadcaster) - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 07:57, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article Gerry Collins (broadcaster) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

no evidence of notability

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 {{dated prod}} 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 {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Oo7565 (talk) 08:07, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You already know this, and you seem not to be here anyway, but someone asked about it, so for clarity for future readers, I'll mention here that I'm not you. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 00:02, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thought you might be interested as you commented on his application at WP:PERM. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:34, 17 July 2013 (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) 22:17, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Demiurge. 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)[reply]

Hello, Demiurge. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]