Please direct all comments to Torchwoodtwo

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Indiepix 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/Indiepix 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. Orange Mike | Talk 23:47, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-06-23T23:47:00.000Z","author":"Orangemike","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Orangemike-2011-06-23T23:47:00.000Z-Nomination_of_Indiepix_for_deletion","replies":[],"displayName":"Orange Mike"}}-->

Articles for Creation urgently needs your help! Articles for Creation is desperately short of reviewers! We are looking for urgent help, from experienced editors, in reviewing submissions in the pending submissions queue. Currently there are 1766 submissions waiting to be reviewed. Do you have what it takes? Are you familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines? Do you know what Wikipedia is and is not? Do you have a working knowledge of the Manual of Style, particularly article naming conventions? Are you autoconfirmed? Can you review submissions based on their individual merits? If the answer to these questions is yes, then please read the reviewing instructions and donate a little of your time to helping tackle the backlog.

Sent on behalf of WikiProject Articles for creation using AWB on 20:25, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Peter John Ross 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/Peter John Ross 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. JFHJr (㊟) 19:53, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2013-04-07T19:53:00.000Z","author":"JFHJr","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-JFHJr-2013-04-07T19:53:00.000Z-Nomination_of_Peter_John_Ross_for_deletion","replies":[]}}-->

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Christie Goodwin 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/Christie Goodwin (2nd nomination) 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. Donnie Park (talk) 15:23, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2015-10-23T15:23:00.000Z","author":"Donnie Park","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Donnie_Park-2015-10-23T15:23:00.000Z-Nomination_of_Christie_Goodwin_for_deletion","replies":[]}}-->

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) 17:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2015-11-23T17:33:00.000Z","author":"MediaWiki message delivery","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-MediaWiki_message_delivery-2015-11-23T17:33:00.000Z-ArbCom_elections_are_now_open!","replies":[]}}-->

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Illusion On-Demand 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/Illusion On-Demand 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. Raymie (t • c) 21:07, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2020-09-08T21:07:00.000Z","author":"Raymie","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Raymie-2020-09-08T21:07:00.000Z-Nomination_of_Illusion_On-Demand_for_deletion","replies":[]}}-->