User talk:Ndpjohnny

Welcome!

Hello, Ndpjohnny, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!

Sorry about changing UAW to CAW in one of the articles that you edited. I didn't know that the UAW back in or still in Canada. I had assumed, incorrectly it seems, that all of the locals went over to CAW when that union was formed. Thanks for your great work on the riding articles. Best regards, Ground Zero | t 20:31, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

UAW in Wallaceburg

No Problem, Ground Zero. UAW Local 251 was the only UAW local in Canada to reject joining the CAW in the 1980's. NDP Johnny 20:40, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Circumcision Userbox

You may find a userfied version of the deleted box in my user space at User:Tomyumgoong/ubx/nocirc, feel free to subst or transclude it if you wish. Tomyumgoong 20:38, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AfD

Hi Ndpjohnny, I noticed your supportive vote on Niki Ashton, and found a similiar AfD on a young NDP candidate in the 2006 election that's already had one AfD vote to Keep. Right now it's hovering, and just needs your Keep vote. Please go here Thanks. CanadianElection 10:34, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The AfD defaulted to Keep on the second AfD, but the article was speedily deleted anyway. Please vote undelete on the deletion review[here]. Thanks.

Here's a better [link]. GSinclair 07:08, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet

[People are accusing you of being a sockpuppet] because you voted Keep in an AfD. Be careful, they are blocking practically everybody. They blocked me. Gsinclair 00:33, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Dexter_darrell030705.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Dexter_darrell030705.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:28, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List page afd

This may be of some interest to you:

http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/New_Democratic_Party_candidates%2C_1990_Manitoba_provincial_election

CJCurrie 23:58, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On a similar tangent: [1] CJCurrie 01:52, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edmonton meetup

Hello - I'm contacting you with this message because you have listed youself in Category:Wikipedians in Edmonton - if you are not actually in Edmonton, I apologize for bothering you; unfortunately, the sort of spamming I'm doing isn't conducive to reading everybody's userpages thoroughly. I am investigating the possibility of creating a Wikipedia meetup in Edmonton for sometime during the spring or summer of 2008. If you're interested, please visit Wikipedia:Meetup/Edmonton, add yourself to the list of interested editors, and watchlist the page. Cheers, Sarcasticidealist (talk) 23:52, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Ndpjohnny! 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 insure 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 5 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

Hugh Peacock - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Bill Estabrooks - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Marie Laing - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 22:24, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review: David Lewis (politician)

Hi Ndpjohnny, wondering if you'd be interested in peer reviewing an article I've been working on over the past few years, David Lewis (politician). It recently went through a major rewrite, and I would really like to get this article up to feature status. Take care, --Abebenjoe (talk) 19:52, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference

Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was true. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to false in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being 'minor'. The only thing that's changed is that you will no longer have them marked as minor by default.

For established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. If you are familiar with the contents of WP:MINOR, and believe that it is still beneficial to the encyclopedia to have all your edits marked as such by default, then this discussion will give you the details you need to continue with this functionality indefinitely. If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 18:59, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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) 13:50, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Ndpjohnny. 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)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Ndpjohnny. 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)[reply]

User category proposed deletion

You may be interested in Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 August 21#Category:Wikipedians who know where their towel is. It is proposed to delete this category. SpinningSpark 16:32, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Paul Moth

The article Paul Moth has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This page has had the banner for not meeting notability guidelines since January 2010 (over 10+ years), its also barely been edited since around 2012, and the page doesn't cite any sources. Given the reasons stated, I propose the page be deleted.

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.

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) 09:00, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]