User talk:Sawblade5

Welcome!

Hello, Sawblade5, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

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! CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 02:58, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User page

I checked your user page and it was not delted at any time. I also checkd your talk page and it has not been deleted either. Also a quick look at the history of your user page here shows that you are the only person to have edited it. If some one does vandalise it then all you have to do is use the history to restoe the version you want. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 06:38, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sandbox edits

When you make an edit to the sandbox you need to be aware of two things. One, don't take out the headings like this. It's there so that other users have reached the right place. Second, the sandbox get's reset at least every 12 hours so anything you put in will be deleted eventually. You should make your own sandbox such as User:Sawblade05/Sandbox and that won't get cleaned out after 12 hours. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 06:52, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry that's not ment to be any sort of warning. I wan't sure if you knew why the heading was there or may have even missed seeing it and I thought you probably just removed it by accident. The sandbox heading gets removed fairly often. Don't worry about resetting it. There is at least two bots that reset it every 12 hours. If you want to remove this section then that's fine as it's not a warning and I know you weren't doing anything wrong. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 04:04, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: section removal

See Talk:Test Drive Unlimited, this is not vandalism. ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 01:37, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that, I did not notice the date changes. As for the PC requirement specs, posts on Gamefaqs message boards are not a reliable source for such information. Atari will release the specs soon enough. ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 01:45, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

3RR Note

To User:Sawblade05, User:Anetode and User:JimmyJoeBobby:

Please be careful when reverting - and remember the three revert rule. This states that you cannot revert (i.e. remove or partially remove someonelse's edits) more than three times within 24 hours. The exception to this is "blatant, simple vandalism", which I don't think applies to Test Drive Unlimited. On this, I think you have all either come very very closed or have broken the rule within the last day.

As Antefoe and Sawblade05 seem experienced and have reverted in good faith, whilst JimmyJoeBobby is new, I'm not going to take any action such as blocking - this is often done with the three revert rule, but I don't see how it would help here - but I encourage you all to remember that, whatever the situation, reverting is not a good way of editing on Wikipedia. The page is now protected so hopefully this can all be ironed out on the talk page. Robdurbar 16:27, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Spam

If you look, you'll notice I removed the speedy deletion tag several hours ago. -- Steel 18:35, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strip map

You can edit the map in Inkscape (which is free) or Adobe Illustrator (which is not). As for where I got the data, the map was traced over a screenshot of Google Maps.

You may want to ask someone at the Maps Task Force to redo the map totally using GIS data, which would likely yield a more accurate map. —Scott5114 ↗ 15:36, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I been around. Been toying with a little new project called WikiLou with several others. Kimmy78 19:47, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Goat userbox

Your I like goats userbox …

This user likes goats.

… shows a gnu, not a goat. Sorry, I don't get if this is an intended joke or not, so I thought I'd drop by and risk making a fool of myself :). — Ocolon 18:50, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't forget to sign when posting here

I have inserted a tag where a bot should auto sign if I forget the tildes, the bot would sign for me Sawblade05 18:19, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

test for bot.

Note

You used {{criticism-section}} in an article, but it's been put up for deletion:

Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2007 May 11#Template:criticism-section — Omegatron 05:56, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio tag

I removed this edit: [1]. By going to Template:Copyvio, and clicking on one of its categories, I found a more correct template for it. Just so you know, that template is used when a whole page is blanked out and is in danger of being deleted. --68.161.171.105 22:26, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:usbk

First of all Template:usbk does allow parameters now also i have converted the following pages to the new standard Wikipedia:Userboxes/Emoticons
Wikipedia:Userboxes/Science Fiction
Wikipedia:Userboxes/Encycloboxes
Wikipedia:Userboxes/Profession
Wikipedia:Userboxes/Time

It allows up to 4 parameters I have also converted the following User:Ashley_Y/Userboxes/Religion#Religions
User:Xaosflux/UBX/Sexuality
User:Disavian/Userboxes#Hobbies

I am working on converting more --Java7837 02:20, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just finished Wikipedia:Userboxes/Health --Java7837 02:45, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussions

I just noticed that you added "delete per nom" to a bunch of deletion discussions. Please try to be more specific with your reasons for deletion; "per nom" doesn't usually cut it. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps)))} 17:43, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To follow up on that, "not encyclopedic" isn't really enough either when discussing user categories. User categories don't have to be worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia, because they are for categorizing users and not articles. Also, please do not use strong delete for every comment you make; your opinion is no more or less important than anyone else's and should not appear that way. By overusing emphasis you won't be able to show it when you really mean it since people will get used to your votes and disregard them as sensationalist. One final thing, UCfD is User Categories for Discussion, although you seem to suggest "strong delete" even when a user cat is nominated for a rename or merge. Consider reading some of the past discussions in the UCfD Archive to get an idea of how these discussions work. BigNate37_(T) 23:08, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup

Can you please replace the content of User:Sawblade05/tempoaryWikipedia:Userboxes/WikiProjects with {{db-user}} if you are done with that page? It is causing you to show up as a member of every single WikiProject on the system that has a userbox. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 09:35, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Double Shot (Ride)

Nice work on this one! I have changed by !vote to keep. --Fang Aili ^talk 17:28, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Psuedoreligionist Wikipedians

As you may already be aware, Category:Psuedoreligionist Wikipedians and its subcategories, Category:Discordian Wikipedians, Category:Flying Spaghetti Monsterist Wikipedians, Category:SubGenius Wikipedians, and others, have been deleted. That deletion is now up for review. If you have anything you'd like to say on the subject, now is the time. If you know of any other editors who might have something to say on the subject, pass the word. If, on the other hand, you are not interested in the slightest, feel free to delete this. — The Storm Surfer 01:02, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal

A proposal has been made to merge Replacement I-35W Mississippi River bridge into I-35W Mississippi River bridge. The matter is being discussed at Talk:Replacement I-35W Mississippi River bridge. Please feel free to comment. Thank you. Kablammo 18:25, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't make changes like this when the matter is under discussion. I will not revert your edit. I am just telling you not to do that again. Thanks. Chris! _{my talk} 23:23, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Major League Baseball All-Star Game

A more recent reference would be Marc Okkonen's Baseball Uniforms of the 20th Century, p. 7. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 20:51, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a good secondary source to me. Sawblade05 20:58, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did some work on the article. It did not get any shorter, as I hoped it would, but at least it's arranged a little more logically now. Some further paring of the excess verbiage would seem to be called for. One problem with many articles, especially the longer ones, is the hodge-podge result of editors adding essentially the same information 2 or 3 times, apparently not having bothered to read the full article first to make sure they are not adding redundancies. The article is too long and probably has too much minutia. But a separate article on the results, as you've proposed, would separate the general history of the game from the individual game details, which could also be moved from the general article. Then the individual games could be discussed in more depth, and simultaneously we could get rid of absurdities like "Major League Baseball All-Star Games in Pittsburgh". It's sufficient to have a few lines in each of the ballpark articles about hosting the game, and put the details in the single article about all the games. The extreme would be to write an article about each game, but frankly I don't see the point. Others might disagree, but it's just one game, and the number of noteworthy highlights is seldom more than a few sentences. Back in the 80s, NBC or whoever it was used to run a one or two minute rapid-fire montage of All-Star Game highlights, starting with the Bambino's homer in the first game and ending with the most recent highlight, all in the space of a minute or two. That same approach could be used here. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 02:29, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Usbk and Wikipedian categories

Hello, can you help put a parser function of this nature: {{#ifeq:{{{categories}}}|no||[[Category:Example|{{PAGENAME}}]]}} in this template to allow for the suppression of Wikipedian categories on pages such as Wikipedia:Userboxes/Health, Wikipedia:Userboxes/WikiProjects, and Wikipedia talk:Userboxes/New Userboxes? -Sox 207 04:05, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Coleman (columnist)

Thanks. - Reaverdrop _(talk/nl) 18:59, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wild Adventures

Can you tell me how "Phobia will be held September 28-30, October 4-7, 11-14, 18-21, 25-28, 31." is written like an advertisement? It is an event and it lists the days that event is held. Mjrmtg 15:39, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

QuikTrip

I added the hangon tag to this article. While it probably needs a major rewrite, deletion is not the way to go. FYI, I have no connection to QT other than as a customer. --Iowahwyman 21:15, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indy Lights

All the statistics came from the Ladder Series portion of [2]. -Drdisque 18:58, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NEXTEL Cup vs Sprint Cup, etc

I noticed your revert at the Landon Cassill article since it is on my watchlist. I started a discussion at WikiProject NASCAR about when to change the series name since it affects all NASCAR articles. Please participate in the discussion there so we can form consensus. Royalbroil 15:04, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the link: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_NASCAR#When_to_change_the_series_titles_from_NEXTEL_to_Sprint_and_Busch_to_Nationwide. Royalbroil 15:08, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done I posted my rational. Sawblade05 ⁽^{talk to me} ^| ^{my wiki life}⁾ 15:24, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What's the point of WikiProject NASCAR if no one is using it? Why wasn't critically important things like the name of the new Sprint Cup division article discussed there first instead of me moving it and wasting my time? There was no planning. I request discussion and it doesn't happen. Why are we running around as a series of individuals making unilateral decisions with no direction or discussion? Not saying that it necessarily was a bad decision, but it was not discussed at all. It sounds like I should propose disbanding the WikiProject since it is pointless. Royalbroil 15:02, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The reason why I had it moved there is to eliminate a double standard as the other 2 series articles Nationwide Series and Craftsman Truck Series both have "Series" in the name. Sawblade05 ⁽^{talk to me} ^| ^{my wiki life}⁾ 21:03, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Superman

Hello Sawblade05. I see that you recently tagged Superman with {{very long}}. However, you did not begin a discussion on the talk page regarding remedies. It would be helpful if you could offer some suggestions of what topics you think should be split into separate articles or what sections you think should be condensed. Thank you.

P.S. In your edit summary, you linked WP:Size, but I think you meant to link WP:SIZE. GentlemanGhost (talk) 19:27, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NASCAR Fan24's Secret Page!

		The Secret Page Detective Award
		This user has found NASCAR Fan24's secret page! Congratulations!

NF24^{(radio me!)} 12:47, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for letting me know about PlayStation 3 games. You gotta love people who have nothing better to do... Thingg ^⊕^⊗ 21:31, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WOF

Ya I'm not too worried about forecasting or crystal balling...in the whole grand big picture most only KC people look at the WOF wikipage. But anyway IF it is a wooden coaster, I have to ask why? Because I love the Timber Wolf, but you can do so much more with Steel roller coasters but either way I'm excited for one more thrill ride at the Disneyland of the Midwest. oh and thanks for contributing to the page too! keep it up! Moonraker0022 (talk) 18:57, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WOF

Ya I'm not too worried about forecasting or crystal balling...in the whole grand big picture most only KC people look at the WOF wikipage. But anyway IF it is a wooden coaster, I have to ask why? Because I love the Timber Wolf, but you can do so much more with Steel roller coasters but either way I'm excited for one more thrill ride at the Disneyland of the Midwest. oh and thanks for contributing to the page too! keep it up! Moonraker0022 (talk) 18:57, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Steel Force and Possessed

Hi, Sawblade05! I've added a note to the Steel Force coaster Talk page indicating the article's redundancy with the article on Possessed. That would mean combining any information that's included under Steel Force and missing from Possessed (the survivor), then using a disambiguation to link them, similar to what you did in creating Voodoo. Since I've never done this before and would like feedback, I thought I'd contact other editors who have worked on the articles. Would you let me know what you think about this? Also, if you have any references to suggest, I would appreciate that as well. This would save a lot of work in adding citations to the Possessed article and the one on Dorney Park. Thanks. Allreet (talk) 20:33, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, for a moment I confused Steel Force with Steel Venom (Geauga Lake), which has the Talk posting I referred to. Substitute one for the other, and the rest of the above applies. Again, thanks. Allreet (talk) 21:10, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Houston Tower

Thanks for the heads-up; I've changed my vote based on something else you mentioned (or rather, the category it lead me to). Because we have articles on other structures that were no less hypothetical than the HT, I would feel very uncomfortable deleting the HT article without better guidance on the relevant notability criteria and a firmer feel for how our decision vis-à-vis the HT article will bear on similar articles. I've updated the nomination page with that view, and suggested that if those questions aren't answerable fairly quickly, we should prefer keeping the article by default, albeit without prejudice to a future nomination if the notability guideline question is later resolved adversely to the article's fortunes. - Simon Dodd { U·T·C·WP:LAW } 20:50, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Coolimage.gif listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Coolimage.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 22:50, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Saving the Orcas

I saw your comment on the AfD orcas and the omnibus Captive orcas article. My thinking in creating Captive orcas was that these articles on individual orcas probably do not warrant individual articles. Most orcas are not really notable, so the articles were likely to be deleted. But the statistics show that a lot of readers are interested in them - they are celebrities of a sort. By making a large container for the individual articles I could save the content, and maybe add value because a reader interested in one captive orca would quite likely be interested in others, and in general information about captivity. Now you point out that the container is too large. In the real world, this would never be a problem for the orcas, but would be a problem for the spectators. Can't win!

See my suggestion on Talk:Captive orcas. I agree that the article is sort of long, although not as long as the parent Killer Whale article, but am not sure the best way to split it up. Best is probably to let the AfD process run its course, changing the individual articles into redirects into Captive orcas. The content has already been merged. Then separately discuss whether and how best to split up Captive orcas. As WP:SIZE says, there is no need for haste. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:20, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We have got closure on the individual articles, most of which were merged into Captive orcas. Some of the sections on individual orcas are sort of trivial. But readers and editors do seem to like trivia list articles. Some of the orca individuals are not exactly trivial, maybe being the first of some sort or showing some unusual behavior. I am off skiing for a week, and will have a backlog of real-life work when I get back, but would like to hold off splitting until I have time to do an overhaul. I am definitely thinking of a split, with the individuals in a separate list-type article, but want to pull some of the material from individuals into the main article, and balance some of the individual content to match the main article before splitting. Easier to edit as a whole and then split than to split then make consistent. Thanks, Aymatth2 (talk) 01:38, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Sounds good to me. I am currently at work during the week so the long discussions that I am having now are stuck on the weekends. I feel it should be split, but I think I would like to see some more consensus on the split. Sawblade05 ⁽^{talk to me} ^| ^{my wiki life}⁾ 09:35, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
See comment on Talk:Captive orcas. I support a split too, but am holding off for 5 days to see if there are any counter-arguments. Don't think there will be, but there is no urgency. Aymatth2 (talk) 17:10, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Split out List of captive orcas. A real improvement, I think. Aymatth2 (talk) 16:45, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your help is needed

Please review Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_NASCAR#Nationwide_driver.27s_images_-_HELP_NEEDED. Royal broil 00:21, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes 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. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

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) 18:34, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP NASCAR in the Signpost

"WikiProject Report" would like to focus on WikiProject NASCAR for a Signpost article to be published this month. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Also, if you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 20:44, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

KBBG

I thought it was worth taking a second to drop by and say hello, and to explain why I undid your change on this article.

I understand the instinct to disambiguate between the radio station and the airport in this instance. There are lots of situations where radio station call signs overlap with ICAO codes for airports, both in the U.S. (in the Ks) and internationally (in the Ws). Over time, there's been a reasonably standard approach developed for these situations, whereby the radio station article remains at its call sign, and a hatnote is placed on the radio station article pointing to the airport article.

The reason this approach is preferred in most cases over a disambiguation page – where the radio station and airport are the only items needing disambiguation – is because ICAO codes are at best a tertiary identification for the airport. The airport's name, obviously, is the primary way it's identified. Given how broadly they're used by travellers, the airport's IATA code would generally be considered its secondary identification. On the other hand, except where they may brand themselves in some manner (Jack FM, Hits 107), the radio station's call sign is always the primary way it's identified.

There are a few exceptions to this approach – the airport in Atlanta, Georgia comes to mind – but those situations are mostly ones that just haven't been cleaned up yet. The other exception would be where the radio station's call sign actually contains '-FM' or '-LP' (or a TV station uses '-TV', '-DT', '-LP', or '-CA') – in those cases, the radio/TV station article sits at its official call sign and a disambiguation page at the four 'base' letters will be created.

One other note – in cases where a radio station article does need to be disambiguated away from its call sign, that's done by adding a '(AM)' or '(FM)' at the end, rather than adding a '-AM' or '-FM'.

I hope I didn't go overboard on the explanation here. In case I've been unclear or you'd like to discuss further, I'll watch your talk page for a few days. Happy editing! Mlaffs (talk) 19:01, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can you point me to the Discussion archive or the active discussion on this policy or guildline change of these disambigs where this concensus was built? Otherwise at least leave a note on top of the page saying that For the Airport that uses this ICAO code and point it to Branson Airport as the reason why disambigs exist if there's over lapping meanings of the same thing that is Article worthy here. Sawblade5 ⁽^{talk to me} ^| ^{my wiki life}⁾ 08:20, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note I saw that you did put a hat note up there before I noticed. That is what I get when I go stright to my talk page when I don't check on what you did first. That darn yellow box on top that tells me to go here first. Sawblade5 ⁽^{talk to me} ^| ^{my wiki life}⁾ 08:28, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that darn seductive yellow box... :>). I'm not sure that I can point you to a specific discussion or guideline, no. WP:TWODABS provides some guidance regarding primary topics and discusses disambiguation pages versus hatnotes. WP:RADIONAMING outlines how to name radio/TV station articles that need disambiguating. Otherwise, I mostly learned by looking at similar situations, asking questions, and doing. I got involved back in late 2007, was a heavy-user through until early 2010, and then I've been away for the most part since then until recently. From what I can see — at least on this topic — things seem to be still done the same way.

Don't get me wrong, by the way — I don't mean at all to suggest that what you did was wrong. It's completely within policy. It's just that there are a lot of naming conflicts between radio/TV stations and airport ICAO codes, and they're more often handled the way I've outlined. If I looked really hard, I could probably find 50-60 examples of the hatnote approach in these cases, whereas I'd be surprised if I could find more than a handful of the dab page approach. Again, the airport in Atlanta is the one that stands out and I remember a change to the hatnote approach being suggested on the talk page of the dab page, but there was one editor who was particularly opposed and we couldn't come to a consensus. Mlaffs (talk) 19:35, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The reason why I did it in the first place as I was searching some info for Branson Airport for Flight Sim X and the way I like to search airports is by ICAO code. When I entered the ICAO code into Wikipedia I was deadended on that Radio Station page so what I did was create the disambig. I created it based on how the Disambig was for my home Airport Kansas City International Airport where KMCI disambigs to Kansas City International Airport and KMCI-TV. Fell free to fix it also if you want to. I think more people are trying to find the TV station anyway as it is one of the most popular TV stations in the KC Area. Sawblade5 ⁽^{talk to me} ^| ^{my wiki life}⁾ 04:44, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Come to the First Topeka Meetup, January 15!

Come celebrate Wikipedia Day with other Kansas Wikipedians sponsored by Wikimedians Active in Local Regions in the United States (WALRUS) and hosted by the Topeka and Shawnee Public Library. Come chat, hang out and enjoy good company while find out more about Wikipedia in our regional community! RSVP at Wikipedia:Meetup/Topeka/Wikipedia_Day.

If you can't come, but still want to find out about events in the greater Topeka region (which may include KC, Manhattan, Lawrence, Salina, or other places where volunteers are interested) sign up for future notifications at Wikipedia:Meetup/Topeka/Invite list.

Hope to see you there Sadads (talk) 20:26, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your request for undeletion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that a response has been made at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion regarding a submission you made. The thread is George Toma. JohnCD (talk) 21:36, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Tlwrow

Template:Tlwrow 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 21:51, 29 October 2014 (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) 16:20, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of current NASCAR races for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of current NASCAR races 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/List of current NASCAR races (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. – Nascar1996 ^{(talk • cont)} 16:06, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Sawblade5. 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]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Sawblade5. 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, Sawblade5. 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]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

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) 01:30, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

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) 00:10, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:30, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]