User talk:Heegoop

Wrong place?

While it's quite nice to see you've started yourself a personal page, this may not be the best place for it. People post comments/notes/messages to and about you on your user talk page. Perhaps you could move this to User:Heegoop instead? - Fennec (はさばくのきつね) 17:57, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I'll do it tomorrow

Great. :) Also, note that you can sign your messages with ~~~~. -Fennec (はさばくのきつね) 19:16, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Thats a deal

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia!

Here are some tips to help you get started:

If you haven't already, please add your name to the new user log to let others know a little about yourself.
Read the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the Sandbox.
Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk or ask me on my talk page.
Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!
Jrdioko

P.S. One last helpful hint. To sign your posts like I did above (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).

Uploading Images

You can use Special:Upload to upload an image to the site, and then follow the instructions there to insert the image onto a page. Be sure to pay attention to the licensing information and guidelines on that page to ensure that your image isn't deleted. Ask again if this didn't answer your question. HTH – Jrdioko (Talk) 01:46, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Eye colour of redheads

I can't find many stats, but here's one data set I could see tabulated: [1].

Rank ordering is, from most common: 1. Brown, 2. Blue, 3. Hazel = Green.

-- The Anome 20:33, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Skull and crossbones

Thanks for your note on my talk page! However, I'm not quite sure what you mean. It seems to me that the skull and crossbones article already to links to the Jolly Roger article, for example. Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're talking about. Either way, the beauty of wikipedia is that you don't have to ask for changes to be made, you can make them yourself! If you feel something needs to be changed on that article, go ahead and make the change. On the other hand, if you feel that a page needs attention, it's better to post a note on the appropriate page (such as Wikipedia:Requests for page expansion or Wikipedia:Pages needing attention) rather than asking specific users. HTH! – Jrdioko (Talk) 05:48, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Vandal

For one, I don't even know what you mean. Second of all, why are you sending this to me? Mike H 20:19, Jul 10, 2004 (UTC)

(In answer to your question, Heegoop, no, I wasn't calling you a vandal. The entry on my talk page headed "Vandal" is someone else replying to me about a bit of tidying I did on an article, removing vandalism. It's not related to you in any way). -- The Anome 22:32, 10 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Re: deleting talk

Regarding the comment you left me on my talk page: I hardly ever delete content from my talk page, usually opting to move it to an archive page. However, that particular comment was unsigned, ungrammatical, and did not make sense to me in the context of the discussion. As such, I had no qualms removing it. If you have any more questions please reference Wikipedia:Talk Etiquette FAQ or feel free to ask me. Ed Cormany 16:47, 11 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Re: humans as animals

Yes, thankyou very much, I am aware that humans are animals; I think I may have learnt that during my biology degree. What you added to the human article was silly and not up to the standard of the rest of the article;

"Humans are animals because (a. They are in the kingdom Animalia. (b. They are warm blooded like other mammals and birds" [2] - is patently obvious. The human#Homo sapiens compared to other species section is much better because it discusses the anthropogenic arrogance affect rather than just repeating info in the taxobox. Dunc_Harris|☺ 19:49, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Althought I also think that humans are an animal species, adding a category of non-human animals seems too much like trying to prove a point of some kind. - Skysmith 11:57, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Cats as Carnivores

Re: Carnivore

I have a pet cat, and it eats grass. And I swear i've seen lions do so on a documentary.

It also will eat vegatables fed to it from the dinner table (even those with no contact with meat/meat products).

Now I'll agree it might not able to digest it. But are you sure that true carnivores can eat non-meat products, as long as they can't digest it. Rememeber much of the vegetative matter you eat isn't really digested either.

Good edit though. Did you have a weblink to where you got that list? Drop me line at my Talk Page. --ZZ 03:44, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Years in television

Hi Heegoop! I changed the sections back, and explained why in the edit summary. As 2000 is the last year of the 20th century, it belongs to 1990s (there must be 10 years in all decades!). Let me know if you have questions.--Ëzhiki (erinaceus europeaus) 16:45, Oct 20, 2004 (UTC)

Yeah, it seems that decades can be named either ways (so 1990 can be either the last year of 1980s or the first year of 1990s). Since it would be silly going through all of the articles and changing them from one system to another (not to mention it would meet resistance from ignoramuses who still think 2000 was the first year of the 21st century), I will change "Years in television" back. Should have done my research first :) This does get confusing at times though.—Ëzhiki (erinaceus europeaus) 19:07, Oct 20, 2004 (UTC)

List of rock and roll albums

The list of rock and roll albums compiles professional best-of lists, so please don't add albums to it unless they are on one of the lists. Your addition of Tracy Chapman's self-titled album refered to the VH1 list, but the album is not on that list AFAICT, so I have removed it. Tuf-Kat 21:00, Oct 23, 2004 (UTC)

Duran Duran

Any good reason why you changed tried to tired? --Tagishsimon (talk)

Ageing links

I'm sorry to tell you this, but the article ageing should NOT link to the terms quadragenarian through nonagenarian. They re-direct to ageing as a survival of Vfd. Georgia guy 23:04, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Fields

Interesting question. Businesspeople generally give the product or service of their industry when asked their "field". So, someone who worked for Revlon would say "cosmetics", someone from IBM would say "computers". A medical doctor would say either "general practice" (or "family practice") if he's the kind of doctor you go to for ordinary sickness and minor injury (general practitioner), and would specify "radiology" or "emergency medicine" if he's a specialist, or he might say his field is "medical research". A veterinarian would specify either agricultural medicine, or companion animals (i.e. dogs, cats), or small animals (hamsters, gerbils) and exotics (i.e. pygmy goats, skunks). Tuf-Kat 21:22, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC)

Well, I'm not sure the many different kinds of fields have anything particularly unifying about them except in that they are careers. You could start a Wikiproject on occupations -- I bet there'd be some people interested in that. I'm afraid I've got too much on my plate for the moment to really help out though. Tuf-Kat 06:18, Apr 23, 2005 (UTC)

Years in television

Hi there!

This is a message to all users who were at one point of time or another actively involved in editing the "Years in television" articles.

I have developed a new format, that I am currently proposing to apply to all "xxxx in television" articles. If you could take a look at 1976 in television/Temp and leave your comments/objections/propositions at Talk:1976 in television/Temp, that would be much appreciated.

Please note that the Temp version is by no means final. It is there to give an idea of the new proposed structure. Please do not be critical of the actual layout; it will most definitely not stay unchanged.

Any ideas you might have will be quite welcome. Thank you for your time.—Ëzhiki (erinaceus amurensis) 21:13, May 27, 2005 (UTC)

Stylistic changes

Please do not make stylistic changes to multiple articles without attempting to first reach a consensus. Your attempts to change all instances of "American" to "United States" or "United Statesian" is not supported by the Wikipedia style guide, and it makes the prose clumsier and less readable. Firebug 03:19, 30 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You have referenced Alternative words for American in justifying your alterations. First of all, this is an article, not a stylesheet. We have a List of ethnic slurs as well, but that certainly doesn't mean it's appropriate to throw them into articles. Also, even the article you reference as justification notes that "References to these words have been around since the early days of the republic, but they are virtually unused and American remains by far the most common term." NPOV doesn't require that we coin silly neologisms. Firebug 03:29, 30 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If you feel there should be a Wikipedia-wide rule not to use "America" and "American" to refer to the United States of America, then try to establish consensus for that, and get it included in the Manual of Style. You might glance, too, at Wikipedia:How to create policy and Wikipedia:Edit war. But it's just not Wiki-etiquette to try to make a point by editing a lot of pages in a non-consensus way. Frjwoolley 15:54, 30 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Three-revert rule

It is Wikipedia policy that you may only revert an article a maximum of three times in a 24-hour period. (See Wikipedia:Three revert rule.) You have already used three reverts within the past day on Hasbro. If you continue to revert, you may be temporarily blocked from editing Wikipedia. Firebug 17:27, 30 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Since you performed a 4th revert within 24 hours to Hasbro after being warned of the 3RR, I have reported your actions on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR. You may be blocked by an administrator for up to 24 hours as a result of this infraction. Firebug 19:33, 30 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

3RR

Hi Heegoop, you've been reported for a 3RR violation at Hasbro and have been blocked temporarily from editing. If you feel this block is unfair, feel free to e-mail me using the link on my user page. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 23:50, May 30, 2005 (UTC)

Aristotle vandalism

Please do not insert nonsense into serious articles [3]. If you want to have fun, try Uncyclopedia. Pavel Vozenilek 19:22, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

American / United States

Once again, I must ask that you please do not make stylistic changes to multiple articles simultaneously without attempting to first reach a consensus via proper channels. Whether or not the use of "American" to mean "from the United States" is etymologically accurate, it is the standard usage. Changing "American" to a multi-word phrase merely makes the prose clumsier and less readable. What is most troubling about this is that you have not made an effort to discuss this on the affected Talk pages. Rather, you have engaged in protracted edit war (especially on Hasbro) to enforce your desired style. This is not considered good Wikiquette. Please reconsider your actions. If you continue on your present course, I may open a RFC on your behavior in this matter. Firebug 03:49, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Wait a second, Heegoop. I really do appreciate what your wrote on my talk page, but there's a problem here. I didn't coin any terms. I actually found it pretty weird that this is happening, because it made no sense to me. Then I checked the edit history for the Vila Sésamo article (is that right?). Only then I understood. That was a mistake of mine. I didn't mean "United Stated" in the link. I meant "United States". That's where I wanted "American" to point to. It was really a mistake of mine. Like you, I also share some discontentment when I think the way that, whenever you say "American" to any person nowadays, they'll almost always end up thinking of the United States country instead of the American continent. It's kinda revolting, I agree. Some languages have terms that were created to try solving this issue. They are somewhat neologisms, but they are used once in a while. I can speak for Portuguese, which is what I speak. The term is "estadounidense". I think that's it.

However, yeah, it was all a mistake. I'm sorry. Didn't think you'd end up liking something like that either. I'm also sorry to say this, but it's better to leave this idea alone. It won't work. As far as I know, the term doesn't exist, so I think it's useless to try to create something like that right now. Hope you'll understand.

See you.--Kaonashi 02:32, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Are you listening to me? I said I didn't create that term, nor anything else. To keep asking for help makes no sense. I suggest you to hear what's been said about your actions instead of fighting against other people without even reflecting first. If you keep going against the rules, you will be punished. I hope I'm being clear this time.--Kaonashi 22:51, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

By the same token, you should not have moved American English to United States English without first seeking consensus by following the procedure at Wikipedia:Requested moves. I have moved it back to American English, which is by far the more commonly used term. --Angr/_{tɔk tə mi} 6 July 2005 06:26 (UTC)

I'm going to reiterate what has been said above: stop changing "American" to "US". First, it's "U.S.", not "US." Second, "American" is the proper adjective to describe someone or something that is of the United States. This is true not only in the United States but among English speaking people of other countries as well. Postdlf 23:28, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I personally don't have a problem with you replacing "America" with "United States", as the latter is more common and precise as a reference to the country. But "United States" is simply NOT an adjective, nor is "U.S." the dominant term. "American" is the customary word, regardless of what you may prefer. Stop making those changes unless you can prove that someone from the United States is not overwhelmingly called "American" in the English language. Postdlf 20:46, 16 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

VFD notices

You may not remove the VFD template from articles while a vote is in progress. Doing so is considered vandalism. I have tried to assume good faith in dealing with you, but doing so is becoming harder and harder as a result of your actions. Firebug 22:11, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

RFC

For your refusal to follow collaborative editing procedures, your insistence on edit warring, and your personal attacks against me, you can expect a RFC to be opened on your behavior. One is now being compiled. Firebug 1 July 2005 04:08 (UTC)

Hi. You may wish to review Wikipedia:No personal attacks and Wikipedia:Civility. Please try to remember these points, even when dealing with people/issues that you may find frustrating. Hope this helps, -- Infrogmation

Category:Cult figures

Category:Cult figures was CfD'ed recently, Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2005 December 13. If you wish to contest that, please use Wikipedia:deletion review. Thanks, -Will Beback 21:16, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nashville

The information you are adding to the summary of the Nashville article is not correct. Nashville-Davidson (balance) does not correspond to the old City of Nashville. Nashville-Davidson (balance) is Nashville minus seperately incorporated satellite cities. It is a designation used only by the U.S. census (so that they don't count the same people twice for two cities) and has virtually no use or value of public interest. Nashville-Davidson (balance) includes many suburbs and rural areas that were not part of the old City of Nashville. The old City of Nashville hasn't existed since the 60s and no one in Nashville (besides historians and old folks) have any idea what it corresponded to as everyone these days considers Nashville synonymous with Davidson County. Putting esoteric information about a peculiar census designation in the summary of the Nashville article isn't appropriate in my opinion, especially since it isn't accurate to begin with. Kaldari 19:54, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nashville-Davidson (balance) would have to correspond to the former City of Nashville since it says in the article of the balance "This portion generally corresponds to the area of the City of Nashville before the formation of the consolidated Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County." Heegoop, 13 January 2006 (UTC).

It says that it "generally corresponds" because most of areas unincorporated prior to consolidation were sparsely populated and thus didn't make much difference census-wise. I have corrected the article to say "roughly" rather than "generally" so that it is less misleading. I wish I could draw you a picture to explain things better, but I'm afraid the wiki-software isn't that advanced yet :) Kaldari 20:18, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully this will help it make sense:

Kaldari 20:39, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have moved our discussion to the Nashville talk page, as I believe it would be useful to have a record of it there. Please add any additional comments there. Thanks! Kaldari 21:03, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with your edits to the Nashville-Davidson balance article. "Nashville-Davidson balance" is not the same thing as the former City of Nashville. It's not a city (or a former city). It's simply a technical demographic term used by the US Census bereau so that they can avoid counting people twice who live within cities that exist inside Nashville (and thus live in two different cities at the same time). The term isn't used for anything except statistical purposes. The article wouldn't even exist except for the fact that the bot that automatically creates wikipedia articles from census data created it. Kaldari 00:08, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you interested in discussing your edits to Nashville-Davidson (balance), Tennessee or would you prefer that we just keep reverting each other? Kaldari 03:02, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pamela Anderson

Hello, I noticed that you added Category:Vegans to Pamela Anderson. Well, in her bio, in the section "Animal rights" it says that she's not a vegan. So, if she is could you change that, and give a source, if possible. Thanks. Gilliamjf 16:25, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TMNT (1987)

Case of the Killer Pizzas

You were interested in an aricle about "Case of the Killer Pizzas", an episode from the 1987 TMNT cartoon. Now there is one: Case of the Killer Pizzas (TMNT 1987 episode).

User: J 1982

TMNT (1987) Episode Airdates

I noticed you changed the airdates for the TMNT 1987 episode guide. Where did you get those dates? I don't know if the site is incorrect, but I got the dates here:

Inner City Blues 03:51, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Roseanne

Please stop advertising you're online petition on Wikipedia. You are not allowed to do this. Please stop. Or you could be blocked. --Caldorwards4 17:45, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have opened a section on the talk page to discuss this petition. Please attempt to work out this disagreement there. Otherwise, a RfC will be opened. -- Garfield226 21:27, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your page move

I've reverted your move of New York metropolitan area. There was no discussion of the move beforehand, and since the phrase "New York City metopolitan area" is practically unheard-of (and, in fact, the "New York" in most uses does refer to the state—as in NY-NJ-CT metropolitan area), there's no reason to suppose that consensus would support a move to that title. If you feel strongly about it for some reason, please feel free to submit a move request. Thanks. Kafziel ^Talk 14:18, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:4197.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:4197.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source 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. 02:04, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Native cuisine nominated for deletion

Hi. A category which you created, Category:Native cuisine, has been nominated for deletion. If you care to, you may participate in the discussion here. Regards, --cjllw ʘ TALK 07:16, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Omni90a.gif

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Omni90a.gif. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Jusjih (talk) 00:34, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Suburb update

Actually San jose, CA is a suburb of San fransisco.. Dwilso (talk) 02:39, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Pink. Your edits appeared to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. VMS Mosaic (talk) 19:19, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Silver Ranger

There has only ever been one Silver Ranger and that was in PRiS. All others are not called the "Silver Ranger" and grouping them as such would be original research.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:06, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Violet

The category is Category:Shades of violet, not "Category:Shades of purple", so the template should be Template:Shades of violet, not "Template:Shades of purple". Why do you change it?? Georgia guy (talk) 22:50, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mesquite

'Why isn't Mesquite not in the Las Vegas metro area?'

The simple answer is it is not near the valley and it not considered part of the metro area as described in the article. Consider that there is 80 miles or so of desert between the valley and Mesquite. There are objections to including Boulder City in the metro area and that is close. If Mesquite is in the metro area, then add Lauhghlin, Pahrump and Bullhead City. 02:38, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Actually per the census bureau it is the Las Vegas-Paradise-Pahrump, NV CSA. The article has never been intended to map to that area, but to cover the valley and the name was chosen to match what was used for other areas. If you want to run with your definitiion, then you need to explain what is different between the Las Vegas metropolitan area and Clark County, Nevada. And that would leave the Pahrump issue open. Vegaswikian (talk) 02:50, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Mmpr-rg-billy.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Hi Heegoop!
We thank you for uploading Image:Mmpr-rg-billy.jpg, but there is a problem. Your image is currently missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. Unless you can help by adding a copyright tag, it may be deleted by an Administrator. If you know this information, then we urge you to add a copyright tag to the image description page. We apologize for this, but all images must confirm to policy on Wikipedia.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks so much for your cooperation.
This message is from a robot. --John Bot III (talk) 18:47, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2059, 2070s

Per Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Years, anniversaries are not included in year articles unless there are present plans for observance. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 21:00, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CfD nomination of Category:Fictional unincorporated communities

I have nominated Category:Fictional unincorporated communities (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 06:20, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Fads and trends by decade

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Fads and trends by decade, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Consists of nothing but redlinks to pages unlikely to be created as the topic is too broad; even should those pages be created, this would be better as a category

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Jamoche (talk) 00:42, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Full flavored cigarettes

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Full flavored cigarettes, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Unreferenced. Little more than a definition of a term. Furthermore, I have never heard of cigarettes being described as "full flavour" in the UK or elsewhere. It sounds a utterly risible. If this is an established term used in some parts of the world then that may be fair enough but if it is just a promotional neologism then it is not encyclopaedic.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. DanielRigal (talk) 00:46, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Full flavor (cigarette type)

I have nominated Full flavor (cigarette type), an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Full flavor (cigarette type). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. DanielRigal (talk) 01:22, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Page moves

Please do not move a page to a title that is harder to follow or move it unilaterally against naming conventions or consensus, as you did to Honolulu. This includes making page moves while a discussion remains under way. We have some guidelines to help with deciding what title is best for a subject. If you would like to experiment with page titles and moving, please use the test Wikipedia. Thank you. HkCaGu (talk) 17:19, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This goes for your move of Antioch, Tennessee as well (see: Talk:Antioch, Nashville, Tennessee#Requested move). In general, the move of any city or neighborhood in the U.S. should be considered potentially controversial and therefore must go through a WP:RM move proposal process. Thank you. --Born2cycle (talk) 22:00, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

February 2013

Hello, I'm Lawrencekhoo. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Koi, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. LK (talk) 00:48, 5 February 2013 (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) 22:17, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Heegoop. 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.

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Heegoop. 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]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Heegoop. 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]

Full flavored cigarettes listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Full flavored cigarettes. Since you had some involvement with the Full flavored cigarettes redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 17:46, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've added Full flavor (cigarette type) to that discussion. Thryduulf (talk) 20:02, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Heegoop. 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]

Disambiguation link notification for November 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Evolutionary grade, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hexapod (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) 09:20, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

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) 00:03, 19 November 2019 (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) 01:17, 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) 00:04, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of I Love the '90s (American TV series) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article I Love the '90s (American TV series) 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/I Love the '90s (American TV series) 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 until the discussion has finished.

Drmies (talk) 15:59, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]