User talk:123957a

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!
Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. 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 2022 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 to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:08, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Unbitrium (February 1)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by CNMall41 was:

The comment the reviewer left was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Unbitrium and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
 * If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Unbitrium Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:CNMall41&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Unbitrium reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

CNMall41 (talk) 19:21, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

RfC handling
wrt WP:RFC @ WT:ELEM: Please read more carefully. eg, you are supposed to add & sign a line. And here you have removed a datestamp, which is not correct (you may not change posts this significantly). Personally, I have seen no reason to extend. DePiep (talk) 10:16, 15 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Let me ask this straight: why did you extend the RfC? DePiep (talk) 10:32, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I extended it because I thought there hadn't been enough responses. 123957a (talk) 12:49, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Not enough? Counting??? Or not the !votes you prefer? How do you evaluate the responses present? This way, you are putting a burden on other editors, requiring them to respond extensively to repeated arguments-already-rejected. And because, as you know, some responses have not been eeh helpful nor in GF. Instead, you are expected to digest and weigh responses present. And from there, you could have (should have) concluded that you Request was fulfilled. DePiep (talk) 08:47, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. 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 to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:40, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Bad grammar
Your addition of bad grammar has now been reverted twice by two different and experienced editors. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons&diff=next&oldid=1203322722 -- Valjean (talk) ( PING me ) 17:04, 4 February 2024 (UTC)


 * That's fine. I know the subjunctive mood is archaic, pretentious and terrible. 123957a (talk) 17:05, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Also, the second revert was over WP:BRD, not a content dispute. 123957a (talk) 17:07, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Then don't do it. You're just being disruptive. This isn't a playground. You're wasting our time. BTW, the one who thanked you is a disruptive editor. -- Valjean (talk) ( PING me ) 17:08, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I thought the two different wordings clearly meant the same thing... whatever. I will never edit policy pages again if that's what is required from me to be a good editor! 123957a (talk) 17:36, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
 * @Valjean If you must gain consensus on the talk page before any edit goes through, they should just full-protect the page instead of semi-protecting it, to reduce disruption and save editors' time. 123957a (talk) 18:25, 4 February 2024 (UTC)