User talk:Dazedbythebell

Help request
Hello, I need help. There are two articles about the same person. Baba Tajuddin of Nagpur is the same person as Baba Tajuddin. What is the right way to proceed to correct this? Thank you. Dazedbythebell (talk) 21:55, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I'll leave the "helpme" for someone to give more detailed advice, but start by reading WP:Merging. JohnCD (talk) 22:08, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Dazedbythebell (talk) 23:20, 20 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I've removed the, as it looks like you've got things under control. Dori ☾Talk ⁘ Contribs☽ 01:05, 21 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you Dori. Yes, it appears under control. Dazedbythebell (talk) 16:48, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

The Miracle
Thank you for your relentless paring-down of The Miracle (1912 film), it's looking much better already. I still have to fix a few refs etc. > MinorProphet (talk) 00:44, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I think it's turning into a very good article. You have done an excellent job. Dazedbythebell (talk) 10:57, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Sprituality
Hi Dazedbythebell. If I understand it correctly, hatnotes should only be placed at the top of an article? I didn't know; I've so often seen hatnotes at the top of a paragraph. I guess a proper way of using "important" links is by using them in the paragraphs themselves? Greetings,  Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   21:30, 5 February 2013 (UTC)


 * I like your recent changes to Spirituality, and wish you would do more. Hat-notes over sub-sections are meant to lead to "Main Articles" by the same heading, not "See Also" which is subjective and leading. Dazedbythebell (talk) 22:10, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 * There are actually two types of section hatnotes, template:main and template:see also. What you're describing is the former, but there is nothing inherently wrong with a "see also" hatnote as long as the appropriate template is used. - SudoGhost 22:17, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 * In this case it does appear like like some of the "see also" templates appear too soon, just under the subheaders. I am not sure I understand how Dazedbythebell means "leading" but if he means "suggestive", I find they are so, being positioned in a place before the content of the section is read. Hoverfish Talk 00:09, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey, what a lot of responses! Very happy to see so, after the turmoil of the last days. I'll work through the article again the coming days or weeks, trying to integrate the links into the main body of text or the "See also"-section. Greetings to all of you,  Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   05:50, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Good to see you here, Hoverfish. As I said, Joshua, I like your recent changes and think you are doing a good job. Perhaps this discussion should be moved to the Spirituality discussion page. There are a couple of things I have in mind. By leading, I meant pointing the reader to articles that might be considered subjectively (to the point of view of the editor) vitally related, as opposed to objectively so. For instance another editor might find that particular 'See also' as not exactly the same thing in all contexts, or too exact to a particular point of view. So I mean subjective or bearing an opinion. One thing I think the article suffers from is that it can come off as anti-religious, to to bypass religion too quickly or dismissively, as if the religious use of the term is no longer in current use. This would not be so. Encarta defines spiritual as
 * spir·i·tu·al adj
 * 1.	relating to the soul or spirit, usually in contrast to material things
 * 2.	relating to religious or sacred things rather than worldly things
 * 3.	connected by an affinity of the mind, spirit, or temperament
 * 4.	showing great refinement and concern with the higher things in life

The Free Dictionary defines spiritual as:


 * 1. Of, relating to, consisting of, or having the nature of spirit; not tangible or material. See Synonyms at immaterial.
 * 2. Of, concerned with, or affecting the soul.
 * 3. Of, from, or relating to God; deific.
 * 4. Of or belonging to a church or religion; sacred.
 * 5. Relating to or having the nature of spirits or a spirit; supernatural

These are not outmoded or outdated uses, but current. The article would lead one to think these are not current usage. Certainly the mystical experiences of, for instance, Teresa of Avila are considered by the Church to be 'spiritual experiences.' I simply would love to see the article have as little bias one way or the other. Dazedbythebell (talk) 14:58, 6 February 2013 (UTC)


 * I definitely think all the 'See Also's can be incorporated better, as you suggested, and that they all are valuable in the bottom See Also list. Dazedbythebell (talk) 15:09, 6 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Copied to Talk:Spirituality  Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   16:39, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for monitoring! By the way, I just notice that I forgot an "i" in the header. Makes it soemthing like "Spritzuality" - check "Herman Brood" as well. Which would be a nice name for a Wiki-policy against the annexation of religion-topics. See also diff. Greetings,  Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   04:19, 8 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you Joshua, for bringing my attention to this agenda: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hinduism&diff=531288543&oldid=530922964 Dazedbythebell (talk) 12:31, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Tireless
Thank you Hoverfish for this very appreciated Barnstar. Dazedbythebell (talk) 12:15, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

If I guessed your intentions right, you should place after all the existing userboxes, and underneath it copy this barnstar. You can also place before the three userboxes to have them all in a line clear of the other images and tempaltes. Hoverfish Talk 15:27, 21 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you again. (: Dazedbythebell (talk) 21:17, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Photo help
Can an administrator or someone knowledgeable help me to put File:Mani irani.jpg on Commons? It has ORTS permission. Dazedbythebell (talk) 11:55, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Please read here and reply. Gryllida (talk) 12:08, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you Gryllida. I will do it manually. I see now how to do it. Thank you. Dazedbythebell (talk) 12:12, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Copyright violation question
I deleted a long section from the Wikipedia article Happy Birthday (Pete Townshend album), and explained the change in the Discussion page. However, it was a very gross violation of copyright. Thus as I understand Wikipedia policy it ought to also be cleared from the article history. See Discussion Page there. However, I do not know how to do this procedure. So I am asking for an admin who can do this, or knows what ought to be done. Thank you. Dazedbythebell (talk) 22:31, 15 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks for removing the copyright violation! Nothing else needs to be done since removing it from the article history would also remove the attribution for non-infringing edits that happened in between. Huon (talk) 23:43, 15 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Thank you Huon. Dazedbythebell (talk) 04:44, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 2
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Names of God, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Elah (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 08:50, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Deletion confusion
Dear someone. I tried to propose an article for deletion on August 12. The article is here: Carol Weyland Conner. However, I think I did something wrong. For it shows up in no AfD list anywhere I can find. Can you check and see I did everything right? I myself created it, but it was an old name (Sharnak) I no longer use or remember the login for. Thanks. Dazedbythebell (talk) 17:14, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
 * You have proposed deletion, which is a different from Articles for Deletion. -- Mdann 52   talk to me!  17:24, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you Mdann52. Dazedbythebell (talk) 17:04, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Baba (disambiguation page)
Hi, my edit of 19th September (which you have reverted) was not spam, there are numerous disambiguation pages with stock ticker codes, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSFT and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WMT for examples. Alibaba holdings came to the market on 19th September, see http://www.cbsnews.com/news/alibaba-ipo-trading-to-start-after-22-billion-sale/, hence the edit. Clivemacd (talk) 09:03, 21 September 2014 (UTC)


 * You're right. My apologies. Dazedbythebell (talk) 11:36, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

The Five Perfect Masters
Yes I copy and pasted, and Yes I am a follower of meher baba as well, and I believe including the perfect masters section in narayan maharaj article is no harm. I can change the sentence construction accordingly, so that it wont become subjective. But it would only become additional information, which is always useful for an encyclopedia. Please check the re-edited content by me Danice thrall (talk) 04:33, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Danice, yes it is useful information about what Meher Baba taught. And it is in the correct place in that page on that subject, where it can be found by those wanting to know what Meher Baba taught. But to put Baba's teaching on the pages of other masters, with their own disciples, of different traditions, with different teachings, is simply to proselytize. It will not last in those articles, which are meant to be on the lives and teachings of those particular masters. So "spreading Baba's message" on other articles is not going to hold up on Wikipedia. Also you must discuss a radical change like this (on four pages no-less) on the appropriate Talk pages, and reach some consensus. Simply reverting without discussing is not the way to work on Wikipedia. Dazedbythebell (talk) 18:54, 20 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Please don't edit war. If you think there is a case to make for your addition, make it here. You seem to be promoting a particular viewpoint without reaching a consensus with other editors. I don't have any axe to grind either way with this topic, but if editors seem to be pushing a particular line rather than establishing an agreed version, I will take appropriate action Jimfbleak - talk to me?  19:52, 20 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi. Wikipedia is a good concept, but we have to talk to each other Danice on the bigger edits, otherwise it falls down. I'm sure you meant well, goodwill and all that. Back yourself if you like, but discuss before edits. It actually reads well, what you wrote. Its referenced OK, but the cut and paste let you down. Vary it a bit and go to the talk page of each article to explain what you are doing. Dazedbythebell I think she has a point, being these five Sadgurus are linked by Baba. She could write it in a way that its not Babas so called teachings being inserted but is what he stated. Its certainly a key concept how all five were linked to the Avatar (loads of refs around) and all had their Ashrams not far from Babas seat. I see some merit, but it needs reworking a bit. BTW I checked edit history, I dont think there will be much input from devotees of the Sadgurus. Saint Aviator  lets talk 23:31, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Doing a U turn on the devotees of the Sadgurus. Did a deeper check and I now think this will be seen as an attempt to proselytize. Saint Aviator  lets talk 02:47, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you Saint Aviator. I agree. Luckily several people have been working to clean some of this out. Meher Baba's very respectable teachings definitely are appropriate in Meher Baba articles, as that is their subject, but not in articles of other Sadgurus and Qutubs. Baba said a lot about Saint Francis. But it doesn't belong on the Saint Francis article. Dazedbythebell (talk) 02:54, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

How to close a proposed merge
There appears to be a clear consensus not to merge a page at Talk:Meher_Baba. What do we need to do to close it? Dazedbythebell (talk) 21:24, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Dazed, if there is a clear consensus, then be BOLD and perform the merger. Primefac (talk) 21:38, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Primefac. Dazedbythebell (talk) 22:57, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion
I have asked for a page I did 9 yrs ago to be Speedy Deleted. It is so strange it requires explaining. I did it when I was a novice and under an old name I no longer remember the password for the user name Sharnak. For a single day 9 years ago it linked from the main article in a See Also section viewable here. It is a pointless and silly personal trivia page, much of it false it turns out. It falls under many CSD criteria including: What makes it confusing is I no longer have access to the old account. I apologize for creating it. I am wiser now. Dazedbythebell (talk) 12:36, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
 * 2.1.7 G7. Author requests deletion
 * 2.1.1 G1. Patent nonsense
 * 2.2.8 A11. Obviously invented
 * 2.1.2 G2. Test pages

I am afraid I failed to ask my question above. Can you as an administrator delete it? I am concerned it will not be clear by itself, as it has no talk page to put this information I've listed above there. Dazedbythebell (talk) 13:25, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Ah, gotcha. You've correctly placed the CSD tag, so (eventually) an admin will see it and take action. Primefac (talk) 13:37, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I will be patient. Dazedbythebell (talk) 15:23, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

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) 14:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

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) 14:04, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Self Declared messaih - Meher Baba
Meher Baba himself publicly declared that he is the Avatar of the Age, God In Human Form. He said I have come not to teach but to Awaken. He is the Ancient One, He is the Messaih. What do we call this ? Why are you so upset and dazed with my creativity. Prophetkrish (talk) 13:44, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Nothing to be upset about, Prophetkrish. It is simply the wrong category for this article, as I will explain. If Dazedbythebell hadn't removed it first, I would have done so myself, with no offence meant to your creativity. Long before Meher Baba's public declaration of his Avatarhood, in 1921/22, the perfect master Upasni Maharaj had told Merwan: "Merwan, you are the Avatar". Also before that, Hazrat Babajan had disclosed to him being the "Ancient One". During the 1958 sahavas, Meher Baba said so himself as well. In this sense it is not correct to state that Meher Baba was a self-proclaimed Messaih. Hoverfish Talk 16:41, 13 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Also, while some print media in the early 1930s, including a book by journalist Paul Brunton, referred to Baba sardonically as "the Indian Messiah" or "the silky haired Messiah," Meher Baba at no time in his life referred to himself as the Messiah or a Messiah, which really means liberator of the Jews. While that is the closest term in Judaism it is not the same thing as the concept of Avatar. Baba also was not a self-declared prophet or messanger, even if some could call him that. So 'self-declared Messiahs' does not fit him. Dazedbythebell (talk) 14:52, 14 July 2016 (UTC)


 * That's why prophets exist (I believe), to divert attention, and to provide amusement during the lean times. >MinorProphet (talk) 00:04, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi...
...sub-editor extraordinaire,

I also believe that in the last 4 years I have come relatively close to understanding just how The Miracle came to be made, not least with the help of one George C. Crager, who was indirectly involved with an American Indian 'Messiah' (Wovoka) and the results of his ministry. I feel this draft article is ready for some heavy pruning and presentation to the world, and Joe Menchen is (as usual) not far off. If you felt like tackling a somewhat different approach to the central mystery of existence (via the US-European Entertainment World of 1912), I would very much appreciate your input about how to make the article a bit more presentable.

On a slightly different tangent: when you were kindly editing The Miracle way back, I never actually visited your user page or contribs, you were 'just' another username on the history page. I now belatedly realise the connection with 'Maria Carmi' and Meher Baba; coincidentally, I still happen to have my printed copies of this and this, bought many years ago. Haha, I just looked up to see if they ever met or corresponded, and lol and behold this pops up. >MinorProphet (talk) 00:04, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

please be attentive
What is going in at Bhau Kalchuri page? Chandipriya (talk) 10:14, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Looks like you fixed it. Dazedbythebell (talk) 21:02, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Select Survey Invite
I'm working on a study of political motivations and how they affect editing. I'd like to ask you to take a survey. The survey should take no more than 1-2 minutes. Your survey responses will be kept private. Our project is documented at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Wikipedia_%2B_Politics.

Your survey Link: https://uchicago.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_9S3JByWf57fXEkR?Q_DL=56np5HpEZWkMlr7_9S3JByWf57fXEkR_MLRP_5vzXduLGgP7z3M1&Q_CHL=gl

I am asking you to participate in this study because you are a frequent editor of pages on Wikipedia that are of political interest. We would like to learn about your experiences in dealing with editors of different political orientations.

Sincere thanks for your help! Porteclefs (talk) 12:39, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Note
You need to abide by our conflict of interest guideline, disclose your conflicts and refrain from any direct editing as to the broader locus of your conflict(s).

You also need to declare accounts that you've previously used in any form/manner over WP, in consistency with the concerned guideline, mention all accounts with whom you have coordinated off-wiki in areas of your conflict per this policy and refrain from pursuing promotional activities over here.

Anything to the contrary may see your editing privileges affected.

Please reply to this message mandatorily aprior to any further edit.

Best, ~ Winged Blades Godric 06:57, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Sad that, with this new and semi-improved use of the policy, we are going to have to lose so many long-time and new editors on any and all articles and WikiProjects related to Christians, Catholics, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Sports Fans, and the odds and ends of beliefs and/or traditions. I guess lots of editors will be looking for something to do, and I could offer to teach them how to do a good italic run. Randy Kryn (talk) 19:29, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

You do know that my comment above, as well as the odd statement above that, are pure nonsense, right? You can ivote on all of those deletion attempts if you want, even if the non-administrator who placed that thinks you are making a mint by doing so. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:07, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I know that Kryn. But as you brought it up, perhaps I should say a few things about myself. I don't belong to any organization. I'm not an employee or on the board of directors of any organization. I don't sell anything. I'm not interested in promoting any club, group, or movement. I have been a Baba follower all my life. I have a lot of knowledge about Meher Baba's life and his books and have a Masters in philosophy. Obviously a Christian can edit articles on Christianity, last I heard. And a Baba follower can write about the subject he knows. I have never written anything on Wikipedia or anywhere that promotes believing anything Baba said. And the idea of a Baba movement is, to me, kind of an oxymoron. Baba himself stated clearly again and again that he not only had no need for societies or organizations, but was opposed to them. Examples of his own words saying exactly that: "Societies and organizations have never succeeded in bringing Truth nearer." "I do not intend to found any religion, cult, creed or society. There are already far too many of these organizations." I also have no objection to any vote to eliminate any minor article. I'm not even adverse to deleting 'Silence Day,' though no one seems to have noticed that it has been featured on Wikipedia's Main Page ten times, on July 10, 2007, July 10, 2008, July 10, 2009, July 10, 2010, July 10, 2011, July 10, 2012, July 10, 2013, July 10, 2014, July 10, 2015, and July 10, 2016. People want to know why Baba followers the world over ask for a day off work to observe the day of silence, and so turn to Wikipedia. There are two other days of silence listed on Wikipedia. Why not delete them too? Obviously someone hadn't heard of Baba and thinks it's not notable as its not in the press, though this is due mostly to the fact that Baba opposed proselytizing. Seems odd to remove Baba's prayers. Why not the hundreds of other prayers of other groups on Wikipedia? Why delete only all Meher Baba's prayers? But if people want to expunge the prayers of just one faith, then have at it. Baba himself said that even opposition was good for his work. Deleting the article on Baba's special use of the term "Perfect Master" will leave a lot of people confused trying to understand him, and removing 'Dhuni (Meher Baba)' will leave readers having no idea what the ritual meant to Baba. I actually think the articles about Kitty Davy, Faerdoon Driver, Mani Irani, and Shireen Irani are best removed. They are dumb and it is true they have no notability in their own right. Removing the Trust article is stupid, but so what. It's not very notable in America. Wikipedia ought to delete all Indian nonprofit articles. After all, what do they have to do with America, which is what Wikipedia is all about. Whatever. None of this really bothers me. I think several of the AfDs are reasonable, a few not so much. And the bias, well you can't stop bias in the world. It's part of the human condition. Whatever Wikipedia wants to do is fine by me. Wikipedia, due to its very intelligent nature, tends to make the right decisions in the end. I'm a big believer in its process. Dazedbythebell (talk) 14:53, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Okay, but you are part of Wikipedia, and you can help to make these intelligent decisions by commenting on the deletion nominations pages that you disagree with. I've quoted your information about Silence Day's use on the main page on its deletion page. And this is not an American Wikipedia, it's a world-wide English-language Wikipedia and if I'm not mistaken it's main user base, or second-most main user base, is India, whose readers would have an interest in many of the major articles about Meher Baba recently put up for deletion. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:07, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 * OK, I'll add my vote to some of these. I think people will be surprised how many I agree with. I have helped in part of their creation, but that was a long time ago, and there is nothing sacrosanct about them. Dazedbythebell (talk) 15:12, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Then your fair 'Keep' and 'Delete' ivotes will be all that more valuable for your discernment. Thank you. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:15, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. I've started. Dazedbythebell (talk) 15:18, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Avatar Claimants
I woul like to inquire why you removed the maitreya website reference. This is a semi-notable cult with a small but well established base. Is it not well known enough? And why call it spam? Goneb4thewind (talk) 00:52, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

mani irani
what happened to these articles ? Mani Irani, Sheriar Irani, and Shireen Irani ?? what kind of a meher baba editor are you, you just dont care for meher baba related articles?? Rvls (talk) 02:45, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
 * They were voted delete. Dazedbythebell (talk) 11:00, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Please
don't revert maintenance tags w/o any attempt at resolution. Thanks, &#x222F; WBG converse 17:45, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Beyond Words
Since you were pinged on this I'd think it's allowed to ask if you have any comments on the ongoing deletion attempt at Beyond Words (1997 film). Randy Kryn (talk) 13:04, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't know what to contribute. Seems this has all been gone over before. So I have nothing to add. Dazedbythebell (talk) 20:59, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Silence_Day_(2nd_nomination)
IN case you were unaware. Articles_for_deletion/Silence_Day_(2nd_nomination). --Nemonoman (talk) 19:03, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Yet Another GAR of Meher Baba
Talk:Meher_Baba/GA3 Also a dozen AFDs on Baba topics. I can't cope. Have a look at the GAR -- that editor is being helpful. Hope you are well --Nemonoman (talk) 02:43, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Meher Baba Journal.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Meher Baba Journal.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:28, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Discourses.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Discourses.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:29, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Meher Baba topics
Please what is going on with these articles, why are you not protecting them being a torch bearer of meher baba articles, and why are they being deleted ?? I have restores some of them, please discuss this with arbitration committee because these articles are notable enough.


 * Meher Mount
 * Sufism Reoriented
 * Meher Spiritual Center
 * Meher Baba Universal Spiritual Center
 * Avatar's Abode
 * Amartithi

Pinkymama (talk) 11:16, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Sufism Reoriented
Please make sure this is published .. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Sufism_Reoriented Pinkymama (talk) 11:32, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Charl du Plessis
Hi, you were right that the rugby union player is not a primary topic, so I moved that article to Charl du Plessis (rugby union), with Charl du Plessis itself now a disambiguation page. Just make sure you follow the proper WP:MOVE procedure next time :) Lennart97 (talk) 11:01, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Meher Baba
The article is being pov pushed by others. Meher Baba is not a yoga guru. Please have a keen eye on the article, I go with your edits, as you made significant contributions to the article, I have reverted some junk content added in the article, and corrected it to December 23 2020. Please take care of this article. Cocamend (talk) 16:09, 1 September 2021 (UTC).

Orphaned non-free image File:God in a pill.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:God in a pill.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:19, 5 April 2022 (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) 00:40, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Georges-matchabelli.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Georges-matchabelli.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. — holly  {chat} 21:19, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Garrett Elsden Fort.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Garrett Elsden Fort.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:12, 26 December 2023 (UTC)