User talk:Joriki

Hi! welcome to Wikipedia!

Hope you enjoy contributing to Wikipedia. Be bold in editing pages. Here are some links that you might find useful:


 * Try the Tutorial. If you have less time, try How to edit a page.
 * To sign your posts (on talk pages, Articles for deletion page etc.) use 	 ~ (four tildes). This will insert your name and timestamp. To insert just your name, type (3 tildes).
 * You can experiment in the test area.
 * You can get help at the Help Desk
 * Some other pages that will help you know more about Wikipedia: Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines, Neutral point of view, Civility, What Wikipedia is not
 * If you made IP edits before creating a user account, you can attribute your IP edits to your account at Changing attribution for an edit.

I hope you stick around and keep contributing to Wikipedia. Drop a note at New user log.

-- Utcursch | Talk to me

Royce Da 5'9"
Your wish is our command. *Poof* -- done. :-) SWAdair | Talk  06:15, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Quantum circuit
Please have a look at my edit to quantum circuit. I tried to deal with your objection. Did I miss something? Thanks. --CSTAR 14:09, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

constructivism (mathematics)
Unfortunately I think your "improvement" in the disambiguation notice made it worse, because those who are looking for "other meanings" in this case very often DO NOT KNOW that the philosophy of mathematics-education is another meaning and is not what the article is supposed to be about. Piaget is not relevant here! Michael Hardy 20:15, 5 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Hi Michael -- I see what you mean -- it hadn't occurred to me that mathematics and education overlap in mathematics education -- I was just thinking that all meanings of constructivism are created equal and there seemed to be no reason to single out education from the others. These warnings shouldn't be too long, though, I think -- is my shortened version of your warning OK?

Wrong, wrong, wrong! You're totally missing the point! "all meanings of constructivism are created equal and there seemed to be no reason to single out education from the others"? The point is: the word "constructivism" in philosophy of education and the term "constructivism" in philosophy of mathematics refer to two entirely different things. In philosophy of education, "constructivism" is a tenet about the way people learn by "constructing knowledge". In philosophy of mathematics, "constructivism" is about the sense in which mathematical objects such as numbers, functions, sets, etc. can be said to exist, and how their existence can be known. Michael Hardy 19:22, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

sign your posts with four tildes
Please sign you posts with four tildes ~ &mdash; Dunc|&#9786; 21:18, 1 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Oops -- I usually do -- sorry :-) Joriki 21:37, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Re Davidson copyright violation
Hi! Thanks for the heads-up on this; it slipped under my radar. Well, even though there is no copyright notice on that site, I think we should err on the side of caution and assume that it is unless explicitly stated otherwise, so I removed it again and added a note on Talk:Davidson. I notified the user who inserted it, too, although he has not contributed for awhile. HollyAm 03:50, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Non-imposition&monotonicity
That was a very nice example! Thank you. Well, I give. I need to recheck my notes. It will take me some time, as I will be completely offline in the next month. But I promise to come back and pursue this with greater detail. What I had in mind was what Arrow called "positive association" of the welfare function. Your examle is intriguing - it shows that monotonicity isn't equivalent with that. I think you should show it around more. I wonder what the others will have to say about it. Also, I have a feeling that this should be no more than a freak pathology having to do with having just one voter. Can you show this phenomenon in general with any number of voters? Where did this example come from? mousomer 18:34, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

State Great Khural move
Thanks for the tip. My comments are on the talk page. AjaxSmack 03:46, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

framing merge proposal
Please see Talk:Framing (sociology). - Grumpyyoungman01 14:01, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

First Nations of Canada
I'm sure there was some reason why I did that, but I at this point I don't remember, and you're right, it doesn't seem to make sense. I'll fix it. - TheMightyQuill (talk) 03:36, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Tätort
Hi Joriki!

I think it's best if it says for instansce: "There are 17 localities in Falkenberg Municipality" and the word "localities" should link to the page "Urban areas in Sweden". That's the way I'm going to write in the future. Jensapag (talk) 13:27, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Missing Supreme Court Cases
You know, I actually don't know why they weren't listed. I have a strong suspicion that it is because the non-included cases were denied certiorari although that is a decision in itself and there can be dissents. I'm not sure why the missing cites weren't listed on the Supreme Court's website where I got the cites originally. Sorry it took me so long to respond (Holidays). --Cdogsimmons (talk) 01:26, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 21:33, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Elephant
Stephen Colbert involved? Why no, never... ;)

Also the population went from 8,000 to more than 20,000. I think three times is a reasonable estimate. You could say two and a half, but that doesn't count the more than part, and it also doesn't read as well as "The population has tripled." Xizer (talk) 21:45, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Hellenistic
In line with your general proposals, I have reorganized the articles on Hellenism/Hellenization/Hellenistic period etc.etc.
 * Hellenism now re-directs straight to a disambiguation page.
 * Hellenism (Greek culture), replaces the old Hellenism article, and is listed on the disambiguation page, but re-directs to Hellenization
 * Hellenization now gives a brief definition of the general use of the term, and points the reader to Hellenic civilization for an overview of the spread of Greek culture after Alexander.
 * Hellenistic civilization gives a description of the spread if Greek cultre after Alexander
 * Hellenistic period gives a description of the events of the Hellenistic period
 * Hellenistic Greece specifically gives a description of the Greek peninsula during the Hellenistic period.

Hope this works for you!MinisterForBadTimes (talk) 20:46, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Rob malley redirect
Hi Stifle,

your edit summary for Rob malley says "certainly not an unlikely typo". I'm wondering whether you noticed the lower-case 'm'?

Joriki (talk) 15:59, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Indeed I did. Many people searching for a term in Wikipedia will type only in lower case, or in mixed-case, and may type the URL directly of their desired topic. As the software will assume that the first letter of an article title, but no more, is upper-case, and redirects are cheap, I see no reason to delete this page. Stifle (talk) 16:08, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

The Razor's Edge (1984 film)
Do you think this article is stub?  Otolemur crassicaudatus  (talk) 06:45, 17 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I think it's probably too large for that; you might consider replacing the stub template by an template. Joriki (talk) 07:03, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Political aspects of Islam
re: garbled sentence Thank you, I do a lot of editing and sometimes forget to get back to cleanup my additions. I shouldn't have left that section in such a state. --BoogaLouie (talk) 17:32, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

sounds good
Dear Joriki,

Your edits to the foot-in-the-door article make it much clearer. Thanks! Renee (talk) 19:49, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Interwiki sorting order
Thank you. I know this page. But who decided, that ky (Kyrgyz language, ky:) is sorted as "kirgizca" and bg (Bulgarian language, bg:) as "bulgarski". ы is y in all transcriptions and transliterations I know and Bulgarian ъ may be ʺ, ǎ, y, ŭ, u or a. Besides for example ug (Uyghur language, ug: as "oyghurque" or cbk-zam (Chavacano language (Zamboangueño), cbk-zam:) as "zamboangueno" heve became disactualised. And zh-classical (Classical Chinese, zh-classical:) is now "wenyan", not "guwenwenyanwen". BartekChom (talk) 20:41, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Second Amendment Text
Thanks for proving that reasonable people may also agree. I had a little trouble tying in the second version, but it seems OK for now and I'm sure someone will improve it in time. Cheers, Celestra (talk) 02:31, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Treaty of Amity and Cooperation
Sorry, i have busily invested my time in American Idol. Anyway, the name Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia is the formal name s it should be used at the top of the article but not the title. Meanwhile, Treaty of Amity and Cooperation is more colloquial but not that exact or definitive. I prefer the name ASEAN Treaty of Amity and Cooperation because its not too lengthy yet it describes the article as being about ASEAN or Southeast Asia.--23prootie (talk) 18:23, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
 * On second thought, if your name has more hits then it should be used.--23prootie (talk) 18:25, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

With regard to ASEAN summit, actually I just thought it is more recent so it is not history but I guess my expertise in this area is limited, perhaps it should be under recent history. --Just my 2 cents -- Hemanshu (talk) 12:06, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Positive definiteness
Your comments are requested on a discussion about whether or not a particular page is a disambiguation page or a stub here. Neelix (talk) 20:05, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Roger Price (Utah politician)


The article Roger Price (Utah politician) has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * non-notable political candidate, still no references 18 months after tagging

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Dravecky (talk) 07:07, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Bernoulli polys fixed
Per you note on my talk page, done. Thanks for pointing this out. linas (talk) 18:35, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Telescoping series
I cannot agree with this edit. It is certainly true that in general, rearrangements depend on absolute convergence. But this is only one specific kind of rearrangement. We have
 * $$ a_0 + \underbrace{a_1 + a_2 + \cdots + a_{n-1}} + a_n \, $$

and all of the terms over the underbrace add up to 0. The whole thing becomes
 * $$ a_0 + a_n \, $$

and that approaches a limit if the sequence of terms an converges. Michael Hardy (talk) 23:55, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Parlement
I would like to ask you to explain at some length why you added Template:No definition to Parlement. Debresser (talk) 22:35, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

In addition, would you say that my definition "Parlements were regional legislative bodies in ancien régime France." is correct? Debresser (talk) 23:10, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Desarguesian plane
Thank you for your question. You are right about the origin of the article. It has since been edited by others and frankly, it is now beyond my level of knowledge. I can't answer your question but I have no objection if you change it according to your suggestion. Encyclops (talk) 14:54, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Projective planes
Hi,

I reverted your recent edit to the projective plane article. My reason being that mathematicians talk of "the projective plane" meaning in effect the mathematical class of object, and "a projective plane" when implying a specific example. You can also see this usage in the sphere and Klein bottle articles and probably in others on well-known manifolds. &mdash; Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 20:22, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I replied to your comments on my talk page. &mdash; Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 22:16, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Four Parameter
Thank you for correcting the missing factor in the four parameters section of the beta distribution article. Such collaborative efforts is the great strength of Wikipedia :-)

Dr. J. Rodal (talk) 03:14, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of BABEL


The article BABEL has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Doesn't appear to be notable; couldn't find any non-primary sources which discuss the language in detail.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Psychonaut (talk) 09:22, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link fixing one-day contest
I have decided to put on a mini-contest within the November 2013 monthly disambiguation contest, on Saturday, November 23 (UTC). I will personally give a $20 Amazon.com gift card to the disambiguator who fixes the most links on that server-day (see the project page for details on scoring points). Since we are not geared up to do an automated count for that day, at 00:00, 23 November 2013 (UTC) (which is 7:00 PM on November 22, EST), I'll take a screenshot of the project page leaderboard. I will presume that anyone who is not already listed on the leaderboard has precisely nine edits. At 01:00, 24 November 2013 (UTC) (8:00 PM on November 23, EST), I'll take a screenshot of the leaderboard at that time (the extra hour is to give the board time to update), and I will determine from that who our winner is. I will credit links fixed by turning a WP:DABCONCEPT page into an article, but you'll have to let me know me that you did so. Here's to a fun contest. Note that according to the Daily Disambig, we currently have under 256,000 disambiguation links to be fixed. If everyone in the disambiguation link fixers category were to fix 500 links, we would have them all done - so aim high! Cheers! bd2412 T 02:33, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Bird vocalization / hypothesis
Hi - thanks for your edit to Bird vocalization. You reverted my edit saying "of course it's a hypothesis ... the title of the source even says so." I have two reasons to disagree with you here: (1) The title of the source talks of "testing the hypothesis" - once a hypothesis is tested, it is more than just a hypothesis (it is then either a fact or a falsehood). (2) The phrase "Scientists hypothesize that..." implies very strongly that the matter is not settled. You say "hypothesis does not imply controversy", which is true, but hypothesis does imply uncertainty. I would like to undo your reversion. Any thoughts on this? --mcld (talk) 15:42, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:
 * Reviewing, the guideline on reviewing
 * Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
 * Protection policy, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:47, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Brooks (programming language) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Brooks (programming language) 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 Articles for deletion/Brooks (programming language) 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. &#8213; Padenton &#124;&#9993;  08:36, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Indian-occupied Kashmir


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that Indian-occupied Kashmir, a page that you created, has been tagged for deletion. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
 * It is unambiguous vandalism or an obvious hoax. (See section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please do not introduce inappropriate pages to Wikipedia; doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.  Human 3015  Say Hey!! • 02:06, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Hernán_Cortés
Looking at your edit (removed sexist language), I have to wonder if the previous wording was actually more accurate. The latter wording is what we'd like to say about a relationship and events today, but back in Cortés days, there wasn't much "together" about the events. Sexist was the way of the world. Tarl N. ( discuss ) 16:01, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the comment! I thought about that briefly when I made the edit but then decided against it. I do think there was more "together" than the previous formulation suggested, but you're right that my replacement also implies something about gender relations at the time, which it shouldn't, even if it happened to be right. I've replaced it now with the formulation used in the article on the mother: "she would later give birth to his first son". That seems more neutral than either of the other two? Joriki (talk) 23:34, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that definitely sounds better. There are lots of comments about La Malinche which fly by, ranging from calling her "La Chingada" (effectively a slut) to calling her a victim of pedophile rape. We know there was a sexual relationship, but her options in the matter may have been limited. So going beyond stating the birth is probably reading more than we know about their interaction. Thanks, Tarl N.  ( discuss ) 03:30, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

FIDE Grand Prix
At FIDE_Grand_Prix_2019, I appreciate that you're trying to disambiguate colours, but green is conventionally used for qualifying (see e.g. FIDE Grand Prix 2017, FIDE Grand Prix 2014–15, Candidates Tournament 2018, and also other sports e.g. 2019_Cricket_World_Cup). So I'd prefer to go back to green for qualifiers like Rajabov, and remove green from the points part of the table. Actually a while ago I suggested removing some colours from the points part of the table at Talk:FIDE Grand Prix 2019. Adpete (talk) 10:19, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I've made some changes to the article and replied to your two points on the talk page. Joriki (talk) 14:08, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Wild card in Candidates Tournament 2020
Hi Joriki, I did'nt see your last edit message and all extensive discussions about your foggy consensus. I just update the fact : According to the Wild Card selector: A Russian will be the wild card. Moreover, if you really want to put every eligible player according to the FIDE rules, they is MVL, Alekseenko, Giri, Mamed, Nepo, Grischuk ans So. If you want to be more realistic and take in account the Russian Chess Federation, you put Alekseenko, Nepo and Grischuk. I dont think there is any other realist list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hyrozen (talk • contribs) 22:39, 11 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi Hyrozen – thanks for replying to my message on your talk page.
 * I'm not sure why you consider the consensus on the talk page "foggy". Please elaborate.
 * You're wrong about Giri, Mamed, Nepo, Grischuk and So being eligible according to the FIDE rules. They are in the top ten of the rating averages from February 2019 to November 2019. Eligibility for the wild card will be determined according to the rating averages from February 2019 to January 2020. It is not only possible, but in fact currently seems likely that Aronian will overtake So and end up in tenth place in the averages from February 2019 to January 2020. Thus, we don't know yet who will be eligible for the wild card based on average rating. By contrast, we do know that MVL and Alekseenko will be eligible (unless they qualify for the Candidates Tournament via another path).
 * By the way, this was also already discussed on the article's talk page. In the meantime, a discussion about how to take into account the RCF announcement has also begun on that talk page. I suggest that we continue the discussion there, where all editors can read and contribute; I was just writing to you on your personal talk page because I got the impression that you weren't aware that there was a discussion on the article's talk page and you might not see it if I wrote there. Joriki (talk) 23:28, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 25
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Don't Give Up the Sheep, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Don't Give Up the Ship ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Don%27t_Give_Up_the_Sheep check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Don%27t_Give_Up_the_Sheep?client=notify 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) 09:36, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

"Chinese Kashmir" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Chinese Kashmir. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 November 2 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 17:30, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Magnus Carlsen Chess Tour
Hi, I created the page for the Magnus Carlsen Chess Tour. Since you are following the Champions Chess Tour 2021 page, I thought you might be interested. I am a n00b at editing so that page might need some more expert eyes. Retxnihps (talk) 17:54, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know! The article actually looks quite good to me – I just added a missing space and combined the columns for third and fourth place into "semifinalists", since there were no games for third place. Joriki (talk) 20:32, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Re: ranking of Michael Adams
Hi, I'm sorry but after six months I don't remember, it was probably a mistake. Anyway it was for the list of January, we are in July now. Conviene (talk) 07:44, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks for the reply – I just wanted to make sure I'm not missing something. Joriki (talk) 08:43, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Important Notice
Doug Weller talk 08:48, 10 September 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) 00:27, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Toni Najdoski moved to draftspace
Thanks for your contributions to Toni Najdoski. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it has no sources. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 10:24, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Chess champions 8
Template:Chess champions 8 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Pbrks (t • c) 03:32, 28 September 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) 00:22, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics
You have recently made edits related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. This is a standard message to inform you that post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. Contentious topics are the successor to the former discretionary sanctions system, which you may be aware of. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Contentious topics. For a summary of difference between the former and new system, see WP:CTVSDS. — Red-tailed hawk  (nest) 14:59, 14 July 2024 (UTC)