User talk:Kimdime

Weclome
Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ~ ; this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question and then place  before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! IZAK 08:20, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Error
Sorry, my error, I saw the 1 pixel image size change, and thought it was someone testing, stupidly didn't realise that I was taking the image out, jimfbleak 06:55, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Merci-Nauru Map
Thank you for creating the map. Je parle le francais au niveau intermediate, mais je ne sais pas si j'ai le niveau de faire un propre translation. I'll see what I can do to get a translation, but thank you again for your hard work. Bobo is soft 02:21, 15 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi again, I just downloaded Inkscape. I saved the file as a .png, how do I select the french text in the image without having to delete and paste over it? Bobo is soft 02:27, 15 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm having trouble uploading the map properly. I upload it, but it shows the map with my titles but not the original ones you put on the map. How do I fix this or merge all the layers in inkscape? Thank you. See here Bobo is soft 05:00, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Caption
Do you mean the key or the caption of the image? The caption of the image says "Map of the Near East: A Thousand B.C. Green: State of King of David and Solomon (1006 - 926 B.C.)" LeszekB 01:39, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

The key:
 * Middle East


 * Israeli State 926
 * Judai State 926
 * Dependent areas 1006-926


 * -Neighbouring states
 * -Names of Israeli tribes
 * -State capital
 * -Other cities
 * -Rivers
 * -Lakes

Most of the names on the map are basically just the same as in English just with Polish-sounding. There's no real direct translation of them. LeszekB 02:06, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Catalan Atlas
Hi, I noticed today that on 24 March you tagged Catalan Atlas as a copyright violation from this website. It has since been deleted. My languages skill are not good enough to translate the original website, which I am assuming is in Catalan, but they are good enough to make me curious as to why you consider this a copyright violation. It seems to me that the differences in the text are significant enough for the wikipedia article to not be considered a translation. (A copy of the version you tagged can be found here I will be deleting this copy when this discussion is ended). Some specific concerns are as follows: There are more, but I think that this illustrates the point. I recognize that the original document and the WP article seem to share a common structure, but I question whether this is enough to trigger a copyright violation. My language skills are not strong enough to translate the original document, so I can't really tell how close the two are, so I may be wrong and they may be a copyright violation of each other, I just would like to be certain. Dsmdgold 15:38, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
 * The first sentence of the Wikipedia article contains the date 1375 which does not apear in the original document.
 * The first sentence of the original document mentions the "Biblioteca Nacional de París". which I assume is the "Bibliothèque nationale de France, which is not mention in the WP article"
 * In the first sentence of the second paragraph of the original article, it  apears that the subject of the sentence is "La documentación", which I take to mean something like "The documentation" or "The archives" there is no similiar sentence in the WP article.
 * The second paragraph of the original article mentions"Carlos VI, Rey de Francia", who I assume is Charles VI of France The WP article does not mention a Carlos or Charles.
 * The same sentence that mentions Carlos VI mentions the date 1381, which does not occur in the WP article.
 * The dates 1387 and 1389 are mentioned the origianal document, but not the WP article.
 * The dimensions of the Atlas are given as 64 X 50cm in the original article and 65 X 50 cm in the WP article.
 * The introduction to the WP article states "It is considered the master work of the 14th Mallorcan cartographic school, and one of the finest works in medieval cartography." I can find know similiar sentence in the Original document. (i.e. one that mentions the 14th century, cartography and medieval, words that I assume I can recognize in the original)

After a message from the admin who deleted this, I am convinced that the article probably had significant copyright violations. I will use the old version to write a copyright free version. Sorry to bother you. (By the way, the link I gave you to the text of the article doesn't work anymore, I've deleted that copy.) Dsmdgold 20:52, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Abir (martial art)
Hi Kimdime: Thank you for bringing this up. See Articles for deletion/Abir (martial art). IZAK 12:30, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

The ringworm children affair
Hi Kimdime: Please re-read The ringworm children affair article as I have re-written and wikified it with sources and reliable citations. Thanks, IZAK 08:20, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Question
I am not. Thank You for the offer to translate my articles, your massage sounds like translated from French. Shoteh (talk) 22:26, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I did link the articles to the French version, so I would ask you to fix the French, and not delete it meantime, othewise the links would be useless. Shoteh (talk) 22:29, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank You Shoteh (talk) 22:42, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

History of the Jews in the United Arab Emirates
Hi Kimdime69: See the important new additional information with citations added at History of the Jews in the United Arab Emirates based on the notable journey of Rabbi Benjamin of Tudela to that part of the world 1165-1173. Thank you, IZAK (talk) 04:06, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

February 2008
Hi, the recent edit you made to Talk:British Phosphate Commission has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks.   Compwhiz II ( Talk )( Contribs )  21:00, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Wrong button :D   Compwhiz II ( Talk )( Contribs )  21:00, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Commons stuff
Hi! I posted a reply to you on my talk page. aliasd·U·T 13:43, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

revert
I reverted your change to History of Western Australia, links are generally excluded from the first few words of the articles title. cygnis insignis 16:08, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

noted
I agree. cygnis insignis 16:39, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Mastic (resin) it is not Gum arabic !!!
" Gum arabic " system made of acacia tree ! , And " Mastic " is made out of Pistacia lentiscus tree ! . Unfortunately many people in the world do not know this spice is known to only a few in the Middle East, And a secret except for people as a great healer. I ask not to be confused with Gum arabic is something else entirely! . " Mastic is made of wood and Pistacia lentiscus ". And Gum arabic is produced from a Acacia tree resin. This spice also does not appear in any dictionary in the world and the first time he appears in the encyclopedia That he always appears in the encyclopedia as a "resin of Pistacia lentiscus". Recently I went to the Hebrew Language Academy to recognize this word of this spice to appear in the dictionary. Greek island " Chios " know the spice is already 2000 years. Today Mastic known oriental foods, especially " Mastic ice creams " like Dondurma (turkish ice cream gum) and " Booza (arabic ice cream gum) . I would like to know about " Mastic " as an independent value for all. this spice is called only " MASTIC " and nothing else. in hebrew it is have many names and latin the word mastic is mean chewing gum. burekas (talk) 22:32, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Please read again my statement...--Kimdime (talk) 22:40, 3 March 2010 (UTC) ok, I just wanted to " clarify " that - "Gum arabic" is made of " acacia tree " and it is not the same. burekas (talk) 08:57, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Please, reread my statement and stop harasing me--Kimdime (talk) 09:22, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

I corrected the words were not understood. burekas (talk) 12:49, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

How do I contact with other Wikipedia ?
I want to ask for a translation of articles. burekas (talk) 12:49, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Nauru
The French article on the Japanese occupation looks fantastic. That's one area of the Pacific War history which sometimes seems hard to find information on, but your references appear to be good ones. I hope the English version of that article can be improved soon. Cla68 (talk) 23:05, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
 * The information I found only mentioned "Ry" as the name for the operation in relation to the first invasion attempt. But, what looks like a Japanese editor later added the material on the second invasion and appeared to indicate that it was called "Ry" also.  So, I'm not sure if the second invasion was part of Operation Ry or not. Cla68 (talk) 22:53, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Le traitement des copyvios sur en
Juste histoire de poursuivre (et en français pour éviter que des questions de langue ne s'interposent):

Les process sont toujours perfectibles. En ce qui concerne ta protestation que je ne présuppose pas ta bonne foi, j'ai vraiment eu de la peine à voir autre chose dans ta démarche et les posts précédents autre chose qu'un expression de dédain concernant des processus qui ne sont, au fond, que fort peu différents de ceux de fr.wiki. Que les nôtres en particulier souffrent d'une documentation disparate, parfois obscure et souvent difficile à trouver est incontestable. Ceci dit, de citer en exemple de traitement de l'historique un article dont la première mention d'un problème de copvio remonte à 2007 et qui n'a été traité qu'il y a deux semaines, c'est simplement souligner que la problématique des copyvios reste difficile tant au niveau de la détection que, souvent, au nettoyage.

Et si la mention du modèle "historique manquant" est bien présente dans le guide pour les nuls (je l'avais manqué et je m'en excuse), je ne vois ni dans le guide ni dans la doc du modèle d'indication que l'attribution des contributeurs n'est pas une option à bien plaire mais bel et bien une obligation. J'ajouterai également que l'intitulé du bandeau apparaît à première vue imprécise, puisque toutes les contribs restent, sauf importation d'une source tierce sous license spécifique, sous double license CC-BY-SA et GFDL, alors que le modèle tendrait à sous-entendre que GFDL n'est pas une license systématiquement présente.

Ce qui illustre mon point ci-dessus, à savoir que les process et la documentation sont perfectibles sur tous les projets. J'aurais également tendance à croire que l'échange d'expériences entre langues ne peut qu'être bénéfique, mais les effets de manche du genre "je suis horrifié que cela se passe comme ça ici" et "je ne peux en conscience supporter l'importation d'historique" on tendance à prendre tout le monde à rebrousse-poils.

Bref, je pense que tous les admins traitant des copyvios texte (et on est entre 4 et 10 suivant la période, ce qui explique aussi la pauvreté de notre doc - il y a beaucoup d'informel parce qu'on se cause directement en cas de doute) apprécient un feedback constructif (je pense, après avoir vu le document fr, qu'un "copyvio pour les nuls" est quelque chose qu'il faut que nous écrivions sur en.wiki), et t'invite à poursuivre la discussion sur WT:CP. Bien à toi, MLauba (talk) 09:36, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
 * L'expression "je suis horrifié" n'est pas un effet de manche, elle traduit bien mon désarrois, ma déception aussi, sans doute d'autant plus grande que j'estime de par son avancement, ce projet est bien plus intéressant que son alter-ego francophone, d'ailleurs si j'édite principalement en français, je lis surtout ici. Effectivement j''ai du mal à comprendre que l'on puisse trouver normal ici de gérer les copyvios à coup de reverts. Il aurait sans doute été plus intelligent de ma part de rester plus neutre dans mon expression pour mieux faire passer le message, ceci dit, l'autocensure à des limites, quand on pense qu'une politique est abhérente, on est en droit de le faire savoir. Quand je compare avec la wikipédia en français, ce n'est pas par esprit cocardier, s'aurait été la wikipedia en espagnol que j'aurais fait la même remarque. J'accepte par ailleurs tout à fait les remarques concernant les imperfections de la wikipédia francophone dont je ne me sens nullement le repésentant. Ceci dit, sur cette question précise (alors que sur bien d'autres c'est l'inverse), la wikipédia en français me semble bien plus en avance que la wikipédia en anglais, et, les rejeter dos à dos comme tu l'as fait dans l'admin board ne me semble pas être un bon point de départ. Plus que l'élaboration de manuels, c'est une prise de conscience qui me semble nécessaire, tant que partie des admins considérera qu'il est légitime de gérer les copyvios à coup de reverts, je continuerais à être horrifié.  Mon intervention sur l'admin board visait avant tout à savoir quels étaient les us et coutumes ici sur la question parce que j'ai eu des déboires avec des admins (voir diffs). Accesoirement, j'ai exprimé mon opinion (ce qui a peut être été contreproductif) et indiqué ce qui ce faisait ailleurs, je n'irais pas plus loin, préférant consacrer mon temps sur wikipedia a des activités purement encyclopédiques, je décline donc ton invitation à poursuivre le débat sur une autre page. Ceci dit, je vais informer les admins francophones sur le fr:Wikipédia:Bulletin des administrateurs/2010/Semaine 13, parce que je pense utile de les tenir au courant de ces différences de pratiques. Cordialement et en espérant que tout malentendu ait été levé.--Kimdime (talk) 10:13, 29 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Ayant lu ton texte pour le bulletin et le ton choisi, je suis en effet un peu sceptique sur les possibilités d'un dialogue constructif. Bonne continuation. MLauba (talk) 10:18, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah! il me semble pourtant que mon texte, si il reflète effectivement une opinion très négative sur ce qui ce passe ici quant à la gestion des copyvios a un caractère plus informatif qu'outrancier, ceci dit je ne comprends pas bien ce que tu entend par "dialogue constructif", de quoi souhaitais tu dialoguer? Encore une fois je le répète, mon objectif n'est pas de dire que la wikipédia en anglais c'est le MAL. A contrario, je pense en règle générale que cette encyclopédie est bien plus digne d'intéret.--Kimdime (talk) 10:30, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Ton texte reflète en effet une opinion, de surcroît éronnée, sur ce qui se passe ici. Pour rappel, tu as employé un mauvais modèle, qui appèle à un effacement complet de l'article. Les admins qui gèrent les Speedy deletions ne sont pas forcément versés dans le traitement des copyvios, ce qui est sans doute regrettable, mais c'est difficile de faire passer le message à certains éléphants qu'il serait mieux de ne pas toucher les queues de traitement qu'ils ne maitrisent pas entièrement.


 * A partir d'une demande de speedy deletions, l'admin qui la voit, s'il ne connait pas les autres options, va soit effacer tout l'article, soit faire un revert sur une version propre. C'est en effet un problème, mais qui, à la source, vient de ce que tu as demandé une speedy deletion au lieu de faire usage de copyvio, où nous aurions traité le problème de manière appropriée sans plus de boulot de ta part, ou encore en faisant le revert toi-même puis demandant une purge d'historique avec copyvio-histpurge (un modèle dont, soit dit en passant, je suis à l'origine), tout comme ça se passe sur fr.


 * Partant d'une erreur de tagging de ta part pour en conclure que, je cite, "il n'y a donc aucun souci là bas à gérer les copyvios à coup de reverts." est une généralisation qui à mon sens n'a pas lieu d'être. Ton outrage repose principalement sur une erreur qui, initialement, vient de ta part. MLauba (talk) 10:52, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
 * En ce cas, c'est que je n'ai pas tout compris et que tu aurais peut être du laisser la discussion suivre son cours, j'ai lu de la part de  la réponse suivante: "no, en:WP does not currently as a matter of course delete copyvios from the history itself. And yes, a simple revert to the last non-infringing version - if it exists, and by anybody - is just fine by en-wiki guidelines." qui n'est reprise par personne sur le board. Par ailleurs, elle donne un lien vers WP:CP qui effectivement ne semble pas indiquer que c'est obligatoire dans le cas d'un article non entièrement basé sur du copyvio. Alors est ce que oui ou non un copyvio doit être systématiquement effacé de l'historique? Moi je n'ai toujours pas de réponse claire. Je note aussi que l'opération effectuée par  Slp1 est tout à fait similaire à celle effectuée par  sur l'article Selahattin Ülkümen qui avait également réverté mon tag prévenant d'un copyvio expliquant que la version nouvelle de l'article était clean. Moi j'ai commencé à douter de la compétence de ces deux admins et puis je me dis que décidemment non, ça devait correspondre à des pratiques différentes et que je devais assumer leur bonne foi. Donc je viens sur l'admin board et j'obtiens cette réponse de Slp1 et dans le même temps je vois que personne ne la contredit, que dois-je en penser si ce n'est que le revert est une pratique de lutte contre le copyvio acceptée ici? Par ailleurs je trouve l'argument selon lequel le problème vient de mon emploi d'une mauvaise template assez spécieux, certes je me suis planté sur le coup (note que j'avais demandé à un admin de m'indiquer une template plus appropriée, sans résultat ), mais, même si la demande n'est pas adaptée, la template joue tout de même bien son rôle de signalement et l'admin alerté d'un problème de copyvio devrait intervenir sur l'historique de l'article de manière adéquate. Or, je le répète, la manière qui semble convenir à  Slp1 c'est de reverter, et elle s'en explique tout à fait clairement dans la citation si-dessus. Alors si vraiment mon apréciation ne reflète qu'une "opinion erronée", je suis tout à fait pret à l'accepter et à faire autant de mea culpa que nécessaire, ceci dit, si ce que tu dis est vraiment vrai, j'ai comme l'impression que je ne suis pas le seul à me planter et qu'il y a un gros travail de conscientisation à effectuer. En tout état de cause on ne peut pas me reprocher de ne pas avoir voulu chercher à m'informer avant d'en venir à tirer cette conclusion.--Kimdime (talk) 11:35, 29 March 2010 (UTC)--Kimdime (talk) 11:35, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi, in the case of the Selahattin Ülkümen article, an apparent copyright violation was sorted out by the contributor changing the page that the article was a copy of, to enable copying under a free licnese. It was explained on the talk page. Perhaps I do not understand all the french above though!Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:48, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure, I knew that, this is not an issue at all :)--Kimdime (talk) 10:49, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Re: Turkish–Portuguese War (1509)
I thought you already had come to a conclusion; I’ve already left my comments there; Did you not read them?

If you want to conclude it, post the suggestion that if there are no objections you will close with (whatever decision it is), then if there are no objections after a day or so, do what you’ve decided.

As I referred to the original editor in my reply, I suggest you also post him/her and say you haven’t heard from him, and will be doing (whatever), just to cover all the angles. Regards. Moonraker12 (talk) 10:44, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

PROD on Template:Campaignbox Turkish–Portuguese War (1509)
The WP:PROD process is only for articles, so if you want to have a template deleted, use Templates for discussion. I went ahead and removed the PROD tag, and created a TfD discussion here — Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) 17:44, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Armenian Genocide
Hello Kimdime,

You are welcome to participate in the discussions of the Armenian Genocide article. But before reverting an edit claiming that it is unneeded, pls discuss it. And I am sorry but an other claim of yours that the info is on Hamidian massacres page is not true.

Regards,Aregakn (talk) 21:00, 20 May 2010 (UTC) 1)I didnt revert anything 2)I didn't claimed it was on another article, I said it was enough to mention it there--Kimdime (talk) 10:46, 21 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I am not going to copy what I answered on the Arm. Gen. talk-page here. As for now, thank you for participation. Aregakn (talk) 00:30, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Rachid Ammar


A tag has been placed on Rachid Ammar requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you.  Baseball Watcher Lets Chat  01:50, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I hate that kind of templates even if I understand why they can be usefull, but please don't act as if you where a bot--Kimdime (talk) 01:55, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

thanks
Now, with one more female contributor, perhaps this will be an increase by at least 10 percent.--Lauralouve (talk) 19:59, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

RE: Shia islam and horse meat consumption
Here are two references which say that "It is Makrooh to eat the meat of a horse, a mule or a donkey" in Shia Islam: Hopefully it addresses your requirement -- Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider t c s 19:21, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Seestani's Islamic Laws : Slaughtering and hunting of animals » Rules of things allowed to eat and drink, Rule#2640,
 * al-shia.org: The Social Islamic Laws, FIRST TYPE: ANIMALS

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Recep Tayyip Erdoğan Stadium, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kasımpaşa (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) 10:27, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Machine translations discussed on Proposals page
Hello, after your experiences with machine translation at History of the Jews of Thessaloniki (see Talk:History of the Jews of Thessaloniki), you might be interested in a current proposal to ban machine translations here: Village pump (proposals), and in the extensive discussions that followed. (I'm not canvassing you to take any position on this, since I don't have one myself, but I thought the topic might be of interest.) —— Shakescene (talk) 22:02, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of 9/11 Wiki


A tag has been placed on 9/11 Wiki requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Gsingh (talk) 04:16, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Invitation to discussion about Per-user page blocking
Hi there,

The Anti-Harassment Tools team is seeking input about building User Page (or category) blocking feature.

We’re inviting you to join the discussion because you voted or commented in the 2015 Community Wishlist Survey about Enhanced per-user / per-article protection / blocking.

You can leave comments on this discussion page or send an email to the Anti-Harassment Tools team.

For the Anti-Harassment Tools team SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 23:01, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Please let us know if you wish to opt-out of all massmessage mailings from the Anti-harassment tools team.

Help us design granular blocks!
Hello :-) The Anti-Harassment Tools team at the Wikimedia Foundation will start building these granular blocking tools in a few weeks and we've asked WMF designer Alex Hollender to help us make some wireframes so the tools are intuitive to MediaWiki users.

We have a first draft of how we think this tool should work. You can read the full proposed implementation here but here are the significant parts:
 * Granular blocks (page, category, namespace, and file uploading) will be built on top of Special:Block. These blocks will function as if they were regular blocks and allow for the same options, but only take effect on specific pages.
 * We will add a new checkbox for "Block this user from the whole site" which will be checked by default. When it is unchecked the admin will be able to specify which pages, categories, and/or namespaces the user should be blocked from editing.
 * Granular blocks can be combined and/or overlap. (For example, a user could be simultaneously blocked from editing the articles Rain, Thunder, Lightning, and all pages inside the Category:Weather.)
 * Only one block is set at a time, to adjust what the user is blocked from the administrator would have to modify the existing block.
 * Block logs should display information about the granular block
 * When a blocked user attempts to edit an applicable page, they should see a block warning message which include information on their block (reason, expiration, what they are blocked from, etc.)
 * If a category is provided, the blocked user cannot edit either the category page itself and all pages within the category.
 * If the File: namespace is blocked, the user should not be allowed to upload files.

We like this direction because it builds on top of the existing block system, both a technical and usability wise. Before we get too far along with designs and development we'd like to hear from you about our prosposal:


 * 1) What do you think of the proposed implementation?
 * 2) We believe this should be an expansion of Special:Block, but it has been suggested that this be a new special page. What are your thoughts?
 * 3) Should uploading files be combined with a File namespace block, or as a separate option? (For example, if combined, when a user is blocked from the File namespace, they would neither be able to edit any existing pages in the File namespace nor upload new files.)
 * 4) Should there be a maximum number of things to be blocked from? Or should we leave it up to admin discretion?

We appreciate your feedback on this project's talk page or by email. For the Anti-Harassment Tools team, SPoore (WMF) (talk), Trust and Safety Specialist, Community health initiative (talk) 20:54, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

My poem is bad but my apology for the bad links is sincere!
Rosa Red Chateau01.jpg are red,

Good message links are blue,

My proofreading stinks,

So here's a good link for you SPoore (WMF), Trust &#38; Safety, Community health initiative (talk) 16:26, 10 May 2018 (UTC)]].

A page you started (Richard Edes Harrison) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Richard Edes Harrison.

User:Rosguill while reveiwing this page as a part of our page curation process had the following comments:

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with. And, don't forget to sign your reply with.

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

signed,Rosguill talk 23:24, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi >Rosguill, I really appreciate that you took the time to review this article. I have over 30k edits in French and +400 article creations. So the wikicode, the neutrality or the sourcing isn't an issue for me but the language is one. Which is why it is somehow easier for me to quote than to paraphrase. I'm not opposed to the transformation of my quote into a paraphrase but I lack of inspiration to do it by my self. Best regards.--Kimdime (talk) 10:25, 3 July 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) 00:30, 29 November 2022 (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) 00:26, 28 November 2023 (UTC)