User talk:Mar vin kaiser

License tagging for File:Early-tang.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Early-tang.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 14:05, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I just saw the map that you added to the wiki on the Tang dynasty. It comes from the Sui-Tang volume of Zhongguo lishi dituji 中国历史地图集 (1982), a historical atlas edited by Tan Qixiang 谭其骧. Whoever took the picture cropped it so that we don't see the title of the page, but the format of the "Legend" is unmistakably the same as in the rest of the atlas. Cheers, Madalibi (talk) 15:28, 24 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for identifying the source, Madalibi, but Mar vin kaiser did not scan it from a book himself; he saved and uploaded the image from a website. I have a question about the map's caption (i.e. "The border of the early Tang Dynasty"): exactly which year or decade is this map supposed to represent? Perhaps some time during the reign of Tang Taizong? The bubbly, idealistic borders look ridiculously inaccurate, for one, and all of this supposes that scholars are of the consensus that the Tang at some point had direct control over all surrounding areas inhabited by Turks and northern nomads (I say this because there is no shades of green to indicate which areas were directly administered by the Tang, and which areas were inhabited by nothing but roaming tribal groups claiming loyalty to the Tang).--  Pericles of Athens  Talk 16:03, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I should have expressed myself more clearly. I saw that the map comes from another website, but that website doesn't mention the source of the map and doesn't indicate that it has obtained permission to post the map in the first place. And since the book was first published in 1982, it's not automatically open-source. The Wikimedia |file for the picture is tagged for speedy deletion unless someone clears the copyright issue before January 31. Is there anything we can do at Wikimedia to clear the map? Otherwise I agree that it's either very misleading or grossly inaccurate. Happy holidays, guys! Madalibi (talk) 10:52, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Gun (Chinese)
A tag has been placed on Gun (Chinese) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

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), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the article or have a copy emailed to you. HamatoKameko (talk) 09:11, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

About Ancestral name（姓）and Clan name（氏）
Spring and Autumn Period，male noble used clan name,female use Ancestral name，so 姬某某 (Ji +given name) is wrong，maybe you shall know this. -星光下的人 (talk) 18:15, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

about Bo zhong shu ji（伯仲叔季）
In china,Bo zhong shu ji is used to permutation brothers order,Bo means his the eldest son,zhong means the second ,shu menas the third,ji means the youngest.Taibo's bo is not Count. 班固《白虎通·姓名》：“《故以时长幼号曰伯、仲、叔、季也. 伯者，长也. 伯者子最长，迫近父也. 仲者，中也. 叔者，少也. 季者，少也. 适长称伯，伯禽是也. 庶长称孟，以鲁大夫孟氏. “ -星光下的人 (talk) 01:28, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

If you say so, it sounds about right. Thank you.

Disambiguation link notification for May 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Duke Huan of Zheng, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hua County (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) 23:54, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 21
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ibis (novel), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Colombian (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) 09:04, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Francisco González Ledesma
Hello, Mar vin kaiser. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Francisco González Ledesma, for deletion because it's a biography of a living person that lacks references. If you don't want Francisco González Ledesma to be deleted, please add a reference to the article.

If you don't understand this message, you can leave a note on my talk page.

Thanks, Weinfield (talk) 21:10, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Re: Question about Deletion
Hi, Thanks for contacting me! About your previous question, I do not have access to previously deleted articles but I'm sure the administrator, who performed the action, can undo it once you explain your intention to add sources; here's his page User:Xoloz. And, as for the sources, citing foreign sources is perfectly fine.

Deletion of Francisco González Ledesma
Hi,

I apologize for the lateness of this reply, but I have been in hospital for a bit dealing with a pesky illness. In answer to your question, Wikipedia cannot be used as a source for itself. When writing an article in the English Wikipedia, it is inappropriate to cite the Spanish Wikipedia as the reliable source. Instead, the proper choice is to cite the sources used by the Spanish Wikipedia in composing its article. For instance, today's featured article on Spanish Wikipedia is Leche. If one wanted to translate that article to compose the English article on Milk, one wouldn't simply cite the Spanish Wikipedia article Leche; one would cite any or all of the 91 reliable sources referenced in the reference section of the article Leche. One should follow the same practice in composing an article concerning Francisco González Ledesma. Best wishes, Xoloz (talk) 20:43, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

August 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=623293222 your edit] to Liu Yuan (musician) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:33, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Liu Yuan (, pronounced ; January 1, 1960 in Beijing, China) is

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:37, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Thank you so much for participating in Translating Ibero-America!
--Anna Torres (WMAR) (talk) 20:31, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Translating Ibero-America is back! Come and join us :)
Dear Mar vin kaiser , Hope this message finds you well! Again this year 2017 the Iberocoop network is launching the editing contest "Translating Ibero-American" aiming to position the Ibero-american culture outside our borders :) You can find the contest page here We hope you can join us! Hugs--Anna Torres (WMAR) (talk) 20:02, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Janek Rubeš concern
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Janek Rubeš, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:32, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Janek Rubeš


Hello, Mar vin kaiser. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Janek Rubeš".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the, , or  code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 14:00, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Janek Rubeš (April 5)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Legacypac was:

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


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Janek Rubeš and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Janek Rubeš, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "db-self" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Janek_Rube%C5%A1 Articles for creation help desk] or on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Legacypac&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Janek_Rube%C5%A1 reviewer's talk page].
 * You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Legacypac (talk) 06:38, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 22
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of cathedrals in Egypt, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Minya ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/List_of_cathedrals_in_Egypt check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/List_of_cathedrals_in_Egypt?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) 09:33, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Why???
Why are you deleting the word ‘Roman’ from Roman Catholic Church from a large number of pages? Have you achieved community consensus for this? If not, would you consider reverting all of these edits?-- Literaturegeek |  T@1k?  11:50, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Check here, Manual of Style/Catholic Church. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 11:53, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
 * As the Wikipedia Manual of Style says, "The terms Catholic Church and Catholic are acceptable names for the worldwide church in full communion with the Pope in Rome. Although branch theory-derived objections tend to be rejected along WP:FRINGE lines, what settles the WP:CONSENSUS is WP:PRIMARYUSAGE. Article names, and by consequence its content, should not be changed from this convention without strong reason.". Therefore, the convention is to use the terms "Catholic Church" and "Catholic". I'm just bringing articles to convention. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 12:02, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
 * That manual of style is about the Catholic Church article naming dispute, i.e. whether the Catholic Church article should be a disambiguous page covering Anglican and other Protestant denominations who view themselves as a Protestant Catholic/universal faith. That page you link to has absolutely nothing to do with usage of the term “Roman Catholic Church” in article text. In fact, the Catholic Church page has Roman Catholic Church bolded in the first sentence as a name it is known by. There is no policy or guidelines that says or suggests that ‘Roman Catholic Church’ is an unacceptable name on Wikipedia that should be changed in article body text. Please revert your changes and seek community consensus for your edits. There may well be good reason for the reader to know which form of Catholic Church is being referred to as Anglican and certain other faiths regard themselves as a Catholic/universal Christian faith church.-- Literaturegeek |  T@1k?  12:32, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Wow! That manual of style is only a proposal, it is not even accepted, but yet you are making sweeping changes to many articles. Please stop making these changes to articles, which is effectively banning the term ‘Roman Catholic Church’ from the entire Encyclopedia. Your editing is, at this point in time, disruptive.-- Literaturegeek |  T@1k?  12:53, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
 * No, it does not make sense to ban the term "Roman Catholic Church" in Wikipedia and that's not what I'm doing. It is a term that refers to one of the particular churches in the Catholic Church that uses the Roman rite, among the other particular churches in the Catholic Church. If you read the discussions, one of the reasons why the term "Roman Catholic Church" is not preferred, but instead the "Catholic Church", because different groups of people take it to mean different things, leading to ambiguity. My edits are consistent with the manual of style (even if it does not refer to article text), that whenever what is referred to is the "Catholic Church", that is the preferred term. As you can see, all article entry names already use "Catholic" instead of "Roman Catholic", unless that is indeed the norm (for example in dioceses that use the Roman rite). Whenever it is more advantageous to use the term "Roman Catholic Church", it is used in specific cases that don't lead to ambiguity. And no, my editing is not disruptive. Since you feel strongly about this, I will stop for now, but I will look at the issue again, due to your objections. Sorry for bringing you into this, but what do you think? Is there an issue with me editing entries like this? Thanks. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 13:21, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
 * The thing is is that there is no manual of style about this issue, it is a proposal that went stale. Chic by accident can join the conversation but will run into the problem that the manual of style is a proposal that so far is not accepted by the community. Who knows, may be your changes are positive but I think you need to get that manual of style accepted as a guideline if you feel strongly about this issue and get some text included in the manual of style guidance about changing ‘Roman Catholic Church’ to ‘Catholic Church’ before making any further changes like you have been doing.-- Literaturegeek |  T@1k?  13:42, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
 * The Anglican Communion considers itself part of the Catholic church. I think the changes are a bad idea. Doug Weller  talk 16:48, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
 * That link is a failed proposal. Please revert the rest of your changes. "Roman Catholic" is the common name. If you have not reverted within a day, I will do so for you and may request a topic ban. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:03, 30 September 2018 (UTC)


 * This is going to be long, but you've stumbled into one of the most complex areas of Wikipedia: I've said this elsewhere, but while I typically fall on the Catholic side in article title discussions (for a variety of reasons, but I'm certainly not a hardliner on it), changes within article prose are a very different matter. The Protestant vs. Orthodox vs. Catholic feud over the title is less important here than the fact that any change is going to make people angry, and quite simply it is not worth the effort or amount of time that would be expended to get a universal guideline on usage here (plus it would fail because of how complex this situation is.)We have finally come to a somewhat stable status quo on article titles (which has been trending anti-Roman for the last few years), but there is simply no way that we will be able to parse out how to deal with it in prose in a way that achieves anything remotely resembling a community consensus. Lacking such a consensus, on Wikipedia, the rule for stylistic changes such as this is to stay with the stable usage and use it consistently.If you create a new article, you are generally free to use either usage you want: I almost always only use Catholic in my articles, and you're free to do this too. If someone came along and started adding Roman to articles I'd written such as Pietro Campori, I'd be mad too, because it's pretty disruptive and literally does no good.Sorry for the long post, but you've inadvertently reignited something that has been sleeping for a very long time, and that in all honesty, should be left asleep. The status quo of not having a consistent usage for prose in every article might not be satisfying, but it really is the best outcome we're going to get. TonyBallioni (talk) 05:53, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, I'd just like to ask your opinion on this. For example, there are some saints that are listed on the sidebar to be venerated by the "Roman Catholic Church" and "Eastern Catholic Churches", and some saints listed as being venerated by the "Roman Catholic Church" without the "Eastern Catholic Churches" listed. The thing is, technically, all saints venerated by the "Roman Catholic Church" (whether you mean the communion of churches in communion with the Pope or those that just use the Roman rite), are also venerated by the "Eastern Catholic Churches" (which are also in communion with the Pope). So, there seems to be an inconsistency here when it comes to what churches are listed to venerate a saint (or how it is listed). The options would be: 1.) to list both every time (Roman Catholic Church and Eastern Catholic Churches), 2. to list only "Roman Catholic Church" (to mean all churches in communion with the Pope even though other Wikipedia articles understand it only the Roman-rite churches), or 3. to list only "Catholic Church" (which would be in line with article names as meaning the churches in communion with the Pope regardless of rite). Leaving the articles as is results in inconsistencies at best, misunderstandings at worst. What do you think? Thanks. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 05:55, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Do not change unless there is a strong reason to change. If you think there is such a reason, explain it on the talk page after you make the change. As I said above, a large part of keeping the peace on this dispute is maintaining the stable version of an article when either C or RC is valid and some inconsistencies are fine. Nothing you raised above is factually wrong, so the need to change is not pressing. TonyBallioni (talk) 06:08, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for asking. If the term was originally "Roman Catholic", there was likely a good reason. The exception is on specific Catholic theology or Catholic history articles. As for the saints, the question is what the common name is. If they are also recognized by the Anglican communion, I believe that "Roman Catholic" is appropriate. I'll let you decide.
 * I did suggest that you should revert the changes. In that case, you could have had more latitude in which articles to restore and which not to. I'm applying the rule-of-thumb I described and linking to the discussion where I proposed it. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:14, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

I could add that none of the commentators above act in a exclusively representative way for Wikipedia, the Wikipedia community, or the consensus around here. While I agree with parts of it, I'd like to add two comments myself in this area. 1) When an article name states "Catholic" rather than "Roman Catholic", I see little if any reasons to stubbornly mainatin "Roman Catholic" in its text context. Thus far, I think made a positive contribution, and the users critics are addressing the issue unjustly. 2.) A manual of style mirroring the previosuly mentioned point may very well be realised. It would be desirable. Chicbyaccident (talk) 21:15, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Consubstantiation
Re: this edit. Thanks for providing an explanation this time. Edit comments are helpful in explaining the purpose of your edits to other editors.

I'm still curious to what in the Manual of Style you are referring. Looking around I see:
 * A failed proposal for a Manual of Style section
 * A failed proposal for a naming convention on the Catholic Church, and
 * A draft proposal for a naming convention on Catholicism, which is mostly not written yet.

I'm not aware of any Wikipedia guidelines that would prevent refering to the Church as the Roman Catholic Church, and the repeated failure of attempts to set up a naming guideline suggests that there is not consensus for such a guideline.--Srleffler (talk) 21:21, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Reverting removal of "Roman Catholic"
I would have appreciated that you make these reverts. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:06, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Important Notice
TonyBallioni (talk) 06:09, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Just alerting you of this since the edits in dispute included infobox issues. TonyBallioni (talk) 06:10, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Barnstar
I'd like to promote you with a barnstar for commendibly working towards progress in an area of Wikipedia that could use some improvement. Chicbyaccident (talk) 21:18, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Ways to improve Rastislav (Gont)
Hello, Mar vin kaiser,

Welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for creating Rastislav (Gont)! I edit here too, under the username FR30799386 and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:-

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with. And, don't forget to sign your reply with. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

— fr&thinsp;❄  06:31, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Janek Rubeš


Hello, Mar vin kaiser. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Janek Rubeš".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the, , or  code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 20:20, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 30
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Taguig Church, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Church ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Taguig_Church check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Taguig_Church?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) 14:45, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Simeon (Jakovlevic)


The article Simeon (Jakovlevic) has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp/dated tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. Girth Summit  (blether) 15:43, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 13
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of Catholic saints, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Dutch and Antonio González ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/List_of_Catholic_saints check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/List_of_Catholic_saints?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:23, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Ways to improve David Galván Bermúdez
Hello, Mar vin kaiser,

Thank you for creating David Galván Bermúdez.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

"Please add references with in-depth coverage about the subject from independent reliable sources to the article to meet our verifiability requirements."

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with. And, don't forget to sign your reply with. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 15:02, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

List of saints of the Dominican Order moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, List of saints of the Dominican Order, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of " " before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. buidhe 16:20, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: List of saints of the Dominican Order has been accepted
 List of saints of the Dominican Order, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as List-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=List_of_saints_of_the_Dominican_Order help desk] . Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Thanks again, and happy editing!  DGG ( talk ) 03:57, 30 July 2020 (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) 00:31, 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) 00:27, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics
Egsan Bacon (talk) 11:43, 10 April 2024 (UTC)