User talk:Qwerty786

June 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Apple Inc., did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you believe there has been a mistake and would like to report a false positive, please report it here and then remove this warning from your talk page. If your edit was not vandalism, please feel free to make your edit again after reporting it. The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Apple Inc. was changed by Qwerty786 (u) (t) making a minor change adding "!!!" on 2009-06-13T21:31:37+00:00. Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 21:31, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

IP block exemption granted
I have granted your account an exemption from IP blocking. This will allow you to edit through full blocks affecting your IP address when you are logged in.

Please read the page IP block exemption carefully, especially the section on IP block exemption conditions.

Note in particular that you are not permitted to use this newly-granted right to edit Wikipedia via anonymous proxies, or disruptively. If you do, or there is a serious concern of abuse, then the right may be removed by any administrator.

Appropriate usage and compliance with the policy may be checked periodically, due to the nature of block exemption, and block exemption will be removed when no longer needed (for example, when the block it is related to expires).

I hope this will enhance your editing, and allow you to edit successfully and without disruption. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 14:45, 19 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank You. HelloAll 12:48, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

July 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. GameShowKid – talk – evidence  17:42, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Olympic event pages
Hello, I just noticed you have been creating and editing Olympic event pages, so first of all, thanks for your help! But you should know that the consensus we now have at WP:WikiProject Olympics is to use Infobox Olympic event for these pages, and this infobox includes a link to the previous and next event pages. Therefore, we do not use succession boxes on Olympic event articles. See my update to Fencing at the 2004 Summer Olympics – Men's foil for an example of what we have been doing since the 2008 Games. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask me, or better yet, at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Olympics. Thanks — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 20:43, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:1980 diyatin.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:1980 diyatin.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation.  Zoo Fari  03:45, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Limbach07 140.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Limbach07 140.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation.  Skier Dude ►  07:02, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Gymnastics at the 1960 Summer Olympics – Women's artistic individual all-around
A tag has been placed on Gymnastics at the 1960 Summer Olympics – Women's artistic individual all-around 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. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

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 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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you.  fetch  comms  ☛ 22:50, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * That was a major accident on my part. I meant to create the user page! Sorry!Qwerty786 (talk) 22:51, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Gymnastics at the 1960 Summer Olympics – Men's artistic individual all-around
Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as Gymnastics at the 1960 Summer Olympics – Men's artistic individual all-around, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

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 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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you.  fetch  comms  ☛ 22:50, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry that was a major accident on my part! Delete! I meant to create the user page! Qwerty786 (talk) 22:52, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Gymnastics at the 1968 Summer Olympics – Women's artistic team all-around
A tag has been placed on Gymnastics at the 1968 Summer Olympics – Women's artistic team all-around 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. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

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 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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you.  fetch  comms  ☛ 22:50, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Pages
OK, thanks for telling me!--  fetch  comms  ☛ 22:55, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I felt like an idiot! Sorry! Qwerty786 (talk) 22:56, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

2010 Skate America
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of 2010 Skate America, and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: 2009 Skate America. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page&mdash; you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 02:09, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of 2002 Winter Paralympics medal table
A tag has been placed on 2002 Winter Paralympics medal table, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this.

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 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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. RadManCF ☢ open frequency 22:14, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Oops. you will see I had a user page for that but accidentally created a article. Can't believe it happened again!Qwerty786 (talk) 00:15, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback! Justcontributions (talk) 06:55, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Gymnastics Notability
I noticed that you are an active member of the wikipedia gymnastics project and wondered if you could comment on the gymnastics notability guidelines being proposed at WP:NSPORT. Note that satisfying any of these guidelines would lead to notability, but those who do not satisfy them could still be deemed notable if they satisfy WP:GNG. --MATThematical (talk) 21:42, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Non-free files in your user space
Hey there Qwerty786, thank you for your contributions. I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:Qwerty786/Brand new one for edigintg. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.


 * See a log of files removed today here.


 * Shut off the bot here.


 * Report errors here.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 05:04, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Chinese Skating Association
This is an automated message from VWBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Chinese Skating Association, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www1.chinaculture.org/library/2008-01/25/content_31824.htm.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) VWBot (talk) 04:50, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

TAR18
None of the specially subtitled seasons of The Amazing Race have the subtitle featured in the article title. Now that an IP has edited the redirect, I am going to have to get an admin to move the page back. In the future, please do not move the page without discussion.— Ryūlóng ( 竜龙 ) 02:39, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Ira Vannut
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Ira Vannut, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.isuresults.com/bios/isufs00010708.htm.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 18:20, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

2011 World Junior Figure Skating Championship
Why are you removing the Croatian team? Intoronto1125 (talk) 04:50, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Random survey
Hi, This is a random survey regarding the first sentence on the Wikipedia policy page Verifiability.
 * "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—whether readers can check that material in Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether editors think it is true."

In your own words, what does this mean? Thank you. Regards, Bob K31416 (talk) 19:41, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:FigureSkatingattheGoodwillGames


A tag has been placed on Template:FigureSkatingattheGoodwillGames requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it must be substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. — This, that, and the other (talk) 09:19, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.


 * Writers Guild of America Awards 2011 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Hugo, The Descendants, Young Adult, 50/50 and Win Win

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:49, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Consensus
We need your help to come to a consensus on Talk:List_of_The_Young_and_the_Restless_characters_(2010s) for Ricky Williams. Arjoccolenty (talk) 22:37, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2013 Triglav Trophy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Daisuke Murakami (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) 11:38, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

April 2013
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on International recognition of Kosovo‎. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. TDL (talk) 17:24, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

source
I am afraid that i will be forced to report you next time. You have been already explained, and you again added source falsification. Do not do this again, it is actually a major disruption, in ARBMAC area. Be well. -- WhiteWriterspeaks 17:28, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
 * No, of course is not. That is only your personal opinion, and therefor, not for wiki. Revert your self fast, your edits are very wrong, and out of discusion. Revert everything quickly. -- WhiteWriterspeaks 17:37, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Fine report the facts "It is agreed that neither side will block or encourage others to block the other side's progress in their respective EU paths," point 14 of the accord states. http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/19/us-serbia-kosovo-eu-idUSBRE93I0IB20130419 Qwerty786 (talk) 17:39, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Ok, i will report the fact Serbia officially recognised Kosovo! Do you have source for this sentence? Please respond, i need neutral source for this exact sentence. If you have it, add in article, if you dont revert everything. Simple as that. -- WhiteWriterspeaks 17:45, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I posted the source over and over again! Kosovo in the EU supported by Serbia is recognizing its independence! Qwerty786 (talk) 17:50, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Wrong. Serbia recognising Kosovo is recognising its independence. Nothing less in this outfit. Diplomatic relations are black and white. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 17:52, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
 * You are wrong. Being in the EU which is for independent countries is black and white. Serbia saying Kosovo can be in the EU not a part of Serbia but as its own country is recognizing its independence. It's all in the agreement. Qwerty786 (talk) 17:55, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
 * So is being in any trade bloc, EU, EFTA, AU or NAFTA. Serbia and Kosovo have been members of CEFTA since 2007, but that doesn't mean Belgrade recognises Kosovo. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 19:55, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
 * yes it does. Tadic was a strident supporter of Kosovo independence too. Ever since tadic made these deals Serbia has recognized Kosovo independence but to Wikipedia it hasn't, dacic is expanding Kosovo independence every day now Serbia has customs agents and ambassadors with kosovo Qwerty786 (talk) 20:06, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

So Tadić a strident supporter of Kosovo independence, and Serbia recognises but Wikipedia doesn't. Now I've heard it all. I suppose according to you, Tadić was in Pristina waving a "Newborn" banner on that Sunday in 2008 when independence was declared. Never mind. Maybe one day you'll awake to discover the shock reality, but until then, sweet dreams. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 20:38, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes Tadic is a supporter. He met with Thaci didn't he? There is a picture of them together at a meeting of current and former world leaders and there was Tadic and Thaci as equals. Qwerty786 (talk) 20:54, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Good observation. But then it could equally have meant Hashim recognises Serbia's territorial integrity and recognises Kosovo as being part of Serbia. What goes one way can go the other, right? Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 21:04, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 21:16, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 28
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nebelhorn Trophy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ashley Cain (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) 12:10, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited North Kosovo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Brussels Agreement (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) 09:03, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Assembly of the Community of Municipalities of the Autonomous Province of Kosovo and Metohija
You wrote on this article that the Assembly has been abolished, as part of the Brussels agreement. However, in all the text documents of the agreement that I can find, it says:

"1. There will be an Association/Community of Serb majority municipalities in Kosovo. Membership will be open to any other municipality provided the members are in agreement.

3. The structures of the Association/Community will be established on the same basis as the existing statute of the Association of Kosovo municipalities e.g. President, vice President, Assembly, Council."

Therefore, I will revert you, until you provide some source that says otherwise. Furthermore, please reply on my talk page, and assume good faith. If you can prove that this assembly has been abolished, then I will accept it. However, the Brussels agreement (2013) seemed not to abolish it, while also not providing any legislative power to it. Heracletus (talk) 18:44, 29 March 2014 (UTC)


 * I disagree. From the perspective of Albanians, the old one was always illegal, as from the perspective of Serbs, the whole Kosovo independence was illegal. I do not find anywhere in the Brussels agreement something about any assembly being illegal or not. What I can read is that there will be a recognised community of Serb majority municipalities in Kosovo and that its structures will be established on the same basis as the existing statute of the Association of Kosovo municipalities, including an Assembly.


 * Even if we distinguish between the already existing Assembly and a new assembly to come, the Brussels agreement makes no declaration on the legality of the old assembly.


 * But, as we read in Association of Serbian municipalities, Kosovo, the new Community envisaged by the Brussels Agreement, had been initially established as the Association of Serb Municipalities and Settlements of Kosovo and Metohija before the Brussels Agreement. It follows that its Assembly, which was the Assembly of the Community of Municipalities of the Autonomous Province of Kosovo and Metohija will also be the new assembly, as the old community of Serbian majority municipalities is the new community envisaged in the Brussels Agreement.


 * Furthermore, I see nowhere a source that the old assembly has been disbanded/dissolved and does not continue as the new assembly. It only makes sense that if the community of Serbian municipalities has been recognised and transformed by the Brussels Agreement, the same recognition and transformation holds true for its Assembly.


 * After all, the agreement says that the new community organisation will have the same kind of structures as the old one.


 * Moreover, an IP user has made edits on Association of Serbian municipalities, Kosovo regarding the new Assembly, which are not supported by the sources. Specifically, in the Serbian criticism section, it is written:


 * "The Brussels agreement has been criticized by the Democratic Party of Serbia which argues that all Serbian autonomy in Kosovo is abolished with the dissolution of the Assembly of the Community of Municipalities of the Autonomous Province of Kosovo and Metohija, as it effectively means that laws of the Republic of Kosovo will be administered in the Serb-majority municipalities of North Kosovo previously governed by the Assembly.[8]"


 * However, reference 8 (http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics.php?yyyy=2013&mm=04&dd=23&nav_id=85844) says about the assembly:


 * "The former Serbian prime minister welcomed the decision of the Kosovo Serbs who established their own assembly on Monday, saying that they are the ones defending the Serbian state in Kosovo, while the government is destroying it."


 * So, it says that an assembly was established in 2013 in Kosovo by the Serbs. I would think this is the new assembly or will be recognised as such. Furthermore, it makes no comment about the dissolution of any assembly.


 * The Brussels agreement was formally signed on 19 April 2013, and reference 8 is from 23 April 2013, so the Monday it refers to is 22 April 2013. Therefore, I see nothing else than the implementation of the deal.


 * Moreover on the same article, it was Ramush Haradinaj who said that the new Assembly will not have executive power and thus would not violate the constitution of Kosovo. Hashim Thaci also said it would not violate the constitution but did not comment on the powers of the Assembly. The reference is this: http://top-channel.tv/artikull.php?id=252302.


 * The Brussels Agreement says about this:


 * "4. In accordance with the competences given by the European Charter of Local Self Government and Kosovo law the participating municipalities shall be entitled to cooperate in exercising their powers through the Community/Association collectively. The Association/Community will have full overview of the areas of economic development, education, health, urban and rural planning.
 * 5. The Association/Community will exercise other additional competences as may be delegated by the central authorities.
 * 6. The Community/Association shall have a representative role to the central authorities and will have a seat in the communities’ consultative council for this purpose. In the pursuit of this role a monitoring function is envisaged."


 * I therefore do intend to change these sections according to what the sources used actually state.


 * Finally, my edits on the Assembly were exactly on the spirit of the Agreement that the Assembly will now be recognised by all Kosovo authorities, but will not have legislative power. I really fail to understand why you disagree with them.


 * So, the interesting thing would be to see the new composition of the Assembly, after the 2013 elections, and change the article accordingly to the new composition of the Assembly. Heracletus (talk) 01:39, 30 March 2014 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, but I strongly disagree. If you read the text, it does not abolish something, it merges the Serb police force into the (Albanian) Kosovo police force, and does the same for the courts.


 * For example:


 * "7. There shall be one police force in Kosovo called the Kosovo Police. All police in northern Kosovo shall be integrated in the Kosovo Police framework. Salaries will be only from the KP."


 * For the Association of Serbian municipalities in Kosovo, it explicitly allows it to exist and sets out the rules on its competences and dictates that its structure will be the same as the already existing one. Since the old Association has been transformed into the new Community of Serbian municipalities, its follows that its structures follow the same fashion; I would call this fashion "implementation of the Brussels Agreement".


 * The text is here: Brussels_Agreement_(2013) and can also be easily found online. The text and the agreement explicitly follow a neutral tone. On the contrary, you try to deviate from this neutrality. Please stop doing so, as all articles related to Kosovo (and the Balkans in general) are under probation by the Arbitration Committee, as can be read here: WP:GS.


 * There is no mention in the Agreement of anything being dissolved. There's a mention of institutions merging or being established. It is clear that the new Community continues the old one, but with different competences being recognised. This is clear by a search online, by the way the institution is formed, by the text of the agreement mentioning it will have the same structure as the old one and by the wikipedia article on it. The article is small enough to not require splitting.


 * In the same spirit, the assembly of the old institution will obviously be constituted as the assembly of the new institution after the 2013 election results. Its members will again be the elected officials of the Serb-majority municipalities in Kosovo. This is also quite explicit in the text of the agreement:


 * "3. The structures of the Association/Community will be established on the same basis as the existing statute of the Association of Kosovo municipalities e.g. President, vice President, Assembly, Council."


 * Please stop taking a point and try to act neutrally, as that is the spirit of the Brussels Agreement, too. It does not touch the legality of previous institutions or dissolves anything, it just merges them and allows for legitimate recognised representation of the Serb-majority municipalities.


 * This representation already existed, but was not recognised by the Albanians in Kosovo. Now, it is limited in its powers and is recognised by the Albanian side, too. Heracletus (talk) 02:45, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
 * no this is completely wrong. The old assembly was a parallel institution abolished by Serbia. It doesn't exist anymore. It was not a part of Kosovo law on municpal powers. It was completely beyond that. This is just fundamentally wrong. Qwerty786 (talk) 05:29, 30 March 2014 (UTC)


 * If you do not understand English, could you please just go to the wikipedia of your own language?


 * You write to me:


 * "sticking to your view that the Brussels agreement is not about abolishing all Serbian parallel structures"


 * Fine, find where it talks about abolishment and quote it. Until you do this, I believe that you're making an assessment of the agreement and you're pushing your POV.


 * You also wrote:


 * "The things you quote explicitly say a new assembly will be formed based on the condition of neutrality so no assembly can be called "assembly serbian municilanties of province of kos met."


 * Where did I support that the new Assembly will be called "assembly serbian municilanties of province of kos met"???? Give me the quote. What I supported is:


 * There was a Community of Serbian municipalities in Kosovo and Metohija which was made up from elected members of the Serb-majority municipalities of Kosovo, in elections that the Albanians of Kosovo did not recognise, which had an Assembly with legislative and executive powers over those territories. Obviously, the Albanians did not recognise these powers to that Assembly either. Now, there will be a Community of Serbian municipalities which will be made up from elected members of the Serb-majority municipalities of Kosovo, in elections that the Albanians of Kosovo have recognised, which will have an Assembly without legislative and with regional oversight powers over certain areas (economic development, education, health, urban and rural planning) in these territories.


 * For reasons obvious to everyone unbiased on the issue, I also wrote the same stuff on the relevant articles.


 * You also wrote:


 * "You talk about assemblies according to the Kosovo law on municipalities associations and the old one was not that. You just don't see that the old assembly was a parallel institution. Not in line with Kosovo law and was abolished by Serbia because it was serbias pre Brussels parallel institution"


 * I do not talk about such things. The agreement says:


 * 1. There will be an Association/Community of Serb majority municipalities in Kosovo. Membership will be open to any other municipality provided the members are in agreement.
 * 2. The Community/Association will be created by statute. Its dissolution shall only take place by a decision of the participating municipalities. Legal guarantees will be provided by applicable law and constitutional law (including the 2/3 majority rule).
 * 3. The structures of the Association/Community will be established on the same basis as the existing statute of the Association of Kosovo municipalities e.g. President, vice President, Assembly, Council.
 * 4. In accordance with the competences given by the European Charter of Local Self Government and Kosovo law the participating municipalities shall be entitled to cooperate in exercising their powers through the Community/Association collectively. The Association/Community will have full overview of the areas of economic development, education, health, urban and rural planning.
 * 5. The Association/Community will exercise other additional competences as may be delegated by the central authorities.
 * 6. The Community/Association shall have a representative role to the central authorities and will have a seat in the communities’ consultative council for this purpose. In the pursuit of this role a monitoring function is envisaged.


 * Before there was an agreement, there was a Serb-majority institution which was not recognised by Albanians. Now, there is an agreement, this institution is also recognised by Albanians and its operation should be based on the European Charter of Local Self Government and Kosovo law. That's what the agreement says. Personally, nobody asked me where I want it to be based, which institution I recognise or if I want it blue or black. However, if we suppose that Kosovo is a Serbian province, then the Serbian institution might have been in accordance with the law of Kosovo. If we suppose that Kosovo is an independent country, then the Serbian institution might have been in violation of the law of Kosovo. If we suppose that Kosovo is a UN-administered territory, then things would be even more complicated. However, it is not my place to suppose something here. Try to understand this and understand English, especially when talking about an agreement that was specifically designed to be as neutral as possible under the circumstances.


 * No Serbian institution is to be dissolved according to the Agreement; they are to be implicitly merged or "rebranded". There was a Community of Serbian municipalities, it had an Assembly. There will be a Community of Serbian municipalities, it will have an Assembly. It is CLEARLY stated that it will be pretty much the same thing with the same structure:


 * "3. The structures of the Association/Community will be established on the same basis as the existing statute of the Association of Kosovo municipalities e.g. President, vice President, Assembly, Council."


 * Two things changed. 1. The Albanians agreed to recognise it. 2. The Serbs agreed to eliminate its legislative power, and minimise its executive one. This is a compromise. I understand you do not like it, but this is what happened.


 * And, as your comment caused an edit conflict, you had already commented in the same way, with the same arguments on my talk page, why repeat it here? I will repeat again, from a Serbian point of view, Kosovo has only Serbian and perhaps UNMIK laws, so, you cannot say that something was not lawful by the laws of an entity (the independent state of Kosovo) which does not exist. However, again, we're not here to comment on who's right or wrong in world politics. The institution existed, now it changed a bit, it still exists.


 * From a Serbian point of view again, there was no parallel structure as you mean it, there were the legal Serbian structures and the illegal Albanian ones. From an Albanian point of view the opposite thing was true. Guess with which point of view you side. Also, Serbia did not dissolve any institution, they were just merged or had their competences changed. This is a legal position. I will try to give you a document that explains the Serbian negotiating position: http://www.vaseljenska.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/non-paper.pdf, but your writing does seem to indicate you will not understand it. Heracletus (talk) 06:31, 30 March 2014 (UTC)


 * I implied that English is your native language, because you just keep failing to understand what I am writing, and because you wrote something like this: "assembly serbian municilanties of province of kos met". I challenged your overall position, by asking you to come up with the quotes that support it, and you just don't. You want to turn a neutral agreement into what you would perceive as favouring one of the sides (the Albanian one). I cannot help you with that. There was an obvious compromise, as I explained above. The position you support for parallel institutions that were abolished and so on, cannot be found in the Agreement text, exactly because it would bias it. I would see the Agreement as a fragile attempt for some normalisation, rather than an instrument of pragmatic EU politics.


 * If we had to be pragmatic, it's also obvious that without a NATO/EU presence in the region, Kosovo would never have survived as (semi-)independent. And, furthermore, as it is not an EU member, it cannot block Serbia's accession to the EU, which, speaking in a strictly realistic tone, is set to occur before Kosovo's one. In this case, Serbia could block Kosovo's potential accession to the EU, its recognition and even EU missions there. But, all these scenarios, whether plausible or not, do not have a place on wikipedia. Let's just stick to what the Agreement says and not on how we may perceive things to be. Heracletus (talk) 15:13, 30 March 2014 (UTC)


 * The Reuters source that you gave me doesn't really support your position. The euobserver one is written by a person of Kosovar Albanian origin who makes quite some claims, such as that Serbs won, as in that they do not follow the agreement, which is simply not true. Apart from the comments right below his article, the balkaninsight article proves him wrong. The balkaninsight article is based on Thaci's comments and opinions. I wouldn't exactly consider him unbiased either. In any case, the agreement makes not the claims you wish to make. It is clear that the agreement is formulated in a way that tries to produce no winners or losers. Try to understand this and not be biased. Heracletus (talk) 00:58, 31 March 2014 (UTC)


 * There's a distinct difference between something being abolished and something being incorporated, merged, absorbed, fused or replaced by something else. Not all the sources claim that the Serbian institutions were just abolished. Since the new institution will be comprised of people representing again the Serbian-majority municipalities and will have the same structure as the old one, it is clearly a continuation of the old one. Moreover, even so, the Agreement is still being implemented and the previous structures have not yet ceased to exist. For example, the police seems to have somehow united (http://www.b92.net/eng/news/crimes.php?yyyy=2014&mm=04&dd=01&nav_id=89838), but the courts are still being restructured (http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics.php?yyyy=2014&mm=03&dd=31&nav_id=89824). And, about Serbia, Kosovo and the EU, try to read again what I have written above and understand what it means, because you try to argue against a position that I did not take.


 * Seeing your recent edits on the article of the Assembly, I fail to see where we disagree. I mean, I am not arguing on whether the Assembly was reformed, reconstituted or some other similar word. I'm arguing that the Assembly of Serb-majority municipalities did not just vanish by being abolished, but there's some continuation with the new one. In the previous state of the article, this was not mentioned anywhere. Heracletus (talk) 08:27, 1 April 2014 (UTC)


 * You wrote:


 * "One was from elections organized by Belgrade in 2008 and which has been defunct for years..."


 * and this does not seem to be true. The news sites I have been looking at do not seem to indicate this assembly (the Assembly of the Community of Municipalities of the Autonomous Province of Kosovo and Metohija) has been inactive over the years. Yes, it was not recognised by the Albanian side, but it does not seem to have been defunct for years. Do you have some source to back this up?


 * You also wrote:


 * "The Brussels deal formally abolished all Serbian government institutions and powers in Kosovo which the former assembly was a part of and therefore completely abolished by the Brussels deal..."


 * However, each time I challenge you to find this on the Brussels Agreement, you do not provide me with something from it, but rather with one-sided (Albanian-sided) references. Would you like to take a third opinion on the issue, while also moving this to the relevant talk page? Heracletus (talk) 10:37, 6 April 2014 (UTC)


 * And, I will try to make my position more clear. You claim that the Brussels Agreement abolishes the previous (Serbian-backed) institutions, and establishes new institutions for Serbs in Kosovo. And, I tell you that:
 * The Brussels Agreement does not explicitly abolish the previous (Serbian-backed) institutions for Serbs in Kosovo. It only implicitly does so by explicitly setting up the same or similar institutions, especially in the case of the Assembly. In the case of the Assembly, the only thing I see changing is its competences being diminished and its being recognised by the Albanian side.
 * A document which only implicitly abolishes the previous (Serbian-backed) institutions for Serbs in Kosovo by explicitly setting up the same or similar institutions, cannot but make these institutions continuations of the old ones.


 * Finally, all this is still under negotiation and nothing is final. Even what we know as the Brussels Agreement is a first agreement on principles rather than a final agreement with full details. I mean, here:


 * "31 March 2014


 * The negotiators in Brussels today are also expected to discuss the jurisdiction of the Basic Court in Kosovska Mitrovica, which, according to Priština, should include seven municipalities, three of which are predominantly ethnic Albanian.


 * Belgrade believes that such a solution is not in the spirit of the Brussels agreement, as the ethnic structure of judges and prosecutors of such a court would be majority Albanian. "


 * Heracletus (talk) 12:11, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

First of all, you reverted me on the Association_of_Serbian_municipalities,_Kosovo article. The relevant reference: http://top-channel.tv/artikull.php?id=252302 does not have anyone saying something about legislative or judicial powers. Therefore, what you add is not from the source. I do not deny that the Community won't have legislative or judicial powers, but that is not found in the source. I would suggest you just add something like, "According to the Brussels Agreement, the Association/Community of Serbian municipalities of Kosovo will not have legislative, judicial or executive powers." However, it does say something about broad overview on certain fields, and this probably is still under negotiation, so I would also add something like "It will only have broad overview on the ..... fields."

Secondly, I do not want to revert you, in general. And, as I also reverted you on the number of communities in the Assembly article, do you have some source on how many they are or how many people they elect to the Assembly?

Thirdly, exactly above this comment, I gave you some sources that explain that the particular details of how this Agreement will be implemented are under negotiation. Moreover, the article (article 10 of the Agreement) you mention is about the courts and says that they will be integrated. This is quite different from just everything Serbian being abolished. And, again is about the courts, while we argue about the Community and Assembly of this Community, which are mentioned in the first articles of the Brussels Agreement. Where that Agreement says that something happens under the Kosovo law, that will of course happen under the Kosovo law. However, there is no mention of anything being abolished. I also agree about the case of the mayor you mentioned, this has been reported by both sides. Heracletus (talk) 20:46, 7 April 2014 (UTC)


 * I'm tired of trying to reach a consensus with you. You just want to push your one-sided POV. Heracletus (talk) 22:26, 10 April 2014 (UTC)


 * I started a dispute resolution procedure. You can find it here. Heracletus (talk) 01:25, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is "Assembly of the Community of Serbian municipalities". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBot   operator  /  talk 01:21, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Madam Secretary (TV series), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Barbara Hall (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Qwerty786/Police one noe
User:Qwerty786/Police one noe, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Qwerty786/Police one noe and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of User:Qwerty786/Police one noe during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. PNGWantok (talk) 11:30, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Qwerty786/Vladislav Tarasenko
User:Qwerty786/Vladislav Tarasenko, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Qwerty786/Vladislav Tarasenko and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of User:Qwerty786/Vladislav Tarasenko during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. PNGWantok (talk) 11:31, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Kosovo status
Kosovo will participate as an independent country at the Olympics. Why add a status when the IOC has recognized the Republic of Kosovo (including your country, USA).. and just by the end of the line it says 'as an independent nation.' This is Kosovo's official profile at the Olympics.

Do not add the status, because it's just politicizing the article, when this is just about sports, and that the Rep. of Kosovo is going to participate with its flag and name, not as a disputed territory. Thanks! --PjeterPeter (talk) 21:19, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
 * go to other athletics pages you will see the fact that kosovo is disputed recognized. Or prove Kosovo is not disputed. Qwerty786 (talk) 21:21, 18 December 2014 (UTC)


 * This is about the Republic of Kosovo, not the disputed territory of Kosovo. The Republic of Kosovo is recognized by the IOC, and it will be represented as a country, not with a footnote!


 * republic of Kosovo is disputed and not just by Serbia but by china Russia brazil India and more Qwerty786 (talk) 21:26, 18 December 2014 (UTC)


 * The IOC has recognized the Republic of Kosovo - and that's a page related to the Olympics. --PjeterPeter (talk) 21:47, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
 * this is not the ioc. This is Wikipedia Qwerty786 (talk) 21:49, 18 December 2014 (UTC)


 * This is Wikipedia, talking about IOC's decision. The IOC has recognized Kosovo, and there is no footnote in the recognition. --Donikanuhiu (talk) 23:36, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
 * that's not relevant at all Qwerty786 (talk) 23:38, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

FYI
I told you I would. King regards IJA (talk) 21:34, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
 * congratulations. You are so special. Qwerty786 (talk) 00:31, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
 * That better not be a reference to a Learning disability! IJA (talk) 13:13, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

December 2014
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as you did at Kosovo at the 2016 Summer Olympics. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice:. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 21:58, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Invitation to discussion
You have been cordially invited to discuss Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Gymnastics following this and this discussions. Thanks for your quick and prompt response. --Osplace 04:13, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:04, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Producers Guild of America Award for Best Theatrical Motion Picture, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Henry V. 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) 09:18, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Invitation to the African Destubathon
Hi. You may be interested in participating in the African Destubathon which starts on October 15. Africa currently has over 37,000 stubs and badly needs a quality improvement editathon/contest to flesh out basic stubs. There are proposed substantial prizes to give to editors who do the most articles, and planned smaller prizes for doing to most destubs for each of the 53 African countries, so should be enjoyable! So it would be a good chance to win something for improving stubs on African sportspeople, including footballers, athletes, Olympians and Paralympians etc, particularly female ones, but also male. Even if contests aren't your thing we would be grateful if you could consider destubbing a few African articles during the drive to help the cause and help reduce the massive 37,000 + stub count, of which many are rated high importance (think Regions of countries etc). If you're interested in competing or just loosely contributing a few expanded articles on African Paralympians, Olympians and committees etc, please add your name to the Contestants/participants section. Diversity of work from a lot of people will make this that bit more special. Thanks. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:14, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

August 2017
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Doping in Russia into another page. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g.,. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted copied template on the talk pages of the source and destination. If you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 17:00, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 25
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Four Continents Figure Skating Championships, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chris Reed ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Four_Continents_Figure_Skating_Championships check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Four_Continents_Figure_Skating_Championships?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) 09:21, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

AfC notification: User:Qwerty786/Pavilion of Women has a new comment
 I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at User:Qwerty786/Pavilion of Women. Thanks! Legacypac (talk) 08:13, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

April 2018
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Freejack, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 07:12, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Oksana Baiul
Hi! Can you please explain why you reverted this edit of mine? Surtsicna (talk) 21:22, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
 * That’s Maria butyrskaya Qwerty786 (talk) 00:23, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Elena Radionova
Hello! Could you tell me what your source is on Elena Radionova's retirement from figure skating. As far as I know, that information hasn't been confirmed by Elena herself, her coaches, or by a reputable media source. Thanks!

Important Notice
TonyBallioni (talk) 02:16, 15 February 2019 (UTC)


 * This doesn’t belong here. Editing for years and years. Qwerty786 (talk) 02:24, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I explained this on my talk, but I'll reply here: WP:AC/DS requires that these be given in areas where discretionary sanctions are in force for editors to be made aware of sanctions. They are standardized, and have no comment on your edits, and I don't control the wording. I gave them because after I had removed the books on the Dice article, mentioning the talk, you restored them. This is probably the single most contentious article on Wikipedia right now, and basically is the situation making people aware of DS was designed for. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:27, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I did restore but with a source. I did think amazon could be used as a source for books if it was an author page. Qwerty786 (talk) 02:34, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Nope. We don't link to Amazon because of the selling bit. The other issue on that article is that no secondary sources cover the books at all (I've looked because if there was coverage, I would actually like to include it along with commentary from book reviews, etc.) If secondary sources don't cover them, we don't, especially considering the books are self-published. Also, your confusion here has prompted me to suggest removing the word "recently" from the template. Sorry for any hurt feelings over that. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:42, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

Important Notice
TonyBallioni (talk) 02:16, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

Taking care in making page moves
I have undone a recent page move that you undertook. A brief glance at the top of the article talk page would have informed you that there had just been a formal requested page move that settled on the title to the page. Requested moves is very clear that one should not unilaterally move a page title if there has been any discussion, especially recent discussion, about the title of the page, or in other similar cases. Neutralitytalk 21:21, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

June 2020
- MrX 🖋 21:34, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Ethan Burgess for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ethan Burgess 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/Ethan Burgess until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Rockchalk 717 02:08, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Important Notice
Doug Weller talk 13:40, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Important Notice
Doug Weller talk 13:41, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Formal warning about a BLP violation
Your edit summary at My Son Hunter saying "It is perfectly reasonable to call hunter Biden corrupt. It’s not false. He’s under investigation" was a clear violation of our BLP policy, which you should know by now. Being under investigation does not make anyone guilty. This is the sort of thing that gets editors topic banned if repeated. Doug Weller talk 13:45, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I never said he was guilty Qwerty786 (talk) 04:16, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
 * You said he was corrupt, more or less the same thing and definitely a BLP violation. Worrying that you don’t understand this. Doug Weller  talk 06:02, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
 * It’s a legitimate opinion Qwerty786 (talk) 02:37, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:40, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

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) 00:31, 28 November 2023 (UTC)