User talk:SebastianHelm/archive2019

Category:Phases of matter has been nominated for discussion
Category:Phases of matter, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:32, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

that's already on the page man Geographyinitiative (talk) 01:58, 26 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks for pointing that out. So why then add the "see also" link? That nothing-to-see link seems even more pointless, then. ◄ Sebastian 02:50, 26 April 2019 (UTC)


 * I don't make the rules- the lords of Wiktionary have so decreed it that way and I just go along with it- Suzukaze-c & Justinrleung etc Geographyinitiative (talk) 03:58, 26 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Can you please point me to the rule you believe you are following? ◄ Sebastian 07:26, 26 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Basically what happened to me was that I made a million mistakes that Justinrleung and the other users reverted all the time, and finally I kind of figured out what their standards were. I don't know where the rules are, I'm kind of guessing what will and what will not be reverted by other users. Sorry if I was a little rude to you earlier. I'm probably not the best representative of Wiktionary to talk to. Suzukaze-c & Justinrleung and the other users can help you with that info. Geographyinitiative (talk) 09:07, 26 April 2019 (UTC)


 * No worries - you were not in the least rude; maybe a bit brusque, but that's OK. I don't know much about Wiktionary; at least here on en:Wikipedia, the standards are not defined through the actions of any "lords", but by our policies and guidelines, developed by the community at large. So, what is your personal opinion? If you realy feel there's value in that link, then I'll trust you. If not, then I'll remove it again and see if one of the "lords" has a convincing argument. ◄ Sebastian 09:55, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 special circular
   

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:48, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)
ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:04, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Ye Mengde


A tag has been placed on Ye Mengde, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
 * It is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. (See section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) 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.
 * It is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. (See section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Wikipedia has standards for the minimum necessary information to be included in short articles; you can see these at Wikipedia:Stub. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. SimeonManier (talk) 00:43, 14 September 2019 (UTC)