User talk:SiberianCat

Welcome!
Hello, SiberianCat, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful: Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome!
 * Introduction to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

Sandonesians
Hi SiberianCat, I got your friendly and informative message and question, thanks for stopping by. You are certainly welcome to edit the Settings in The Adventures of Tintin article in the manner you say. I'll even be glad to stop by the article later and make sure it looks OK. I do want to encourage you to edit Wikipedia, but along with editing that article, it would be best if you could locate a published article or book stating exactly what you told me, then cite that reference in your edit. Wikipedia is a collection of articles that are each based on verifiable sources, and are not based on original research. I thank you again for stopping by with your question; you are always welcome to contact me anytime! —Prhartcom (talk) 06:15, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi SiberianCat, I took at look at your edit, and it's even better than I expected it would be. You really nailed it; you researched a reference from a reliable source and properly cited that reference to back up the edit you made to the prose of the article. You even got the format of the cited reference correct. If you'd like, you can return and add the customary "date=" (date article was published by the author) and "accessdate=" (date you cited it) parameters. And just think, you removed inaccurate information some other editor had added who had not cited a reliable source and probably based it on original research, neither of which we want in Wikipedia. Would you like to go to the Flight 714 article next? Cheers. Prhartcom (talk) 16:09, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bangka Island, North Sulawesi (November 12)
 Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved.
 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at.
 * To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [ Articles for creation help desk], or on the [ . Please remember to link to the submission!
 * You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.
 * Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! APerson (talk!) 17:20, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Your submission at AfC Bangka Island, North Sulawesi was accepted
 Bangka Island, North Sulawesi, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. . Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! Fiddle  Faddle  16:57, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
 * 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=User_talk:SiberianCat help desk] .
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Reference errors on 7 December
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:24, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
 * On the Ahmad Dhani page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=753429341 your edit] caused a URL error (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F753429341%7CAhmad Dhani%5D%5D Ask for help])

DYK for Georges Dargaud
Mifter (talk) 15:31, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

A page you started (Grace Natalie) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Grace Natalie, SiberianCat!

Wikipedia editor Cwmhiraeth just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

"A well-written article and a useful addition to Wikipedia. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:15, 22 March 2018 (UTC)"

To reply, leave a comment on Cwmhiraeth's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Proposed deletion of Siti Nurbaya Bakar


The article Siti Nurbaya Bakar 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. Boleyn (talk) 20:33, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Invitation to join Women in Red

 * Hi there, SiberianCat, and thanks for becoming a member of Women in Red. If you run into any difficulties or need assistance, please let me know. We look forward to more new articles on women and their works and organizations. Happy editing.--Ipigott (talk) 09:53, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Women in Red June Editathons
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:15, 29 May 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Invitation to participate in study
Hello,

I am E. Whittaker, I am working with Wikimedia’s Scoring Team to create a labeled dataset, and potentially a tool, to help editors deal with incivility when they encounter it on talk pages. A full write-up of the study can be found here: m:Research:Civil_Behavior_Interviews. We are currently recruiting editors to be interviewed about their experiences with incivility on talk pages. Would you be interested in being interviewed? I am contacting you because of your involvement in Wikipedia’s Women in Red project. The interviews should take ~1 hour, and will be conducted over BlueJeans (which does allow interviews to be recorded). If, so, please email me at ewhit@umich.edu in order to schedule an interview.

Thank you Ewitch51 (talk) 20:23, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

Get ready for November with Women in Red!
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:40, 14 October 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging

April 2019
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:02, 25 March 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

(Please excuse this post if it is a duplicate!)

May you join this month's editathons from WiR!
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:17, 27 April 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

June events with WIR
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:42, 22 May 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

July events from Women in Red!
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:41, 25 June 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

October Events from Women in Red
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:36, 23 September 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

December events with WIR
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:44, 25 November 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Asterix and the Chieftain's Daughter
In this edit to Asterix and the Chieftain's Daughter, you removed a note with the edit summary "Deleted spurious, unsourced claim about "hinting at imminent death". Plenty of the Asterix books contain the prospect of death, such as the tax inspector in Switzerland, and every time a character is threatened with being sent to the circus."

In my opinion, this is different. There have been numerous occasions in Asterix comics with the prospect of death, as you say. However, this one is different, because it is hinted that the character really does die. In pretty much all of the other occasions, the character survives after all. J I P &#124; Talk 12:37, 28 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your message. First, I disagree with the notion that Asterix and Obelix All At Sea is "hinting at the imminent death" of Crustacius. Is he facing imminent death after having been transformed into stone for guzzling magic potion? Or is he already as good as dead because he is without any reasonable prospect of receiving Getafix's antidote? Or should we assume, as we have always been told, that the effects of the magic potion are temporary, so he will eventually return to normal after an indeterminate period of rocky suspended animation? How about Asterix and the Black Gold? We finish with Dubbelosix and Surreptitius smeared in honey and being chased by a massive swarm of bees in the Circus. Are we to assume they will outrun the bees? Or could they too be facing imminent death if stung by thousands of bees? Sure, this scene is played for laughs (rather than the more ominous image of Binjwatchflix being followed by a shark) but there is a prospect of imminent death. On page 24 of the same book, Asterix and Obelix attack and sink a Roman galley after bashing (and seemingly knocking unconscious) most of the crew. We then see only three members of the crew clinging to wreckage. What happened to the others? Did they somehow survive or are they likely to drown (or have they drowned)? In 'the Chieftain's Daughter' should we assume Binjwatchflix will be eaten by the shark? He's a wily survivor. It's common enough in fiction to show a villain apparently about to meet their end, only for them to return in a future installment (although recurring villains is not a major trope in the Asterix world, notwithstanding the hapless pirates). Toward the end of Chieftain's Daughter, Caesar says, "As for the tracker ..." which sheds no light on the fate of Binjwatchflix. Subtlety is definitely not the strong suit of Ferri and Conrad. The fact that Binjwatchflix says "And nothing can stop me" just before we see the shark, certainly suggests he could be killed, but I don't feel this is the "second" Asterix volume hinting at an imminent death. On another matter, Goscinny always had a modicum of comic pathos in his villains, making them human and ridiculous, whereas Binjwatchflix is monochrome evil (and has only one comic line -- a repeat of the running gag, "she's a bolter"). The absence of pathos and silliness is what makes him most different (in my opinion). SiberianCat (talk) 10:56, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

February with Women in Red
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:31, 28 January 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging

September Women in Red edithons
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:53, 29 August 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Your draft article, Draft:Asterix and Obelix: The Silk Road


Hello, SiberianCat. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Asterix and Obelix: The Silk Road".

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.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:32, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

October editathons from Women in Red
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 15:11, 21 September 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging

November edith-a-thons from Women in Red
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:50, 28 October 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging

December with Women in Red
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:41, 26 November 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging

A New Year With Women in Red!
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 03:02, 29 December 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Disambiguation link notification for February 1
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Semanggi shootings, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Semanggi. 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) 06:26, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Prabowo
Any description about the riots should go to the riot article. Mentioning "deadly" in a BLP can be considered inflammatory. How many deaths should happen for it to be called "deadly"? enjoyer|talk 00:23, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Hello,, I disagree that stating a fact is inflammatory. Removing the word 'deadly' is tantamount to whitewashing. If someone loses a fair election, then claims the election was rigged and mobilizes the masses (whether directly or through proxies) to run riot and this results in deaths - why should this be censored from that person's biography? An encyclopedia should not censor the truth under the pretext of truth being inflammatory. That is what tyrants and dictators do. At least eight people died in those deadly riots. To answer your question more precisely, one death is sufficient for something to be described as deadly. Perhaps you feel the sentence should be changed to something along the lines of "riots in which people eight people died". SiberianCat (talk) 01:51, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , current wording reads as if he is to blame for the death. "should not censor the truth under the pretext of truth being inflammatory", who decides what is "the truth" or not. We don't deal with truth, but verifiability. Like I said, any description and characteristics of the riot should go to the riot article itself, not this BLP. And don't accuse me of whitewashing, I don't know what that is. enjoyer|talk 02:21, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , here's Wikipedia's explanation of whitewashing in the context of censorship (apparently sourced from Encyclopædia Britannica). I hope that clears things up. Also, here's Wikipedia's definition of hyperbole. You claimed in your edit (deleting the word 'deadly') explanation that a headline's hyperbole should not be brought into the text. I fail to see how describing riots in which multiple people died as 'deadly' is hyperbole. Could you please explain why it's hyperbole? As for truth in this case, the truth is that people were killed in those riots and those deaths have been verified. "As if he is to blame" are your words, not mine. SiberianCat (talk) 03:52, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , you keep defending your points while failing to address the points I've made. Like why are you insist on emphasizing the "deadliness" of the riot on the lead of this BLP instead of the riot article itself. I argue this is WP:UNDUE. enjoyer|talk 08:05, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , I think you're exaggerating the and mobilizes the masses (whether directly or through proxies). The riot isn't even mentioned in the article body of Prabowo Subianto, so yes this is WP:UNDUE. Removing the "deadly" term is not censorship. It is neutral. He doesn't control the level of violence in the riot. It should go to the riot article. enjoyer|<b style="background:linear-gradient(#cbedf8,#cdf4ae);color:#6d6f30">talk</b> 08:25, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , rectified that and added to the article, thanks. SiberianCat (talk) 09:43, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

April editathons from Women in Red
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 20:17, 22 March 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging

May 2021 at Women in Red
--Rosiestep (talk) 21:37, 28 April 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Muhammad Rizieq Shihab
Hi, sorry if this is rude for requesting such a thing. But i've seen that you contributed significantly to article Muhammad Rizieq Shihab. Since im not contributing significantly to the article, it is discouraged for me to nominate it into GAN. But i think the article might have chance to pass. Would you like to nominate it? If you need assistance to improve the article, i'd like to help too as many as I could. Thanks Nyanardsan (talk) 04:27, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Hello, . I think the article requires significant improvement before it can be deemed good or worthy of nomination. The 'Legal cases' and 'Views' sections need much improvement. Parts of the article seem to be added by Rizieq fans, and parts by his opponents. Presently, I have neither the time nor inclination to make necessary improvements, but might be keener once there is a verdict in his current trial. SiberianCat (talk) 10:34, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Ways to improve Asterix and the Griffin
Hello, SiberianCat,

Thank you for creating Asterix and the Griffin.

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

"There are two reviews and two primary references. More reliable references (not comics) are needed else, the article will go to deletion? Thank you."

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 begin it with. Remember to sign your reply with. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

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

Whiteguru (talk) 05:22, 13 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Hello ,

Thank you for informing me of the tag placed on Asterix and the Griffin.

You state there are "two reviews" as references. Your confusingly worded explanation (Why end a sentence with a question mark if you're not asking a question? Why is there a comma after 'else'?) suggests the "reviews" came from comics and therefore lack reliability. First, they're not reviews. A forthcoming comic, of which preview copies have not yet been released, cannot be reviewed. Second, the two non-primary references are not comics or comic books. The two references in question are online news items, announcing details of the forthcoming book in the Asterix series.

The first reference is Bleeding Cool. It is not a comic. It is an online news site, focused on comics, TV, film and games. Owned by Avatar Press, Bleeding Cool was launched on 27 March 2009. Avatar Press also publishes an associated magazine, Bleeding Cool. Google News displays articles from Bleeding Cool. It is a reliable news source regarding comics and related popular culture.

The second source is Multiversity Comics. Also founded in 2009 and also featured on Google News, it is an online news site dedicated to comics and features daily news, interviews, reviews and editorials.

I have no problem with a tag requesting additional references - and I have added four more references and deleted the tag; however, I don't feel that news items from news websites focused on popular culture and comics should be inaccurately described as "reviews" from "comics" and deemed deficient in reliability. I appreciate that page reviewers may act in haste due to heavy workloads, but confusingly worded explanations will not entice editors to stay at Wikipedia. If you have comments on my response, leave a comment here and begin it with. Please remember to sign your reply with four tildes:. SiberianCat (talk) 09:07, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Rewiew my Discussion on Yemimas29 page
Dear SiberianCat, I have answered the discussion on my account page, please check it == Improving Isyana Sarasvati page == Yemimas29 (talk) 03:53, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

COVID-19 misinformation‎
It's great that you are making helpful edits - one word at a time in this case. Is it possible, though, to make them without being quite so snarky as you did here?

misusing the word 'purposefully' (the correct word in this context is 'purposely' or 'deliberately' or 'intentionally') for months undermines the credence this page, in my opinion. Sloppy writing doesn't generate credibility

I am betting that there was no intention to be sloppy.–CaroleHenson (talk) 04:57, 7 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Hello

Thanks for praising me for making edits. Such praise is exceedingly rare and gratefully appreciated, even if it's a politely prefatory buffer to criticism. I agree with your bet that there was no intention to be sloppy. In my limited lexicon, "snarky" suggests sarcastic mocking or irritability. There was neither sarcastic mocking nor irritability in my clumsy Edit Summary (I unwittingly omitted the preposition 'of'). I had just read through the Talk Page of Investigations into Covid Origins and the Talk Page of Covid Misinformation, digesting the debate in which some editors derisively dismissed the Wuhan lab leak scenario as pseudoscience and misinformation, despite assertions from some reputable scientists that the scenario merits further investigation. Considering that substantial time and energy had gone into debating and edit-warring over the issue, I found it interesting that the editors had not corrected the long-term misuse of "purposefully" in the lead (or does Wikipedia prefer 'lede'?) of the Misinformation page. I didn't single anyone out for criticism, nor did I suggest the sloppy writing was intentional. I'll reiterate that sloppy word choice and failure to notice/correct mistakes don't inspire credence in an article built on intense debate between people purporting to speak from the pulpit of scientific high ground. I'll endeavor to refrain from Edit Summary explanations that might be construed as "snarky". Thanks again for taking the time to give some praise. SiberianCat (talk) 06:41, 7 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Gotcha. You're exactly the kind of editor that is needed here, someone who can fine-tune articles. Thank you for your thoughtful response.–CaroleHenson (talk) 06:51, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Asterix & Obelix: The Middle Kingdom has been accepted
<div style="border:solid 1px #57DB1E; background:#E6FFE6; padding:1em; padding-top:0.5em; padding-bottom:0.5em; width:20em; color:black; margin-bottom: 1.5em; margin-left: 1.5em; width: 90%;"> Asterix & Obelix: The Middle Kingdom, 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 Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. 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=Asterix_%26_Obelix:_The_Middle_Kingdom 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! 2pou (talk) 21:12, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Asterix & Obelix: The Middle Kingdom


A tag has been placed on Asterix & Obelix: The Middle Kingdom requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://xn--80apgfhelckg6l.xn--p1ai/health/asterix-and-obelix-comics-in-bengali.php and https://hainburgin.at/wp-content/cache/ysnmrjr/acaf22-asterix-und-obelix-titelmusik. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

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.  Onel 5969  <i style="color:blue">TT me</i> 14:02, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
 * FYI, this tag was removed. You can see rationale by the declining admin at Talk:Asterix & Obelix: The Middle Kingdom

August Editathons with Women in Red
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:27, 23 July 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging

January 2022 Women in Red
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:03, 28 December 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging

February with Women in Red
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 15:11, 31 January 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging

March editathons
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:38, 27 February 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging

April Editathons from Women in Red
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:46, 22 March 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging

June events from Women in Red
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 09:22, 31 May 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Women in Red in July 2022
--Lajmmoore (talk) 15:49, 27 June 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Women in Red August 2022
--Lajmmoore (talk) 11:00, 29 July 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Women in Red in September 2022
--Lajmmoore (talk) 15:38, 31 August 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Women in Red October 2022
--Lajmmoore (talk) 15:02, 29 September 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Women in Red November 2022
--Lajmmoore (talk) 17:36, 26 October 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Women in Red in December 2022
--Lajmmoore (talk) 20:57, 26 November 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #AAA; background-color: ivory; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; "> 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) 01:26, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Women in Red January 2023
--Lajmmoore (talk) 18:04, 27 December 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Women in Red in February 2023
--Lajmmoore (talk) 07:29, 30 January 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Women in Red March 2023
--Lajmmoore (talk) 12:55, 26 February 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Women in Red April 2023
--Lajmmoore (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:53, 27 March 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Women in Red May 2023
--Lajmmoore (talk) 18:29, 27 April 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Women in Red - June 2023
--Lajmmoore (talk) 09:17, 28 May 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Women in Red July 2023
--Lajmmoore (talk) 07:44, 27 June 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Women in Red 8th Anniversary
--Lajmmoore (talk) 11:02, 18 July 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Women in Red August 2023
--Lajmmoore (talk) 19:26, 28 July 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

September 2023 at Women in Red
--Victuallers (talk) 16:59, 25 August 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Women in Red October 2023
--Lajmmoore (talk) 10:54, 29 September 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Women in Red - November 2023
--Lajmmoore (talk) 08:23, 26 October 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Women in Red December 2023
--Lajmmoore (talk) 20:24, 27 November 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Women in Red January 2024
--Lajmmoore (talk) 20:18, 28 December 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Women in Red February 2024
--Lajmmoore (talk 20:11, 28 January 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Women in Red March 2024
--Lajmmoore (talk 20:23, 25 February 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Women in Red April 2024
--Lajmmoore (talk 19:43, 30 March 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Women in Red May 2024
--Lajmmoore (talk 06:18, 28 April 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C
<section begin="announcement-content" />
 * You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. 

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,<section end="announcement-content" />

RamzyM (WMF) 23:10, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Women in Red June 2024
--Lajmmoore (talk 07:06, 23 May 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Women in Red August 2024
--Lajmmoore (talk 14:29, 30 June 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging