User talk:WezouskyMike

A belated welcome!


Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Bbraxtonlee! I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:


 * Introductory tutorial
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * Writing an article
 * Five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Community portal
 * Help pages
 * The Teahouse (newcomer help)
 * Main help desk

Need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

If you don't already know, you should sign your posts on talk pages by using four tildes ( ~ ) to insert your username and the date.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! Sdrqaz (talk) 15:41, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Prime minister list
Hello, can you explain your statement that we "don't usually add prime ministers to royals"? This seems to be a common thing to do--see Juan Carlos I and Margrethe II of Denmark, for example. On George V, the field was present since at least 2019 (I didn't check back further in the history). Was there a discussion somewhere that deprecated its usage? If so, it should probably be removed from the infobox template. Thanks, Aoi (青い) (talk) 20:55, 9 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Hello! I probably should've specified, we usually don't add prime ministers to the UK-realm royals. While you may be right about George V's infobox, the rest of them never had it until this month. There is no point in having it because each country has different laws, and technically a country in the realm could have a President instead of a PM.
 * Bbraxtonlee (talk) 21:47, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Bbraxtonlee (talk) 21:47, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Brigette Peterson moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Brigette Peterson, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of " " before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. FishandChipper 🐟🍟 05:31, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Elections in California
Hey, since I've seen you edit a couple of election articles in California (mostly just the L.A. mayoral and S.F. district attorney), what do you think about using the word "nonpartisan" within these types of elections in both the infoboxes and election boxes? They used to be on the L.A. mayoral elections going back to the 2013 one but have since been removed by an anonymous user who said that they removed it because elections are nonpartisan (which they are, but I can't understand why they literally removed "Nonpartisan" on the pages, especially when it looks better imo). reppoptalk 07:31, 14 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Hello. I removed it from SF just for consistency from the 2019 regular race but I agree about the nonpartisan label. What I disagree with is the edits of putting the "alliances" in the infobox. It is incorrect, as they just put the alliances for what they are registered as. And, we really only use alliances for electoral fusion. Thanks for reaching out as I have been curious as well. :) Bbraxtonlee (talk) 17:48, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Oh, I wasn't talking about alliances (I don't think they should be added either), I was just talking about infoboxes and election boxes looking more like this, which a user removed the parties altogether, which I think is worse imo. reppoptalk 17:53, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Hello. Sorry for the late response. I agree with you, we should always put the party on the infobox for elections (even if it's a nonpartisan race). I know you weren't talking about the alliance thing I was just saying that too because I feel like people on Wikipedia are just starting to edit what they think is best but in the end it just ends up being a good faith edit. But yeah I definitely agree with putting a party in the infobox.
 * Bbraxtonlee (talk) 21:27, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * An update for update's sake: The user under a new IP address (has reversed all the changes, still saying things like "removing political parties as all elections in California are non-partisan Do Not add political partys." I've attempted to start conversation multiple times with the many addresses they had but they've only pushed back or ignored me. reppoptalk 01:43, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Bbraxtonlee (talk) 21:27, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * An update for update's sake: The user under a new IP address (has reversed all the changes, still saying things like "removing political parties as all elections in California are non-partisan Do Not add political partys." I've attempted to start conversation multiple times with the many addresses they had but they've only pushed back or ignored me. reppoptalk 01:43, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Brigette Peterson for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Brigette Peterson 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/Brigette Peterson 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 until the discussion has finished. Bearcat (talk) 13:49, 14 November 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) 01:50, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

2023 Speaker of the United States House of Representatives election
Hi there, I appreciate your improvements to this article. For the infobox, could you please self-revert, or remove the others columns entirely? There's clearly no consensus on the talk page for which candidates should be included beyond the party nominees, while there is explicit opposition to including Donald Trump and candidates receiving less than five votes and receiving less than 5% of the votes. It's unlikely we will have a resolution soon, especially if the voting continues for days, so we should have as neutral of an infobox as possible for now, which would probably be having one column for Jeffries, one for McCarthy, and one for 'Others'. Thanks. Onetwothreeip (talk) 12:17, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:2023_Speaker_of_the_United_States_House_of_Representatives_election#Trump_in_infobox Bbraxtonlee (talk) 12:22, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

I added my own section to the talk page in which I think is the best. Don’t get me wrong that the Infobox is a mess. Bbraxtonlee (talk) 12:24, 6 January 2023 (UTC)


 * We should keep the infobox to a minimal neutral version for now, not because it is the version that you or I may prefer, but because it would be the most stable while discussion takes place. Onetwothreeip (talk) 12:25, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Now that I think, there wasn’t a consensus on the Donald Trump one lol. My section on the talk page supported the 5% rule continuation, and that is the general rule for Infoboxes. However, good luck as the most active Wiki users tend to be the most biteful. Bbraxtonlee (talk) 12:27, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Wikimedia US Mountain West online meeting
Wikipedia users in the United States Mountain West and High Plains will hold an online meeting from 8:00 to 9:00 PM MST, Tuesday evening, February 14, 2023, at meet.google.com/kfu-topq-zkd. Anyone interested in the history, articles, or photographs of our region is encouraged to attend.

If you don't wish to receive these invitations any more, please remove your username from the Meetup/US Mountain West/Invitation list. Thanks.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:42, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Brigette Peterson for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Brigette Peterson 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/Brigette Peterson& 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 until the discussion has finished. SecretName101 (talk) 01:37, 9 April 2023 (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) 00:55, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C

 * 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,

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