Stevage

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mawson Trail, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Wilmington, Melrose and Craddock. 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) 09:22, 7 October 2014 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for uploading File:Leaflet example.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:15, 12 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Great Dividing Trail, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Daylesford. 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) 09:06, 3 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

Wikipedia does not allow editing through open proxies or anonymising services. This is partially because such services are depressingly abused routinely (especially by banned users) and partially because Wikipedia identifies anonymous users by their IP addresses. While there is a workaround it isn't granted unless there's a reason editing through a closed proxy/with the anonymising service off is impossible. —Jeremy v^_^v ^Bori! 07:33, 27 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

It seems so strange that editing is prevented on the basis of IP first, rather than account. Surely the fact that I'm logged in with my not-banned account is enough to verify that I'm not an unwanted user. Hmph. Stevage 11:31, 27 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

IP blocks can actually be set to allow registered users to edit through them. Open proxy blocks, however, generally aren't flagged with "anon. only". —Jeremy v^_^v ^Bori! 19:01, 27 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

You might like to check your recent addition to the above - it has been removed! Regards 15:43, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Stevage. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "GeoPackage".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation 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 edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

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

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Puffin ^{Let's talk!} 08:53, 26 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

 — Chris Woodrich (talk)) 00:02, 22 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ibex (band) 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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ibex (band) until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Karst (talk) 12:18, 20 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

A tag has been placed on Financial Risk Manager, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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 removed 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 deleting administrator. DGG ( talk ) 06:47, 17 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ibex (band) 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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ibex (band) (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Karst (talk) 10:32, 26 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

The article The Open Stage has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Doesn't appear to be independently notable with significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Possibly merge to the University of Melbourne.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Boneymau (talk) 21:57, 16 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Open Stage 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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Open Stage until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Boneymau (talk) 22:00, 16 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

 Template:Hydroelectric plants in Australia has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 15:04, 22 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hi Stevage,

I'm Pau Giner, a member of the Wikimedia Design team. We are interested in providing better support to some of the activities that experienced editors do. In particular, we want to understand better how backlogs work and the issues that users may find when adding the work to be done, and finding/completing this work.

We are organising a series of short interview sessions, and we consider you as an experienced editor are an ideal candidate to participate. In order to participate you can fill this form that collects the basic information for us to schedule a session and contact you back. If you know other users that may provide useful information in this area, feel free to recommend them to participate too.

The sessions will use Google Hangouts, which is a browser-based videoconference tool, but using a camera is totally optional. We use this tool since it will allow you to share your screen and show how you do your on-wiki activities in more detail. If you prefer a different format/tool, please let us know.

Thanks! --Pginer-WMF (talk) 10:08, 28 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

The article Factual (data company) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails notability criterion (see WP:CORP)

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.  --Lambiam 10:45, 5 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

A quick note: There is a meetup in Fed Square this Sunday at 6pm. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 00:58, 22 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi there,

I've been having difficulty lately with some users who have limited experience with hypertext, and who don't really understand the concept of WP:EASTEREGG.

The typical situation is:

1. I'll make a completely uncontentious edit correcting some arbitrarily-titled link.
2. A random user will undo it claiming that it's not an easter egg.
3. I'll make the edit again, point out that it is an easter egg, linking WP:EASTEREGG.
4. They'll undo it again, claiming that it's not that type of easter egg.
5. I'll make the edit again, pointing out that it is.
6. Again they'll undo it, this time saying that the whole WP:EASTEREGG article isn't any good, and that those guidelines anyway are just made up by random passing strangers anyway.
7. Wikipedia slowly devolves into TVTropes.

I think this interaction exposes one of the fundamental weaknesses of Wikipedia: Often established formatting practices will be overruled by the consensus on inexperienced users. And as you can see above, it makes no difference whether you can clearly show them the established formatting practices.

In order to help solve this, I've been trying to find good references to link/anchor style guidelines. But it occurred to me that users such as yourself (who've worked on the Wikipedia:Piped link article) might have some even better references for me to learn from, or possibly point out where I may have misinterpreted the guidelines in some way.

Kind regards,

InternetMeme (talk) 01:36, 7 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Joseph Seipelt 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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph Seipelt 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. Kirbanzo (talk) 00:44, 8 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Bibliography (Climbing). Since you had some involvement with the Bibliography (Climbing) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. UnitedStatesian (talk) 03:52, 5 March 2019 (UTC)Reply

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect How to climb. Since you had some involvement with the How to climb redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. — the Man in Question (in question) 05:35, 8 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of rivers of Egypt 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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of rivers of Egypt 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. ~ Tridwoxi (talk) (contribs) 18:33, 6 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

  A discussion is taking place to address the redirect User:Stevage/rdtest. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 November 16#User:Stevage/rdtest until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Hog Farm _Bacon 16:12, 16 November 2020 (UTC)Reply

The article Gevrik has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not a notable style of cheese, more likely a non-notable product made by a single producer.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — HTGS (talk) 02:47, 1 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

— HTGS (talk) 22:27, 1 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

The article North Road Trail has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence this is a notable bike trail, no obvious merge target

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Star Mississippi 18:09, 23 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

  A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Well I Never. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 1#Well I Never until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. ––FormalDude talk 06:56, 1 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Eastmain (talk • contribs) 12:02, 22 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

The article Sunopsis has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence of notability per WP:NCORP, and the article reads like a corporate website or sales brochure.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. FalconK (talk) 05:37, 9 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

A tag has been placed on Category:Towns in South Gippsland indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:32, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

  The redirect Zero-entry has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 March 23 § Zero-entry until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 22:17, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

The article FinalBuilder has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:NSOFT

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 09:00, 25 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

Category:Climbing books has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it 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. Aszx5000 (talk) 16:29, 5 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Just for your information, another editor has PRODed Tiger Rail Trail. Fork99 (talk) 07:38, 7 September 2024 (UTC)Reply