User talk:Matthead/Archive2010

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Matthead. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Hello, Matthead. Since I added your encounters with Sennen goroshi and his suspected sock IPs to automobile related articles and others as evidences for Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sennen goroshi, so your input would be highly appreciated. Thanks.--Caspian blue 15:34, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Hello Matthead! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 10 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 317 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

1. Klaus Ludwig - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
2. Jochen Neerpasch - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
3. Max Welti - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
4. Herbert Linge - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
5. Davy Jones (racing driver) - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
6. Ellen Lohr - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
7. Marc Duez - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
8. Justin Bell - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
9. Klaus Fischer - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
10. Giovanni Galli - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 05:41, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Hello, I thought I should let you know that I've requested a page move from Wolfgang Graf Berghe von Trips to Wolfgang von Trips, as you made the original move a few years ago.--Midgrid(talk) 21:10, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

I'd appreciate your comment on this.  Sandstein  09:08, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

To enforce an arbitration decision, you have been blocked for a period of 48 hours from editing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may appeal it by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below; but you should read our guide to appealing arbitration enforcement blocks first.  Sandstein  22:58, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

---

Notice to administrators: In a 2010 decision, the Committee held that "Administrators are prohibited from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as WP:AN or WP:ANI). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the proper page. Any administrator that overturns an enforcement action outside of these circumstances shall be subject to appropriate sanctions, up to and including desysopping, at the discretion of the Committee."

This is a block per WP:DIGWUREN#Discretionary sanctions for your nationalist WP:BATTLEground conduct and harrassment at [1] as discussed at [2]. Please stop this.  Sandstein  23:00, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

This is an unacceptable statement by Sandstein. Shame on you. -- Matthead  Discuß   00:05, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Matthead (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

What? Loosmark follows me around, provoking me repeatedly, and Sandstein blocks me? What a lop-sided act. No wonder admin Sandstein was recommended on the EEML mailing list, and Loosmark has chosen to complain on his talk, successfully. Somewhere, somebody is laughing his ass off.

Decline reason:

Procedural decline: A reviewing administrator is not allowed to unblock unilaterally someone who an administrator blocked to enforce an ArbCom decision. Please see WP:AEBLOCK for instructions on how to properly appeal this block. NW (Talk) 23:17, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Uh, what? Special rules? A blocking admin just has to claim he enforces an Arbcom decision, and the block must not be questioned by another admin? Beats me. -- Matthead  Discuß   23:25, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

There are indeed special rules, but that doesn't mean the block is unquestionable. Feel free to appeal using the {{sanction appeal}} template. NW (Talk) 23:27, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Ich denke am vielversprechendsten wäre es vorerst nur die FRG/GER Fusion zu unterstützenden. Wenn ich mir die zurückliegenden Versuche anschaue hier einen Konsens zu erlangen, denke ich, dass hier die Logik am meisten überzeugt. Wäre schön wenn Du die Variante unterstützen könntest. Es sieht so aus als wenn hier langer Atem und konsequentes Argumentieren notwendig wäre. Cheers KarlMathiessen (talk) 22:43, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Langer Atem und konsequentes Argumentieren reicht nicht wenn einige Leute ihre Meinung durchdrücken wollen, oder gar nur provozieren, während die schweigende Mehrheit schweigt und schweigt und schweigt ... Es wird wohl vonnöten sein, das Thema "Westdeutschland gibt es seit 1990 nicht mehr, und Deutschland gab es zwischen 1945 und 1990 nicht" mal grundsätzlich klären zu lassen, in einem RfC oder so. Aber da werden nur wenige konstruktiv mitmachen, dafür aber viele der POV-Ritter auftauchen. -- Matthead  Discuß   16:32, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Moved to AN. NW (Talk) 03:25, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

So that you know what is going on, the template you filled out is the start of a community discussion, which will take place on the Administrator's noticeboard. This discussion will examine the situation that led to this block, and determine if it should be lifted or (if it takes too long, which in this case is quite possible) noted in your block log as improper. If you have further comments to make in regards to this discussion, post them here, and they will be transferred over to AN by another editor. This procedure is required for Arbitration Enforcement blocks, as these are made under the authority of the Arbitration Committee, and cannot be unilaterally undone by any single administrator, only with the written consent of the Committee or a community consensus. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 03:32, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

At Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Appeal_by_Matthead, there is a trial in which I have no chance to defend myself, as I am still blocked, while Sandstein and Loosmark are allowed to participate. Very fair procedure. -- Matthead  Discuß   13:44, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Do you accept the terms outlined with respect to you here? Ncmvocalist (talk) 14:06, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Ncmvocalist, I appreciate your effort with this proposal, and your input at the now closed ANI discussion. Actually, me staying away from the article on West Germany (and related ones) might have benefits for me, as the three latest blocks of me were related to it - or rather to others having rather odd ideas about it, and me getting punished for not swallowing them with a smile. As for the question: Ncmvocalist, may I ask you if you would accept to avoid editing your home country article and talk page in exchange for an unrelated foreigner doing the same? -- Matthead  Discuß   22:21, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

I'd give such an area a break even if the other side continues to edit the article; an agreement of this sort is more of a rare luxury than something that commonly happens on-wiki. Staying away from the area you are most passionate about can be really useful, and I also think it would be beneficial for each individual. You may of course disagree, and you're not being forced to sign the agreement, but it's there...for now anyway. Do have a think about it. Regards, Ncmvocalist (talk) 09:49, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

It's not beneficial for Wikipedia if well-informed editors stay away from an article, and outsiders can establish their POV as they please. One of the biggest problems of Wikipedia is that the "civility" of the talk among editors is held in much higher esteem than the reliability of the actual content they add or remove. Editors who can not win a content dispute can still succeed by provoking opponents, and by finding a sympathetic admin who edit restricts or blocks opponents. Seen it many times, almost exclusively on the receiving end. Reasonable mainly non-passionate editors are driven away, and highly motivated POV warriors (like that one) remain (successful). So I simply could give up on Wikipedia, too. Or maybe I should only edit articles others are most passionate about, applying some needles and pins there with cold blood, until the blood of an editor who actually cares about the topic starts boiling? -- Matthead  Discuß   17:06, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

WP:ANI#Nationalist SPA.--Kotniski (talk) 13:18, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive605#Nationalist_SPA was about one of the countless socks of Serafin. -- Matthead  Discuß   22:43, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi Matthead, ich habe gesehen, dass du das Template:PGDA erstellt hast. Für die Open Library wurde das Template:OL von einem Benutzer angelegt, der leider nicht mehr aktiv ist. Hast du eine Idee, wie man die Vorlage verbessern kann? Deine gefällt mir wesentlich besser. Gruß --Kolja21 (talk) 03:40, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

PS: Da die OL-Vorlage (zu?) vielseitig ist, habe ich jetzt - analog zur dt. Wikipedia - eine getrennte Vorlage für Autoren (Template:OL author) erstellt. Hintergrund: In der neuen Version der Open Library wird es möglich sein, auch Werke (einschließlich aller Ausgaben) zu verlinken.[3] Gruß --Kolja21 (talk) 00:59, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Mit dem Techno-kram kenne ich mich nicht so gut aus. Zudem scheint sich bei OL auch noch einiges tun müssen. -- Matthead  Discuß   22:44, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for creating an article about this important encyclopedia.

Apparently you did not like my changes.

1. What did you mean by "You can not make a copy&paste move"? I did it, so you must mean that my procedure violated some guideline. What is the preferred way of accomplishing the switch between 2 pages? This is a question about procedure, not about whether or not a switch between 2 pages is the right thing to do.

2. The article Universal Cyclopædia & Atlas includes material about Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography. The two works are unrelated. Do you object to removing the irrelevant material about the latter work?

3. Why do you not want Universal Cyclopædia & Atlas redirected to Universal Cyclopaedia and Atlas? The latter is the title printed on the actual work, and I don't see why saving 2 characters by replacing "and" with "&" would be your preference.

4. Is there an online edition of the "1902 edition" that "is now in the public domain"? I would be grateful if you could provide a link.

I found some websites where "Universal Cyclopaedia and Atlas" was confused with Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography. I suspect the date 1902 comes from the work on American biography, since "Universal Cyclopædia and Atlas" editions are 1900, 1901, 1903, and 1905.

I found "JOHNSON'S UNIVERSAL CYCLOPEDIA" (1898) at: http://www.archive.org/stream/johnsonsunivers01pubgoog/johnsonsunivers01pubgoog_djvu.txt

I am not seeking a battle, I just want to understand your reasons for undoing my changes.

I'll watch this page for your response.

Well, please see Help:Moving a page for the guideline. It is explained there why copying/pasting is not the proper thing to do. As for the content, I can't remember details, so please fix it. -- Matthead  Discuß   01:31, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the quick reply. I shall read the guideline and fix the details. Xophist (talk) 04:18, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

You know what Matthead? I'm going to do nothing and leave the inaccuracies on your page. The guideline is the biggest load of bureaucratic bullshit I've seen in a long time. Guess I'm not cut out for this type of picayune nonsense. Thanks anyway. Xophist (talk) 04:27, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Sorry about the bureaucratic guideline, but complaining at its talk could lead to its improvement, maybe. Also, leaving the inaccuracies on my page does not help anybody, while putting it on the related article talk might. -- Matthead  Discuß   22:48, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

You are correct Matthead. I shall take a look at it again, and at least remove the inaccuracies. Perhaps after I make some comments on the talk page, someone with more tolerance for such procedures will initiate the redirection. Thanks for your opinion. Xophist (talk) 03:01, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi, Matthead. Because you participated in Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 January 18#Richard Tylman, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Tylman (4th nomination). Cunard (talk) 02:07, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm sticking to the proposal to let uninvolved editors decide, as they now have a chance to succeed. Unlike in prior cases, some supporters of the subject are currently banned from editing. -- Matthead  Discuß   22:51, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Richard Tylman was deleted. -- Matthead  Discuß   19:14, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

• Matthead (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Considering that your contributions and your block log show that you are habitually engaging in battleground-like conduct related to nationalist issues involving Poland and Germany, that you have been repeatedly sanctioned for related disruption under WP:DIGWUREN, and that you now show up on my talk page making demands for action against others even while being yourself, again, involved in nationalist edit wars at Wilhelm Gnapheus, Rübezahl, Henricus Petrus and Mauritius Ferber, I consider your mode of editing in this topic area to be persistently disruptive. For this reason, per WP:DIGWUREN#Discretionary sanctions, you are hereby indefinitely banned from the topic of Poland and Poles, broadly construed. For the avoidance of doubt, the topic includes subjects which are or were only partially Polish, or whose Polishness is disputed (by you or others), and the ban includes all articles, other pages, parts of pages and discussions related to the topic, and does not contain exceptions for reverting vandalism or WP:BLP violations (but these may be reported to the appropriate noticeboard instead). Be advised that any violations of this ban may result in immediate long blocks. This sanction may be appealed as described at WP:DIGWUREN#Discretionary sanctions.  Sandstein  20:59, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm waiting some time to see whether you retract that. -- Matthead  Discuß   22:34, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

In vain, hardly surprising. Only four days ago, I had asked asked you, Sandstein, about a certain user who has been warned. Since, said user has returned, and has just been asked to redact a personal attack. Wonder what will happen next. -- Matthead  Discuß   18:50, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Well, Future Perfect at Sunrise blocked indefinite (Apparent ban-evading EEML sock.-- Matthead  Discuß   19:13, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

On May 5, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Warsaw Lyceum, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

I'd report this 3RR violation myself but it's too late in the day for me to figure out the instructions! [4] [5] [6]

He's also been warned again for WP:BATTLE behaviour ("Continued misuse of this forum as a battleground will result in sanctions.")[7] despite already being under a DIGWUREN Discretionary sanctions warning for, among other things, violating WP:BATTLE [8]. Is the guy not subject to normal WP policies? Varsovian (talk) 22:29, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Strangely enough, although his initial reaction to my 3RR warning on his talkpage was to deny that he had reverted me "even once" and to accuse me of making "bogus accusation." [9], he then backed off slightly, stating "I don't remember reverting any of your edits. Please show me the diff which of your edits have I reverted and I will gladly undo it." [10]. But after I posted the above message to you, he self-reverted [11]. Of course he couldn't just self-revert, he had to threaten to take action "returned the collapse thing to avoid the usual wiki-drama. i still don't agree with it and will raise the issue at an appropriate board later" [12]. He then went on to prove his commitment to WP:CIVIL with a post which simply stated "Varsovian, you have just re-defined the word epic fail." [13] Varsovian (talk) 13:20, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

I have mentioned you in a reply to an AE request made by Loosmark. [14] Varsovian (talk) 11:19, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

AE is so boooring. -- Matthead  Discuß   20:37, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to England and Germany football rivalry, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. 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. TFOWR 14:51, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, but as I edits since 2004, it is a little belated. -- Matthead  Discuß   20:37, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Template:Normdaten has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 00:22, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

One wonders why some are so highly motivated to get useful templates deleted. -- Matthead  Discuß   20:40, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Matthead (sorry this keyboard doesnt have brackets on it). Radek (or tildas) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Radeksz (talk • contribs) 21:52, 27 July 2010

BTW: any Wikipedia edit window has a "Wiki markup" section that can be used with a mouse or touchpad or whatever moves the pointer/cursor. While this remark by Radek is not as talkative as the last one, it is about as friendly.

So yet another AE drama? Well, AE requires that a "request may be declined without further action if insufficient or unclear information is provided in the "Request" section below". This AE entry by Radek was judged severely malformed by an admin. Also, the big colorful box at the top of the page states "Please be aware that as a user requesting arbitration enforcement, it is your responsibility to supply all information required for administrators to determine whether enforcement is required, as described in the instructions. Your request may otherwise be declined without further action". Thus, I'm convinced that a neutral admin will decline it without further ado. -- Matthead  Discuß   21:02, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Matthead If this is in fact not you you have my sincere apologies in advance. I really mean that. Radek — Preceding unsigned comment added by Radeksz (talk • contribs) 02:56, 30 July 2010

There have been 24h blocks for trolling a closed 3RR case. How about trolling a closed SPI case? -- Matthead  Discuß   21:13, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Template:Personendaten. Since you had some involvement with the Template:Personendaten redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Magioladitis (talk) 12:03, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

To enforce an arbitration decision, you have been blocked for a period of 1 week from editing . Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, please read our guide to appealing arbitration enforcement blocks and follow the instructions there to appeal your block.  Sandstein  06:04, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

---

Notice to administrators: In a 2010 decision, the Committee held that "Administrators are prohibited from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as WP:AN or WP:ANI). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the proper page. Any administrator that overturns an enforcement action outside of these circumstances shall be subject to appropriate sanctions, up to and including desysopping, at the discretion of the Committee."

For an explanation of this block, see this AE thread.  Sandstein  06:04, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

One wonders how long I would get blocked if I would slap {{db-redirtypo}} not only to ErnstMayr, but also to this redirect created by this NPOV move? -- Matthead  Discuß   02:14, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Matthead. I won't change it back, but I disagree with you about the decimal format in List of Nordschleife lap times (racing). Even though the track is in Germany, this is the English-language Wikipedia, so I believe the times and speeds should be written using English-language punctuation, i.e. using a full stop as a decimal point, not a comma. Note that when I made my changes, I tried to only change the values in the tables and to leave the values in the references as they were, but I might have accidentally changed some of the references as well. DH85868993 (talk) 08:51, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your contribution to the discussion at Talk:Autobahn#Split_or_Merger on whether Autobahn should be split to articles Motorways of Switzerland and German Autobahns. The proposal was made a very long time ago and appears to have gained a reasonable amount of support. It is now time to bring the discussion to a close. Please add your final comments at Talk:Autobahn#Split or Merger so the proposal can be actioned or abandoned. Thanks, Nankai (talk) 21:10, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

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

Non-notable per WP:CLUB.

While all 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. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Shire Reeve (talk) 10:28, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Restored as disamb. -- Matthead  Discuß   10:48, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi, Matthead! How are you doing?
Send me (spacecadet123@inorbit.com) your email, I've got a couple of scans I want to share with you. No wars, no arguments, no points to make - just a couple of WIKI colleagues sharing interesting stuff. Space Cadet (talk) 19:35, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Matthead. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

You violated your topic ban: [15] --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 14:10, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

To enforce an arbitration decision, you have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing arbitration enforcement blocks and follow the instructions there to appeal your block. NW (Talk) 20:47, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

---

Notice to administrators: In a March 2010 decision, the Committee held that "Administrators are prohibited from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as WP:AN or WP:ANI). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the proper page. Any administrator that overturns an enforcement action outside of these circumstances shall be subject to appropriate sanctions, up to and including desysopping, at the discretion of the Committee."

The article European Federation of American Football has been proposed for deletion. The proposed-deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all 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. —Bagumba (talk) 01:21, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited List of Nürburgring fatal accidents, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Herbert Müller (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) 10:45, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Template:DM has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:48, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

You edited the Template:NDB some time ago. The web link and the structure in the Template:NDB do not work anymore because of a change in the web address. Is it possible to fix that? Thanks! --Stone (talk) 06:34, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

As a courtesy note I informing that I mentioned your name. M.K. (talk) 11:30, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. Hardly surprising, it's about the hundred and umpteenth Arbcom case by or against the usual suspects. No wonder I've lost all confidence in Wikipedia and Arbcom, no matter who is serving there. For many years now it's always the same old trouble with the same old small group of Polish non-Cabal, non-EEML etc. editors. Despite the overwhelming evidence piled up since at least 2006, they are still allowed to use Wikipedia for their agenda, which is promoting their nation and their vain egos by bullying others. So Königsberg Krolewiec was a Polish city now. Thank you very much, Wikipedia. What's next, Drezno? -- Matthead  Discuß   19:53, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Carl Diercke, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to a nonexistent page, or a redirect loop.

If you can fix this redirect to point to an existing Wikipedia page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you also fix the redirect. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. - Camyoung54 talk 22:03, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Diercke, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to a nonexistent page, or a redirect loop.

If you can fix this redirect to point to an existing Wikipedia page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you also fix the redirect. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. - Camyoung54 talk 22:03, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Islamic Council in Germany. Since you had some involvement with the Islamic Council in Germany redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). PanchoS (talk) 09:27, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

[16].  Volunteer Marek  15:41, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

To enforce an arbitration decision, and for violating your Poland topic ban,

you have been blocked from editing for 2 weeks. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block. If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing arbitration enforcement blocks and then appeal your block using the instructions there.  Sandstein  16:06, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

---

Reminder to administrators: In March 2010, ArbCom adopted a procedure prohibiting administrators "from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as WP:AN or WP:ANI). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the proper page." Administrators who reverse an arbitration enforcement block, such as this one, without clear authorisation will be summarily desysopped.

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Paul Rosenberg (publisher) 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/Paul Rosenberg (publisher) 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. j⚛e decker^talk 03:20, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Koblenz monument 19729s.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 07:02, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Template:Infobox medical condition has been nominated for merging with Template:Authority control. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Alakzi (talk) 21:52, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

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) 22:15, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cartography, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Mine, Church and Burg. 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) 11:05, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello. A policy regarding the removal of "advanced rights" (administrator, bureaucrat, etc.) was adopted by community consensus in 2013. According to this policy, the stewards are reviewing activity on wikis with no inactivity policy.

You meet the inactivity criteria (no edits and no log actions for 2 years) on the wiki listed above. Since that wiki does not have its own rights review process, the global one applies.

If you want to keep your rights, you should inform the community of the wiki about the fact that the stewards have sent you this information about your inactivity. If the community has a discussion about it and then wants you to keep your rights, please contact the stewards at m:Stewards' noticeboard, and link to the discussion of the local community, where they express their wish to continue to maintain the rights.

If you wish to resign your rights, you can reply here or request removal of your rights on Meta.

If there is no response at all after approximately one month, stewards will proceed to remove your administrator and/or bureaucrat rights. In ambiguous cases, stewards will evaluate the responses and will refer a decision back to the local community for their comment and review. If you have any questions, please contact the stewards. Rschen7754 20:26, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Meyers Online has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:55, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Matthead. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Template:Authority control has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Fram (talk) 14:56, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Matthead. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I'm Slatersteven. Matthead, thanks for creating Konrad von Erlichshausen!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Needs a lot more sources. If you want a hand give us a shout.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Slatersteven (talk) 14:17, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Template:NDB/Nativeno 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) 15:42, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Matthead. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Center for Peace and Civil Society 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/Center for Peace and Civil Society 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. Störm (talk) 12:17, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Center for Peace and Civil Society 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 {{{value1}}}. 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 Wikipedia: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 Wikipedia: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. Largoplazo (talk) 12:25, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

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

Delete Dictionary definition is not a sufficiently notable concept to warrant an English WP article.

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. UnitedStatesian (talk) 19:56, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

The article Michel Ferté 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 request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Mdaniels5757 (talk) 17:58, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Briggs Cunningham 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. 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 Wikipedia: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 Wikipedia: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. The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 15:38, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article TeslaBjorn 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/TeslaBjorn 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.

Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 06:38, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:03, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

An article you recently created, European Association of Motorcycle Manufacturers, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs citations from reliable, independent sources to estalish notability. (?) 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 "Draft:" 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. Kleuske (talk) 19:43, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. Thanks for improving Wikipedia. Not. Move yourself to draftspace, or anywhere else.  Matthead  Discuß   23:29, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Natural gas, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chimera. 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) 06:14, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Otto von Nostitz and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 19#Otto von Nostitz until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:32, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Queequeg, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lay.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Zero Motorcycles, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ZF.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Renat 12:21, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

The fact that it is a German surname does not change the fact that the term, nowadays, refers to Putin, most often. We do have disambiguation pages, exactly for this kind of stuff. Please stop. Thanks. Kleuske (talk) 12:31, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Matthead. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:European Association of Motorcycle Manufacturers, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 00:03, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Template:Hochmeister has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Izno (talk) 07:10, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Just a reminder that your signature contains obsolete font tags. They create Linter errors, and it is advised that you change your signature to  [[User:Matthead|Matthead]] [[User_talk:Matthead|<small style="color:#ffff00;background:#0000cc;"> Discuß </small>]]  ASAP. Your signature also uses &nbsp;, and the replacement signature doesn't render those even when nowiki is used. However that is a simplified version of your sig; if you want to use &nbsp;, use the replacement signature &nbsp;[[User:Matthead|Matthead]]&nbsp;[[User_talk:Matthead|<small style="color:#ffff00;background:#0000cc;">&nbsp;Discuß </small>]]&nbsp;.

The purpose of this message is because Linter errors affect the way the page looks, and with a lot of errors, the page may render badly. To reduce Linter errors, please change your signature. See WP:SIGFONT for more info.

If the software doesn't accept my replacement signature, let me know, and if that's the case, unfortunately you may have to change it to something else. Sheep (talk) 17:41, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Nicolaus Copernicus/Archive 3 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 30 § Nicolaus Copernicus/Archive 3 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 06:27, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Nicolaus Copernicus/Archive 2 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 30 § Nicolaus Copernicus/Archive 2 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 06:27, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Paul Lewis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Out of the Blue.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

The redirect Albert, Margrave of Meissen (1934–2012) 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 June 15 § Albert, Margrave of Meissen (1934–2012) until a consensus is reached. DrKay (talk) 07:19, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi Matthead, I've posted a "citation needed" warning on a statement you edited many years ago in the article on the Duchy of Troppau, which appears to be the result of personal speculation. The statement reads: 'After the 1620 Battle of White Mountain Prince Karl also acquired the Duchy of Krnov, and ever since the heads of the Princely Family of Liechtenstein bear the title "Duke of Troppau and Jägerndorf".' Stating "ever since" seems to conflict with the attribution, which is generally reported, of the ducal title to Maria Theresia of Liechtenstein who was no head of the family (and to her husband and son). I wonder if you could please indicate the source from which your statement is taken, and perhaps provide some information, if you have any, on the rules followed in the duchy for hereditary succession (was the Salic law in force?). Cheers. Jeanambr (talk) 13:20, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

An automated process has detectedthat when you recently edited 1970 12 Hours of Sebring, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page NART.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:52, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of races at the Nürburgring 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 races at the Nürburgring 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.

SpacedFarmer (talk) 16:33, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

The redirect Gelo Racing 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/2024 February 29 § Gelo Racing until a consensus is reached. SpacedFarmer (talk) 21:15, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sacramento Surge, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Frankfurt Galaxy and Barcelona Dragons.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:07, 4 April 2024 (UTC)