User talk:Asav

Hunger

Hey, got your message about the new hunger article, however I'm not sure what steps I have to take to get it replaced. Wouldn't just copying your article into that article suffice, deleting the copyvio? Since it's the christmas holidays I'm a bit busy for wikipedia right now, but I'll try to get around to it soon. Thanks! --Vanguard 16:30, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

It seems to me that the copyvio was removed from the copyvio page anyway for some reason, or maybe I just didn't look hard enough. I'm sure no-one will notice, or care, that it's been wiped and a better entry put in place :-). Thanks for your time and effort! --Vanguard 16:46, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Bestseller

Hi. A little while ago, you added some interesting stuff to the bestseller article. Can you cite sources (for example, a question was posed in Talk about not finding any evidence for "Werther eau de cologne" bit). Thanks! --Tsavage 21:04, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

At the moment, I don't know what merits what... Cheers! --Tsavage 00:53, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Oscar De La Hoya

You removed content from the Oscar De La Hoya page without stating a reason in the edit summary. Please do that. Thank you. (Planecrash111 (talk) 15:25, 25 June 2008 (UTC))

There seems to be a glitch in the system. I acually added a section (Charitable work), and if you look at the revision history, the text was removed by an anon user (216.132.15.200), not me. But when you click the actual edit, it's attributed to me. I was responsible for the previous edit, not this one. I don't have time right now, but I think this should be reported as a bug. I'll get back to it, but feel free to report it as such. Thanks for your feedback! Asav (talk) 16:27, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Elizabeth Rauscher & Nassim Haramein

Please establish the notability of these people under the correct guidelines (ex. WP:BIO) and include better citations than just self-published works and websites (WP:SELFPUB). It would be preferable if you could state the reason for notability in the talk pages of the respective articles. Maintain your pages and participate in the discussions or else your pages will be proposed for deletion. Ace blazer (talk) 16:21, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Excuse me, that was my mistake! Ace blazer (talk) 00:46, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Everlast Logo.svg

Thanks for uploading Image:Everlast Logo.svg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
• That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 02:26, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

David Mason image

Thanks for catching that and removing it. I realize now on second look that it isn't David Mason... I somehow managed to confuse him with Kean W. Spencer, probably due to the poor image quality. I've already nominated the File:David Mason.png for deletion... I'll have to look at my video of the poetry conference a second time to see if I captured the real David Mason. —CodeHydro 23:36, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Hydro, but you give me too much credit. I'm an OTRS volunteer, and was actually just acting on a message in that system :) Asav (talk) 01:20, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Benoît Mandelbrot

Hello. Benoît Mandelbrot's death has to be verified per WP:V. Further, per WP:BLP unreliable sources such as Twitter, Facebook, etc. cannot be accepted. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 10:25, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

File:Nikospiperis.gif

Hello. I'm puzzled by File:Nikospiperis.gif. It seems to have turned from a GIF into a PNG when you uploaded it on Commons as commons:File:Nikospiperis.png. Angus McLellan (Talk) 13:05, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

I converted it to to png, as it is "the Wikimedia format". I obviosuly should have renamed it accordingly. Blame it on OTRS overload :) I'll file a request to have it renamed and I'll do the link fixing. Thanks for pointing it out! Asav (talk) 18:22, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Seems it's already been done. Asav (talk) 18:53, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Gabrielle Wilde ID

Thanks for the correction to the Gabrielle Wilde page. I moved the Nina Eichinger image to her own page and replaced it with the proper one for Gabrielle. Now I have a favour to ask - take a look at the uncropped shot of that scene with Gabrielle and Nina at File:Three Musketeers balcony shot.jpg. Can you identify any of the unknowns in there (the three people to the left of Christop Waltz and the one to the right of Nina)? Tabercil (talk) 15:45, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm afraid I haven't got the faintest idea! The whole matter was initiated by an email to OTRS, so I just acted on behalf of the user who wrote to us (after making sure the statement in the email was correct.) Asav (talk) 01:13, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

You sure the person in file:Gabrielle Wilde as Constance.jpg (as opposed to File:Nina Eichinger.jpg) is not Gabrielle? I'm looking at this link where she's identified as Gabrielle... Tabercil (talk) 13:46, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

That image (file:Gabrielle Wilde as Constance.jpg) indeed seems to depict Ms Wilde. However, when you try to enter it in the infobox, the image of Ms Eichinger reappears, just as it does if you have a look at your revision on the Ms Wilde's history page. I just tried to reinstate the image file:Gabrielle Wilde as Constance.jpg, and again the Eichinger file appeared. I suspect there is a problem with the Commons Cache. Asav (talk) 20:21, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Hmm... that may be the case. I did a rename of the image to File:Gabrielle Wilde in Three Musketeers.jpg (nice thing about being an admin there <G>) and successfully inserted it into the article under the new name. Tabercil (talk) 23:34, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

What page?

At WP:AN you say 'also see this page', but it links back to itself. What did you mean to link to? I'm also guessing you need to ask elsewhere to solve your problem, but I'm not sure where. Dougweller (talk) 09:33, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

It links back to WP:AN because it's a copy of my entry in the Indonesian WP, in case the admins there want to have a look at the English noticeboard. The reason I entered it on the WP:AN is that it looks very much like the previous problem discussed there. Asav (talk) 12:36, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, now I understand. Dougweller (talk) 18:34, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

OTRS complaint: Bader Picture

On 24 December, I received a complaint regarding copyright infringement; however, the aforementioned file, found on the Alfred Bader page was uploaded by the author himself (Amrit Ahluwalia). Accordingly, no copyright has been violated and I ask that you withdraw your complaint to OTRS. Thank you- 6mat1 (talk) 19:23, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

I work on the OTRS team, as you can verify through my user page. I have acted upon a complaint; I did not file it. Please do not upload images when you do not have the copyright to them. If you do not cease this activity, I will ask to have you blocked from further Wikimedia Commons uploads. Furthermore, notices on your talk page should be answered there. Asav (talk) 21:14, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

User pages

I noticed you reverted The Darkest Wolf's deletions of his warnings. Not that it matters, the dude has been banned, but that reversion was perfectly acceptable. See WP:OWNTALK#User_talk_pages where it says: "Users may freely remove comments from their own talk pages, though archiving is preferred. They may also remove some content in archiving. The removal of a warning is taken as evidence that the warning has been read by the user. This specifically includes both registered and anonymous users." (bolding mine)

I got caught on this earlier. Just thought I'd let you know. Have a good evening. Regards, --Manway (talk) 05:41, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

I was actually aware of that :) But I thought the warning, ban notice et al. deserved to be displayed as a deterrent for the world to see. I don't exactly recall how I came across the page; some OTRS copyvio or vandalism complaint, I suspect. Asav (talk) 15:25, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Good enough. Nice to make your acquaintance. Regards, --Manway (talk) 15:36, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

File:Van and dog.jpg

I had a comment and question about this image: First, please be careful to tag the license appropriately per the ticket, you used a different CC license than they specified. Second, was there a particular reason you removed the OTRS tag completely? VernoWhitney (talk) 21:25, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

No, I did that by mistake. Sorry. But the permission read "I/We agree to publication of the photo under the terms of {{cc-zero}} — Creative commons zero 1.0 license.", so I applied the the {{self2|cc-by-sa-1.0}} tag by mistake. I've resaved the page with the complete and correct tag, i.e. both ticket# and license. Asav (talk) 21:47, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I figured it was something like that. Cheers! VernoWhitney (talk) 22:04, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Peter Oborne

Hi, I saw you do a revert on the Oborne article yesterday, but the Zimbabwe item has been deleted again today for the umpteenth time and I'm tired of undoing. The deletes are very specific and seem to be clustering around a set of anonymous IPs (I've yet to create my own account)but there was a specific account related deletion by one Henrydelisle who I suspect is at the heart. I've undone this time and added to the discussion page, specifically about this item apparently causing trouble for Oborne in his 'freedom of movement.' Be grateful if you would take this on.

Best wishes 94.72.252.104 (talk) 11:42, 25 January 2011 (UTC) (BTW my account will be appearing under the name Lakatos (in honour of Imre Lakatos for whom I have a lot of respect)when I finally get around to it.

Please see my reply on the discussion page. Asav (talk) 13:19, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for that clear statement Asav and pleased to make your acquaintance.

94.72.252.104 (talk) 13:25, 25 January 2011 (UTC) (to be Lakatos [if available, that is ]).

Hi - I've put a piece on the Peter Oborne page arguing for 'English' rather than 'British'. I don't get why passport ownership is more important than national identity. Oborne is English, just as Dylan Thomas was Welsh and Ian Rankin is Scottish. To call those two 'British' would be confusing and misleading. Cooke (talk) 14:45, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm unable to find that piece. Wikipedia policy is to normally mention a person's nationality (as in citizenship) unless there are compelling reasons to do otherwise. The two authors you mention are distinctly Welsh and Scottish, but as far as I can tell, there are no distinguishing features in Mr. Osborne's biograpy or work that make him particularly English as opposed to British. Asav (talk) 14:54, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Asav. You have new messages at Hell in a Bucket's talk page.
Message added 01:22, 11 January 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hatfield College images

Hello, I don't suppose you know why these images are up for/being deleted from Commons, do you? It's just I knew the chap who uploaded them and I'm almost 100% sure that he took them (the chapel image, for example, was taken when I was there!), so I'm not sure why they're up as a copyvio. Has something been confused during their Commons migration? I can't imagine he would have needed an OTRS tag. I don't have Commons OTRS access, so I don't know what the particular ticket states. Rob (talk) 18:45, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

No. Some were confirmed copy violations. (If i remember correctly, the uploader even forgot to remove the EXIF info identifying the real photographer!) I checked them following an OTRS complaint, and they're lifted from a professional photographer's website, were they are clearly marked as copyrighted. It's possible that doesn't apply to all images, but it's just a matter of prudence to have suspected copyvios removed as well in such a case. I don't have the ticket no. handy right now, but I'll be happy to post it here if you have access to OTRS. Asav (talk) 06:05, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Oh, that's really weird, it's just the snowy pictures were almost certainly taken circa January 2009. I can't see OTRS unfortunately, so I don't suppose you could inform me who the photographer was and where on the web they are copyvios from? They look like point-and-shoot quality, so I seriously doubt that they were professionally taken (what was a professional photographer doing hanging around the college anyway?) Rob (talk) 17:27, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm really sorry, but I can't. OTRS correspondence is confidential. Asav (talk) 03:14, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Asav. You have new messages at Moonriddengirl's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

OTRS ticket 2011012710013707.

Re [1]. Sorry about the email, I don't know why the system sent that to you. No need to worry about the ticket - it's been closed. -- Jeandré, 2011-02-06t10:35z

Hello, Asav. You have new messages at Moonriddengirl's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ardour (software)

Hello, Asav!

Regarding your recent edit to Ardour (software): I share your desire to improve the article. I am an avid user of Ardour, so I must be careful with my edits to avoid violating WP:NPOV. I would appreciate any suggestions you could give me about making the article more neutral. Was there anything in particular that caught your attention as being "written like an advertisement"? Would adding a "Criticisms" section be helpful?

For purposes of comparison, would you say that the GIMP article is suitably encyclopedic? (Ardour has some similarities to GIMP in that it is a free, open-source competitor to established commercial products in its field.) If so, I can use that article as a model for improving the Ardour article.

Note that, being a free, open-source project, Ardour lacks the marketing clout of a commercial product like Pro Tools or Logic Pro, so there are no paper books about it, and very few articles in glossy Pro Audio magazines. Thus, most or all of the references must necessarily be web-based and fairly close to the project. (This is also true of GIMP, btw.)

Regards, SoCalDonF (talk) 19:27, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

They were mostly minor issues, auch as the use of phrases like "completely flexible" and a few others. I made some cosmetic corrections and removed the tag. I usually don't engage in this sort of "drive-by tagging", but I was looking for some MIDI software to edit a file, and didn't have time to make those edits. Of course, you should review the changes and make whatever adjustments you feel appropriate! Asav (talk) 12:33, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I see your point now. SoCalDonF (talk) 18:38, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Please help me out - In the Iyengar wiki page.

Hello Asav. I remember you had once warned an "anonymous user-ip" in the Iyengar page, where the user had indulged in vandalism by removing tag references.

Now, another user - user:Ramanujamuni (talk), had repeatdly been committing vandalism in the Iyengar page -
1. by removing valid sources that i had provided - which are "Online books authored by renowned authors, & published by renowned publishers".
2. by repeatedly indulging in edit war, and editing in unconventional manners without even knowing any wiki' rules and norms. The user also deliberately misinterprets "source contents" and gives his own bogus POV.
The user (user:Ramanujamuni) has also been vandalizing the article, by falsely editing huge sections in the article, which literally changes the article's contents. The user has also been providing false and bogus info' without any reference.
I had placed warnings in that user's talk page. But he does not stop vandalizing. Although i have presently reverted his false edits, he will come back again. I request you to please help me out by checking into the Iyengar wiki page. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hari7478 (talk • contribs) 22:34, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

I reverted the last contribution by the user, but honestly the subject matter is way beyond anything I'm qualified to edit. I have noticed that the user deletes what seem to be valid references on a regular basis, and this probably is an administrative matter. Since I'm an OTRS volunteer and no administrator, I'll need a little time to find the proper procedures to handle this. Asav (talk) 02:32, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello Asav I am not sure which is the right way to seek help. Regarding the comment valid reference - Please read the reference and the item which was deleted. The page 365 did not contain the information provided and the it was a cunning inference. Please go through the reference - and how it is linked because it is an inaccurate assumed reference.

Also I need to complain about the NPOV of this article and I need to know the appropriate forum and procedure for the same. The same article has been highlighted in three different references with no overall context provided, because the percentage of the population involved in both the weaver and christian population is not even 1% of the subject matter concerned and i need to know how to object to the same. To provide a blunt example the article referred uses words like Sudra which are politically incorrect (like the use of nigger etc.)

Please guide me about the NPOV process.

Above message about NPOV is not mine.
Asav, only the first message to you in the talk page under this topic was mine. The above message here is from the user about whom i complained(Ramanujamuni).He modidfied my message by giving you his version. Check your "talk:history" page. The above message is not mine. Thank You Hari7478 (talk) 11:16, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, I was aware of that. I actually mentioned it on the Wikipedia Addministrators' noticeboard. I hope the matter can be resolved there, as I can do very little about this. Asav (talk) 11:27, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello Asav, can i tell my grievences and justification in the Wikipedia Administrators' noticeboard under your heading?? Also the "userpage links" of ours, that you have provided in the "admin' noticeboard" do not lead to our user pages. Rectify the links to our user pages. As your links donot lead to our user pages, the blocking will not work. Thank You.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Hari7478 (talk • contribs) 11:34, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Absolutely. That's what the page is for. I see you have already done so. You'll find suggestions for dispute resolution there, too. Asav (talk) 16:13, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Pagans Motorcycle Club

You moved Pagans Motorcycle Club to Pagan's Motorcycle Club with the comment "Correct name". Pagan's Motorcycle Club would be the motorcycle club belonging to Pagan, not the motorcycle club composed of people who are pagans. Although the Pagans' patches say "Pagan's", virtually every source refers to them as "Pagans". I will be asking for it to be moved back. Just letting you know. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 17:00, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

That was done following a request to OTRS by a long-time member of the club (Ticket #2011030910012319). Furthermore, the image on the page makes it clear that the club's name is "Pagan's", not "Pagans". As a Wikipedia article should have a correct title, I'm opposed to moving it back, even though I don't have any personal involvement here. I did leave the redirect, by the way. Asav (talk) 02:33, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm sure the move was made with the best intentions. The discussion is here. Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 09:53, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Moving articles and license requirements

I'm surprised at your reverts here and here, ignoring basic facts about license requirements and moving pages that had been pointed out previous edit summaries and should be required knowledge for any OTRS agent. I would appreciate it if you could resolve the license violation that resulted from your edits. Regards, HaeB (talk) 10:49, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

I hadn't thought about the fact that the way I moved the page effectively nulled the revision history, which is obviously not acceptable. I'm not sure I completelty understand the rest of your request, but in any case I won't have time to make any amendments in the coming 2-3 weeks due to a demanding itinerary and work schedule. Asav (talk) 14:09, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

OTRS Ticket #2011060810015901 and your edit at Simple English Wikipedia

Hello Asav, my name is BarkingFish and I'm an editor with the Simple English Wikipedia. I came across your message concerning the above mentioned OTRS ticket, and the removal of the information from our American Civil War article. I've taken the liberty of adding a version of your message in Simple English, because some of your original message contained words that users of Simple English would find hard to understand, such as "verbatim", "violation" and "pursuant".

Might I please ask you, that if you leave such messages on our site for the attention of users, that you try and simplify the language that you use please? If you're in any doubt as to the level of words our users understand, please refer to the Basic English Wordlist BE850 and Extended Basic English Wordlist BE1900, both of which are available at the Simple English Wiktionary. Thank you for your time, and for your understanding. Fish^Barking? 00:09, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry. You're absolutely right that I should have tried to simplify the message, but on the other hand it's important that "administrative" messages are succint. Nevertheless, I should have work a little harder at it! I'll remember next time. I was planning to post a simple message on the contributor's talk page, but it was an anonymous edit more than two years old, so I didn't see the point. Thanks for the reminder! Asav (talk) 00:18, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

OTRS ticket 2011070410000244

Thanks for notifying me. I was unaware of OTRS ticket 2011070410000244 and have restored the page. Have a great day! Neutrality^talk 21:48, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

After The Battle

Wasn't intending to! My original edit to the article was prompted by acquiring a run of about 100 of the magazines and being impressed by the quality of the articles- this "Gail Parker" was not referenced as a co-author. As you say, not worth getting in a scrap about. Ning-ning (talk) 06:23, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Chess Attack

I didn't tag Chess Attack, I only corrected a type and put in a link in the article. I did make a comment about it on the talk page, but it is played by some top players, so I have no problems with the article staying. It would be good to have more references and expand the article. Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 13:06, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, my bad! Should've checked the history page... Asav (talk) 14:45, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

About the new talk page comments in the iyengar discussion page.

Hello. I agree that i should not have removed the edit request template. But the contents of the new talk page messages from the "user ip-65.219.4.7" are to be removed, as they violate wp talk page guidelines in every way. However i will wait till an admin' answers the "edit request", then i'll make the deletions. Thank You for notifying in the revert comments. The reason why i will be deleting it are:

1. The user ip had mentioned - "it is a shame to mention kamal haasan, as he is an atheist with anti-brahmin sentiments". Here the user ip thinks of this website as a pro-iyengar forum, and does not understand wiki' npov policies. The user had also attacked the celibrity(kamal haasan), and has defamed another religion(atheism). Also the "anti-brahmin sentiments" claim was dubious.
2. The user Ip speaks of "main stream iyengar views" as authentic. However here in wiki', especially w.r.t challenged data, neutral party views(from reliable sources/non-iyengar sources in this case) are those which matter.

3. The user ip had also communally offended authors/editors by saying "i suppose the author is a vadama, hence he had the agenda". Again he says "random sources cited are not trusted", thereby not complying with wiki' policies.

4. Finally, he refers to some sources as "not reliable". But they are the most "relied upon sources", as any indian wikipedian would say. "Castes and tribes in southern india - by edgar thurston" , and book sources which display genetic test results are highly authentic. But the user ip had just termed it "unreliable" as he was too uncomfortable with the facts. Check his contribs please(a long history of inappropriate edits by the user ip).

Hence i made those reverts. But, since you notified me about "removing an edit request", i will wait until an admin' answers the request. Then i'll remove those talk page messages. I'm 200% sure that the messages are to be removed. Also, by the way, the user ip had posted 2 messages, but they are one and the same, except that the 1st message from the user has an edit pp request. I guess i can remove the second message right away. Hari7478 (talk) 12:51, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Generally, its is inadvisable to remove comments from an article's talk page unless they're patently aggressive, obscene or the like of it. That is not the case here, so leave it be, please. Asav (talk) 19:43, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

But i had consulted with an administrator. You can check it from my contributions. His opinion was that, except in one or two cases, "the request and the reason made by the user-ip" was mostly based on WP:IDONTLIKEIT, which he(administrator) felt "would pertain to deletion discussions." Also, as you can see, the second message from the user ip is just a copy paste of the first. Isnt that intentional trolling?? The user-ip is just trying to jam the talk page by repeatedly posting the same message. There are other reasons too, which i had mentioned earlier, above. On the whole, the messages clearly violate talkpage guidelines. Hari7478 (talk) 20:54, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

I read your other messages to the administrators. I very much doubt that the other editor was trying to "jam" the talk page; if one message indeed is a verbatim copy of the other, it's probably just a newcomer mistake. The message certainly seems to have been posted in good faith and does not constitute any form of trolling. I can't see exactly what "talkpage guidelines" have been violated by his post. Please consult Wikipedia:Assume good faith on the other user's behalf and Wikipedia:Ownership of articles on your own behalf. As you're certainly aware, I have had this article on my watchlist for some time after the edit wars you were involved in, and it would seem you're still reverting and deleting where you should be seeking consensus. Asav (talk) 21:21, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry for prolonging this discussion in your talk page here. I apologise if these discussions here are consuming your time(this'll be the last msg). I'm not denying any of what you've mentioned here. I agree i should not have removed the talk page comments in a haste, as i did before. But w.r.t the edits in the main article, i've never violated any of wiki's policies. As you can see, all these new users/Ips simply edit based on WP:IDONTLIKEIT, and none of their reverts can be justified in wiki'. As you can see, their talk page comments are mostly based on that. And for such comments, all i can do is to remain silent rather than feeding them. They fail to provide sources for their controversial claims. They also keep removing data which are well sourced, thereby not accepting source material authenticity. If any sourced data happens to be unacceptable to them, then they simply term it as "unreliable". Even if there are multiple sources for cross checking, they give the same reason. In a rare case, one of them had provided an "Iyengar source"(from iyengar websites, authored by iyengars), and that too an irrelevant contrib' under an unrelated section(no relevance). Sometimes the same user is using multiple Ips/Ip hoppers and some new users - are trying their hands on annoying tactics to win over an edit war by frustrating the other editor. In one case, one such user ip had even reverted your edit(reverts) in the same page. You might have checked it from the history of the article.

I have reached consensus(with some editors) in some other wiki pages, in the past, as they've mastered wiki' editing policies and their discussions were so genuine. They provide valid Np sources for their claims and do consider providing add' sources for cross checking(if the data is too sensitive). But in this case(in the iyengar page), the new users/ips simply post what they feel as right, and deny the existing version just based on "wp:idontlikeit", and by simply refuting even the basic policies of wiki' editing. They fail to provide sources for their controversial claims. They also keep removing data which are well sourced, thereby not accepting source material authenticity. If any sourced data happens to be unacceptable to them, then they simply term it as "unreliable", even if there are multiple sources for cross checking.
And all i've been doing is "tutoring them" about wiki's editing policies, as they are not even aware of the basics "abcd" of wiki' editing. While one user seems to understand after a long explanation, another new user/ip comes up with the same claims, without even looking into previous discussions. If some new user/ip tries to revert based on their "likes, without complying with policies, and by trying to annoy the opponent", i cannot give up(especially when i stick to wiki's policies). Also, recently, i've never made more than 3 reverts within a 24 hour time. By the way, plz check the user ips contribs. He is not a new comer. I just want to convey that i've not violated any of wiki policies in any of my recent edits, w.r.t to contents, reverts, etc. And probably i'll do some more discussions with some senior editors and admins who have knowledge about the subject, w.r.t the new "talk page" comments. By the way, the article is still prone to new user/ip vandalism, and thanks for watching over. Also, the same contents from the disputed section of the page, also exist in some other related articles, which have been reviewed by some senior editors(knowledgable about the subject) and have allowed them to exist. Upon request, one such article has also been rated B in the "Wikiproject:India portal". I'm confident about the authenticity of the current revision.
I hope i did not trouble too much with these discussions here in your talk page. I apologise if i did. Thank again. Hari7478 (talk) 07:38, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

Just wanted to drop you a note to say thanks for picking up an OTRS issue for me. I really appreciate it! Christine, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 05:03, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Taylor Locke and The Roughs

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Taylor Locke and The Roughs requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. DoDo Bird Brain (talk) 21:29, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Please refer to my response at your talk page. Asav | Talk (Member of the OTRS Volunteer Response Team) 21:42, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Asav. You have new messages at RadioFan's talk page.
Message added 12:18, 9 September 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

RadioFan (talk) 12:18, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

OTRS

It's in a queue I can't access. Asav 00:01, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Replied on my page. -- DQ (t) (e) 01:14, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Likewise! Asav | Talk (Member of the OTRS Volunteer Response Team) 01:33, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

What is the English equivalent of these Norwegian words

glattcelle, foretaksstraff

And in what articles do they belong? (Note that glattcelle now is used about such cells with or without mattresses, and with or without an elevated platform to sleep on — a bed). Glattcelle is mentioned on a disambiguation page on wiki Norwegian.

The following link might be relevant, Politiet glemte asylsøker på glattcelle

Is this link [2] relevant as an external link in any other articles, (it's about torture of prisoners that ISAF and others have turned over to Afghan security forces)?--155.55.60.112 (talk) 10:31, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

I'd translate glattcelle as holding cell. The Norwegian glatt, as in smooth, indicates that it doesn't contain any furniture or other implements that can be used as weapons or the like. They're typically used for shorter arrest periods. I believe there's a legal limit to how long someone can be held in such a cell.

Foretaksstraff (literally business penalty) is a legal punishment for companies or corporations (as opposed to individuals). It's been in force for some twenty years in Norway. When there is an objective responsibility for a crime, e.g. environmental or financial criminality, the company responsible can receive a foretaksstraff, either in the form of a fine or an order to cease activities in one or several fields of business, or both. This sort of foretaksstraff can be given even if no individuals are held responsible for the felony. It's part of Norway's Criminal law (§48 a).

The article you're referring to has been provided by the Norwegian news agency NTB and is probably just a compilation of international news sources. IMHO, NTB is not a very good news source. Asav 11:01, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

(The subject of article, Politiet glemte asylsøker på glattcelle' is also the subject of the editorial of Verdens Gang yesterday, "Fange forsvunnet" ("prisoner disappeared").

Now I see that Prisons in Germany has not been followed by Prisons in Norway. ( Glattcells can be found at police stations as well as (a number) at prisons.) I will have to check my priorities.--155.55.60.112 (talk) 06:44, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Cut-and-paste moves

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to give Cal Giardina a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Cal Rein. This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you. Jenks24 (talk) 21:36, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

No, I haven't, or at least I didn't mean to. There was a double redirect between two pages, so I ran into a bit of trouble getting it all correct. Btw., it was done on the basis of OTRS 2011102310000747. Asav | Talk (Member of the OTRS Volunteer Response Team) 22:28, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Request for your perspective on SOPA

Hi Asav, there's currently an ongoing discussion about splitting the Stop Online Piracy Act page at Talk:Stop_Online_Piracy_Act#ONGOING_DISCUSSION_-_Splitting_the_Article. You've familiarized yourself with the entry before, and your insight and perspective on the matter would be appreciated. Hope to see you there, Sloggerbum (talk) 00:01, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Re: Sue Gardner's talk page

I was hoping to continue this conversation. The section also has unresolved questions about declines in the numbers of admins and editors which haven't been answered. Selery (talk) 23:04, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Answered on your talk page. Please keep discussions in one place. Thank you! Asav | Talk (Member of the OTRS Volunteer Response Team) 23:58, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

SOPA/PIPA petition

Hi

Many thanks for that link to the non-US citizen petition. Hopefully we can continue to keep these in the forefront of media discussion until this latest threat to the internet has dissipated :¬) Chaosdruid (talk) 20:23, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

User:Mayasutra's behaviour in the Iyengar:talk page

Hello Asav, let me first deal with the other user's behaviour, and then i'll go for formal mediation. I guess i've been too patient. First of all, users editing in the "Iyengar page", who repeatedly fail to adhere to any expected standards of behavior are likely to be imposed with sanctions. The general sanctions template is placed on top of the Iyengar talk page by admin:Qwyrxian. According to a decision by admins - "The Wikipedia community has permitted administrators to impose discretionary sanctions on any editor who is active on any page about social groups, explicitly including caste associations and political parties, related to India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal. Discretionary sanctions can be used against an editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process. "
Inspite of that, "user:Mayasutra" has been repeatedly using names in talk page discussions, and that too in a way that maligns the other user(s), which is considered very offensive in wiki'. I'm wondering as to why this user is still allowed to edit as he has crossed the line long back and is still continuing to do so. Although i've used his name, i did so, only while replying to his messages so that other users might not take it on themselves. But i've always maintained a civil tone unlike user:mayasutra. Let me list out his behaviour here:

• First of all, he's posting diff of the edits i made 3 years ago, and is pointing out the mistakes, thereby maligning me. At that time(3 yrs back), I was new to wiki' and made some obvious errors. Posting the diff' of those edits, and trying to convince the administrators reg' his stand is extremely cheap on his part. He also posted a link to my editlog here. Diff of his edit:[3]
  
• Attack on communities - Mayasutra said "there are some enthusiastic vadagalais propagating falsities, like racists. Diff:[4]." Having seen the general sanctions template, placed on top of that talk page, posting such comments should attract a considerably higher penalty than usual.
  

Attacks on other users(attacks on me in this case): Here are some of his(Mayasutra's) comments on me, in the Iyengar talk page:

• He said "...Hari7478 does not seem to have a background in the genetic sciences. It is useless to reason out any data with him." Diff of edits:[5]
• In another post, Mayasutra said "This being a talk page, Hari's blabbering is ok". Diff:[6]
  
• Again, he insults me by saying - "You are absolutely ignorant in genetics. You can blabber whatever you like here." Diff of edits:[7]
  
• And finally he made these coments on me - "People with half-baked or no knowledge on genetics, like Hari7478...". Diff of edits:[8]
  
• Above all, as you can see from the talk page discussions, he has been repeatedly posting the same message under various sections/topics, which is indeed spamming, and has been a prolonged troll.

Inspite of the bashing on me, i've been too patient, trying to concentrate on the contents and not on the other user. But i can't be a saint anymore. Despite knowing about the "general sancitons", and inspite of me requesting him to abstain from such behaviour in talk pages, he has been too offensive. I wonder why no action has been taken. I'll go for formal mediation, once this user gets the deserved judgement for what he did. This has been long due. Hari7478 (talk) 11:23, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Hari7478! As you may remember, I initially started watching this article in response to an OTRS complaint and tried to mediate involving several editors. As far as I recall, I didn't succeed, so I initiated arbitration through the standard Wikipedia channels. I believe I've repeatedly stated that the subject matter (and certainly the disputes) itself are beyond my comprehension; I'm an European editor with no knowledge within the field. I was under the impression that the previous disagreements had been solved amiably, and I can only hope and advise that the same happens this time, too. OTRS has no discretionary powers, and can neither impose sanctions nor protect pages. I can only repeat the suggestions I made earlier, i.e. in the now archived discussion page. If you and the other editors cannot agree on a course for the article in question, you may request another arbitration. If it's of any help, I can initiate the process, but I have no measures beyond that. Asav | Talk (Member of the OTRS Volunteer Response Team) 18:16, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

ANI

Currently a discussion at ANI is ongoing which is in concurrence with one of your observations at Iyengar talk page recently. You can find it here. VSVettakkorumakansnehi (talk) 18:11, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much ASAV for your neutral comment at ANI. As a consequence of events alarmingly akin to WP:GANG and WP:OWN, i have been "muscled out" through a ban at Nair-talk and allied talk pages for 6 months using using the pretext of IDIDNTHEARTHAT, see [here] !!!. (1) Is there a way, my ban could be re-negotiated ? (2) What measures can be taken to proscribe this dominant user-administartor team engaging in WP:OWN sort of behavior in this specific context ? Vettakkorumakansnehi (talk) 16:31, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Iyengar

Asav! Everyone knows that "Vadakalai means northerners", while "thenkalai = southern". Swapping the definition/translation such as "vadakalai=south & thenkalai=north" is too mischievous, and the corresponding user "Hayagreevadasa"(who has been editing in articles related to indian religions/caste/saints) certainly knew it. It's like saying "arctic is south pole while the antarctic is in the north" - laughable indeed. It makes the whole article unstable. Anyhow, my edit comments this time are not so offensive, and i've explained the reason. But, it is a silly and laughable piece of contrib' which has to reverted right away. Above all, the reference provided(the particular inline citation) has it all. Also, it's just a mere translation to english. Making a small change like that might go unnoticed, but it is too big(figuratively), as it changes the whole interpretation. Thank You! Hari7478 (talk) 07:55, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

It has been discussed and sorted, in the Iyengar talk page. Another user got confused and misread the src. See talk:Iyengar. But "user:Hayagreevadasa's" edit was clearly mischievous. However, that was really silly. Hari7478 (talk) 09:02, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

In cases like this, you should assume good faith and revert with the comment above, ie. "Vadakalai means northerners", while "thenkalai = southern". It may well have been a bona fide mistake by the previous editor, so one shouldn't needlessly aggravate the situation by assuming acts of vandalism. Asav 10:59, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the rename Asav!. Van Aldenhaag (talk) 13:36, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

OTRS #2012082910009491 edits to Port Arthur Massacre

OTRS #2012082910009491 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Port_Arthur_massacre_(Australia)&oldid=510426350

This ticket may be a con; this is a conspiracy theorist type edit(WP:FRINGE, WP:WEIGHT). The murderer named has pleaded guilty and been convicted of the massacre, so there is no need to protect anyone from unfounded accusation with 'allegedly'. This use of 'allegedly' is part of the ongoing vandalism of this page by conspiracy enthusiasts.

Someone else reverted already, but thought you should know. Took me a while to understand you are not the conspiracy enthusiast when your edit history did not match. ChrisPer (talk) 03:01, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

I understand the murders are well documented in court; however, use of the term "alleged" does not diminish the factuality of the article in any way. Given that the perpetrator "had significant intellectual disabilities", the edits did no harm. I have no knowledge of any conspiracy theories regarding this matter, but one should be prudent i articles like this, given the grave nature of the incidents and the fact that we're dealing with a biography of a living person. I will not revert the edits made after mine, as OTRS does not get involved in edit wars. Asav | Talk (Member of the OTRS Volunteer Response Team) 03:47, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Cool. I dislike editing that article because it is so badly constructed and the sources so poor. My main involvement is in responding to conspiracy enthusiasts misguided edits. The policies at WP:FRINGE address this fairly clearly. In the case of this edit, WP:BLPCRIME applies; the presumption of innocence only applies until a conviction is secured. Regards, ChrisPer (talk) 10:28, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Cal Rein

Please explain what's going on--to the best of your ability--at WP:ANI#Cal_Rein. The case seems a bit complicated for WP:AIV. — Scientizzle 18:10, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Asav. You have new messages at Hari7478's talk page.
Message added Hari7478 (talk) 20:04, 30 November 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Posted another reply. Please talkback. Hari7478 (talk) 20:48, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Fixing dead link at the article

Hello, Just wanted to know if my edit was not made properly at this article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transport_in_Ipswich. I just replaced dead link with working link of the same content.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrGarkaviy (talk • contribs) 08:16, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

No, your edit was fine. My bad. Asav | Talk13:44, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

BNA access

Hello, Asav. 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 at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Chris Troutman (talk) 16:45, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Loai Deeb

The article has been edited extensively recently, and it does have some neutrality issues, but I don't see where it sounds like an advertisement for the subject. Also the "autobiography" tag is not meant to be permanent, and the article is linked to from at least one other article, so it's not an orphan. Please remove the tags that are not relevant. — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 07:25, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Asav. You have new messages at WP:BOTREQ.
Message added 22:13, 22 August 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 22:13, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Waqar Zaka

Note that I've reverted your addition of a birth date to Waqar Zaka as an OTRS ticket is not verifiable by readers. OTRS agents (myself included) have no remit to add unsourced information to biography articles based on off-wiki communication. The subject should be directed to either add the information to their official website, which meets WP:SELFPUB, or provide a reliable source that can we can use in the article.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:01, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

This is quite simply wrong. There is absolutely no source for the previous (incorrect) DOB, so there is no rationale to the reversion. Please provide a source for the (again, incorrect) date of birth in your version of the article.

Until you are able to do so (which you won't be), I strongly suggest you leave my current edit alone. I see no reason why two OTRS volunteers would engage in an edit war. We have excellent tools, such as a mailing list, to resolve these issues. You could also have contacted trhough my e-mail address, which is posted on my user page.

In short, I will revert your edit and I post a message on our mailing list. I will not discuss OTRS matters such as this in public. Asav | Talk

I've seen your message on the mailing list and the consensus there is that the date is unverifiable by readers and it should not be included. bons mots 15:56, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

I have already pointed out that I do not discuss OTRS matters, especially BLP questions, in public. Your statement that there is conensus on the mailing list i patently wrong. The matter is being handled internally. Asav | Talk 19:38, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Could you explain what you mean by "the matter is being handled internally"? The two venues where it is being discussed, the mailing list and the WP:VPP discussion, both overwhelmingly concur that scanned documents via OTRS tickets cannot be used as verifiable sources in BLPs and that any unverified date should be removed. If you cannot see this then I question your judgement.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:42, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

I will not discuss OTRS matters publicly. Period. Asav | Talk 20:44, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Asav - I'm not sure you check it often, but I've left you a small message on your OTRS-wiki talk page. Cheers, Storkk (talk) 14:49, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Poul Thorsen

I noticed that you placed a PROD on this article with a lengthy explanation. The article was deleted but has been recreated and I wondered if you thought it merited a deletion discussion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:09, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Liz! I've prodded the article once again. Asav | Talk 18:43, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

I know you can't PROD the same article twice but I don't know if you can PROD two different versions of the same article. I'll have to look into that. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:54, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

@Liz: I was thinking the same, but since this is an entirely new text, I believe a PROD is okay. The editor who created it has been alerted, and I suppose s/he will take it to an AfD discussion if s/he finds it necessary. Asav | Talk 18:59, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 12:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Asav. 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)

Images

Asav,

I am working on the article called Wolff_Landscape_Architecture. You recently uploaded two images to this entry. Thank you. I have subsequently created a Gallery section and moved the images into it.

Question for you: The photographer Essi Ala-Kokko unloaded a total of four images to Wikimedia. (Ticket # 2017030810018126) Only one was added to the article: Cheney Mansion Waterfall Garden 04.jpg

I would like to add the additional three, but I do not know the file names.

Can you assist?

Thank you.

Wednesday 0008 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wednesday 0008 (talk • contribs) 20:06, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

I added a category named Landscape architecture in Illinois. You will find the images there. Asav | Talk 20:23, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Hoping You Can Help - Rehs Galleries

Asav ... I am sure you have more important things to deal with, but I would appreciate any help and advice you can give. It appears that editor Toddst1 has decided to remove almost all of the content in this entry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rehs_Galleries. A similar issue took place back in 2014 when DissidentAggressor did a similar thing. The administrators looked into the matter and put everything back the way it was ... the only thing that needed to be done was a notice needed to be placed on the About Us page of the Rehs Gallery site stating that the information was not copyrighted. That was done in 2014 and is still there: http://www.rehs.com/aboutus.html?contemporary=N

I am not sure why Toddst1 has decided to remove all the content, but I did find it odd that when I made a request for a Conflict of Interest change to be made to the gallery's page ... and my request was placed at the bottom of the appropriate page -- and there were many requests still outstanding (dozens and dozens ... I think over 150) ... that my request was handled almost immediately. Makes me wonder if Toddst1 and DissidentAggressor are one in the same or know each other??

Any light you can shed on this matter would be greatly appreciated and if I need to take this matter to another level, please let me know how to do that.

All the best and thanks for listening Howard L. Rehs (talk) 19:58, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Survey Invite

I'm working on a study of political motivations and how they affect editing. I'd like to ask you to take a survey. The survey should take 5 minutes. Your survey responses will be kept private. Our project is documented at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Wikipedia_%2B_Politics.

Survey Link: http://uchicago.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_80J3UDCpLnKyWTH?Q_DL=3dz0m2ubQw1KSnb_80J3UDCpLnKyWTH_MLRP_2i5z8XJz7gE2XJj&Q_CHL=gl

I am asking you to participate in this study because you are a frequent editor of pages on Wikipedia that are of political interest. We would like to learn about your experiences in dealing with editors of different political orientations.

Sincere thanks for your help! Porteclefs (talk) 19:51, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

OTRS member, confidential info and character assassination

Welcome to ANI. Toddst1 (talk) 03:43, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Paul Vasquez (actor)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Paul Vasquez (actor) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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. PRehse (talk) 07:06, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Please edit your userpage "Email this user (OTRS/admin matters only, please.)"

As you are NOT an admin on English Wikipedia you should refrain from claiming you can handle admin matters and should edit this immediately. CommotioCerebri (talk) 13:00, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Asav. 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)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Asav. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 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)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

"Seymour Schwartz" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Seymour Schwartz. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 September 6#Seymour Schwartz until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Royalbroil 12:59, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 01:20, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

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) 00:06, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

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) 00:27, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

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) 00:22, 28 November 2023 (UTC)