I've decided to start a project discussion on this. Please see WT:MOTD. Simply south...... having large explosions for 5 years 17:34, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi UberScienceNerd, hope you are fine. You may have noticed that over the past few days (5–7 March) MOTD has displayed a red link or "This space for rent". Any help would be greatly appreciated! –pjoef (talk • contribs) 14:16, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear UberScienceNerd,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the communityHERE, where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.

So a few things about the interviews:

• Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
• Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
• All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
• All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
• The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.

Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your nameHERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar — Preceding unsigned comment added by 35.9.115.210 (talk) 21:21, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

April Fools Day is just around the corner. As such please could you nominate a new motto or comment on existing suggestions at Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations/Specials? Simply south...... facing oncoming traffic for over 5 years 16:25, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

One-line stub about non-notable group. No independent refs in > 5 years.

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. Stuartyeates (talk) 08:14, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article MacDas 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/MacDas 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 template from the top of the article. Stuartyeates (talk) 20:33, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. Regards, — Moe Epsilon 00:06, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next several days. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 20:58, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MBisanz ^talk 05:16, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. Regards, — Moe Epsilon 02:24, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ahmed Faseeh 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/Ahmed Faseeh (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Boleyn (talk) 10:20, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article G-Force Accelerator has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Stub article that lacks references and notability.

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. Astros4477 (Talk) 04:44, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 3.1415. Since you had some involvement with the 3.1415 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). SnorlaxMonster 11:29, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Wikimedia Incubator 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/Wikimedia Incubator (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. --Jakob (Scream about the things I've broken) 00:23, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Motto of the Day (WP:MOTD) is in a state of emergency and really needs your help! There are not enough editors who are reviewing or nominating mottos at Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations/In review, and this probably means that you will notice a red link or “This space for rent” as our mottos for the next weeks and months.

Please take a moment to review the nominations and nominate your own new mottos at Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations/In review and Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations/'Specials. Any help would be appreciated! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:13, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This message has been sent by pjoef on behalf of Motto of the Day to all editors of the English Wikipedia who are showing MOTD's templates on their pages, and to all the participants to MOTD: (page, template, and category).

Your upload of File:Constellation star.JPG or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 15:06, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:47, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. I dream of horses If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{Ping|I dream of horses}} to your message. (talk to me) (contributions) @ 01:24, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Donal Wales. Since you had some involvement with the Donal Wales redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. BDD (talk) 04:10, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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) 13:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Planet Zebes. Since you had some involvement with the Planet Zebes redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 21:58, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Donal Wales. Since you had some involvement with the Donal Wales redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 07:03, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Glazed ham. Since you had some involvement with the Glazed ham redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 00:04, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

This article does not meet Wikipedia's guidelines for inclusion in the encyclopedia, specifically the general notability guideline and verifiability policy.

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. Dysklyver 21:23, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Possible unreliable thing, no reliable sources are given (in fact, no sources at all for the text, only for the list, and that sources are unreliable)

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. » Shadowowl | talk 21:51, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Autophilia. Since you had some involvement with the Autophilia redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 12:50, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Rusty Krab. Since you had some involvement with the Rusty Krab redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Soumyabrata ^{stay at home} _{wash your hands} ^{to protect from coronavirus} 09:46, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:Female mallard on grass.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

orphaned image, low quality

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 files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

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

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:03, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Obliviousness. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 21#Obliviousness until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 23:47, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Wikimedia Incubator. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 19#Wikimedia Incubator until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 23:26, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Jimbo Whales. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 April 2#Jimbo Whales until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Anarchyte (talk • work) 05:08, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect A Ninja and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 May 6#A Ninja until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 17:36, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Couldn't find much sourcing beyond the one article already cited

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. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 01:40, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

A longstanding unreferenced article summarising the features of a software package. This particular IntelliTalk product (there are others in other fields) appears to have been merged into the vendor Synapse Adaptive's wider classroom tool package. Whilte searches find a couple of brief product summaries (link 1, link 2), I don't think these are sufficient to demonstrate that it attained notability, either in ts own right on as part of that package.

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. AllyD (talk) 18:04, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

AllyD (talk) 10:21, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect The Sexiest Zoo in America and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 25 § The Sexiest Zoo in America until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. IntegerSequences (talk | contribs) 04:54, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect First President of the United States has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 March 29 § First President of the United States until a consensus is reached. Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis ❄️ 15:08, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Ocen 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 April 19 § Ocen until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 21:06, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]