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) 01:55, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, i am new to wikipedia, kindly suggest me some tutorial refrences or videos about wiki --Mcqsstore (talk) 01:37, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi yes sure. Please go through it. Citation part will find another mentor to help out. Thank you very much. --Sarmilan1992 (talk) 07:34, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A --MR.Asadul Islam (talk) 19:08, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

s 58.145.190.245 (talk) 02:19, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I want to always translate Maldives language here how can I de that as well --Wale001 (talk) 10:42, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop removing the {{TOC right}} template from disambiguation pages, particularly longer dab pages. It's not mandatory by any means, but moving the TOC to the right is generally considered useful on these pages. You can read the relevant guideline at MOS:DABGROUPING. Cheers! —ShelfSkewed Talk 06:19, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

the default view now locates the toc to the left. Iterresise (talk) 06:22, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and the TOC right template changes the TOC position to the right, and this is often done on dab pages for the reasons explained in the guideline. —ShelfSkewed Talk 06:27, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

even the default view overrides the template. Iterresise (talk) 06:29, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

But not in every view in every version. And what the default view does is place the TOC in a separate left column, so it doesn't push the content down or waste whitespace. TOC right does this for users who aren't using the default view. —ShelfSkewed Talk 06:39, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well if it is the default view, there is consensus it is preferred. Why aren't people using CSS? Iterresise (talk) 06:42, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Preferred? I mean, there has to be one default version, and that changes every few years. But users and editors of various vintages and with various preferences may be more comfortable with other available versions. —ShelfSkewed Talk 06:47, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest taking this up to Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Disambiguation pages or WP:TFD. Let me know if you do. Iterresise (talk) 06:51, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was just explaining what the guideline already suggests. If TOC right doesn't interfere with the default view but is potentially beneficial for users using other views, why change the guideline or remove the template? —ShelfSkewed Talk 07:07, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CREEP Iterresise (talk) 07:10, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sure: there is technically broad consensus since it was promoted to guideline. That part of the page, though, might not have consensus. Iterresise (talk) 20:53, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Vector 2022: "On January 18, 2023, the skin was turned on as the default on the desktop site." Iterresise (talk) 20:58, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I represent an organization that has a Wiki page with outdated information. Do you know how I begin the process of suggesting/providing new content for consideration? Also, can this content be provided wholesale (like a full document with revisions to existing sections), or does it have be provided section by section, or point by point? Thanks! --JohnSnook (talk) 19:28, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

falsey --Wayben 12234 (talk) 17:58, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! How important or significant does somebody or something have to be before they are allowed to have a wikipedia article about it? --Whataboutery (talk) 13:32, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please read my article. And how do i make citations please? --Ise444U (talk) 01:05, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, would like to create a new wiki page..someone who is known but not on wiki yet..how do I do that? --ProGolfer123 (talk) 17:33, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  02:17, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Iterresise.

Apologies if you actually wrote that welcome note (vs. auto-generated boilerplate). Thank you for the offer.

I've only done a couple of additions to wiki, one of which had valuable material deleted (imo) prompting my renewel of interest. I opened a topic on the talk page to raise the issues there.

FWIW - I once tried to get back-links added to the chess checkmate page, but was essentially mocked by the editors and gave up on the idea. Pity that.

(Back-links allow quick jumps back to the toc on pages with long lists of items, enabling quick navigation solely with the mouse).

Not sure how involved I'll be here on wiki, but please allow me to express my greetings to you too in return.

Cheers. --Interlist2 (talk) 14:06, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why in the past three days have you been removing dozens of {{see above}} and {{see below}} templates, seemingly arbitrarily? Your summaries ("not necessary", "extraneous", "excessive") don't offer much insight to your thinking. Do you oppose all cross-references in article text on principle? I think what you're doing is to the detriment of the articles, but I want to give you a chance to explain your thinking before I start reverting all the removals. —swpb^{T • beyond • mutual} 19:18, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

see ani Iterresise (talk) 02:52, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]