User talk:CNMall41/Archive 2

Wikiclaus' cheer !

		Wikiclaus greetings
		Michael Q. Schmidt talkback is wishing you the happiest of Wikiclaus' Wikipedian good cheer. This message is intended to celebrate the holiday season, promote WikiCheer, and to hopefully make your day just a little bit better, for Wikiclaus encourages us all to spread smiles, fellowship, and seasonal good cheer by wishing others a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings and the happiest of holiday spirits from Wikiclaus !

Happy New Year, CNMall41!

Happy New Year!

CNMall41,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:48, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Happy New Year, CNMall41!

Happy New Year!

CNMall41,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. –Davey2010 ^{Merry Xmas / Happy New Year} 00:04, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Happy New Year 2016}} to send this message

I see that you deleted and redirected an album page I created (A New Day Dawning by Siena Root) as a non-notable album.

I am not an experienced Wikipedia editor and may not be well-versed in the Wikipedia etiquette. Actually this is the first time I'm writing to another user's talk page. So sorry for any amateur mistakes beforehand.

Other people I encountered, first marked the page for deletion, offer a rationale and a way to fix that and waited for it to be done. IMHO, you should consider doing that too.

I don't believe the album you deleted is "non-notable". So what is the procedure to revert this action? Dfisek 18:57, 14 January 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dfisek (talk • contribs)

Thank you for the message. I actually redirected the page, not deleted it. I do not have the capability of deleting a page as I am not an administrator. I though about recommending the page for deletion, but since the album exists, the next best thing was to redirect it into the page for the band. This way, it is still searchable in the encyclopedia even though it does not meet notability requirements - IMHO. I would recommend that you check out WP:MUSIC#Recordings for notability requirements. I am only one person and Wikipedia works on consensus so not sure what you advise you beyond that. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:49, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 25 January

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Mark Pirro page, your edit caused a URL error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:17, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Fixed, you stupid bot!! --CNMall41 (talk) 02:44, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Conflict of interest work

Hi CHMall41 - we haven't interacted, but I was formerly very active at COIN and still do a bunch of COI related work, just more quietly. I noticed you have been working COIN a lot recently (thanks for that) and found some of your input... a bit odd (which we can talk about later if you like).

That led me to look at your contribs. I can see that your first edit was creating the article on Kerry Marx with templated citations and all. You went on from there to create other articles on country music and a strange array of obscure tech companies like Geektime, Mophie, ChargeBee, NativeX, Xero (software)... and it goes. This is editing that ~looks~ a lot like paid editing.

Again I really appreciate your COIN work but is there anything you would like to disclose about your history here under this account, or others? Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 05:23, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Your kidding right? You don't like my comments at COIN and ANI so you accuse me of being a paid editor. Let me be perfectly clear. I am not nor have I ever been a paid editor. No edits I make here are for pay or favors. While I do not need to justify ANY of my edits to you, maybe you should look closer. Some of these were requested articles. The others you will see were created on the same date as major press as I read some of the publications that they were cited in. Also, most were stubs and have since been expanded - somewhat promotional - by other editors who you can gladly go and bug. However, do not vail your accusations on my talk page. Finally, its Bluegrass, a form of Country, of which I am a fan. --CNMall41 (talk) 05:28, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

As I wrote at ANI, I was unaware that you had written anything there, when I wrote this. And I have not made any accusations; I described your editing and asked you a question. I am sorry the question upset you. I'll not continue this for now as you are upset, but I would like to, eventually. By the way, if you continue to work at COIN, you should avoid getting upset over interactions this way. You need to be able to steer through difficult conversations. Jytdog (talk) 05:37, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

I'm upset but that is not the issue. I have learned to talk calmly when it is needed and have spent more than 50 years doing so. However, your attempt to make this about me being upset does not excuse your behavior. If you look at my edit history, you will see that I am FAIR. From your edit history - including the ANI threads and complaints from edits - you have an issue with paid editing. I understand your issue with paid editing as I do not like it either. However, I feel that Wikipedia has a greater purpose than spending time chasing these people. If something can be fixed easily, then I do it. If something needs to be deleted - which you can see I recommend quite a few spam and non-notable articles yesterday which others seem not to care about as the only votes are from the spammers who created them. I have also opened up sockpuppet investigations and done quite a bit of work that you did not mention in your thread above. I find it easier to deal with these people in a civil manner as opposed to lashing out at them. They are in the wrong, but there is not a need to take up people's time with things such as placing a COI tag on an article that is only a few sentences long. This is an improper way to use such tag. So, let's be clear. You did not simply ask a question. I don't care how you word it, you made an accusation that I am a paid editor. An accusation which you need to redact. Also, you will continue to see me at COIN, not to bother you, but to continue what I do which I believe is improving the encyclopedia. You have your way, I have mine, but there is no reason for you to make accusations as I do not operate with the same MOU as you do. --CNMall41 (talk) 05:49, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Now, for my editing background, I am laid off from my job and have spent quite a bit of time on Wikipedia lately. I write source code for IBM so please feel free to make sure I do not edit anything associated with it. I am also a reader of TechCrunch and love Bluegrass. If you need to check my ip or want a blood sample, please let me know. --CNMall41 (talk) 05:49, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Man, you have a lot to learn about working on COI issues in WP and you have a very wrong impression of how I deal with COI generally. As I said we can talk more later when you are more calm. Maybe have a look at the discussion of dealing with COI issues on my user page, if you like. We've gotten off to a difficult start with your misunderstanding that my comments here were a reaction to what you wrote at ANI, on top of how you might have reacted anyway. It can get better. Talk to you later. Jytdog (talk) 06:11, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Talking in one place is better so I archived the discussion on my Talk page. About your remark there about bringing this to ANI -- nothing I have written to you is actionable and it will be a big waste of time for you to go ANI, but if it is more important to you to do that, than it is to talk through this and build a relationship, then I reckon you will do that. There is potential for real discussion here, there are places where our interests are aligned, and we will definitely be working together. I would prefer to keep talking. But do as you like. I am going to bed now, btw. Jytdog (talk) 06:30, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

There is a good chance for a discussion. However, you have clearly missed the point in all the discussion above. You made an accusation and have been a good example of what not to do according to WP:CIVIL. Once you come to terms and redact your accusation, again according to WP:CIVIL, then we can start a dialogue. Until then, there is no need to discuss anything. You could have come here and asked me why I edit at COIN or what my interests are, but instead you went right with the accusation. If you do not see that as being uncivil, then we likely will never discuss anything. --CNMall41 (talk) 06:33, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict):I was just adding the following and we conflicted: also btw, the point of the ANI thread is to have the user banned who is abusing WP as part of his SEO business, and who is out there teaching other people to do that. That is bad for WP. ANI threads get derailed all the time, and your misunderstanding that my post here had anything to do with what you wrote there, and your upset about what I wrote here, are a derailment. I understand you are offended but this is the place to deal with that. Jytdog (talk) 06:41, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

i do understand that you are offended, and pretty much everything you wrote above is shot through with defensiveness. Getting defensive talking about COI matters is not productive. I don't know how much work you have actually done talking to people (really talking to people, and treating them as people) about potential COI in WP but it is really amazing how people react. Some people have strong egos and just deal with it, other people melt down. But again, I haven't accused you of anything. I described your early editing and I asked you a question. That's all. Now I am really going to bed. Jytdog (talk) 06:41, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

You clearly have not clue and we can leave it at that. Your "question" is similar to asking someone "where exactly were you when the murder took place." After all, it's just a questions (bullshit). I don't care how other people act, but your deflections show me that you have no concern for your actions. And yes, I am defensive about your accusation. Don't like it, then don't accuse me of it. Period. Maybe I should run all my edits by you before I do them. Or, maybe you can assume good faith, thank me for the great work I have done, and then open a conversation without an accusation. Simple as that. Not sure how you cannot see it. --CNMall41 (talk) 06:44, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

And to be clear, YOU derailed the ANI conversation when you brought up the topic at COIN. Again, stop deflecting your behavior and take credit for your actions. Isn't this what you want from all COI editors is for them to take credit for their actions? Seems kind of odd that you don't want it to work both ways. --CNMall41 (talk) 06:46, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

I am awake again. I cross-listed the discussion at COIN to make folks there aware of the ANI discussion; your reaction at ANI to what I wrote here on your talk page had nothing to do with the topic of the ANI thread. You are still locked-in to your initial reaction to my initial comments above. I hope we can talk more when you are past that. Jytdog (talk) 15:39, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank God you are awake. I was worried (sarcasm tone in case you didn't pick up on that). You started the conduct with your accusation and if you do not see that, then you have an issue. One that I will likely not be able to help you with. As such, this is where we part ways. Feel free to go through all the articles I created and recommend them ALL for deletion as they don't mean anything to me as I am not a paid editor. However, you will still me on COIN threads until I get bored - as I often do with certain areas of Wikipedia - and move on. Until that time, you will not be the one to push me out of that area. We are bound by the rules just like everyone else. Despite someone having a COI, you have no right to do what you did and also do not have a right to accuse me as being a paid editor because I called you out on it. We can consider this closed as you are taking up too much breath on my talk page. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:05, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

OK, you are not going to calm down. Part of the work at COIN is asking people if they have a COI and making clear why you are asking. I did not say "You have edited for pay" - if I had, you would be correct that I accused you. What I did, is describe your early work and stated that it ~looks like~ paid editing. It does, and I can show you can examples that we know came from paid editors, and you will see what I mean. Then I asked if you have anything to disclose with regard to your past work. It was a real question, meant to open a dialogue. The answer could simply be "yes I do" or "no I don't" and we could have gone from there (and can still go from there). But you remain hung up on being asked the question. That is unfortunate. You also more than once have read things into my motivation. My initial post was unrelated to your comments at ANI but you have repeatedly said it was retaliation. It wasn't - I wasn't upset with your initial remark at ANI. It was fine. And now you are saying I want to push you off of COIN. I don't. You are making this way harder than it needs to be. That is your choice. It is too bad. Jytdog (talk) 21:43, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Again, maybe you are not reading the thread. I did answer you question. Direct and to the point. Also, you don't know if I am calm or not, but keep trying to deflect your misbehavior back at me which is completely wrong and hence the reason we cannot have a dialog. You made an accusation, it's that simple. I denied the accusation and then launched into you for it as there is no basis for the accusation other than creating articles for a few companies? So again, if you want to start a dialogue, you need to address your conduct, redact your accusation and we can go from there. If not, that is fine as well as my work here on Wikipedia is not determinant upon your conduct and/or approval. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:17, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Yes I am very aware that you answered the question. The discussion has been about other stuff, and we have not been able to continue. I am saying that you are "not calmed down" because what you are writing is still defensive and lashing out. There is no way forward as long as you are still upset about even being asked the question. I did nothing wrong in describing your edits and asking you the question and you have made no case that I did; you are just lashing out defensively. If you become ready to talk more, please ping me. Until then, good luck to you. Jytdog (talk) 22:28, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

I am not being defensive, I am being offensive. My defensiveness was stated with the denial of any paid editing. That was all the defense I need as I am not involved in paid editing, end of story. Now, there is the topic of you accusing me because of what I feel - although you deny - is retaliation for remarks at ANI and now dodging your conduct and trying to make it seem that I need to "calm down" to discuss with you. I do not need to calm down as I am. Even if I wasn't, I have every right to be upset. Again, you just don't see it. So, don't come back to my talk page unless you are here to do some redacting. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:33, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Geektime for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Geektime 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/Geektime (blog) 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. Brianhe (talk) 11:55, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Feel free to nominate any article I created for deletion. Based on the off-based accusation from the editor in the previous thread, I will not be defending any of them so as not to give an appearance of impropriety.--CNMall41 (talk) 20:06, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Geektime website logo.jpg

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:45, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Wipeout (roller coaster) - Changes rolled back

Hi,

I've reverted/removed a couple of your changes to this article.

- You removed the second image because it was supposedly a "gallery" image. Galleries aren't prohibited, they're just generally frowned upon *if* they're gratuitous, repetitive and don't add to the encyclopedic value of the article. The single image shown here was quite clearly a different angle and aspect of the coaster that wasn't obvious from the main image. More importantly, it wasn't even part of a gallery in the first place.

- You claimed that Nickelback referenced the "Coca Cola Roller" (i.e. the coaster's original name) in a song. I think this is unlikely. The actual line in the article you cite is "Coca Cola, roller coaster"; note the comma- in that context, it's not even clear that "coca cola" and "roller coaster" are connected beyond being next to each other in the song. I doubt those lyrics are even intended to have much significance beyond the general vibe they convey. It's unlikely that a Canadian guy is referring to a minor roller coaster that was briefly called the "Coca Cola Roller" on another continent when he was 13 or 14 years old.

Thanks for adding the refs however; the only thing I'd be wary of is whether they got the information from (an older version of) the Wikipedia article in the first place, which would make them circular (and invalid), but I don't have time to look into that at present.

Ubcule (talk) 20:43, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The River (Jordan Feliz song), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The River. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:25, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Blumberg Capital Logo.png

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:37, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Regarding Islamic Republic of Iran Army Day

Considering that you participated in the discussion here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Islamic_Republic_of_Iran_Army_Day your opinion would be appreciated regarding the suggestion at the bottom of the page here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Islamic_Republic_of_Iran_Army --Dreddmoto (talk) 13:22, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Pati Jinich

Thanks for your comment on my Pati Jinich article! It says her birthday is March 30 here https://live.washingtonpost.com/free-range-03-30.html Krisenoel (talk) 18:45, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. Continued thread on your talk page. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:04, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:ChargeBee Logo.png

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:31, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Notice of Biographies of living persons noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to inform you that a discussion is taking place at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Michael Gastauer.The discussion is about the topic Michael Gastauer. Thank you. Murph9000 (talk) 13:19, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of SimpliVity for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article SimpliVity 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/SimpliVity 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. Light2021 (talk) 06:33, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of SimpliVity

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 SimpliVity, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

• It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.
• It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, 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. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.
• It appears to be about something made up, and 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. (See section A11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.)

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. 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. Light2021 (talk) 22:14, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Note about deletion

I was upfront and honest as possible and have been beaten to a pulp by editors: An entire week of trying to do something good for someone I barely know flushed right down the drain. Still, thanks for the learning experience. Wmshultz (talk) 00:33, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi Wmshultz. Thanks for the message and please do not feel discouraged. While it may seem thta what you are doing is something good, the events surrounding your comments at the AfD look suspicious. No one is accusing you of being someone else or working with someone else. I am simply saying that the conduct gives such an appearance. If you are not anyone associated with the company, my apologies. --CNMall41 (talk) 00:51, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. Would there be a way for me to remove my own comments and username from the page? I used a real name with this and think if all of my changes have been deleted then I'd just like to be removed from that page entirely. I will continue learning about wikipedia in the future no doubt -- could I just go in and edit the source, putting "removed" with my signature beside it? I don't care if anyone at wikipedia internal, editors see it but it isn't anyone else's business, especially since I was accused of doing something wrong and have that note at the top of the page. Thoughts? Wmshultz (talk) 18:45, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Using my real name was obviously a mistake plus thinking nobody else does this (unless you are Mr. or Mrs. CN Mall), but this is a privacy issue. Wmshultz (talk) 18:47, 28 October 2016 (UTC). Do you suggest I even delete this profile or can I rename it with an alias? Bottom line is that since all of my changes were removed from that page then I as well as all comments placed by me should also be removed. It would be as if I was never there. Can it be done? Thanks for your patience and assistance. Wmshultz (talk) 19:17, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) You can rename your account by following the instructions at Wikipedia:Changing username you can get more information there. However if you have a COI you still need to declare it and if you receive compensation for your edits you must declare that per Wikipedia's policy on paid editing and the Terms of Use. Changing username or creating a new account to hide a COI would be, in my opinion, a bad faith action and may be considered WP:SOCKing. Changing your username for privacy purposes going forward and openly declaring any COI would be proper. As to deleting edits, the policy on that can be found at WP:REVDEL and you can ask one of the admins listed here. Jbh^Talk 19:49, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks @Jbhunley:. I am not on as often as I like so I appreciate the direction you gave @Wmshultz:. For Wmshultz, I assure you my name is not CNMall41 although sometimes it would be easier to pronounce than my real name. I would not recommend anyone use their real name on Wikipedia unless they don't care if anyone knows who they are. However, this does become a slippery slope so I advise people to avoid it altogether. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:13, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi

I have added a bit of content you contributed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/POLi Payments to Wikipedia:CHURN, as it applies nicely to the essay. Copy attribution has been provided in an edit summary and on the page itself. Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:44, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks @Northamerica1000:. Happy to have contributed to it. Unfortunately, I think that both Light2021 and SwisterTwister are using their personal interpretation of the essay to support their Deltionsit views. You saw the example on Poli Payments but also on Simpay, Align Commerce, and a few others. Despite the long list of advise and warnings already give to user Light2021 on his talk page, he is still acting like a bull in a china shop. ST has also recently been the subject of an thread for his work at AfD. I agree that we need to watch for WP:CHURN, but we also need to preserve the Wikipedia processes and not use it as a way to WP:DISRUPTPOINT.--CNMall41 (talk) 19:13, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Mophie Website Logo.png

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:09, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, CNMall41. 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. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

The Challenge Series

The Challenge Series is a current drive on English Wikipedia to encourage article improvements and creations globally through a series of 50,000/10,000/1000 Challenges for different regions, countries and topics. All Wikipedia editors in good standing are invited to participate.

• Use {{subst:The Challenge series invitation}} to invite others using this template.
• Sent to users at Northamerica1000/Mailing list. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:15, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm there. --CNMall41 (talk) 05:50, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

Hello CNMall41: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:30, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message