Stephen MUFC

Welcome

Hello, Stephen MUFC, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like it here and decide to stay. If you are looking for help, please do any of the following:

• visit the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have
• type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will answer your questions shortly
• visit the directory of help pages

There are a lot of standards and policies here, but as long as you are editing in good faith, you are encouraged to be bold in updating pages. Here are a few links you might find useful:

• The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Editing tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk and vote pages using four tildes (~~~~), which produces your name and the current date. Also, it would be a huge help if you could explain each of your edits with an edit summary. Again, welcome! --Evb-wiki (talk) 01:45, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:MuseWiki @ 20. 15 on 10.11.09.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:MuseWiki @ 20. 15 on 10.11.09.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 23:43, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Referenda in New Zealand

Please read Talk:Referenda in New Zealand#Referenda vs referendums, and the links I provided there. We discussed the title of the article before creating it - see Wikipedia:New Zealand collaboration/History#Referendums in New Zealand. If you still believe the rename is correct, could you please post on the article talk page explaining your reasoning, otherwise please revert your move.-gadfium 05:28, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Referendum articles

Please could you move them all back per Referendum#Terminology. Cheers, пﮟოьεԻ 57 14:46, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

You seem to be acting against consensus by moving all these referendum articles. Have you made any attempt to discuss the moves? I will revert them to the naming at the link Number 57 gave above.-gadfium 23:24, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

I have raised the matter at WP:ANI#Mass page move: referendums to referenda. You may like to comment there although I am only asking for technical advice on how to revert.-gadfium 23:34, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

It will be a lot of work to undo all your incorrect changes. Can you please not do this kind of thing again? Thanks. --John (talk) 00:24, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

The changes are not incorrect!!! Referendums is just a dumbing down of the proper plural of referendum in the same way as formulas should be formulae, stadiums should be stadia, geniuses should be genii et cetera... Stephen MUFC (talk) 01:35, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Have you not read the links we provided you with above? I am no expert on Latin gerunds. Perhaps you are. However, the Oxford English Dictionary and Fowler's Modern English Usage provide adequate guidance that the term "referendums" is correct. If you believe there should be a change, please gain consensus at Referendum#Terminology.-gadfium 02:37, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't understand how they can say it is a logically preferable if Latin has no plural for it itself other than referenda. Stephen MUFC (talk) 13:21, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Latin has no plural for it; it's an English word so it uses the English plural. To most people 'referenda' sounds like cod Latin - a word invented in the belief it sounds like Latin but which has no actual connection. However the place for this discussion is at Talk:Referendum, and the advice you've been given is good: don't make large numbers of controversial page moves without getting consensus. Sam Blacketer (talk) 13:50, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

But the gerundive plural is referenda...

No it isn't. Gerunds don't have a plural. If they do, then it would be the gerund itself in the plural, which is a different meaning - a referendum is an occasion when the electorate is invited to vote on a specific provision, and a referenda (also singular) is an occasion when the electorate is invited to vote on multiple specific provisions. Sam Blacketer (talk) 14:14, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

I said gerundive. Stephen MUFC (talk) 14:16, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

And regarding edits like this, on Chemistry articles WP:MOSCHEM trumps WP:ENGVAR; we follow IUPAC usage, which means we use aluminium and also sulfur. Derivatives are spelled in the same way. Please, get consensus for any other sweeping changes of this sort you wish to make. Thanks, --John (talk) 07:05, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

In that case why is there a whole article called phosphine? Should that not be called phosphane?? That is it's IUPAC name after all. Stephen MUFC (talk) 13:21, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Difficult because there are two conflicting guidelines. Wikipedia uses IUPAC names to decide which to use when there's a conflict in spelling, as with Sulfur and Aluminium. But there is also the 'use common names' guideline which means that we use the better known name in preference to an IUPAC systematic name - so for example see Acetylene for the article and Ethyne for a redirect. Sam Blacketer (talk) 13:50, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

But surely John's comment that "WP:MOSCHEM trumps WP:ENGVAR" means these page should all be moved to pages headed with their IUPAC names and be corrected accordingly. So please don't have a go at me for making "controversial" changes when there are plenty of "controversial" articles relating to the same kind of thing. Stephen MUFC (talk) 13:58, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

If you want to propose page moves then them, Dear Liza. But one of the joys of Wikipedia is that it isn't always forced to be consistent. Sam Blacketer (talk) 14:14, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

If it's not forced to be consistent why revert my changes then...? Stephen MUFC (talk) 14:16, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Because 'referendums' already had consensus among editors as the plural of referendum. Consensus can change but you have to discuss it first before trying to force a change as a fait accompli. Sam Blacketer (talk) 14:20, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm not talking about that one, I'm talking about the changes relating to sulphur and for the record I wasn't trying to accomplish a fait accompli I was replacing any instances of -iz- with -is- and getting rid of any serial commas. Stephen MUFC (talk) 14:26, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

You are wrong again. See American and British English spelling differences#Greek spellings. -Ize is acceptable in most cases in British English. -Ize endings are not an Americanism; see here for example. WP:ENGVAR will give you a basic appreciation for when and whether it is acceptable to change one national variety into another. --John (talk) 23:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

When did I say it was an Americanism?? And thank you yes I have actually read that article before. Stephen MUFC (talk) 16:22, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Ah, ok. So, why would you be "replacing any instances of -iz- with -is- and getting rid of any serial commas" then, if it is correct in both main dialects of English? --John (talk) 05:58, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

To me (even though technically correct) -iz- is just ugly and a language should be beautiful and since -is- is also correct I prefer it. As for the serial commas, 90% of the time they are totally redundant. Stephen MUFC (talk) 13:03, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

I love that you care this much about language. On a collaborative project, it's extremely important to work with others and observe established consensus. Let me know if you ever need any more help. --John (talk) 17:59, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Anglicisation of articles.

I remind you again of Wikipedia's policy on national varieties of English which you may find at WP:ENGVAR. Put simply you are advised against changing things without substantive reason. I'm a British English speaker myself but the current policy exists for a reason and making changes changes aginst policy is simply disruptive and creates works for everyone undoing your actions. I see you have been reminded of this previously so please take this on board since it is going to be a lot of work repairing the damage you have caused. Crispmuncher (talk) 19:17, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

This is your final warning against disruptive editing. You have been directed to the appropriate policy concerning national varieties of English repeatedly and over an extended period, and yet you still choose to ignore them. Further edits in this regard may result in a block or other sanction. Crispmuncher (talk) 10:49, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Template:Paraguay Squad 2010 World Cup

Hi Stephen. Why do you insist on changing Nelson Haedo Valdez to Nelson Valdez on this template? Logic demands to keep the direct link instead of the redirected one. If not, the player's name is not bolded on his article page. I can't explain it without an example, check Rodolfo Gamarra#External links how in both templates his name is in bold. If a redirect were to be used it would appear as a normal internal link. Regards. Fache (talk) 21:21, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

August 2010

This is the final warning you will receive regarding your disruptive edits. If you vandalise Wikipedia again, as you did at Paraboloid, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Your edits continue to constitute vandalism since they are in knowing violation of policy regarding the use of national varieties of English. Crispmuncher (talk) 14:52, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

September 2010

In editing and renaming Toy store, you switched from American English to British English. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For subjects exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to other English-speaking countries, such as Canada, Australia, or New Zealand, use the variety of English used there. If it is an international topic, use the same form of English the original author used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you.

Bébé name

Can you please not change his name, he released a statement that he uses the name Bébé (even tho it may or may not fit the Portuguese lang, he prefer the double é)

see his own T-Shirt from the link bellow (He uses that in the games he plays) -

Bébé T-Shirt

- 217.132.8.244 (talk) 17:07, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

English plurals

"Formulas" is commonly used in multiple contexts - see formula and also Dictionary of chemical formulas and the categories Category:Chemical formulas and Category:Molecular formulas. The word may have been taken from Latin but it's standard to use the normal rules of English pluralisation for loan words. Timrollpickering (talk) 10:36, 13 January 2011 (UTC) No it isn't. Just because it has been bastardised in America doesn't mean it is correct. Stephen MUFC (talk) 12:53, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

January 2011

This is your last warning; the next time you vandalise Wikipedia, as you did at Spoiled child, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.

• How was that vandalism exactly? Stephen MUFC (talk) 11:44, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of MuseWiki

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

Fails WP:WEB

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. LiteralKa (talk) 02:05, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:MuseWiki @ 20. 15 on 10.11.09.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:MuseWiki @ 20. 15 on 10.11.09.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. 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. Courcelles 04:43, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Changing spelling at The Dark Knight Rises

In a recent edit to the page The Dark Knight Rises, you changed one or more words from one international variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, or New Zealand, use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the original author used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. - SudoGhost 10:08, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Kolkata IPA change

Regarding your edit, I think you are not a native Bengali speaker, and so not aware of the pronunciation of Kolkata. So, to clarify this, the IPA has been changed to ˈkɒlkɑːtɑː. Now, I am not very familiar with IPA, so may commit mistakes, but am sure about the pronunciation, as I am a native Bengali-speaker from the city. The two "a" after "K" and "t" are pronounced like the a in "bra". Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 16:25, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

I am not a native Bengali speaker but what I changed was the English pronunciation which is [kɒlˈkætə]. The current Bengali pronunciation shown on the page is [ˈkolkat̪a] so if you want to represent the correct pronunciation for Bengali change that. Stephen MUFC (talk) 17:21, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I got your point. However, is it usual that the English and Bengali pronunciation of a city name (with unchanged spelling) would differ so much? When you are referring to English pronunciation, what type of English pronunciation(or, what accent) are you using? It is not unexpected that English-speaking people from different region of the world might pronounce it differently. But the ideal pronunciation (or the way one should try to pronounce it) remains the same, the Bengali pronunciation, which the name of the city. How can English (or Japanese, or Russian, or whatever) pronunciation of a city name can differ? I have not hard any native-English speaking people in the North East US pronounce the name the way you have put it in IPA. --Dwaipayan (talk) 01:54, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

It is quite usual for English pronunciations to change the native pronunciation since they normally sound strange in English. I'm from the north of England and everyone in Britain pronounces it this way. The Bengali pronunciation though the correct native one is incorrect in English and the IPA for Bengali is next to it anyway. Stephen MUFC (talk) 08:43, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

User page edits

Hi! Thanks for the edits in my user page. Have not read it in a while! Even the India portal wikilink was wrong!--Dwaipayan (talk) 17:32, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm pleased you're grateful. Stephen MUFC (talk) 17:33, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Smile!

A smile for you You’ve just received a random act of kindness! Mike Restivo (talk) 17:00, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 13

Hi. When you recently edited Neymar, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Paulo Henrique (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:31, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Father vs. Stack

Per edits like this, where you changed the "closest English equivalent" from "father" (that is, /ɑː/) to "stack" or "trap" (that is, /æ/). I can see how you might be motivated to do this. Phonetically speaking, a number of the vowels indicated are [a], which shares many features with [æ]; they are both front and both open. In addition, quite a few of these vowels are short, which differs from /ɑː/ in English.

The problem lies in the variability of /æ/ in English. Very often, it is diphthongal, so that it is closer to [ɛə] or even [ɪə]. In addition, some of the vowels (such as that of Catalan and Spanish) are not front, but central. This would make the choice of /æ/ or /ɑː/ arbitrary were it not for the phonetic variability that I mentioned.

If you are still doubtful about this, consider also that many interlingual guides and dictionaries will compare the /a/ of a language to that of father. This is why I've reverted your changes. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 01:41, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

An additional source of confusion is that the symbol /a/ is often used to represent vowels that are actually more back than front. This is the case in Burmese. The important thing to remember is that IPA symbols (especially those for vowels) are flexible in their reference and that phoneticians often use the typographically most familiar symbol even when another symbol is closer to the actual sound, as long as no ambiguity arises. Thus in languages with only one low vowel, /a/ is usually the symbol used since it's more familiar than /ɑ/ (and better lends itself to combination with diacritics for tones, such as /á/ and /à/) and since no ambiguity arises in languages that don't contrast a front low vowel from a back low vowel. Angr (talk) 08:02, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 26

Hi. When you recently edited Luís Filipe Vieira, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tyre (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:56, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Reduced vowels

Hi,

I see you're removing reduced vowels from IPA transcriptions, as at Sarah Palin and Saturn. The latter is clearly wrong: Saturn does not have the full vowel of "tern", but the reduced vowel of "cistern", at least according to the OED. Likewise, I always hear Palin's name pronounced with a reduced vowel. — kwami (talk) 09:38, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Well English doesn't really have the sound /ɨ/. However, yes, Saturn shouldn't have been changed - apologies for that one. Stephen MUFC (talk) 11:10, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

We're using ⟨ɨ⟩ for the sound some dictionaries transcribe ⟨ᵻ⟩ or ⟨ə̈⟩ (just one dot over the ə; I don't have that on my keyboard). The reason we don't use those is that people have insisted we use only IPA symbols, and ⟨ɨ⟩ is used in some sources. So ⟨ɨ⟩ is correct for "schwi" given our conventions. — kwami (talk) 19:44, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

February 2013

In a recent edit to the page Mongoloid, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, or New Zealand, use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the original author used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. —Noiratsi (talk) 23:44, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

My apologies on this one, I can see that your reason for correcting the title of the Encyclopædia Britannica was perfectly valid and I was wrong to revert it. Have a nice day :) —Noiratsi (talk) 00:55, 10 February 2013 (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) 14:13, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Stephen MUFC. 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)

October 2017

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Marcus Rashford. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Mattythewhite (talk) 19:55, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

The stats I added can be seen here. Stephen MUFC (talk) 20:09, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Stephen MUFC. 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, Stephen MUFC. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

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) 00:12, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

March 2020

Please stop adding unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did on Anthony Martial. This violates Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:05, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

I didn't add any unsourced content, I simply corrected something on the page that was incorrect according to the source already there. Stephen MUFC (talk) 12:05, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Language & Religion

Hi Stephen,

I saw your user page after I noticed you were the last person to edit the Ethics of Ambiguity entry.

In any event, I’d like to discuss with you further and I believe I have a viewpoint that may be of interest to you, and at very least your viewpoint does interest me.

Can we chat? Thewolfde (talk) 06:44, 22 June 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) 02:27, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Matěj Kovář

Any reason why you're continuing to restore unsourced content about a BLP?! GiantSnowman 22:11, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

See the relevant talk page. Stephen MUFC (talk)

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) 00:31, 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) 00:41, 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) 00:33, 28 November 2023 (UTC)