User talk:AusLondonder/Archive 1

Question

[1] Hi, why did you undo? Precedent in 2010 is for brackets? Thanks, 1Potato2Potato3Potato4 (talk) 10:44, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

OK, sorry AusLondonder (talk) 10:46, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

It's not a problem, I was just curious. Thanks, 1Potato2Potato3Potato4 (talk) 10:48, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

AusLondonder, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi AusLondonder! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Rosiestep (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the Teahouse This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 17:30, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Endorsements in the United Kingdom general election, 2015

added links pointing to Republican Party, Peter Duncan, Owen Jones and Tommy Robinson

London mayoral election, 2012

added links pointing to Owen Jones and Danny Rich

Old Oak and Park Royal Development Corporation

added a link pointing to West London

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

 Done AusLondonder (talk) 00:53, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

You need consensus first

Please do not make widespread changes without consensus. The lists involving countries use the article title name. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 17:56, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited United Kingdom general election, 2015 (England), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dudley North. 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) 08:58, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

 Done AusLondonder (talk) 00:53, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Speedy Deletes

You keep adding the speedy delete tags to articles, but they don't fit the criteria one bit.--Yankees10 17:04, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

What particular articles are you referring to? AusLondonder (talk) 17:04, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Without speaking for the OP, I would say that this PROD this PROD is problematic. You claim there are no references, which is absolutely false. What due diligence did you perform to arrive at the conclusion that the subject doesn't meet the GNG? This PROD was supported with a nonsensical rationale, "No credible reason for existence". Your speedy delete nom of Frank Pelzman is improper. You nominated the subject under A7, claiming that there's no credible claim of significance. If the subject is the mayor of a town, it is A) plausible for this to happen and B) reasonable that being mayor might make you notable. Please read Wikipedia:Credible claim of significance. With only 500+ edits under your belt, I have to strongly urge you to cool it with the deletion nominations and get some more experience with Wikipedia guidelines first. We're in no hurry to delete articles and your overzealousness is putting potentially useful articles at risk. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:09, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

In the first case I did not claim there was no sources. I do not believe being a Mayor of a local town is a credible claim to significance, as per WP:POLITICIAN. Nor do I believe a creek has any credible reason for an article. I don't accept I'm putting articles at risk by nominating them. Nice to meet you too, by the way. AusLondonder (talk) 19:14, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

In the first example I used the wrong diff. My mistake. Fixed above or see here. Nextly, you are confusing notability for "a credible claim of significance". For speedy deletions, we're only trying to figure out if there is a claim of significance. "Mayor" is a claim of significance. That doesn't mean every Mayor is notable, and this guy may not make the cut down the road. "Joe Smith is a writer" doesn't claim any significance. "Joe Smith is a writer who has published ten books on mustaches" claims significance. Notability is a much higher standard. I hope this helps. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:25, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

An article that has been proposed for deletion or nominated for deletion cannot be re-prodded

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from North Fork Brewery, which you proposed for deletion, because its deletion has previously been contested or viewed as controversial. Proposed deletion is not for controversial deletions. For this reason, proposed deletion is disallowed on articles that have previously been de-{{prod}}ed, even by the article creator, or which have previously been listed on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article, but feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! —C.Fred (talk) 18:48, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Could you please explain...

You applied a {{prod}} to Robert Rennie. Rennie was a General, and, as per WP:SOLDIER, Generals are almost always considered inherently notable.

I wonder if you could explain why you think Rennie should be an exception to this convention? Geo Swan (talk) 19:00, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

WP:SOLDIER is an essay. The article has very few sources. But I'll remove the PROD for now.AusLondonder (talk) 19:02, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

May 2, 2015

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

May 2015

Hi AusLondonder. Thank you for your work on patrolling new pages and tagging for speedy deletion. I'm just letting you know that I declined your deletion request for Zutto.../Last Minute/Walk, a page that you tagged for speedy deletion, because the criterion you used or the reason you gave does not cover this kind of page. This article does not meet the A9 criteria as the recording artist has an article. Please take a moment to look at the suggested tasks for patrollers, criteria for speedy deletion, and particularly, the section covering non-criteria. Such pages are best tagged with proposed deletion or proposed deletion for biographies of living persons, or sent to the appropriate deletion discussion. Thanks! Michael Greiner 16:35, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

OK, noted. I do apologise. AusLondonder (talk) 16:37, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

I added a prod as no evidence of charting nor any reliable sources, just promotional linksAusLondonder (talk) 16:39, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Lost State Records

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

A tag has been placed on Lost State Records, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an acceptable page. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item G11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this page is not blatant advertising, . Clicking that button will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. You are welcome to edit the page to fix this problem, but please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. As well as removing promotional phrasing, it helps to add factual encyclopaedic information to the page, and add citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the page will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Treyhanawalt (talk) 17:47, 3 May 2015 (UTC) This page should not be speedily deleted because… (added other references, cited other independent sources, removed any promotional descriptions) --Treyhanawalt (talk) 17:43, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Poisoned Arrows: An investigative journey through the forbidden lands of West Papua

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Poisoned Arrows: An investigative journey through the forbidden lands of West Papua, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.monbiot.com/books/poisoned-arrows/.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 17:27, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 4 May

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 Camden Town with Primrose Hill (ward) page, your edit caused a broken reference name (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) 00:27, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

The Original Barnstar

	The Original Barnstar
	You are very, very much appreciated for United Kingdom general election, 2015 (London) Best wishes.Eshwar.omTalk tome 22:40, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Assuming Good Faith

I probably find attempts at gay conversion as repulsive as you do. However, quoting a section of WP:OC at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2015 May 7#Category:Books about preventing homosexuality is more likely to get your nomination passed than ad hominem criticisms of other editors. Thanks. RevelationDirect (talk) 11:46, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is AusLondonder's battleground conduct. Thank you. Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 17:04, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

This block is the result of multiple incidents that were cited at the WP:ANI discussion: you have to comment on contributions, not contributors. Continued incivility will result in longer blocks, perhaps culminating in an indefinite block. Nyttend (talk) 17:41, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

User:Nyttend - other users commented on me first, accusing me of having an agenda and acting in bad faith, not to mention the swearing and abuse. I cannot believe this. AusLondonder (talk) 20:51, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

This must be the worst and most selective incident of selective and biased enforcement of all time. AusLondonder (talk) 20:57, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

If you think that others have also acted problematically, give me your evidence and I'll investigate it. The point is that you've infringed on our civility policy repeatedly and, as far as I can tell, unrepentantly, and as I already noted, you need to take this as a shot across the bow. Nyttend (talk) 23:19, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

User:Nyttend Look here - the admin closed as not abusive enough - what is it I did?

1.This user undid my edit, with an edit summary 'no I don't think so' which seems to breach WP:ESDONTS namely don't 'Make snide comments' or 'Be aggressive' 2.I tried to discuss at User talk:Cassianto but the user was again rather condescending and seemed to be ganging up on me with other users he already knows 3.When discussion began on at Talk:Moors murders, I simply put 'I think it is notable enough for a single line' - however, Cassianto replied 'Then you need to look up the definition of "notable", clearly.' (Ignoring WP:NNC) I believe this breaches WP:CIVIL - when I indicated the editor should read WP:CIVIL they replied 'I did once, and I vowed never to read it again' 4.It is breathtaking the way some editors feel policies don't apply to them. I was not rude to the editor, but I was treated in a condescending and arrogant manner over a very minor matter

The user then preceded to launch a very abusive and malicious attack on me. He linked my 710 contributions [166] and entirely falsely wrote 'Not so ridiculous when you look at his contributions which seem to be all geared around the May elections. This user seems to be on a campaign trial on behalf of UKIP'. This is called blatantly misleading other editors, surely in violation of policies such as WP:AGF, WP:BITE, WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA. I have nothing to do with UKIP. I am not a member of any political party. I am not enrolled to vote in the United Kingdom. So these are ludicrous allegations. I have created 21 pages, 16 non-related to the elections. Articles I have created such as Endorsements in the United Kingdom general election, 2015 are very important and been widely edited and viewed. I have also created articles such as United Kingdom general election, 2015 (Wales) in accordance with precedent. I have worked hard on the project for good and in good faith. Examples: List of European Union member states by GDP growth and Mr Galloway Goes to Washington. I have successfully nominated dozens of articles for speedy deletion. As a new editor, I am deeply upset by how hard it is to edit this site without abuse and being treated like a moron (WP:BITE). It certainly is not encouraging for those wanting to make a difference in good faith. Nothing at WP:SPA points to me. 5.The editor has breached multiple policies.

Editor still going. He has written now 'What makes you think I give a fuck about your political leanings?' (despite questioning them) and removed the ANI notification remarking 'what a waste of time'. What is the point of WP:CIVIL, WP:AGF, WP:NPA, WP:BITE?

What did I say that was uncivil? Mellowed Fillmore said 'It is my view that AusLondonder is clearly not here to build an encyclopedia. He is likely to remain a problematic editor and I'm not sure that any more patience needs to be shown' - yet I have created 27 pages including Endorsements in the United Kingdom general election, 2015 and List of European Union member states by GDP growth. How can they possibly say that with your agreement? I will address each other point at the ANI if you wish. AusLondonder (talk) 23:38, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

So it's not abusive to say 'fucking', 'fuck', 'bullshit', accuse of WP:SPA accuse of breaching WP:SPA but what I did deserves a ban? Look here The admin said this abuse did not even deserve a warning - yet my conduct deserve a block this is utterly unbelievable. AusLondonder (talk) 23:52, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

User:Nyttend...AusLondonder (talk) 07:07, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

For one thing, please read the forum-shopping page: I will not attempt to over-rule a decision at a closed discussion, especially one so recent. Meanwhile, linking your contributions and using them as a basis for saying "He seems to be on a pro-ukip campaign" is not a problem of the sort: maybe it's inaccurate, but unless it's a long-term pattern of behavior (e.g. he's harassing you long-term), it's not something deserving sanctions. The problems that led me to block you are not a matter of individual words; it's behavior patterns, with things like ad homines together with what looks to me like a battleground approach. Your comments here reinforce that: you need to stop beating the dead horse of "Everybody else is hating on me" and stop resuscitating arguments that have already been closed. If you continue spending this much space, and wasting this much time for other people, you'll soon be ignored at best. Nyttend (talk) 13:35, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

But wasn't it your decision User:Nyttend? Can I appeal an expired block? I only even responded to much more abusive attacks, I never attacked anyone else first. Editors accused me of being a sock, or WP:SPA with no evidence, in contravention of policy. I have never sought to engaged in battleground behaviour. I also want to 'resuscitate' as I feel the block besmirches my record and was deeply unfair. AusLondonder (talk) 03:36, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Cameron's Coup

added a link pointing to Faber

Endorsements in the United Kingdom general election, 2015

added a link pointing to Workers Revolutionary Party

Meat Market: Female Flesh Under Capitalism

added a link pointing to Red Pepper

Poisoned Arrows: An investigative journey through the forbidden lands of West Papua

added a link pointing to West Papua

Sarah Hayward

added a link pointing to Channel 5 News

You Can't Say That

added a link pointing to Chris Mullin

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:42, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

 Done AusLondonder (talk) 01:01, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

May 2015

Your addition has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 23:45, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi, User:FreeRangeFrog, in what way was it a copyright violation? Certainly news to me....AusLondonder (talk) 00:29, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Nevermind that, the bot flagged it because you reproduced the quotes, but quotes are obviously not copyvio. I've restored it. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 00:37, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of 2015 London general election protest

The article 2015 London general election protest has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

NOT NEWS

While all constructive 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. DGG ( talk ) 05:20, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Undercover: The True Story of Britain's Secret Police

The article Undercover: The True Story of Britain's Secret Police has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

essentially promotional.

While all constructive 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. DGG ( talk ) 05:24, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Mafia State (book)

The article Mafia State (book) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

essentially promotional. Buzz words from a review do not make for notability

While all constructive 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. DGG ( talk ) 05:25, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of City of Sin: London and its vices for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article City of Sin: London and its vices 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/City of Sin: London and its vices 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. DGG ( talk ) 05:29, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of 2015 London general election protest

The article 2015 London general election protest has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not notable yet, only 100 protesters according to LadyLeitmotif, a mere storm in a tea cup for now.

While all constructive 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. Lerdthenerd wiki defender 15:32, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of 2015 London general election protest for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2015 London general election protest 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/2015 London general election protest 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. 1Potato2Potato3Potato4 (talk) 19:44, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of A Scandal in Belgravia (book) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article A Scandal in Belgravia (book) 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/A Scandal in Belgravia (book) 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. VMS Mosaic (talk) 10:14, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Guantánamo: America's War on Human Rights for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Guantánamo: America's War on Human Rights 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/Guantánamo: America's War on Human Rights 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. VMS Mosaic (talk) 10:25, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of 2015 Reclaim Brixton protest for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2015 Reclaim Brixton protest 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/2015 Reclaim Brixton protest 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. Ad Orientem (talk) 04:14, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Sockorama

Yeah, I saw that. I'm looking into it right now, including a sockcheck. Bearcat (talk) 01:41, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BeaverTails18, if you want to add a comment or anything. Bearcat (talk) 02:01, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Warning - Content removal

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at Islamic Relief, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you..--Bali Makmur (talk) 21:35, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

As someone who just dropped into this talk page and was a little surprised to see the above claim, it doesn't take a lot to see that the accusation of disruptive editing by AusLondonder is nonsense. --Super Nintendo Chalmers (talk) 22:25, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

@Super Nintendo Chalmers: Indeed this editor seems to have a bit of a record of poor behaviour. They have edit-warred, used misleading edit summaries, removed sourced content and failed to follow WP:NPOV repeatedly. This template (from an editor with 108 edits) is about my removal of a "terrorist" category from an article about a British Islamic charity. AusLondonder (talk) 22:37, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Anyway, as you've seen I decided to take the category to CFD because of the major potential for misuse AusLondonder (talk) 22:40, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Leonie Cooper, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Socialist society. 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) 09:51, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Corbyn pic

I note you have not voted yourself in the corbyn beauty pageant, if you were going to vote ... the amusing thing is i sure Corbyn himself would not mind which picture it was :) -- BOD -- 22:25, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

@Bodney: I'm sure he'd be horrified by the very concept, to be quite honest! I think the current pic is certainly not the best. But I'm not convinced entirely on what picture is the best replacement. I'll probably make my mind up in the next couple of days :) AusLondonder (talk) 04:17, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Ports of Nepal?

Please see my comments on your proposal re Category:Ports of Nepal Hugo999 (talk) 23:27, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

@Hugo999: Thanks for pointing that out, I have replied at CFDS. AusLondonder (talk) 01:14, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Pride 2016

As a participant of WikiProject LGBT studies, you are invited to participate in the third annual Wiki Loves Pride campaign, which runs through the month of June. The purpose of the campaign is to create and improve content related to LGBT culture and history. How can you help?

1. Create or improve LGBT-related Wikipedia pages and showcase the results of your work here
2. Document local LGBT culture and history by taking pictures at pride events and uploading your images to Wikimedia Commons
3. Contribute to an LGBT-related task force at another Wikimedia project (Wikidata, Wikimedia Commons, Wikivoyage, etc.)

Looking for topics? The Tasks page, which you are welcome to update, offers some ideas and wanted articles.

This campaign is supported by the Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, an officially recognized affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. The group's mission is to develop LGBT-related content across all Wikimedia projects, in all languages. Visit the affiliate's page at Meta-Wiki for more information, or follow Wikimedia LGBT+ on Facebook. Remember, Wiki Loves Pride is about creating and improving LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects, and content should have a neutral point of view. One does not need to identify as LGBT or any other gender or sexual minority to participate. This campaign is about adding accurate, reliable information to Wikipedia, plain and simple, and all are welcome! If you have any questions, please leave a message on the campaign's talk page.

Thanks, and happy editing! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 19:46, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nikolaos Nikolopoulos, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Achaia. 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) 13:33, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

• Survey, (hosted by Qualtrics)

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:48, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited London Legacy Development Corporation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Biggs. 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) 09:04, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Murder of Jo Cox

Hey :)

I'd just like to point out a few things regarding the draft you just created:

• Under British English (which should apply given it's a British event), an assassination has to have a political motive. Since a motive is not yet known, this cannot be an assassination. (I note that you have since renamed the article from me starting to write this, but the infobox still says asssassination).
• It's not a murder until it's proven as such in a court of law - there's some discussion on Talk:Jo Cox about this. In the UK, Sub Judice applies now since an arrest has been made, which has potential implications for those reporting on the event in the UK, which we both are.
• You've named the alleged perpetrator of an unproven crime - I'd like to point you int the direction of WP:BLPCRIME

I'm not disagreeing with splitting it into a new article, just please be careful with this!

[stwalkerster|talk] 03:04, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Murder of Jo Cox for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Murder of Jo Cox 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/Murder of Jo Cox 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. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 06:58, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Where?

Where is this other nomination? Surely it would be at the current AfD's page title? StillWaitingForConnection (talk) 18:09, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

It is referenced on the talkpage. It was however at the earlier title of the page. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Murder of Jo Cox AusLondonder (talk) 18:12, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Well

You and AGF don't get along very well, I think. "Pointy, sly and contentious"? Drmies (talk) 11:51, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

@Drmies: you and BRD don't get on very well. AusLondonder (talk) 12:33, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Depends. A revert whose edit summary contains only insults, that's not likely to make anyone discuss anything. BRD is an essay, as you know; AGF is a fundamental principle in this joint. Drmies (talk) 20:39, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

You waited until less eyes were on the article to remove a massive section which you know had community support. You arbitrarily chose some nations as "involved" - not French neighbours such as the Netherlands or the United Kingdom. You left the United States in unsurprisingly. The revert summary was describing your behaviour not you as a person or you as an editor. I have disputed your arbitrary and pointy removal now should be the time to discuss. AusLondonder (talk) 01:54, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Flags on Death of Jo Cox

Please see this discussion Mlpearc (open channel) 15:39, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

@Mlpearc: Why bother starting a discussion if midway through with no consensus for your position, you show huge disrespect for your fellow editors by making the disputed change with a totally misunderstood rationale? AusLondonder (talk) 04:26, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Please check the times. Mlpearc (open channel) 04:28, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

@Mlpearc: Apologies, although I think the status quo should have remained before starting the discussion per WP:BRD AusLondonder (talk) 04:36, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Same-sex marriage in the United Kingdom, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Unitarians. 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) 10:01, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

There's an AfD about a topic related to you

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hallel Yaffa Ariel--Bolter21 (talk to me) 18:53, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

AFD

Little late in writing this but wanted to say that I hope there aren't any hard feelings about Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Reactions_to_the_2016_Orlando_nightclub_shooting. Hope you know that it has nothing to do with animus toward the LGBTQ community or anything. I just feel that many of the news-related articles are TOOSOON but it's becoming clear I'm in the minority with that opinion (e.g., Talk:2016_shooting_of_Baton_Rouge_police_officers#Way_too_soon). I'm recalibrating my perceptions of the community norm based on the feedback in the AFD.

TL;DR - sorry if I put you through any undue stress, especially related to such a traumatic event to folks in the LGBTQ community. EvergreenFir (talk) 03:06, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

@EvergreenFir: Thanks for that! Really cool of you, I appreciate it. I had taken a little break from the project for a couple of weeks which I think we all need sometimes! No hard feelings at all :) AusLondonder (talk) 22:27, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Glad to hear and thank you. Hope your wikibreak went well! Glad to have you back! EvergreenFir (talk) 02:47, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Electoral division of Blain, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Terry Mills (politician). 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) 09:25, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Category:Clive Palmer has been nominated for discussion

Category:Clive Palmer, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Bearcat (talk) 01:30, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Asian 10,000 Challenge invite

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge and Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like South East Asia, Japan/China or India etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. At some stage we hope to run some contests to benefit Asian content, a destubathon perhaps, aimed at reducing the stub count would be a good place to start, based on the current Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon which has produced near 200 articles in just three days. If you would like to see this happening for Asia, and see potential in this attracting more interest and editors for the country/countries you work on please sign up and being contributing to the challenge! This is a way we can target every country of Asia, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 01:16, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Seats with most members

Hey, just explaining my undoing your change to Division of Bass - it's actually only had sixteen different members (equal with Bendigo, Denison and Swan), but Warwick Smith was the member twice. :) Frickeg (talk) 08:44, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

@Frickeg: No worries thanks for fixing it up :) AusLondonder (talk) 19:50, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, AusLondonder. 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)

Rename Legal history of cannabis in Canada to Cannabis in Canada?

Your comments solicited here: Talk:Legal_history_of_cannabis_in_Canada#Rename_Cannabis_in_Canada_or_create_new_article.3F. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 08:10, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of United Kingdom general election, 2015 (London) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article United Kingdom general election, 2015 (London) 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/United Kingdom general election, 2015 (London) 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. TheMagikCow (talk) 17:52, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Bret Chiafalo

Couldn't you just put in a regular deletion request? MB298 (talk) 06:25, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi MB298 I am willing to do that if you take exception. Just remove the tag if you disagree. AusLondonder (talk) 06:31, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

 Done. MB298 (talk) 06:33, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Avocado Declaration

Another user already declined your PROD, so now you have to take it to AfD if you think it should be deleted. Me-123567-Me (talk) 01:20, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

BTW I invite you to join a new Wikiproject over at WP:Greens. Me-123567-Me (talk) 01:21, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

My apologies, it was a speedy tag. But if a speedy was declined, it is likely a PROD will be too. I suggest not wasting your time and going right to AfD if you feel strongly about it. Me-123567-Me (talk) 01:24, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Lavender Greens for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lavender Greens 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/Lavender Greens 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. Me-123567-Me (talk) 18:39, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

A few examples

Of recurring events in location establishment categories

• New York City Marathon in 1970 establishments in New York
• Grand National in 1839 establishments in the United Kingdom
• Reading Amateur Regatta in 1842 establishments in England
• Mar del Plata chess tournament in 1928 establishments in Argentina
• Scripps National Spelling Bee in 1925 establishments in the United States

And thousands more. You want to change what articles such as these are categorized, I suggest WP:RFC or the talk page for WP:Categorization....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 17:16, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Are you suggesting it should be categorised as an "establishment in Rhode Island" even though it could be held in any state in future years? AusLondonder (talk) 17:25, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes because that is where it started. Events as well as companies can move, but all started somewhere. There are cases where they move and even come back to its roots before ending. For instance, Western Open, a 1899 establishment and 2006 disestablishment in Illinois. In between the event was played in 15 other United States....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 17:42, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Ways to improve Lavender Hill High School

Hi, I'm TonyBallioni. AusLondonder, thanks for creating Lavender Hill High School!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. If you could add references to [WP:V

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

TonyBallioni (talk) 16:14, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Lavender Hill High School

The article Lavender Hill High School has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable school without any sources

While all constructive 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. TM 16:00, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Lavender Hill High School for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lavender Hill High School 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/Lavender Hill High School 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. TM 16:04, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.

SMILE!

Hello AusLondonder, Me-123567-Me has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing! Me-123567-Me (talk) 18:13, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

CSD - Mexico radio stub cats

I wasn't aware of that particular CSD criterion. I want to populate those Mexico regional radio station stub cats but am not familiar with stub sorting and would need to create 32 templates and edit more than 1,200 articles. Would it be possible for you to help me with that? Raymie (t • c) 08:37, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

As soon as you add a single article to the CSD criteria no longer applies. I would probably be able to help if you let me know what needs to be done. I'm not an expert in stub sorting either though :) AusLondonder (talk) 09:14, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Recent edit to Steve Christian

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Steve Christian, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Dan Koehl (talk) 07:15, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

March 2017

Hello, I'm Me-123567-Me. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/California Green Party Archives that didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Me-123567-Me (talk) 17:28, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

I didn't remove the comment, but it's still not nice. Me-123567-Me (talk) 17:29, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Personal attack

"A bit of a patronizing arse" may be relatively mild compared to some other things I heard recently, but it is still a personal attack. Kindly refrain. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 03:31, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Invitation for comment

As someone who deals with current event articles, I am soliciting comments from you on my first attempt at a Wikipedia essay: WP:DJTG/WP:HOLDYOURHORSES. I've started a section on the talk page of the essay for comments (or you can just edit the article). Having worked on current event articles and terrorism lists, I thought this essay might be useful when addressing editors who add content prematurely (e.g., labeling an even as Islamist terrorism before RS proclaim it to be so). If you have the time and energy, feel free to comment or edit on it. Cheers! EvergreenFir (talk) 04:21, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Tagging for speedy deletion

Thanks for reminding that a copy of the same tag need to be posted at the talk page of the page creator. I have been placing tags on the page alone so far. Bilingual2000 (talk) 06:58, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

@Bilingual2000: No problem thanks for your friendly response :) AusLondonder (talk) 07:00, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kroonstad, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pick'n'Pay. 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) 10:51, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

ANI discussion relating to you

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Wtmitchell's block of AusLondonder. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:04, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Can anyone help me write the article with finished contracts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by NIS Construction (talk • contribs) 16:21, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Is it possible to help me write an article on the corporation. I am the marketer and I have never written an article on wikipedia.

NIS Construction (talk) 16:28, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Discussion invite

Hello. I invite you to join a centralized discussion about naming issues related to China and Taiwan. Szqecs (talk) 10:33, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Belated April Fool's, maybe?

So... Wtmitchell blocks AusLondoner for twelve hours with the rationale to stop series of edits flouting WP:ENGVAR... Fifteen hours after their last edit?! Presumably the edits of concern are those most recent, labelled "per WP:TIES"- but none of those, that I can see, have been reverted, which begs the question as to how disruptive they were. In any case; where's the discussion, the escalated series of warnings, even? — O Fortuna! ^{Imperatrix mundi.} 09:01, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Wtmitchell Is this a joke? What on earth is this about? You haven't even notified me of the block let alone discussed the issue with me?!? AusLondonder (talk) 11:08, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Just checked Wtmitchell has not even reverted a single of my edits? Wtf? AusLondonder (talk) 11:10, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

No complaint about my conduct, no discussion raised that I'm aware of on any forum, no block template, no notification of the right of appeal? I'm seriously wondering whether Wtmitchell's account has been compromised. AusLondonder (talk) 11:13, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

AusLondonder (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I'm not sure whether this is a mistake or not. I'm a regular editor in good-standing. Absolutely no complaint was made on any forum by any editor about my conduct. I received no warning or discussion about the block, as is generally the accepted precedent per WP:BEFOREBLOCK and I received zero notification or explanation of the block from the admin, in breach of WP:EXPLAINBLOCK. That policy states "The community expects that blocks will be made with good reasons only, based upon reviewable evidence and reasonable judgment" and "Administrators must supply a clear and specific block reason that indicates why a user was blocked...Administrators should notify users when blocking them by leaving a message on their user talk page". The admin, in their blocking summary, apart from threatening me with an indefinite block, stated the reason was "to stop series of edits flouting WP:ENGVAR". However, none of my edits have been reverted, even by the blocking admin and I simply changed spelling to, for example, New Zealand English on Suburbs of Nelson per WP:TIES which states "an article on a topic that has strong ties to a particular English-speaking nation should use the (formal, not colloquial) English of that nation". The admin has not engaged with me nor other editors since the block. Very happy to discuss any concerns with the reviewing admin.

Accept reason:

Bizarre block. No discussion, no warning, not even a block notification, even though AusLondoner's last edit was 16 hours before the block was applied. This was a very bad block. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:25, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

• I was just coming to the same conclusion as BrownHairedGirl. Bizarre block, good unblock. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:34, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
  • BrownHairedGirl Thanks a lot for that. Definitely was weird seeing this today. AusLondonder (talk) 12:43, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
    • You're welcome, @AusLondonder. I'm just sorry you had to go through this, and that I didn't spot it sooner. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:45, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
  • (ec)Thanks, Boing. I am going to raise this at ANI, where I hope that Wtmitchell will be able to give a good explanation of what happened here. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:44, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
    • @BrownHairedGirl: Perhaps ask him at his talk page first? There might be a good response that would avoid the need for ANI. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:56, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
      • Sorry -- too late, Boing. I had posted at ANI before seeing your comment.
        In any case, I think that something as bizarre as this deserves a more public discussion, particularly given the possibility of account compromise (as speculated above by AusLondonder).
        Hopefully Wtmitchell will have a good response which keep the ANI thread short. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:11, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
        • Yep, fair enough. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:16, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
• (ec) +1 to my colleagues above. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 12:45, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Belated apology

I want to acknowledge my judgemental error here and to apologize for the block which I precipitously and improperly placed following on that judgemental error. This is discussed in some detail at WP:ANI#Wtmitchell's block of AusLondonder, and I don't want to rehash that discussion here. I do want to to apologize here, though, both for my bad judgement in this instance and for the block which I improperly placed as a result of that bad judgement. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 00:39, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Wtmitchell Thank you for your apology. It is most appreciated. AusLondonder (talk) 17:35, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Wrong guideline in editsummary?

Hi AusLondonder

I was just checking your contribs from yesterday[2] to see if I could find any trace of what might have prompted the block.

No sign of that, which makes the block look even more bizarre, but I did spot one small unimportant thing. Several of your edits which rightly corrected the spelling of International Labour Organization used an edit summary which included a link to WP:BRINT, which is a redirect to WP:Redirect#Bypass_redirects_in_navigational_templates. That clearly isn't what you meant, so I presume it was just a mistaken recollection of another shortcut.

Obviously, that small glitch in no way justifies any reproach, let alone an out-of-the-blue block ... but I just thought I'd point it out for future reference, in case someone gets antsy about it.

Hope this helps! If not, pls ignore.

Best wishes, --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:06, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi BrownHairedGirl. Thanks for that and for your help the past few days. It has been most appreciated. Sorry for my delay in replying I've been super-busy off-wiki. You're right I wasn't using the most correct shortcut. I was meaning the part just below where WP:BRINT appears which says "Spelling errors and other mistakes should be corrected. Don't link to a misspelled redirect". When correcting spelling in similar circumstances in future do you have any advice on what I should say in the edit summary?

Thanks again for your help :) AusLondonder (talk) 15:37, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Edit the guideline and stick a specific anchor in it? Andy Dingley (talk) 15:46, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

@Andy Dingley: I don't think any guideline needed to be cited. It was just a matter of fixing the spelling of a proper name. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:57, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

(ec)Hi AusLondonder

I was glad to be able to help. I saw your username pop up somewhere else, but with a strikeout line through it (I have a CSS setting which does that to blocked usernames), and went to investigate ... and just thought I'd not like that to be me!

I dunno if you have seen my reply to Wtmitchell's response at ANI: WP:ANI#Response_by_Wtmitchell. What I suggested there (in point #1) was that since you were correcting the spelling of a proper name, a better edit summary might have been as something like "correct spelling of proper name International Labour Organization".

But I'm sure there are other ways of doing it. Just check shortcuts afore using them! (I know, we all screw up on that one sometimes, and it's no biggie, unless you encounter an admin on a hair-trigger over a flakey internet connection).

Best wishes, --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:49, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Thankfully we have some competent admins around here! I thought what could I possibly have done to irritate this guy! I've seen your reply it certainly put in words exactly what I was thinking. Thanks for the tip about the edit summary it seems like a good idea to avoid any potential confusion. Who would have thought the spelling of the International Labour Organization would be cause for such excitement! AusLondonder (talk) 16:45, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Glad that helped. And the ANI thread has been closed without any further action, which I think is a good outcome. Wtmitchell has (belatedly) apologised to you, and can be in no doubt that they screwed up badly and had better not screw up like that again. Hope you feel reassured that it hasn't left any stain on your record. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:18, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

I'm glad it is now all resolved. Hopefully they won't repeat their mistake in future. I want to thank you again for your assistance and wisdom through all of this. AusLondonder (talk) 17:38, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

2017 Stockholm attack

In a recent edit to the page 2017 Stockholm attack, 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 India, use Indian 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 of the article 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. AusLondonder (talk) 19:48, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

I think you made a big mistake on this. The article is written in British English. So the people have to use the British words. Look at the discussion page.--Rævhuld (talk) 19:53, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Rævhuld I have replied at the talkpage. Your edits violate MOS:RETAIN and MOS:TIES. The first substantial versions of the page use truck not lorry. AusLondonder (talk) 19:54, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Ulrike Rodust

Title doesn't match text Jutta Steinruck vs. Ulrike Rodust, --Mandavi (talk) 18:11, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Mandavi that was a mistake from copying a template, I have now fixed it. AusLondonder (talk) 18:15, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Enrique Guerrero Salom

The article Enrique Guerrero Salom has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Luis150902 (talk | contribs) 20:14, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

 Fixed AusLondonder (talk) 20:48, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

April 2017

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Aniar, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. also disruptive editing on Locks Brasserie and The Greenhouse (restaurant) plus POV-pushing. The Banner talk 22:19, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

This guideline is a part of the English Wikipedia's Manual of Style. It is a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply. Any substantive edit to this page should reflect consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on the talk page. What part of treated with common sense do you not understand? The Banner talk 22:25, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

The Banner Please advise what "occasional exception" applies here. Don't bother with the crap about what you learnt at school again because that has no bearing on WP:TIES. Please try and stop POV-pushing for once. AusLondonder (talk) 22:45, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Okay, you indeed do not understand treated with common sense. Clear, thank you. The Banner talk 23:02, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Seriously? You're pushing British English onto an article, where you can't even give the title of that article without using Gaelic or at least some level of Irish English? As the local dialect would advise, catch yerself on. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:08, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Reverting

Please stop reverting, as per the discussion on the 420 project I'm restoring them all, Thank you. –Davey2010^Talk 01:41, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Al-Zebabist Nation of Ooog

I declined G4 on this based on a review of the deleted version, I feel that the sourcing provided appears substantially different. This is of course without prejudice to other deletion mechanisms, such as AfD. Note that I had previously been asked about this earlier in the day, see my talk page. Best regards, --joe decker^talk 05:44, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Have you ever heard of don't template the regulars?

If you haven't it's at Wikipedia:Don't template the regulars. There was no disruptive editing on my part. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:14, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Walter Görlitz Yes, I have. Which is why rather than placing a template warning I wrote you a personalised note regarding your disruptive editing. AusLondonder (talk) 06:06, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

I stand corrected. I am a member of the project where that template was placed and there's no consensus of the English language project to promote your project's cause so yeah, I have the right to remove it. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:08, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

You have no such right. Please take a look at WP:TPO which states " The basic rule....is that you should not edit or delete the comments of other editors without their permission". AusLondonder (talk) 06:10, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Abby Tomlinson

The article Abby Tomlinson has been proposed for deletion. The proposed deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

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. Inops (talk) 22:45, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Trump

Just FYI, another editor (not me) removed the word "false". I put it back in per longstanding consensus, but then it occurred to me that it's not proper to revert merely because of no consensus. So it's best if someone else (like you) puts that word back, given that I think it's overkill. Anyway, you wrote "???" in your edit summary, so I came here to explain. Cheers. Anythingyouwant (talk) 05:03, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

@Anythingyouwant: Ah ok no worries. AusLondonder (talk) 12:26, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Just for pride purposes

I hand typed WCPW Pro Wrestling World Cup 2017 out. I understand and begrudgingly agree with it's deletion, but I did not copy and paste anything minus the bracket templates. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hiitit (talk • contribs) 00:54, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

@Hiitit: Hello there. I'm sorry your article got deleted, even if it was something I supported. From experience I know it can be seriously disheartening and irritating, especially when you put in work on it. I did self-revert the speedy template because I realised that wasn't appropriate in the circumstances. AusLondonder (talk) 12:28, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

2017 Stockholm attack (2)

Hello. I have removed the dog again since there was NO consensus for adding it in the discussions on the talk page. The only one who wanted to add it was you, while multiple editors opposed it. - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 09:53, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

@Thomas.W: False. Feel free to re-read Talk:2017 Stockholm attack/Archive 1#Pet dog and then get back to me. AusLondonder (talk) 09:55, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

I agree with AusLondonder, as I already stated in the archived thread. (Why is the archiving so quick?) But adding the dog to the infobox, or adding the dog's name (for god's sake) is just grotesque. Bishonen | talk 10:03, 24 April 2017 (UTC).

I have of course read the discussion in the archive, a discussion I took part in, and see no consensus for adding it (people who say they won't oppose it count as neutral in my book, and when looking at the rest I find more who oppose it than who support it...). - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 10:10, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Well when you mis-count consensus in a way that suits yourself it is no surprise you produce a result that suits yourself. AusLondonder (talk) 10:14, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

• RfC started about whether the dog should be mentioned among casualties/fatalities or not, since the outcome of the previous discussion obviously is "open to interpretations". - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 10:31, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Srinagar (Lok Sabha constituency) by-election, 2017

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.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that Srinagar (Lok Sabha constituency) by-election, 2017, a page that you created, has been tagged for deletion. 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 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 covers a topic on which we already have an article - Srinagar bypoll election protests 2017. (See section A10 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Srinagar bypoll election protests 2017, or to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

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. Kautilya3 (talk) 21:23, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

2017 Manchester Arena Bombing

You re-added 2017 Manchester Arena bombing to Template:Islamic terrorism in Europe (2014–present) and you added the template to the article without edit summaries. The attack has not been determined to be Islamic terrorism in any reliable sources that I'm aware of. Please join the talk page discussion to justify adding this template. Thank you.- MrX 11:21, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Category

Can you please remove it? Your rationale is obsolete.Zigzig20s (talk) 17:53, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Pride 2017

You are invited to create and improve LGBT-related content at Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects throughout the month of June as part of the fourth annual Wiki Loves Pride campaign. Feel free to add new and expanded content on the project's Results page. Happy editing! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 14:59, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Aaron Bastani for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Aaron Bastani 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/Aaron Bastani 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. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 17:45, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Kiev vs. Kyiv

If you feel strongly about the matter, then take it to the Talk:Kiev/naming page, because that's where it's going to be decided -- not at the "Kyi, Shchek and Khoryv" article. AnonMoos (talk) 07:24, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

AnonMoos (talk · contribs) I'm fully aware of that. The consensus is that we use Kiev not Kyiv, which is what I have done at Kyi, Shchek and Khoryv. AusLondonder (talk) 08:15, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

I was very sure that I had already eliminated all "Kyiv" spellings in previous edits to the article (see summaries of past edits), so I guess I got confused, sorry... AnonMoos (talk) 21:26, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

@AnonMoos: No worries :) AusLondonder (talk) 09:00, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Dear AusLondonder, The name Kiev is incorrect. The correct name is Kyiv, Kiev - is a Russian version of Kyiv, and it already has been proved as incorrect. For the more details, please, check the link with grammar background on this issue by Radio Svoboda: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hk8SiM75_eE — Preceding unsigned comment added by Annapetrenko (talk • contribs) 20:38, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Category:History of Cleveland County, Arkansas

Hello AusLondonder. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Category:History of Cleveland County, Arkansas, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The category is not empty at this point. Thank you. ~ GB fan 10:54, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Category:History of Tishomingo County, Mississippi

Hello AusLondonder. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Category:History of Tishomingo County, Mississippi, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The category is not empty at this point. Thank you. ~ GB fan 10:54, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Re: June 2017

"Warning icon Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Grenfell Tower fire, you may be blocked from editing. AusLondonder (talk) 03:16, 14 June 2017 (UTC)"

What does this mean; I am not being "disruptive." Was this message intended for someone else? Am I supposed to register before I edit? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:7FC0:7B:410:4122:4335:F6DD (talk) 03:19, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Grenfell Tower fire

On 14 June 2017, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Grenfell Tower fire, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Mjroots (talk) 12:57, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Revize

I think you/we meant B in Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2017_June_16#Organisations_based_in_Bolivia. Oculi (talk) 17:06, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Finsbury Park attack

There's a claim that you may have supported this because you believed that ten people were killed. Can you confirm or deny that? Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:50, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Aaron Bastani for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Aaron Bastani 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/Aaron Bastani (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. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:29, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Question...

Did you try to comply with WP:BEFORE, prior to nominating the article on Anne Marie Waters for deletion?

Your nomination said she was merely a failed candidate. Yet, when I google searched her I found half a dozen topics where coverage of her was not about her "failed candidacy". Geo Swan (talk) 18:15, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Aaron Bastani

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 Aaron Bastani, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, such as at Articles for Deletion. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discusion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

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) 20:38, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Edits to Lee Rhiannon

Your recent edit to the page Lee Rhiannon doesn't make it clear that the issue was more than just education funding. Would you mind if I made an edit to that effect. Gumsaint (talk) 03:58, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Categories for speedy deletion

Agree with deletion of categories "195 by country" and "196 by country" but not categories "195 by continent" and "196 by continent" Hugo999 (talk) 23:36, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

SMILE!! 9 July 2017

Hello AusLondonder, Me-123567-Me has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing! Me-123567-Me (talk) 16:27, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Use British English template

Here you removed {{Use British English}} from Angers. While WP:TIES talks about which dialect should be used for new articles, my understanding of {{Use British English}}, based on its documentation, is that it's descriptive, not prescriptive. The article happens to be currently written in British English, and WP prefers that subsequent edits maintain consistency unless there is good reason to convert to another dialect (in this case, there isn't). The purpose of the template is to guide subsequent authors, and, at least in theory, the ENGVAR tool; this is an independent concept from WP:TIES. Did I miss something? David Brooks (talk) 02:14, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

The Angers article currently uses a combination of American and British spelling, though. For example it uses "center" and -ize spelling. AusLondonder (talk) 09:57, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

True. Thanks for pointing it out. David Brooks (talk) 11:59, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Jamie Waylett

Hi Aus. You recently added a cat to Jamie Waylett: Prisoners and detainees of England and Wales. I've no idea what he's up to, but I assume he's out and about now. Unless that cat is slightly misnamed, it doesn't apply to him. Could you remove it? Cheers, Bromley86 (talk) 10:25, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Ways to improve Pholisa Makeleni

Hi, I'm Boleyn. AusLondonder, thanks for creating Pholisa Makeleni!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. This has been tagged as needing more references and as a stub.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Boleyn (talk) 13:01, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Murder of Jo Cox

Please take this to the talk page, I've opened a discussion there. This is Paul (talk) 16:40, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia: Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding whether the murder of Jo Cox can be classed as a terrorist incident. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The thread is "Talk:Murder of Jo Cox".The discussion is about the topic Murder of Jo Cox. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! --This is Paul (talk) 17:26, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

A page you started (Noenieput) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Noenieput, AusLondonder!

Wikipedia editor Anoptimistix just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Hello thanks for contibutions, this article about village passes WP:V, as South African police's website confirms it, however other contents like towns location and province could not be verified as the source does not provides information about them. If you add more source than feel free to remove the {{refimprove}} tag. Once again thanks for your contributions

To reply, leave a comment on Anoptimistix's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Anoptimistix (talk) 12:39, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

A page you started (Francis Zammit Dimech) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Francis Zammit Dimech, AusLondonder!

Wikipedia editor Blythwood just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Since there's a picture on Commons (not a great one to be fair) I've added it. A bot had added foreign-language links so I purged the page to activate them. Hope that's all OK.

To reply, leave a comment on Blythwood's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Blythwood (talk) 17:30, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Autopatrolled granted

Hi AusLondonder, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the autopatrolled right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! Schwede66 19:14, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

I have nominated you for Auto patrolled Rights

I have nominated you for Autopatrolled rights at WP:PERM/A, an administrator have asked you whether you commit to fill bare URLs which are cited as reference. Well I think you should say yes as filling bareurls is very easy, all you have to do is go at https://tools.wmflabs.org/refill/ and enter page name, this will automatically fillup bare URL's Anoptimistix (talk) 00:17, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Anoptimistix Thanks for the nomination! I agreed to not use bare URLs in future. Thanks again! AusLondonder (talk) 10:38, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

It was my pleasure nominating a great content creator like you. Anoptimistix (talk) 11:31, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

UK involvement in European XFEL

You made this edit to the European X-ray free-electron laser article and reverted a change to the map, but the source already cited does not appear to back up the way the article now reads. I had raised this on the article's talk page a few days ago. Would you be able to weigh in over there please? Beorhtwulf (talk) 20:40, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Rivals of the Ripper

Hello, AusLondonder. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Rivals of the Ripper".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Legacypac (talk) 11:13, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Invitation to join Women in Red

		Thank you for creating several articles on women and their works over the past couple of months. We have become aware of your contributions thanks to research undertaken by Bobo.03 at the University of Minnesota. You might be interested in becoming a member of our WikiProject Women in Red where we are actively trying to reduce Wikipedia's content gender gap. If you would like to receive news of our activities without becoming a member, you can simply add your name to our mailing list. In any case, thank you for actively contributing to the coverage of women (currently, 17.11% of English Wikipedia's biographies). Our priorities for October: Women and disability Healthcare Geofocus: Nordic countries Continuing from month to month: #1day1woman Global Initiative
		(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list)

--Ipigott (talk) 10:10, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Move review

An editor has asked for a Move review of Grand Duchy of Kraków. Because you participated in the requested move, you might want to participate in the move review. Academicoffee71 (talk) 05:04, 5 October 2017 (UTC)