Jnkish

Welcome!

Hello, Jnkish, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, like List of United States Czars, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• Your first article
• Biographies of living persons
• How to write a great article
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! MuZemike 03:24, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Testing Sortable Tables

Name	Surname	Height
John	Smith	1.85
Ron	Ray	1.89
Ron	John	2.00
Mario	Bianchi	1.72
	Average:	1.82

Sortable rows

I didn't respond a couple of days ago when this was first suggested, because I thought it would work out. Now I realize there are some limitations.

The way we were doing it gave a sense of how many positions there were in each administration - for example you could see that Bush had for example 24 positions called czar. If it is all resorted then it looks like he had 38 or whatever because he had to appoint successors. So I think this is a lot of work and might produce a distorted result. The only thing someone wants to see by sorting, really, is how many czars per administration, and that is easily done with a short table like the one I posted at the bottom.

Anyway, sorry I didn't respond earlier, but I didn't see the downside.W E Hill (talk) 08:53, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

RE: Multiple citations

Thanks for the double notice -- ironically I saw the one on the discussion page for czars before I saw this one, so I answered there. —Regards W E Hill (talk) 09:42, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

RE: Response to your note on citations and footnoting

Posted on the discussion page now W E Hill (talk) 12:09, 5 September 2009 (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) 14:03, 24 November 2015 (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) 14:04, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Assistant Secretary for International Affairs

The article Assistant Secretary for International Affairs has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This article is vague and poor-quality. Several "Assistant Secretaries for International Affairs" positions exist in the U.S., and until recently, this article only acknowledged the DHS position, and it still conflates at least two different positions in the list of officials. This position also doesn't appear to meet WP:GNG, and even if it does, it should probably be deleted per WP:TNT.

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. 1990'sguy (talk) 15:58, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Assistant Secretary for International Affairs for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Assistant Secretary for International Affairs 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/Assistant Secretary for International Affairs until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. 1990'sguy (talk) 16:01, 1 January 2020 (UTC)