Artwriter21532

Proposed deletion of Mark P. Chamberlain

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is invited to contribute to this encyclopedia. However, Wikipedia always demands the inclusion of references to articles, especially when they are about living people. So, your recent article, Mark P. Chamberlain, no leads it. Please include references to article, since article is about a living person and all the articles dealing with a living person, but that have not references, are deleted. This is so since April 2010.

Regards.--Isinbill (talk) 03:29, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Lydia Ringwald January 2004 Wheels of Justice Review.pdf

Thanks for uploading File:Lydia Ringwald January 2004 Wheels of Justice Review.pdf. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:21, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Lip Service Future Fossils Series.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Lip Service Future Fossils Series.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:21, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Possibly unfree files

Some of the files that you have uploaded may be unfree. See Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2014 March 8#OTRS pending since January for details. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:45, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Laguna Coast Wilderness Park

Thank you for your contributions at Laguna Coast Wilderness Park, but please stop removing the conversion templates that show size in both feet and meters and acres and hectares. These conversions are important in an international encyclopedia. You can see Template:Convert for more information. Also note that section headings are in sentence case, not title case (i.e., the first word is capitalized but not the second.) More information on that can be found in MOS:HEADINGS. Thanks, Bahooka (talk) 00:50, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Your attention needed at WP:CHU

Hello. A bureaucrat or clerk has responded to your username change request, but requires clarification before moving forward. Please follow up at your username change request entry as soon as possible. Thank you. --I am k6ka ^{Talk to me!} _{See what I have done} 11:27, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Please remove the following box as it is no longer relevant

This article contains content that is written like an advertisement. Please help improve it by removing promotional content and inappropriate external links, and by adding encyclopedic content written from a neutral point of view. (April 2015)

Please remove the following box from Sawdust Art Festival page as it is no longer relevant

This page is a new unreviewed article. This template should be removed once the page has been reviewed by someone other than its creator; if necessary the page should be appropriately tagged for cleanup. (May 2015)

I responded to the following requests and removed two categories and one external link

The requests read as follows: A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view. Please discuss further on the talk page. (May 2015) This article contains content that is written like an advertisement. Please help improve it by removing promotional content and inappropriate external links

Please tell me what I need to do to the page

Please tell me what I need to do to the page to have the two boxes at top that read as follows - A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view. Please discuss further on the talk page. (May 2015), This article contains content that is written like an advertisement. Please help improve it by removing promotional content and inappropriate external links, and by adding encyclopedic content written from a neutral point of view. (May 2015) - removed.

Thank you!

Removed all copy that sounds like advertising and added significant encyclopedia content to Sawdust Art Festival page

Also added more relevant images, and am speaking to architect who designed facade later today, and will add more about this. Can you remove the 2 bars that read as follows? "A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view. Please discuss further on the talk page. (May 2015)" "This article contains content that is written like an advertisement. Please help improve it by removing promotional content and inappropriate external links, and by adding encyclopedic content written from a neutral point of view. (May 2015)" THANK YOU!

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. Thank you. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 23:22, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

I did not remove the COI tag.

I did not remove the COI tag. Don't know who did. I did, however, add significant historical and encyclopedic content, and did remove all advertising content, as far s I ca tell, i also removed one image that appears like an ad, and uploaded several new images, a few with historical interest. I do think that the page is in great shape and hope that the two tags will be removed soon. Thank you!

Removed all advertising and promotional content

I removed all advertising and promotional content as far as I can tell. I also added historical content. I think that the page reads much better now, and I appreciate the input I have received. I am hopeful that the COI tags will be removed soon. Thank you!

Nice editing job

Thank you for editing this page. It reads well. When do you think you can remove the COI tags?

Added all requested citations

Added all requested citations, where pages read (citation needed). The page appears to be complete now. THANK YOU!

Conflict of interest in Wikipedia

Hi Artwriter21532 you have a load of recent edits to Sawdust Art Festival that appear promotional. I'm giving you notice of our Conflict of Interest guideline and Terms of Use, and will have some questions for you below.

Hello, Artwriter21532. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you have an external relationship with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

• Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
• Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
• Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies. Note that Wikipedia's terms of use require disclosure of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you.

Question

Wikipedia is a reference that the public relies on. Managing conflict of interest is essential for ensuring the integrity of Wikipedia and retaining the public's trust in it.

Would you please let me know if you have any relationship with the organizers of the Sawdust Art Festival? Please note that you are required to disclose it, if you are editing for pay. If you are, the situation is salvageable, but we have to get things on good footing. The WP:COI guideline exists to ensure the integrity of Wikipedia; the community takes it seriously and we ask you to as well. If you have any questions, you can leave them here - I am watching your page. After you respond (and you can just reply below), perhaps we can talk a bit about editing Wikipedia, to give you some more orientation to how this place works. Thanks! Jytdog (talk) 03:51, 29 May 2015‎ (UTC)

Hello Jytdog,

I am a freelance art writer, contributing to a variety of magazines. I have written about the Sawdust Art Festival one time, as part of a larger article, some time ago. I live in Laguna Beach and visit the festival every summer and enjoy it. I created a page on the festival because I feel that the festival is unusual and worthy of a page. I did not create this page for pay.

I realize that my page sounded promotional, but all of that promotional content is now gone. (The promotional sound of the page was a carry-over from the other writing that I do.) This has been a learning experience for me, for if and when I work on Wikipedia pages in the future.

I do not have any relational with the organizers of the Sawdust Festival. I know one person at the Festival because we live in the same City. And a few of the exhibitors at the festival are casual friends. They also live in the same City.

I have created two other Wikipedia pages and edited three pages that were stubs, or something like that. Each page that I worked on was a labor of love, and not for pay. Two recent pages that I edited/enhanced are Laguna Coast Wilderness Park, which I have often visited, and Clark Strand whom I heard give a book talk. As you can tell, neither of these pages have promotional content.

I hope that I have sufficiently responded to your questions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Artwriter21532 (talk • contribs) 04:33, 29 May 2015‎(UTC)

Thanks for answering. Your answer makes sense. So you don't have a COI, you are a fan. People come edit Wikipedia for lots of reasons. Some do it for pay, but most get started because of some passion - like they love the place they live. That passion can bleed over into what we call advocacy (please have a look at that essay) which can even lead to disruptive editing - what we call tendentious behavior (please have a look at that too). Those are all behavioral things. Content-wise, everyone here wants articles to be neutral - not written as though they are advertisements, nor hatchet jobs. It is always a hard balance to strike, and it sounds like you have been trying hard to learn it. Good luck! Jytdog (talk) 05:05, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

by the way - some of the Ps and Qs of talk page discussions... we "thread" comments in discussions by tabbing them. The Wikipedia software turns one colon  : typed at the start of a comment, into one tab, two colons into two tabs, etc. Also, please "sign" your comments by typing 4 tildas after them, like this ~~~~ - the Wikipedia software will turn that into a link to your user name and user Talk page (this page) and add a date stamp. The signature performs a lot of functions here, so please be sure to sign your posts. Thanks again. Jytdog (talk) 05:08, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank You

I have read the advocacy and tendentious pages. Good information, and it is good to read how democratic Wikipedia is in this crazy world.

Please let me know when the COI tags will be removed.

Also, I'm not sure of what you mean by the 4 tildas, but I will attempt to use them and see what happens.

Thank you also! Artwriter21532 05:48, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

yeah things can get crazy here. There are two other editors we have had concerns about on the article. You are the first to reply. Need to hear from the other two. Jytdog (talk) 05:55, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Can you ask FreeRangeFrog to look at the article and then you can hopefully remove the COI tags at the top of page? THANK YOU! Artwriter21532 00:38, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Removed 2 External links, added 1 sentence, 2 citations

Thank you for your recent edits and for removing the COI tag. I also removed 2 external links, as requested, and then added one sentence of content and two citations. Please tell me what else needs to be done - if anything - to remove the following: Artwriter21532 03:43, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Dear FreeRangeFrog and Jytdog,

Thank you for notifying me of problems with the Sawdust Art Festival page. I want to reiterate that I have no professional relationship with the Sawdust. I am a freelance art writer, primarily covering the visual arts in Southern California. You can read about me and link to some of my recent articles here: http://www.contemporary-art-dialogue.com/art-journalism.html.

In my 15 years of covering the arts in this area, I have written two or three articles that mention the Sawdust Art Festival, with each mention as part of a larger article; and none of these articles are available online.

For full disclosure, I have a website with a blog page on the Sawdust: http://www.contemporary-art-dialogue.com/sawdust-festival.html. As you can read, this page is quite different from my Wikipedia page on the Sawdust.

I uploaded the Sawdust page because I feel that the festival is worth reading about.

I appreciate all of your guidance and efforts to improve the Sawdust page and to remove content that sounds promotional, and I agree that it is much better now

I also appreciate the fact that you removed the COI tag.

I think that the page is now in good enough shape to remove the advertising tag. Can you remove it, or is it OK if I do so?

Thank you!

Artwriter21532 16: 38, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Edit war warring

Please do not restore unsourced content to the article. I raised issues about the unsourced/fake sourced content on Talk and about the use of WP:SPS. Please discuss there instead of edit warring the content back in. Thanks.

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Sawdust Art Festival. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Jytdog (talk) 13:26, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

OK, no more editing wars

Please note that Herman Wong is incorrect in citing the festival lot as being 2 ½ acres. It has always been 3 acres. The Sawdust web page and writes: “1968 was an important year for the Sawdust. The show moved to its present three-acre site at 935 Laguna Canyon Road…” Other articles confirm this. Please also note that your following statement is not the primary reason that the festival began to charge admission fees: “Admission, which had been free, was raised to 25 cents, to disincentivize "the locals"—some of whom came to chant and preach—from attending.” Also, none of the citations following this statement support your statement. The reason that I wrote for the admission charge was to pay for the mortgage. And my original version had a quote from a book on the Sawdust. I think it’s OK to include your statement, but as a secondary reason. Also the wooden, fort-like gate is no longer there, but has been replaced by the distinctive façade, designed by Lashley - that I described – that you took out. This façade is the only permanent part of the festival, and I think should be described.

Artwriter21532 16: 53, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Please discuss content on the article talk page. It is here: Talk:Sawdust Art Festival. You can just copy your comment there if you want. But the article talk page is where editors come together to talk about improving the article. Having discussions scattered on various editors' Talk pages isn't as helpful. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 17:01, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Regarding edits again

The following is also on the Talk:Sawdust Art Festival page.

Regarding the Sawdust Art Festival page, which states, “The next year, they rented a 2 1/2-acre site on Laguna Canyon Road across the street from the established FOA.” Please note that Herman Wong is incorrect (in the citations) in citing the festival lot as being 2 ½ acres. It has always been 3 acres. The Sawdust web page writes: “1968 was an important year for the Sawdust. The show moved to its present three-acre site at 935 Laguna Canyon Road…”

Please further note that in the article linking from footnote #17, it is written that the Sawdust Festival is on 3 acres, not on 2 ½ acres as is indicted in the article. The footnote reads, “Michael Miller. "Sawdust Festival lets the wood chips fall where they may" Coastline Pilot, 19 June 2014.” Within the article it reads: “Walking around the 3-acre site on Laguna Canyon Road, it's impossible to miss the shaved wood on the ground or the accompanying smell in the air. The Sawdust festival got its name — and its decor — when it moved to its current home in 1968, and according to the event's website, the roughage is spread on the ground to fight dust and mud.” Please change the 2½ acres to 3 acres for accuracy.

Please also note that the following statement on the page is not the primary reason that the festival began to charge admission fees: “Admission, which had been free, was raised to 25 cents, to disincentivize "the locals"—some of whom came to chant and preach—from attending.” Also, none of the citations following this statement support it, so I don’t know if it is correct. The following statement that I wrote on an earlier version of the page is correct, and is from a book on the Sawdust. (My earlier version also had a quote from this book that I would like to re-insert as a footnote.): “Admission was initially free. But in the early 1970s, organizers began charging 25 cents admission to begin to pay off the cost of that original three-acre parcel of land, which they had just purchased.”

Also, the wooden, fort-like gate is no longer there, but the latest version of the page makes it sound like the gate is still there. The gate has been replaced by the distinctive façade, designed by Lashley - that I described in an earlier version – that was taken out. This façade is the only permanent part of the festival, is recognized by people from around the world, and I think should be re-inserted. There are no specific citations that I can find about the facade, but there are citations about the architect.

Thank you! Artwriter21532 5: 27, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

hey... the normal way that wikipedia works, is you edit the article directly, and if there is a disagreement, you work it out on the article talk page. why are you not writing this on the article talk page? (real question) Jytdog (talk) 10:27, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

I also wrote the above on the article talk page.

I will edit this myself and then write it on the article talk page. i didn't do that because you wrote that I couldn't. But I will do that now.

Artwriter21532 10: 44, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Added content to the history of Sawdust Art Festival page, all with citations, and corrected previously incorrect content about the history. Jim Lashley citation does not specifically mention his designing the façade, but no article on this is available anywhere. The Lashley façade is known to people all over the world and is worth a mention.

Also, I moved the second citation because it did not fit in the original place.

Artwriter21532 19:12, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Added new content with new citation/reference, at Jytdog's suggestion, to the early history to make it accurate.

Artwriter21532 June 4, 2015, 16:32 (UTC)

Response from Artwriter21532

Following is my suggested content for the historical category - to become two categories. This text includes all formatting. I have gone over what I previously uploaded and deleted anything that sounded promotional or was unreferenced, except in one case where I included (citation needed). If you approve of this new content, I will upload it - unless you want to do so. Please note that I have bolded the subheads, or the beginnings of the categories, so as to not appear as new categories in this thread. I am also not including the formatting for the images. I can add them in later.

Artwriter21532 June 3, 2015, 00:02 (UTC)

Early History

In 1965, a group of hippie-type artists were dissatisfied with the nearby Laguna Beach Festival of Arts (FOA) and its jury system, which they viewed as rigged and part of The Establishment. This group held their first showing on the vacant Peacock Lot in Laguna.

In 1968, the festival moved to its present three-acre site on Laguna Canyon Road, across the street from the established FOA. At this new site, Sawdust artists began building "wildly conceived, mostly wood-built quasi-dwellings, which were heavy on the rustic theme, with no two alike." They also built a wooden, fort-like gate, and spread sawdust or wood chips onto the bare ground.

The festival's carnival atmosphere in the early days featured streakers and religious fanatics preaching amid the booths.

Admission was initially free. But a new policy to charge 25 cents came about in the early 1970s when the Sawdust purchased that original three-acre parcel of land, and needed additional money to gradually pay off the mortgage. (citation needed) Charging admission also served to disincentivize the locals—some of whom came to chant and preach—from attending.

The festival soon gained a reputation as a place to go to, and attendance reached a peak of 350,000 in the early 1970s. By the mid-1980s, the home-made booths, gate and sawdust remained. But as the festival became more respectable, attendance fell to around 250,000.

History since the 1980s

In 1985, the Sawdust spent $6,000 for a new front façade, a mock-up of the nearby Hotel Laguna and three other local historic structures. In 1988, Sawdust management decided that it needed a new permanent facade. Laguna Beach architect Jim Lashley designed the new façade, basing it in style on the “Witches House” in the this city.

By the late 1980s, the Sawdust was a bigger tourist attraction than the FOA.

By 2003, the festival had acquired professional management, charged $5.50 for admission and continued to have about 200,000 visitors a year. By then, several artists had been exhibiting at the festival since its early days and still do. These artists include Doug Miller, Larry Gill, Nikki Grant, Dion Wright. and David Nelson.

References

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) 14:27, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Artwriter21532. 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)

Abuse

Stop abusing your editing privileges to promote your book. Jytdog (talk) 18:38, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Artwriter21532. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Artwriter21532. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

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

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Artwriter21532. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

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

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:33, 23 November 2021 (UTC)