User talk:Leuce

Welcome!

Hello, Leuce, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 14:40, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

WP:RM

If you wish to make a Requested Move please read: WP:RM#Steps for requesting a page move You have to complete all three steps if you want the page to be moved. I have added the talk page to the request you posted on WP:RM but you will have to do steps 2 and 3 --Philip Baird Shearer 21:10, 30 March 2006 (UTC) As proposer you do not need to put an opinion under Survey (although some do and it does no harm). But you do need to "PageName → NewName – {reason for move with signature} copied from the entry on the WP:RM page" copied your signature across from the WP:RM page (or signed the similar text - I did not check to see if it is a cut and past or something similar).

The reason for doing this is because after 5 days the request disappears from the WP:RM page and the template is removed. So your proposal becomes the archive on the talk page of the requested move. This is different from WP:AFD where they keep their own archive. We do it this way, because if a page is renamed again t the original talk page moves with it so keeping the archives of requested moves with the page. It is a simple solution to a potentially complicated problem. --Philip Baird Shearer 14:01, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Great job on Abortion in South Africa

I enjoyed reading your article, Abortion in South Africa. I have to admit that when I clicked on it knowing it was a new page, I somewhat expected a biased account. You made the page very informative and presented it from a neutral point of view. Kudos! --Strangerer (Talk | Contribs) 20:18, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Leuce

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Wikipedia:Leuce, by Black Falcon, another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Wikipedia:Leuce fits the criteria for speedy deletion for the following reason:

G6 (housekeeping). This seems to be an unused user sandbox created in the wrong namespace. Its only content is/has been a link to a subpage. The page has no incoming links and no significant page history.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Wikipedia:Leuce, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Wikipedia:Leuce itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 20:44, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Cupertino Effect

Hi there. Just ... wow! I live there, as it happens, and had never heard of that before. Well done in pointing that out (and adding references, too :) ) - good work! - Alison ☺ 16:26, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Lanseria_international_airport.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Lanseria_international_airport.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 00:26, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Spam in Talk:OmegaT

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Talk:OmegaT, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Talk:OmegaT is blatant advertising for a company, product, group, service or person that would require a substantial rewrite in order to become an encyclopedia article.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Talk:OmegaT, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. CSDWarnBot 19:33, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Milansnakeisland.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Milansnakeisland.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 13:33, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Galadriel (band)

A tag has been placed on Galadriel (band), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, 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 that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Coreycubed (talk) 19:06, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Image:OmegaTlogo.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:OmegaTlogo.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 19:07, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

File:SATI coat of arms.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:SATI coat of arms.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Zunaid 16:39, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

File:SATI coat of arms2.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:SATI coat of arms2.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Zunaid 16:40, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of South African Translators' Institute

I have nominated South African Translators' Institute, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/South African Translators' Institute. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Zunaid 16:48, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

3RR

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on AIDS denialism. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Keepcalmandcarryon (talk) 10:43, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi leuce. I think it would be a good idea to avoid making any more controversial edits on this article for a while, until there is a clear consensus on the talk page. I commend your attempt to discuss things, and recommend you leave ample time for the other editors to be convinced by your arguments. There's no rush here, Wikipedia isn't going to be finalised any time soon... So no 3RR block this time, but be extra-careful in future. Thanks, yandman 12:15, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

deletion of reliably sourced information

Please stop deleting reliably sourced information, as you recently did at HIV/AIDS in South Africa. If you feel a reliable source is out of date, please use the talk page to suggest an update...and allow ample time for other editors to review your concerns. Keepcalmandcarryon (talk) 22:09, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

My edits in HIV/AIDS in South Africa have only improved the article. There were duplicated text which I removed. As to your suggestion that I use the talk page, well, I already do that. In fact, I have posted several suggestions on the Talk page about changes that I thought might be contentious. Have you seen it? -- leuce (talk) 10:08, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Outcome mapping

Hi. I checked back on the deleted article, because I didn't remember it, and I was actually the second person to delete it for the same reason - and it was pretty blatant ("how can you find out about outcome mapping - go to this website", etc). As long as it's a notable subject and your new version is written in an NPOV way, there's no reason it should be deleted again. Deb (talk) 17:53, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Looks great to me! Deb (talk) 21:22, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

mere editorialisation

I'm sure there are plenty of references for the symbolic value of the event, if you (or I) feel like looking for them. Zaian (talk) 07:23, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

OK, found one. I'm also looking for references for the social democratic / democratic socialism categorisation for the ANC and COPE, which I see you've also taken an interest in. Regards, Zaian (talk) 08:12, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Rope pump edits

I am also not an expert. I love the idea and intend to build one so spent a bit of time researching them and then did my civic duty of adding what I had learnt to wikipedia! So.... if you think I am wrong on something or that you think it should be better then please do any edits you think make sense PeterEastern (talk) 03:38, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

They shaped our century

Thanks for the compliments! I think the page is definitely interesting and potentially useful. I'd say start the article as soon as you're reasonably happy with it, and put the rest of your discussion points on the Talk page. I'm continuously surprised at how few active editors there are on South African topics, though, so don't be too surprised if there isn't much response when you've created the article.

The first hurdle for the page to survive is to prove that the topic is notable, otherwise articles get deleted fairly quickly. It helps if you assert notability in the first paragraph, e.g. if you describe the list as "the first list of its kind in the new South Africa", "a major survey of 100 000 participants", or something like that, preferably backed by a reliable source. Or maybe there was some significant controversy around the list which made it notable. You've got quite a lot of references in the page and the related discussion, so be sure to include those. Also make links under "See Also" from List of South Africans and SABC3's Great South Africans, or work the link into the text if you can.

My other comments would be fairly minor, e.g. I would use a more neutral term like "State President" or "Prime Minister" rather than statesman, but those are details.

Regards, Zaian (talk) 10:47, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:OmegaT-screenshot.png

File:OmegaT-screenshot.png is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:OmegaT-1.6.0 RCB-wc.png. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:OmegaT-1.6.0 RCB-wc.png]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 16:38, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Christian Democratic Party

Hi Leuce, in response to your query, no, but since they formed an alliance with the CDA, and all communication that I can find since has been in the CDA's name, it seems the CDP has ceased to exist. For example, the most recent press release on the CDP site is this one. Feel free to correct if you can find evidence of their independent existence. Greenman (talk) 15:23, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Opera acid3.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Opera acid3.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 03:13, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

South African National Anthem Page - Your Edit

In fact, Leuce, the "South Afrika - South Afrika" is Sesotho, not English. Since Grade 1 in South Africa I have been taught that it is Sesotho, rather than English but spelled with a 'k' rather than a 'c' as it would be in English. I have edited the page in question, seeing as how I know that there is no bridging line between the Sesotho and Afrikaans verses. This is no personal offense to you, but I find this edit a personal offence to me, because if you do not know that this is Sesotho you are possibly not qualified to edit pages about South Africa. Please reply, I will revisit your page every Monday until this is sorted out, I would like to see some justice for my country and its proud tradition, and in this case the national anthem. Thank you, and note that I will sign my posts on your page with my name,

203.171.197.52 (talk) 15:28, 11 January 2010 (UTC) Courtenay Gass

I can find no web references that "South Afrika" is either Northern of Southern Sotho. But I can find several references that "Afrika Borwa" and "Aforika Borwa" is. Take a look, for example, at President Jacob Zuma's 2009 State of the Nation address in English, Northern Sotho and Southern Sotho: http://www.info.gov.za/speeches/2009/09060310551001.htm, http://www.info.gov.za/speeches/2009/09061716351004.htm, and http://www.info.gov.za/speeches/2009/09061716251003.htm. Nowhere in the two Sotho versions is "South Afrika" used for "South Africa". -- leuce (talk) 16:19, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Omegat logo large.png

⚠

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

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:50, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Koemelaat.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Koemelaat.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please remove the tag.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Melesse (talk) 13:00, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Sleipnir acid3.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Sleipnir acid3.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:03, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Water cycle, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Diogenes (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:09, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

October 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Holocaust denial may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Historical Association]] website. Retrieved December 13, 2009. Reretrieved October 11, 2013.</ref>}}

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:58, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Referencing at South African Sign Language

I see the referencing of the article is a pretty horrible mess of mixed styles including many bare URLs. Cleaning it all up will be quite a lot of work which I am willing to try. However as you are actively editing the article I will wait until you have finished. Please let me know when I can start fixing the refs without worrying about conflicting with your edits. Thanks Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 14:04, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Our edits clashed once today but I think we both managed to "fix" it. I'll wait a few days before making further edits, if you want. -- leuce (talk) 23:46, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:50, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Leuce. 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)

June 2017

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Regulation and prevalence of homeopathy. 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. Alexbrn (talk) 13:41, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

My edit on the Lumosity page is not edit warring -- I simply complied with the comment made by the bot, namely that the edit must be substantiated. --leuce (talk) 13:47, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

There is no hope for the homeopathy article -- it has been hijacked by people with specific, narrow views on the topic and they will revert any edit that does not conform to their superstition. --leuce (talk) 13:47, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

You are repeatedly trying to force your edit (an edit you have also made previously, which was reverted). You have been warned. Alexbrn (talk) 13:50, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

W.r.t. Lumosity: the first reversion (11 February 2017) was actually done by myself, so I wasn't "warring" with the person who reverted it. Today, I changed my mind about the edit, so I reverted it, but I was reverting my own reversion. Then a bot came along and re-reverted it, saying that it should be substantiated, which I then did. But now I'm guilty of edit warring with a bot :-) and that's never a good idea, so I'll just let sleeping dogs lie.

W.r.t. the homeopathy edit, well, my tiny edit brought the article text in line with the cited reference, but the article guardians don't care about that. I might try it your way (i.e. use the Talk page, get consensus, etc.) but I don't have much hope. --leuce (talk) 14:16, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

On both articles you have tried identical edits 3 times, without success. You now have a choice: continue doing this (likely result: you get blocked), or alternatively try and build consensus for change on the article Talk page (how things are meant to be done around here). Alexbrn (talk) 14:18, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Notice

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding Complementary and Alternative Medicine, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Leuce. 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, Leuce. 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)

Cafetran Espresso

Hello, you did a great job improving the page. Do-you think it stands a chance being accepted now? Nicolas Gambardella Le Novère (talk) 15:13, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Absolutely amazing piece of work, btw! Fingers crossed it gets accepted as it's a fantastic collection of info on my favourite CAT tool. Michael Beijer (talk) 00:26, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Galadriel (band)

I have recently created an article for the Australian progressive rock group from 1969 to 1972. I believe the previously deleted article of that title referred to a Slovakian group?shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 06:52, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I believe it was for https://www.metal-archives.com/bands/Galadriel/4203. --leuce (talk) 14:45, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

AfriForum

As I asked the new editor there I guess I should ask you if you have any relationship with AfriForum. Being a member doesn't give you a conflict of interest, working for them or having an official position would. Doug Weller talk 18:49, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

I am not a member of AfriForum or of any other organisation under the umbrella of the Solidarity Movement, nor have I ever given them money. I do not agree with everything that AfriForum does or says, although many of their statements and arguments are consistent with my personal opinions. I may have voted for the Freedom Front or the Freedom Front Plus in one or more of the elections (I honestly can't remember). --leuce (talk) 20:18, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, that's pretty much the sort of reply I expected. It's really the new editor I'm concerned about. Doug Weller talk 20:28, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Which new editor? -- leuce (talk) 10:22, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Cafetran Espresso has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Cafetran Espresso. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 21:28, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Cafetran Espresso (September 30)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by SamHolt6 was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Cafetran Espresso and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Cafetran Espresso, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

SamHolt6 (talk) 01:13, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Leuce! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! SamHolt6 (talk) 01:13, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:07, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Cafetran Espresso

As you might have seen, I am trying to reboot the EN CTE page. I am not even sure it is possible once a page has been rejected (not just declined). Trying to fix the notability issue, I think we went too far and appeared to be trying to "sell" the software tool, GAMING the system. So I stripped the page bare. I apologize because most of the flesh came from you. We still have the history to recover the necessary bits and pieces as we progress, and of course the Talk page with your amazing collection of references. Nicolas Gambardella (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:29, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Although I agree that "we" have been wronged by Wikipedia moderators who constantly shifted the goalposts for this particular article, the fact is that any attempt to reboot the article will only succeed if proper Wikipedia procedures are followed. I'm confident that our attempts at proving notability did not cause the article any harm. The moderators believe that the product is not [yet] notable, and our current arguments did not sway them. So I think what we need to do is wait a few years and hope that CafeTran becomes even more notable (likely) or that another set of moderators who have a different interpretation of notability comes along (unlikely), and then initiate a "deletion review" procedure. Simply recreating the article with revisions that do not address the deletion reason will only antagonise current and future moderators and will not benefit the community. -- leuce (talk) 08:11, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:31, 24 November 2020 (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) 00:11, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:33, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:28, 28 November 2023 (UTC)