StAnselm

 

Thanks for uploading File:Pilbara Minerals logo.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:51, 6 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello!
You seem to have access to many books about Christianity. Do you happen to have the first edition (2001) of George Chryssides' Historical Dictionary of New Religious Movements?
For context for my request, you can have a look a the thread I created at: Wikipedia:Help desk#Potential citogenesis incident - what to do? Veverve (talk) 00:20, 10 January 2022 (UTC)Reply
Nevermind, someone has given me a way to consult the book. Veverve (talk) 18:50, 10 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello. Due to your intervention at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/King's Family of Churches, I inform you I have opened an AfD for this article at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/King's Family of Churches (2nd nomination). Veverve (talk) 19:51, 10 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

  An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect PRJ and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 14#PRJ until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Vitaium (talk) 05:17, 14 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Warrane College logo.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 14:41, 25 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

  An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Birthing person and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 1#Birthing person until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Elli (talk | contribs) 04:00, 1 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:FWF Der Wissenschaftsfonds logo.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:39, 24 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello StAnselm: Thanks for catching my error. Heartmusic678 (talk) 15:36, 16 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Association for Biblical Higher Education logo.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:25, 18 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:IOOF company logo.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:33, 18 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I notice that you recently declined the WP:BLPPROD for Roger Copeland on the grounds that there is one reference. Does a dead link count, though? Nangaf (talk) 16:15, 7 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Yes, it does: WP:BLPPROD is very strict that any source counts. After all, the dead link could be archived. But looking at Copeland on Google Scholar, it appears that he would be notable under WP:PROF anyway. StAnselm (talk) 16:20, 7 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

I am not persuaded by his Google scholar profile, personally. An archived link would be fine. Nangaf (talk) 20:34, 8 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Stephen Dempster 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/Stephen Dempster 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.

SL93 (talk) 22:29, 19 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

Ten years ago, you were found precious. That's what you are, always. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:47, 29 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Seabrook Christian School logo.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:59, 7 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

How do I fix that? If I did it wrong, I can't figure out what the correct method is. Argles Barkley (talk) 15:50, 16 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Well, I think you should have started a discussion via WP:RM. StAnselm (talk) 15:51, 16 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Universidad de San Martín de Porres logo.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:40, 20 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

The article The Hal Lindsey Report has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced stub

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. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 20:14, 27 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Hal Lindsey Report 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/The Hal Lindsey Report 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.

Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 20:30, 27 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kate Bracks 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/Kate Bracks 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 until the discussion has finished.

SanAnMan (talk) 18:52, 20 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Brent Owens 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/Brent Owens 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 until the discussion has finished.

SanAnMan (talk) 21:42, 20 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I noticed that you used "passes NCRIC" as a reason to keep at several recent AfDs. Are you aware that meeting NCRIC is no longer sufficient to establish notability (it merely states that significant coverage is likely to exist) and NSPORTS requires at least one SIGCOV source in the article? Would you consider changing your !votes at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sarah Forbes (cricketer) (2nd nomination) and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shabana Kausar (2nd nomination) now that you know this? –dlthewave ☎ 04:59, 28 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi! I noticed that my edit in the Wikipedia page: Miraculous catch of fish was removed. I would like to say that more than 70% of the world is believers in God, as am I. Contributors on Wikipedia are doing so because they are passionate about different subjects and they are passionate about spreading the truth and knowledge. Now that I am aware that there is such a non-profit organization that can scientifically decode the Bible, I feel that I have a moral obligation to do as much as I can as a Wikipedia editor to let the world know about it. I discussed  the matter with others and I also think that Wikipedia should not stop us to be passionate about subjects, because actually we are in a way volunteers for Wikipedia. Please reverse my edit or please advice how may I change the language and yet continue to help this non-profit organization in their research. I invested 15 hours this week to study their page and their researches. Rest assure that I am not an employee of this non-profit organization. Mr.Durnbey (talk) 20:28, 1 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your post. Yes, you are now a Wikipedia volunteer! But we would need what we call a secondary source: a news article or book written by someone else explaining the approach. When I do a search for code2GOD or "Jesus 153 fish mystery" I don't get much: there is this Universe News Network article, but that is not a reliable source by Wikipedia standards. StAnselm (talk) 20:52, 1 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your reply@StAnselm. I encountered this non-profit organization that is actually using the original Bible written in Hebrew to scientifically decode the Bible or in other words to give us a proof for the existence of God. I do believe in God, but I am not a fanatic, but when I encountered that organization it opened my eyes and as a volunteer in Wikipedia, I also want to help that non-profit, because they've been around for 3 years and they are not known on the web. I joined Wikipedia trying to help the world with more knowledge and to recognize the truth, because in the end we all fight for it. The fact is that the code2GOD non-profit organization actually decoded the original Bible. They have something more powerful than ever, they hold the truth! How can we rely on someone's translations, where actually they didn't even understand Hebrew? But in history we showed that we rely on a "thousand-times" repeated researches and after 2000 years we are not sure that they are true!? Right? I believe that the code2GOD has the answer for all of our questions and I am not just impressed by their work, but I really do believe that they hold the truth and they are focused on spreading it all over the world. They are a young organization and I think they should have their place on Wikipedia. As I stated before, 90% of the writings are from past researches and we can't really hold to their scientific approach. As in the Wikipedia page: Miraculous catch of fish, there is a paragraph that states: "The precision of the number of fish as 153 has long been considered, and various writers have argued that the number 153 has some deeper significance, with many conflicting theories having been offered (see the discussion on the number 153 in the Bible). For instance, Augustine of Hippo argued that the significance lay in the fact that 153 is the sum of the first 17 integers (i.e. 153 is the 17th triangular number), with 17 representing the combination of divine grace (the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit) and law (the Ten Commandments)."

As it is clearly stated that various writers have argued about the number 153 that has a deeper significance, but without any explanation. code2GOD gives a detailed explanation of what the actual 153 number means in the Bible. My point is, that readers want proof, and again we all want to discover the truth. We have this non-profit organization that can teach us about the real meaning of the Bible.

How can I improve the paragraph in order for you to accept it on Wikipedia? I think that you've understand my point of talking about real research and decoding that can help the Wikipedia community and every reader in this world to understand the real meaning of the Bible. Waiting for your kind reply! Thanks! Mr.Durnbey (talk) 16:41, 4 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

So now we have (probably) another conflicting theory, which I have to say you don't explain very articulately. Being a non-profit gives no special status, & we would need to have references for widespread acceptance by specialist scholars independent of this organization. Johnbod (talk) 16:54, 4 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management.gif. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:31, 10 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Noonans Mayfair 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/Noonans Mayfair 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 until the discussion has finished.

MB 23:23, 13 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

  You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Subroto Das § Post playing career and spelling of first name. -- Marchjuly (talk) 20:16, 23 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi StAnselm. Would you mind taking a look at this? It might a case like Mamata Kanojia where the individual was also know under a different name. FWIW, I asked about it at WT:IN#Subroto Das, but have yet to get a response. -- Marchjuly (talk) 20:20, 23 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

The article Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No independent sources at all. What the journal has to say about itself, as in the footnotes here, can never confer notability.

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. Bishonen | tålk 16:30, 27 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 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/Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 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 until the discussion has finished.

Hemiauchenia (talk) 16:45, 27 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

I noticed that you're continuing to cite NSPORTS sport-specific criteria as a reason to keep an article, even when no significant coverage can be found such as here or citing seemingly random achievements unsupported by and guideline such as here. Please make sure that your !votes are compliant with our policies and guidelines and bear in mind that at least one SIGCOV source must be included in the article for sportspeople. –dlthewave ☎ 12:33, 31 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

No, per WP:NEXIST, sources do not need to be in the article. StAnselm (talk) 15:21, 31 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

But they do need to exist. –dlthewave ☎ 15:38, 31 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

  There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. –dlthewave ☎ 15:57, 31 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

I think it had been more than eight years since I was reported at ANI. StAnselm (talk) 23:09, 31 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi again! I write you because I think it would be better to rename this article. I think Hispania (allegory) or Hispania (personification) would be better as all the articles about allegories don't use to be written as f.e. Allegory of Germania but as Germania (personification). Are you agree? Who could rename the article? Thank you Wyatt Abernathy (talk) 21:21, 8 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

  Done Thanks for your hard work. StAnselm (talk) 21:32, 8 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Reformed Church of Nepal logo.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:23, 9 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

I noticed that some of your AfD comments are still citing reasons that don't follow our policies and guidelines, particularly NSPORTS. Recently you've argued that only one SIGCOV source is required to meet NSPORTS [1] (not true, at least one source must be present in the article); that articles without SIGCOV should be kept to counter systemic bias [2]; that "The minimalist view is that for certain sportspeople one source with significant coverage in the article + routine, statistical coverage can be a proxy for GNG." [3] (I've never heard that one before, is it written down somewhere?); that a player should not be deleted because they had a "lengthy career" [4]; and that players who are just starting out should be kept because they're likely to receive more coverage in the future [5] (CRYSTALBALL violation). Given your promise at ANI to follow our guidelines, this really isn't acceptable. Please be sure that the subject truly meets our notability requirements before !voting to keep. –dlthewave ☎ 02:26, 11 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

In fact, only one of those comments were part of a keep !vote, and !voting per IAR is always acceptable. StAnselm (talk) 02:34, 11 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

And there was me just about to come here and thank you for continuing to contribute to AfD - it's so easy to give it up as a waste of time and effort. We don't always agree on them, but I appreciate that you take the time and effort to consider each one and to look for sources. In particular, the addition of the sources from CI at Mukesh Sahni was really helpful. Blue Square Thing (talk) 09:28, 11 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

Talk:Anglican Diocese of Lagos DBD 18:58, 19 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

Three days since you reverted calling for discussion, and you have made contributions during those days. Please would you come by the talk page above? DBD 09:30, 22 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Sterling College logo.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:10, 9 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

On 15 September 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Madeleine Swann, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Madeleine Swann's name is a tribute to Marcel Proust? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Madeleine Swann. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Madeleine Swann), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 15 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Thank for your help with this article. I could use further help with this page as it is nominated for deletion. much appreciated. Blake Alma (numismatist) Coincollector4ever (talk) 21:18, 15 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Casting your vote on the Articles for deletion page would go a long way. Thank you! Coincollector4ever (talk) 22:48, 15 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Keith Mathison 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/Keith Mathison 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 until the discussion has finished.

Star Mississippi 14:48, 16 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

I was clearly off here. Have withdrawn my nomination. FYI in case you're not watching the AfD. Apologies Star Mississippi 17:01, 16 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Well, there certainly wasn't much in the article, to be honest. But thanks anyway. StAnselm (talk) 17:08, 16 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

On 18 September 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article George F. Kosco, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that George F. Kosco filmed the signing of the Japanese surrender in color? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/George F. Kosco. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, George F. Kosco), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 18 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

A tag has been placed on Demonetized (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a disambiguation page which either

• disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic);
• disambiguates zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
• is an orphaned redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" that does not target a disambiguation page or page that has a disambiguation-like function.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

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 deleted 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. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:37, 24 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

You commented in the 2034 Winter Olympics AfD recently about HiltonCalifornia. I started a Sock investigation on them as the editing behaviour dead-on matched the sock master. Might not be the best to defend them until the sock investigation clears them, but from the look of it, it is the sock based on a few dead-on article-article and behaviour-behaviour giveaways. Elijahandskip (talk) 17:21, 26 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

On 5 October 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article United States Army Replacement and School Command, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the men who trained through the United States Army Replacement and School Command (insignia pictured) knew they were going to the deadliest places on the World War II battlefield? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/United States Army Replacement and School Command. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, United States Army Replacement and School Command), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 5 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Institutional Investor September 2005.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:08, 21 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Bega Cheese logo.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:07, 25 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

I appreciate your self-rv at Crisis pregnancy center, which hopefully under the new DS awareness system would suffice, but currently I still have to give you this. ("Have to" as in I've done so for everyone else to rv at that page since I imposed the 1RR, if not already formally aware. As always, an alert carries no finding of wrongdoing.)

 

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in abortion. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

-- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 03:03, 30 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

  An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect BendGate and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 November 2#BendGate until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 00:47, 2 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello, thank you for your opposition to the deletion of my issue on The book of Daniel, I appreciate the issue you brought up, and if you would like to, I think voicing that issue on Talk:Book of Daniel would be very welcome. and I would love to have more positions introduced as it's currently basically me, tgeorgescu and one other individual. Thank you so much, have a great day. Billyball998 (talk) 18:38, 4 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

On 11 November 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article John Kennedy of Dingwall, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that John Kennedy of Dingwall was minister of the same church for forty years? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/John Kennedy of Dingwall. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, John Kennedy of Dingwall), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:02, 11 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Paige Larson.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:29, 14 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Paige Larson.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:47, 19 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Good morning/afternoon/evening! (Choose the one that best fits your time zone.) Curious about why you reverted the redirect at this article. I merged what I thought was the pertinent information. You are welcome, of course, to add more of it to the target if you think I didn't transfer enough. Joyous! | Talk 17:26, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

I would have thought at a minimum, the references would have been included. Interestingly, the target has an expand tag dating back to 2008. StAnselm (talk) 17:36, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Bible Presbyterian Church logo.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. — trlkly 22:17, 9 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Christian Century Dec 2010.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:05, 23 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

 

Happy New Year!

StAnselm,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 02:27, 2 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 02:27, 2 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

Did you really want to revert that? WP:TPO is a guideline, WP:NOTSOAPBOX is a policy. And I'm pretty sure "The bible is quite clear on the subject of homosexuality, and only those who wish to ignore the clearly stated truth of scripture would conclude otherwise" is violating the latter. Black Kite (talk) 23:08, 2 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

Well, I'm not happy with User:tgeorgescu's behavior here: he has reverted talk page comments from several months ago, and somehow already ended up at WP:AE. Ronar~enwiki's comments did make some reference to NPOV and are probably no more soapboxy than tgeorgescu's. Continuing to remove them looks like goading to me. StAnselm (talk) 23:13, 2 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

I agree that tgeorgescu could have went about it in a better manner. However if we’re going to argue from WP:TPO, Ronar~enwiki’s comments fall under the prohibited material criteria. I have not heard of any time limit, especially when it comes to removing prohibited material. Judging by the history of the article’s talk page, Ronar~enwiki was not in the middle of a discussion either. They simply barged in on discussions which were a few and even several years old. Judging by their conduct, they don’t appear to be here to build an encyclopedia. StephenMacky1 (talk) 01:13, 3 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

And what's with "I have served you with WP:GOODBIAS upon your talk page"?

No idea. But I'm really not happy with stuff like "homosexuality as an act or tendency one indulges in is an abomination", so I am minded to remove it again. I think Ronar~enwiki is suffering from a WP:CIR problem, to be honest. Black Kite (talk) 23:34, 2 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

Obviously, any wikipedia editor is free to believe that homosexuality is an abomination, and here on WP we take no official position on that belief. It's somewhat relevant for Bible + homosexuality articles, but it's only the Old Testament that says this, not the New Testament. StAnselm (talk) 23:38, 2 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, but he's presenting it as a fact, not an opinion ("Those who hate God will try any kind of nonsense to deny the truth"). Conflating "what the Bible says" and "what I believe God says" is simply WP:OR even before you get into the religious aspect. And yes, I was going to say that it's only Leviticus that says that, so it's irrelevant for this talkpage anyway. Black Kite (talk) 23:50, 2 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

Except that Wikipedia:No original research explicitly does not apply to talk pages. And if we removed every talk page comment that confused facts and opinions we'd have to do an awful lot of culling. StAnselm (talk) 01:40, 3 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Black Kite: The problem is that the editor used Wikipedia as a pulpit. And I don't know all the rules, but quickly get the point when told. tgeorgescu (talk) 02:22, 3 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Carsales logo.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. echidnaLives - talk - edits 05:50, 13 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Southern Episcopal Church logo.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:30, 22 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

Who's the second Jonathan in Samuel 2 then? The only other one on the disambiguation page is a Jonathan in the Book of Judges, Iskandar323 (talk) 17:24, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

The son of Abiathar and companion of Ahimaaz in 2 Samuel 17.[6] I think he probably does deserve his own article. Note that Jonathan son of Saul dies at the end of 1 Samuel, so "1 Samuel" is a reasonable disambiguator, even though there is a song about him in 2 Samuel 1. StAnselm (talk) 17:32, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

  Done Jonathan (son of Abiathar). StAnselm (talk) 18:18, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

I’m just asking you this because you’re the last person who edited the page Ordinary Girl (Hannah Montana song). I was wondering should we change the cover art to the more official, seemingly correct one? This artwork was actually released on an official cd single release and matches the artwork of the second single I'm Still Good, https://www.amazon.com/Hannah-Montana-Ordinary-Girl-2-Track-S/dp/B0043T50G8, https://www.amazon.de/-/en/dp/B004F78X76. It makes it seem like the regular artwork was just a placeholder or that the single release was a promo single? What do you think? Would this artwork represent the song better? 47.223.46.42 (talk) 05:11, 6 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hmm. I tried to fix it but it didn't seem to work... StAnselm (talk) 17:21, 6 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

I note you have done some oversight work at the Heiser article. I did a major edit today, restructuring and moving lead material into the main body, and otherwise seeking to make the article more encyclopedic (including noting the most material currently is from Heiser sources per se). Could you look in, and make any needed corrective edits, but also solidify the edit, before someone does a less than thoughtful twinkle-inspired reversion, just because I do not log? Merci. 2601:246:C700:F5:F1A0:5FAE:545B:F637 (talk) 21:20, 6 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

  A discussion is taking place to address a potential problem with the redirect Apostolic Church (1911 denomination) and it has been listed for discussion. Anyone, including you, is welcome to participate at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 February 8 § Apostolic Church (1911 denomination) until a consensus is reached. Veverve (talk) 13:29, 8 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

This is the official art online and on cds, it’s for I'm Still Good by Hannah Montana, can you upload the cover artwork? here’s what the image generally looks like online https://open.spotify.com/album/1y9UosW8KsJgIddyJ1ujFt

  Done StAnselm (talk) 05:07, 17 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hello, ST.Anselm. I'm wondering if you are aware of the indefinite blocking of Elizium23 (User talk:Elizium23). Perhaps you could read the ANI discussion that led to that indefinite blocking and give me you observations about it. Regards. Goodtablemanners (talk) 21:25, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

I thought it was a bit trigger-happy on the part of the blocking admin, but I think these sort of blocks are designed to get the editor concerned to admit fault and apologize, which I don't think Elizium23 will do. StAnselm (talk) 21:39, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your reaction. I happen to think it was damned trigger happy considering the guy had never been blocked for even a minute previously. Goodtablemanners (talk) 21:59, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

...at the Entheogen article, and perhaps at the main Christianity article as well. In the first case, I made edits (today) in keeping with WP:VERIFY, and other policies and guidelines. As well, I moved into footnote bulky explanatory material about normative religious practice that was pasted in, in November 2022 (which is largely off-point, as it related Christian communion practices to entheogenic experience, a connection which is and has been a stretch, apart from clerical abuses, for perhaps 1800 years or more). In the latter, the main Christianity article, I have just noticed a bit of warring and perhaps perspective imperialism, and though I will not address, suggest that logging editors dedicated to the quality of that article look in. (Beside you, I would not know others to invite.) Look in at your convenience, to affirm/correct what you see at Entheogen, and to offer what guidance you see fit at the main article? Cheers, an educator. 2601:246:C700:F5:A9DE:5AC2:9872:31B9 (talk) 04:15, 16 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

  The redirect Peter James (Pseudohistorian) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 March 21 § Peter James (Pseudohistorian) until a consensus is reached. GretLomborg (talk) 04:39, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

I really appreciate your neutral voice on Moira Deeming. Given that tomorrow there is a vote on whether or not she is to remain in the Liberal Party, and given that the Liberal leader for Victoria is using Wikipedia's articles (I don't know which ones, but presumably it includes this one) to justify his decision to remove her, now is the time to get this right. The question as to whether or not that rally was really an anti-trans rally is very much in the news right now. It was initially described largely as being anti-trans but then there was a lot of blowback about it and right now it's closer to 50/50, with it alternatively being described as a women's rights rally. My viewpoint is that we should start from what the organisation themselves say, and we should at least mention what they say is the purpose of the rally. They said that the purpose was to talk about women's rights and how they are being eroded away by trans rights. That, in my opinion, should be the starting point. From there, we can then look at how other people view it, as being either anti-trans or women's rights or TERF. It is notable that different people who attended the rally did so with completely different views of what it was meant to be about. The Nazis who attended did so for anti-trans reasons - that is not in dispute - but they were gatecrashing, and weren't a part of the main rally. The counter-rally was pro-trans, and they viewed the rally that they were countering as being an anti-trans rally, but that doesn't mean that it was. Especially given that this is a BLP issue with someone's career and livelihood on the line, and we are being used to justify that decision, I really think that we should get it right, and we should err on the side of caution with this. I actually feel that there could be justification for a separate article on the Let Women Speak rally, or at least on the series of rallies that Posie Parker has done around the world, and then perhaps we can make that one perfect and then refer to it better, rather than trying to worry about getting it right for Moira Deeming's one. But maybe it wasn't big enough to justify it. Blissyu2 (talk) 03:53, 26 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

You created this redirect to Higher Life movement, which I agree is fine, but the article currently doesn't mention it. Would you be able to add a sentence or two? Thanks, Srnec (talk) 01:04, 8 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Done. StAnselm (talk) 03:55, 8 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

  The redirect Liberty, Christian has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 April 20 § Liberty, Christian until a consensus is reached. Veverve (talk) 11:08, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

  The redirect Christian freedom has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 April 20 § Christian freedom until a consensus is reached. Veverve (talk) 11:08, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hi there - you recently removed the list of names on the basis that it was unsourced. however, there was a footnote reference at the head of the table to this article which provides the relevant list of names. Could you either reconsider / revert the edit or provide a more detailed explanation of why you think the section should be removed, on the talk page? thanks! hamiltonstone (talk) 11:47, 24 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

I'm happy to use the article, but it's quite old, and there were many names listed in that table that weren't in the SMH article. Which is why each entry needs to be sourced individually. StAnselm (talk) 13:42, 24 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. I have redone the national MP table using only the names listed in Massola. Agree in future it will be good to have sources done line by line as new sources are introduced, but for now at least it is accurate. hamiltonstone (talk) 01:14, 30 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

I don't understand what you're doing. Why haven't you cited line by line? It's clearly not just the names in Massola - you included Claire Chandler, who isn't mentioned there at all, and Gavin Pearce, who is only listed as being part of a "Veterans" group. I'm inclined just to revert altogether. StAnselm (talk) 03:09, 1 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

I'm sorry, but I do not understand what you are doing. The Massola article contains a table. It is headed "factions". It then has lists of names for each faction. Claire Chandler and Gavin Pearce are named in that list. I have checked the lists for a third time. Every name in the list in the WP article was in the Massola table. every name in the former MPs list in the WP article was in the Massola table except for two, Abbott and Abetz, who are named as faction figureheads in the article text: "For years its figureheads were Tony Abbott, Eric Abetz and Kevin Andrews." So I will revert the revert. Yes, it would be great to change it to line-by-line attribution. But given the citation given at the head of the article was correct at this time, surely the right approach is 1. improve it yourself if you wish and/or 2. raise it at the talk page. hamiltonstone (talk) 06:21, 2 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

I'm so sorry. Yes, this was entirely my fault. I think the problem was that the text of the names didn't show up in the search page function, and I missed the table reading through the article. StAnselm (talk) 06:30, 2 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

The sad truth is that Wikipedia is more dangerous for minors than Pornhub. Pornhub is a dull website in comparison with many dangerous ideas explained at Wikipedia in full detail. tgeorgescu (talk) 04:05, 25 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

I'm wondering about the use of "served" in descriptions of occupations. I am aware that this is common English usage, especially in political positions, military roles, and religious occupations. However, it seems to me that this usage isn't NPOV. It seems to me to be an expression of gratitude to the position-holder and an indication that the speaker considers these occupations to be especially good and valuable. I don't think an encyclopedia should be making these kinds of judgements or thanking people for their work. What do you think? Daask (talk) 18:51, 3 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

Interestingly, I have created two articles since I reverted your edit at Paul Washer that used "serve" in this sense. I guess I find it to be a convenient word. It would appear to be meaning 1.4 of wikt:serve: "To be a servant or worker; to perform the duties of a servant or employee; to render service." I take your point, but I think it would need a rather far-reaching RfC: the phrase "he served as" gets 125,000 hits on Wikipedia! StAnselm (talk) 19:27, 3 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Journal of Early Modern History.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:24, 6 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Christian Witness to Israel logo.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:10, 8 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Journal of Early Modern History.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:27, 12 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

The cover of JEHM that you object to is not simply on Commons, but has a tag saying the copyright holder has released it under a creative commons licence. Your insistence that it is a copyright violation contradicts this. Are you saying that the tag is an error or a lie? -- Andreas Philopater (talk) 02:00, 13 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

Yes I am. The actual copyright is owned by Brill Publishers [7] There is no reason to think that is User:Entity1920. StAnselm (talk) 02:30, 13 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

  The redirect Incomprehensibility has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 May 25 § Incomprehensibility until a consensus is reached. Veverve (talk) 01:28, 25 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

  The redirect Incomprehensibility of God has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 May 25 § Incomprehensibility of God until a consensus is reached. Veverve (talk) 01:30, 25 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

  The redirect Theology of John has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 June 11 § Theology of John until a consensus is reached. Veverve (talk) 07:06, 11 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

  The redirect Divine incomprehensibility has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 June 16 § Divine incomprehensibility until a consensus is reached. Veverve (talk) 09:21, 16 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

  The redirect Divine Incomprehensibility has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 June 16 § Divine Incomprehensibility until a consensus is reached. Veverve (talk) 09:21, 16 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Manly pride jersey player boycott, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manly pride jersey player boycott until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 27 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Ozark Christian College logo.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:20, 2 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

 

A tag has been placed on Kambuja (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a disambiguation page which either

• disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic);
• disambiguates zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
• is an orphaned redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" that does not target a disambiguation page or page that has a disambiguation-like function.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

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 deleted 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. Dsuke1998AEOS (talk) 01:55, 8 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Alfred Mordecai you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria.   This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Djmaschek -- Djmaschek (talk) 00:23, 12 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Stella Bonasera.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:38, 12 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

The article Alfred Mordecai you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold  . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Alfred Mordecai and Talk:Alfred Mordecai/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Djmaschek -- Djmaschek (talk) 04:22, 13 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

The article Alfred Mordecai you nominated as a good article has passed  ; see Talk:Alfred Mordecai for comments about the article, and Talk:Alfred Mordecai/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Djmaschek -- Djmaschek (talk) 20:43, 14 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Schleich logo.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:32, 17 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

I nominated the SPLC-designated groups category for deletion at CfD, without noticing that you had already tagged it for speedy deletion. I'm not sure how best to detangle things. Would you like me to withdraw my CfD nom? Cheers, gnu57 20:51, 23 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

No, you don't need to. I don't know if the speedy will be accepted, since it isn't the exact title that was deleted. StAnselm (talk) 20:52, 23 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hello StAnselm, since you aded the image just wanted to inform you there are other images available now in case you might wish to change   Cheers. Lotje (talk) 14:37, 29 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

Where are they? StAnselm (talk) 14:54, 29 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:California Graduate School of Theology logo.gif. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:05, 30 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Wheels magazine.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:42, 12 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Your rude and inappropriate level 4 template has been rolled-back off of my page, returned to the ether from which it never should have left.

Beyond My Ken (talk) 17:33, 13 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

I just wanted to drop you a note to let you know that you are banned from posting comments on my talk page, unless, of course, you are required to by Wikipedia policy. If you are required to post a notice on my talk page, please clearly indicate in the edit summary what policy you are doing so under. Any other posted comments will be deleted without being read.

Please note that this ban also applies to pinging me.

Also, if you email me to get around this ban, I will assume that you are agreeing in advance that the entire contents of the e-mail can be released to anyone I wish to.

Thanks. Beyond My Ken (talk) 17:35, 13 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hello, StAnselm. Thank you for your work on WFV. User:Lightburst, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thank you for creating a page to help users navigate. One thing to keep in mind is that another editor may determine that these articles do not need to be disambiguated. They may also determine that a hatnote may suffice.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Lightburst}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Lightburst (talk) 04:08, 19 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:New Saint Andrews logo.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:31, 21 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Just a quick note that the image of the updated magazine title was taken down with the comment (Undid revision 1170612063 by Russell Bray's Ghost (talk) - please stop adding copyright violations)

How do we get the image up? We are the copyright holders. I oversaw the creation of the image as the editor of Wheels magazine in Australia, and we hold the rights to it and are happy for it to appear on Wikipedia. You are not going to be subject to a copyright violation. Is there a process that we need to follow inb order to expedite this?

Many thanks

Andy Enright Editor Wheels Australia Russell Bray's Ghost (talk) 01:35, 22 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

  The redirect GGV has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 23 § GGV until a consensus is reached. CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:49, 23 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Danny Messer.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:08, 24 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Lindsay Monroe.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:28, 24 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Mac Taylor.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:33, 24 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hey there! Thank you for contributing to the G3 Ministries article with that version of the logo! ReformedMandalorian (talk) 17:58, 29 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

No problem! It might be able to be added to Commons (as being below the "threshold of originality") but it is easier to upload it as a non-free image. StAnselm (talk) 18:01, 29 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Yes, that makes sense!

Also, I also am the Founder of ReformedWiki(dot)org if you are interested in helping over there! ReformedMandalorian (talk) 18:13, 29 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I know. ;) StAnselm (talk) 18:14, 29 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Free Church of Scotland logo.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:14, 3 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

Can I invite you to Talk:Stay-at-home daughter? Thanks, Polygnotus (talk) 15:23, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

 

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

Please follow the policy WP:ONUS, even if you disagree with it. Polygnotus (talk) 04:38, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

There is indeed an RFC to rename "Spain national football team" to "Spain men's national football team". I see in that RFC no consensus to change the page into a disambiguation page with hundreds of incoming links. I am not going to clean up that mess. See here: Templates with disambiguation links. The Banner talk 10:11, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply