User talk:Chessrat

Opinion Polling next UK Gen Election: graph

Hi, I understand from user:Impru20 that he will add if polling results for Greens are in the main table for the entire period 2010-2014. Since I learnt that from Impru, 7 days ago, I've added 7+ months of Green Party shares in 2014 and to 31 rows of the 2010 table (that I had to add the new column to first, and is harder, because fewer of teh URLs are correct after 4 years). Perhaps, 81.58.144.30, you want to join me in filling in the data? DrArsenal (talk) 18:20, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

OK, thanks for all the work! I'll start adding some old Green Party figures :) Chessrat (talk) 02:46, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

I was really pleased to see that you have come back to working on them: it feels like the end is in sight! ...However, can you be more careful, please - I was looking through the diffs of those you did in the early hours, and noticed some obvious errors - a couple of times when you forgot to adjust the 'others' and some where you seem to have wrongly 'corrected' ComRes and ICM polls. For the ComRes ones I have added notes so editors can see where to look when they think of editing that particular poll - perhaps you could have a look to see why I have put the figures I have in the table? Please don't let that put you off working on the backlog of Green shares - and please do ask for advice/ideas if you think it will help. Thanks DrArsenal (talk) 22:32, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Oh, thanks for spotting that! I had tried to get into a routine of updating "others"- but must have gone too carelessly and missed a few. Sorry about that. Those ComRes tables are very confusing, so I think in the future I'll skip them when doing the general editing, and get back to them later if no one else has finished them. Once again, thanks so much for doing all of this work! Chessrat (talk) 23:40, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Absolutely. I think both Headlightmorning and I have found (having done it strictly by date first) that it is easier to get into a routine of doing a load of polls of one particular pollster before moving on to different pollsters. DrArsenal (talk) 13:41, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the contributions

	Beans on toast for you!
	Thanks for all your work so now we have good coverage of green shares all the way back to October 2011. I also noticed that it was just as well we were working on different years, otherwise we would have had an edit conflict tonight. So, in the interests of avoiding edit conflicts, any thoughts what bit you will try to tackle next? Any way BIG thanks. DrArsenal (talk) 22:08, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

To be honest, I'm not sure what to tackle next. That October 2011 gap needs filling but the data is currently inaccessible... Same with many 2010 surveys. I don't know if the data has been intentionally been made private or accidentally concealed. Will probably fill in the 2012 gaps once other jobs have been done. And try to find the missing 2010 data. Chessrat (talk) 23:39, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Wow! Thanks for getting 2010 done.

Oct 2011 YouGovs seem to be the biggest problem, but try as I might, I can't find them. Techniques that have found all sorts of others don't work with them. So, time to ask impru20 to change the 'Graphical Summary', I think? DrArsenal (talk) 07:37, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

No problem :) Yep, I've tried to find October 2011 YouGovs as well, but no dice. Short of actually contacting YouGov themself, I think we've done the most we can do. Agreed, time for a graph update. Chessrat (talk) 10:35, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Nvm, found the Oct 2011s. https://yougov.co.uk/news/categories/politics/?page=153 http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/2011-10-24/YG-Archives-Pol-Sun-results-241011.pdf Will complete the table. Also, nice graph here. http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/inlineimage/2014-12-04/Monthlytotal.png Chessrat (talk) 13:13, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Cheers!

	Time to share a beer!
	I thought those of us who worked to backdate Green shares at Opinion polling for the 2015 United Kingdom general election and clear up the mess of the UKIP 2011 shares there should share a beer to celebrate 'mission accomplished'. DrArsenal (talk) 20:13, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! Great work, everyone! Chessrat (talk) 21:11, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Burma (Myanmar) which affects the recently renamed page Myanmar. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. Sawol (talk) 16:30, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

PROD rationale for Christina Cock (Swedish pioneer)

Technically, the article wasn't recently-created - it was buried in the edit history of a page that had morphed into a page about someone else (see Christina Cock and the deletion and move logs for that page, Christina Cock (Swedish pioneer), and the typo-generated page Christina Cock (Swedish poineer for details). The rest of your rationales are sound. Please consider re-wording "recently created" in your rationale. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 21:36, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Symphony of Science, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Brian Cox. 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) 11:29, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:59, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

HH Ferry route

Hello ! You put an "advertise warning" on a part of the HH Ferry route article. I can see your point, and it was correctly done. It was unintentional bias from my side, due to the time I spend on this article - and could at the time perhaps not see "the forest due to all the trees". I have removed a lot of "coffee breaks" etc. So I wonder if could you kindly could have a new new look at the part. Perhaps even more ought to be removed, and I guess your eyes are not "contaminated" due to many hours, as still may be the case with me in this article. I'm very open for any kind of suggestion to improve the part further. Thanks ! Boeing720 (talk) 07:51, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Second attempt. I have now reduced the part even further. And as I now find it balanced - and you haven't made any comments (here or in the article), I removed the warning. I you think this was incorrectly done my me, just put it back. (and preferably with some comments to what still is wrong, if thst's the case) Thanks! Boeing720 (talk) 02:53, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 5

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:54, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

File:Annexation Bill of 1866 map.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Annexation Bill of 1866 map.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:12, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Please claim your upload(s): File:France base map 18 regions.png

Hi, Thank you, for uploading this file.

However, as part of ongoing efforts to ensure all media on English Wikipedia is correctly licensed and attributed it would be appreciated if you were able to confirm some details,

If it's your own work, please include {{own}}, amend the {{information}} added by a third party, and change the license to an appropriate "self" variant.

If not's your own work please provide as much sourcing/authorship information as you are able to.

This will assist those reviewing the many many "free" images on commons that have not yet been transfered to Commons.Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:15, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Reusable launch system, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page First stage. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:24, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Trojan centipede listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Trojan centipede. Since you had some involvement with the Trojan centipede redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. BDD (talk) 13:30, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Olexandr Bortnyk, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Aleksandrovka. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:35, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Dollarydoo

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello. A tag has been placed on Dollarydoo requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organized event (tour, function, meeting, party, etc.), but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. WannaBeEditor (talk) 02:38, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

I have a possible solution

Could you make the statistical tie between Clinton, Trump, and McMullin one color on the map? You can pick the color, this would make things easier. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:11, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

@Knowledgekid87: That would work, but goes against the long-standing convention of stripes=tie, and would be less easy to understand at first glance. I think that my current solution is best (the only problem is that stray white box, and I'll try to work out how to get rid of it) Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 16:20, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Chessrat. 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)

Next Conservative Party (UK) leadership election listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Next Conservative Party (UK) leadership election. Since you had some involvement with the Next Conservative Party (UK) leadership election redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Thryduulf (talk) 12:53, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey

Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. To say thank you for your time, we are giving away 20 Wikimedia T-shirts to randomly selected people who take the survey. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.

Take the survey now!

You can find more information about this project. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email to surveys@wikimedia.org.

Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 19:25, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Speakers

Spanish was spoken by 60% of population in early 20th century? Never read that in any history book about Philippines. All I read was only few Filipinos who could afford university education could speak. Also, no evidence of Spanish speakers immigrating to Hawaii in early 20th century. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.235.33.254 (talk) 08:07, 11 December 2015 (UTC) I just wanted to inform you than a man is about to turn 116 y.o. in Costa Rica. Please include it in the list of oldest men alive. You can Google it, his nickname is Chepito — Preceding unsigned comment added by 181.193.19.163 (talk) 22:44, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey

Hello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 28 February, 2017 (23:59 UTC). The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now.

If you already took the survey - thank you! We won't bother you again.

About this survey: You can find more information about this project here or you can read the frequently asked questions. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through EmailUser function to User:EGalvez (WMF) or surveys@wikimedia.org. About the Wikimedia Foundation: The Wikimedia Foundation supports you by working on the software and technology to keep the sites fast, secure, and accessible, as well as supports Wikimedia programs and initiatives to expand access and support free knowledge globally. Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 08:25, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Professional Rapid Online Chess League

On 1 March 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Professional Rapid Online Chess League, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Professional Rapid Online Chess League (PRO Chess League) is a worldwide online rapid chess league with 48 teams, whose members include more than 100 grandmasters? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Professional Rapid Online Chess League. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Professional Rapid Online Chess League), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. 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.

Mifter (talk) 12:02, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Abu Ivanka listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Abu Ivanka. Since you had some involvement with the Abu Ivanka redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 23:27, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Need regular updates of elo rating in other Wikipedias also

hai, I am from Malayalam wikipedia (ml). I notice the Template {{Elo rating}} in which you update the data regularly. Can you update the same in ml wiki ml:template:Elo rating by help of Bot or something else.-Arjunkmohan (talk) 07:32, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

@Arjunkmohan: I update the data manually every month, and don't know how to create a bot. So it would be too much work for me to do the updates for more than one Wikipedia, sorry!
I update the data by copying from the German version, de:Vorlage:Elo-Punkte, which is updated every month by de:Benutzer:Dsds55. Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 11:28, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

A page you started (Universal Rating System) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Universal Rating System, Chessrat!

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

Perhaps needs renamed.

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

Learn more about page curation.

scope_creep (talk) 20:43, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Chessrat. 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)

Doug Jones

I have undone your RM closure after less than an hour, and opened the RM again per IAR. There was no consensus between the two titles, and a rush to establish a stable title would be inappropriate and make it more difficult for whomever eventually closes the RM. Please let the ongoing discussion play out. I've move protected it also to let the RM play out, but if there is a clear consensus for a SNOW close over the next day or so, myself or another uninvolved admin can execute a move. TonyBallioni (talk) 04:41, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Proposal from User:DemocraticSocialism

I see that you support the idea of merging the "List of Roman emperors" and the "List of Byzantine emperors" articles. Although I agree, I've come up with a compromise solution: merge the two, and retitle it, "List of Roman and Byzantine emperors". I've decided to go around contacting those involved in the debate, trying to get support for my idea, and you're the second person I've contacted on this idea. Please write back! — Preceding unsigned comment added by DemocraticSocialism (talk • contribs) 17:29, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

@DemocraticSocialism: I agree, and proposed that exact thing (merging into a List of Roman and Byzantine emperors article) on the talk page on 6 October. Maybe you overlooked the part of the discussion where I suggested that? Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 18:35, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Admittedly, I did. Sorry, but thanks for your support! — Preceding unsigned comment added by DemocraticSocialism (talk • contribs) 23:25, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Andrew Tang for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Andrew Tang 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/Andrew Tang (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. John from Idegon (talk) 07:03, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

TOC in Deaths in 2018

Hi. The TOC as you recently modified it only currently appears in completed archived versions of the Deaths pages which have all the date links working. The "TOC right" in use (agreed during historic consensus) adds a link for each day during the work-in-progress page that is the current Deaths in 2018, and contains no redlinks or non-working date links. A change such as the one you made would require a new consensus among editors and needs a section opened on the talk page to discuss such a change. Thanks. Ref ^(chew)(do) 01:59, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Your signature

Please be aware that your signature uses deprecated <font> tags, which are causing Obsolete HTML tags lint errors.

You are encouraged to change

<font style="font-family: Comic Sans">[[User:Chessrat|<font color="#CC9900">Chessrat</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:Chessrat|<font color="green">talk</font>]], [[Special:Contributions/Chessrat|<font color="#ff7788">contributions</font>]]) </sup></font> : Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)}

to

<span style="font-family:Comic Sans">[[User:Chessrat|<span style="color:#C90">Chessrat</span>]] <sup>([[User talk:Chessrat|<span style="color:green">talk</span>]], [[Special:Contribs/Chessrat|<span style="color:#f78">contributions</span>]]) </sup></span> : Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)}

Note: the 3-hexadecimal-digit colors are identical to the 6-hexadecimal-digit colors; using 3 digits was necessary because this signature string is only one character below the limit of 255 characters.

—Anomalocaris (talk) 02:55, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. I've changed the signature now. Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 10:21, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks! —Anomalocaris (talk) 16:11, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Dollarydoo listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Dollarydoo. Since you had some involvement with the Dollarydoo redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. PRehse (talk) 10:56, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Abu Ivanka listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Abu Ivanka. Since you had some involvement with the Abu Ivanka redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 07:44, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Chessrat. 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)

American Politics editing

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 recently shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. 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.

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.

Lord Roem ~ (talk) 06:19, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Robert Irwin (television personality), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Black bear (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Jules Arnous de Rivière, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stanley Johnson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:10, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 13

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of chess players by peak FIDE rating, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mikhail Gurevich (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:12, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Neven's law

The article Neven's law has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

It's simply far too new a coinage to be notable.

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. XOR'easter (talk) 01:48, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Legendstriped red blue orange.png

The file File:Legendstriped red blue orange.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

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 files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

UK Opinion polls graph

Hi Chessrat. Are you able to update this? It's way beyond my abilities. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 14:12, 3 November 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) 00:15, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of 2020 in music for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2020 in music 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/2020 in music (2nd nomination) 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. Necromonger...We keep what we kill 14:56, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of 2020 in music for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2020 in music 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/2020 in music (3rd nomination) 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. → Lil-℧niquԐ1 - (Talk) - 13:12, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:5

A tag has been placed on Category:5 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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.

This message was automatically delivered by QEDKbot. 18:38, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Sarah Olney article

Reverted your edit as the removed link was an actual recording, which makes it hard to sustain your claim that it is not NPOV. Discuss on talk page for article. 78.33.185.122 (talk) 16:11, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Moving 2020 Portland, Oregon mayoral election

Hi! Could I ask you to revert changing the title of the article, please? Disambiguation is required as there's a Portland, Maine with a similar series of articles about their mayoral election. The change has also made the history of Mayoral election pages related to Portland, Oregon inconsistent. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andymcmillan (talk • contribs) 23:30, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

I see your point and I think a talk page discussion would probably be most appropriate, to get input from others. Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 08:10, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

I would like to suggest that you revert the change as it is breaking consistency in the naming convention. It should be discussed on the relevant Talk page(s). If it's decided that, for some reason, the change should be made, I would like to request that you make it consistently for all the Portland, Oregon mayoral election pages. Thank you! Andymcmillan (talk) 18:08, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of 2024 Republican Party presidential primaries for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2024 Republican Party presidential primaries 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/2024 Republican Party presidential primaries 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. Robert McClenon (talk) 07:20, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Virginia elections chart

I was wondering if you were planning to do this for all of the state elections articles. BD2412 T 01:46, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

@BD2412: Eventually, yes, but will take a while. Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 02:02, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Good. It's a good-looking chart. BD2412 T 02:26, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 02:26, 22 November 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) 02:32, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Wilfred Johnson (pilot) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Wilfred Johnson (pilot) 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/Wilfred Johnson (pilot) 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. MB 03:59, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Category:2021 births

I removed this category due to this deletion discussion, Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 January 5#Category:2021 births, anticipating that this category would be deleted again, for the third time. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:25, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Yamina

Hi Yellow is not the color of the party. So it must be changed. --Panam2014 (talk) 19:30, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Vectis Party

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Vectis Party requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company, corporation or organization that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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. doktorb _words^deeds 00:46, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Important Notice

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 post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. 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.

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.

― Tartan357 ^Talk 19:53, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 26

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of members of the twenty-fourth Knesset, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gesher.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 9

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mid and West Wales (Senedd Cymru electoral region), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Eluned Morgan.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

June 2021

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 articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. 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.

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.

Djm-leighpark (talk) 21:11, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

List of chess players by peak FIDE rating

Hi – thanks for all your work on chess articles here! I updated List of chess players by peak FIDE rating#2020s, and in the process I also checked the sections on the previous decades that you set up in this edit. I found what seem to be some errors, and before I correct them I wanted to check with you, since the sources for historical FIDE ratings are so shaky that some of this might be due to differences in our sources (or their interpretation). I'm working with the lists at https://ratings.fide.com that go back to 2000 and the earlier ones at OlimpBase (https://olimpbase.com, click on "Elo lists 1971-2001" in the right-hand sidebar). Please let me know whether you come to a different conclusion on any of these items or whether I can make the changes as described. thanks! Joriki (talk) 20:20, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

1970s

The date for Vassily Smyslov's rating of 2620 is stated as 1971-01. According to the OlimpBase list table, the January 1971 list was unofficial and the July 1971 list (where he had the same rating) was the first official FIDE list, so I think that should be 1971-07.

The date for Leonid Stein's rating of 2620 is stated as 1972-01. According to the OlimpBase list table, the only list in 1972 is from July, but I'm not sure how precise the months for these initial lists are – do you have other sources on this? In that table, Leonid Stein is rated 2620, and in the July 1971 list he's only rated 2605, so I think the date for that peak should be 1972-07.

1980s

The date for Ulf Andersson's rating of 2640 is stated as 1983-01. I think this should be 1983-07, as he's rated 2640 on the July 1983 list but only 2630 on the January 1983 list.

1990s

Vassily Ivanchuk is ranked as 9, but he's tied for 8= with Alexei Shirov.

You have a peak of 2712 in 1999-07 for Boris Gelfand, but Gelfand is rated 2713 on the July 1999 list, so he should be tied for 12= with Peter Svidler at 2713.

2000s

You wrote a footnote about the discrepancy in FIDE's data on Kramnik's peak rating in January 2002. I looked into that issue and posted my findings under the existing discussion at Talk:Vladimir Kramnik#Was his peak rating 2809 or 2811? – I'd be interested in your take on that. As I argue there, I believe the correct rating for January 2002 is 2811. If we do stick with 2809 though, the date should be 2001-10, not 2002-01, since he reached 2809 already in October 2001.

I think Vugar Gashimov's peak at 2758 dated 2009-11 is correct, but he's missing in the complete November 2009 rating list; this rating is only in the November 2009 top 100 ranking list and on his archived personal profile page (which no longer exists on the FIDE site). He doesn't seem to be missing in any of the other lists; it's strange that it happens to be this peak that's missing. (It's not his overall peak rating, which was in the 2010s, but it's his peak ranking at #6. Incidentally, if the 2758 rating in November 2009 should turn out to be wrong, he'd still be in the top 20, with a peak of 2740 at #20 in July 2009.)

Boris Gelfand is ranked as 15 with a peak rating of 2758; if Gashimov's above rating of 2758 is correct, the two should be tied for 14=.

Ruslan Ponomariov's peak is stated as 2741 in 2009-09, but his personal profile page, the top 100 for April 2002 and the complete rating list for April 2002 agree that he was rated 2743 in April 2002, so this should be 2743 dated 2002-04. (That doesn't change his ranking at 20.)

2010s

Viswanathan Anand's peak rating of 2817 is dated 2011-09, but he already reached this rating on the March 2011 list, so this should be 2011-03.

Teimour Radjabov's peak rating of 2793 is dated 2012-10, but he only reached this rating on the November 2012 list; his rating on the October 2012 list was 2792, so this should be 2012-11.

General

It seems that you didn't include inactive players. (For instance, Kasparov's rating of 2812 isn't in the 2010s list, and Fischer's rating of 2780 isn't in the 1990s and 2000s lists.) If so, I think this should be stated?

That's the standard- no reliable sources like FIDE report such inactive players in their rating lists. However, there'd be no harm in including a note like that. Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 21:53, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

The complete FIDE rating lists do include inactive players; there's a flag for that at the end of the line. The top 100 lists don't include them.

No comment on any of the other items? Joriki (talk) 22:47, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

My apologies- I'd somehow overlooked more sections above that! Thank you very much for your detailed work. Looking at it all...

-I used Olimpbase and the FIDE ratings website too, so in the discrepancies you found that is likely a case of error on my part.

-Having checked it, everything of the Smyslov, Stein, Andersson, Ivanchuk, Gelfand, Ponomariov, Anand, and Radjabov peaks seem to be what you said.

-The footnote about Kramnik was based on one previously existing in his main article. Given your analysis, I think putting the figure at 2811 would be most appropriate, but it's still probably worthwhile to have a footnote there mentioning the source discrepancy.

-On Gashimov, I have no idea why he doesn't appear in that FIDE archive but in general the 2758 figure seems accurate from the other sources.

-And on the inactive players, I'd be perfectly fine with a footnote mentioning that they're not included. Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 23:17, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your rapid response. I made all the changes. Joriki (talk) 10:03, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Panjshir resistance for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Panjshir resistance 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/Panjshir resistance 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.

Chetsford (talk) 02:26, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

New Wikipedia Guideline Proposed which you might be interested in.

Hello. I am letting editors know who participated in the recent discussions that decided whether the Killing of David Amess should be called "killing, murder, or assassination", about a new Wikipedia essay being proposed for a new guideline. The essay, Wikipedia:Assassination, explains how the common definition of "assassination" does not determine an article's title. Only reliable sources can determine whether it is murder/killing or assassination. Since you participated in those recent discussions, I wanted to drop a message to you about this new proposal. If you want to leave your opinion about it, you can do so in this discussion. Have a good day and keep up the good editing! Elijahandskip (talk) 01:42, 25 October 2021 (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) 00:36, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Claude Gruffat

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

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:02, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

A cheeseburger for you!

Here TJjeremiah (talk) 21:41, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Quidditch (real-life sport)

Your move of "Quidditch (real-life sport)" was reverted as it was under discussion. Fyunck(click) (talk) 22:22, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Archie Mountbatten-Windsor#Supposed "legal" titles

A discussion regarding Archie and Lilibet as prince and princess has been started here. Thank you. cookie monster 755 21:01, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Discussion

You are cordially invited: Talk:Archie Mountbatten-Windsor#Supposed "legal" titles. DBD 21:12, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

List of longest-reigning monarchs

The list of 32 states weren't reduced to 15 on the basis that Elizabeth was alive, they were reduced to 15 on the basis of the paragraph before the first table.

"Twenty-five longest-reigning monarchs of states that were internationally recognized as sovereign for most or all of their reign." (emphasis mine).

This means Elizabeth's passing does not require that all 32 states be included, because 16 of those states were not sovereign for most of her reign, they became sovereign over half way into her reign.

If you think they should all be included (and consolidated), then that'll need to be the subject of an RFC. Though I recommend taking the previous two RFCs into account. El Dubs (talk) 22:10, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

Article move

Evening

Please can you undo the article move of Portsmouth South, as per the agreed policy below

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(UK_Parliament_constituencies)

Regards doktorb _words^deeds 19:42, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

@Doktorbuk: Done, sorry about that! I had just assumed that the disambiguation was an error thanks to the general Wikipedia policy against unnecessary disambiguation; hadn't been aware an exception was made specifically for UK parliamentary constituencies. Thanks for bringing that to my notice. Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 19:50, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

No worries. I think it needs better promotion myself but hey ho. Thanks for the swift response doktorb _words^deeds 20:18, 7 November 2022 (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) 01:10, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Charles III requested move discussion

There is a new requested move discussion in progress for the Charles III article. Since you participated in the previous discussion, I thought you might like to know about this one. Cheers. Rreagan007 (talk) 07:05, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Other British monarch requested move discussions currently taking place

Since you recently participated in the Charles III requested move discussion, I thought you might like to know that there are two other discussions currently going on about other British monarch article titles here and here. Cheers. Rreagan007 (talk) 22:24, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

2023 Israel–Hamas war

The removal of the short description was an accident. I was only editing the international reactions section of the article.Tigerdude9 (talk) 01:38, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

I did suspect it was likely an accident but thought I'd mention it in case the citation put at the top of the article was intended to go elsewhere. Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 01:39, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

2023 Hamas attacks on Israel move

I understand your reason to move the article to 2023 Hamas attacks on Israel but that should have happened via an RM. This is definitely a WP:PCM as a reasonable person can disagree with the destination title for many reasons: there should be "October" in the title, replace "attacks" with "offensive", replace "Hamas" with "Palestinian militants" etc.VR _talk 19:28, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

@Vice regent: It was a new article created by a split from 2023 Israel–Hamas war rather than a move of an existing article; I only located it on the same page as the Operation Al-Aqsa Flood redirect for history attribution given the same topic. If you think it would be better to move it to Operation Al-Aqsa Flood and then open an RM for the new title though, by all means feel free to do so. Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 19:40, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Cool, thanks, I do think that's a better course.VR _talk 19:58, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

2023 Israel-Hamas War Talk Page

Cheers for your help in archiving that absolute mess of a talk page. Riposte97 (talk) 22:23, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

No problem, it's quite hard because it's so long and yet so many conversations remain active for days! Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 22:36, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

		The Modest Barnstar
		For quietly working behind the scenes to make the site's most hectic talk page a little more usable. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 03:55, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Operation Al-Aqsa Flood for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Operation Al-Aqsa Flood, 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/Operation Al-Aqsa Flood 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, 14 October 2023 (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) 00:42, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

2023 Periodic Review of Westminster constituencies

I note your suggestion that this article be split, to which I responded with broad agreement. As nobody else seems to have contributed to the discussion, are you happy for me to proceed with this, as the main contributor to the article? No doubt some tidying up would also be desirable. I see you added a table of demographic changes in Northern Ireland. I don't think this level of detail is appropriate for this article which deals with the whole of the UK. I suggest it is included in List of parliamentary constituencies in Northern Ireland. JSboundaryman (talk) 10:29, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

@JSboundaryman: I'm currently busy on holiday so perfectly happy for you to proceed with the split. Also fine with the Northern Ireland info being moved as you suggest. Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 21:11, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

@JSboundaryman: Did you end up moving the table of demographic changes elsewhere? If it got lost in the process of the article split, I'll re-add it to List of parliamentary constituencies in Northern Ireland, but just wanted to make sure I haven't overlooked it being placed elsewhere before I do so. Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 17:04, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

@Chessrat, in the end, I left it in the 2023 periodic review JSboundaryman (talk) 10:53, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Ah yes, I see now. Thanks. Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 10:59, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

1rr

You violated the 1RR, please self revert. nableezy - 00:12, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

My edit reverting your unexplained removal of the BBC source was the only revert I have made on the article in question in the last 24 hours, so no, it wasn't. Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 00:36, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Fine I can report it to AE in a bit. nableezy - 00:43, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Chessrat, for future reference, your edit was fine and this 1RR notice is without merit. See [1]. Coretheapple (talk) 04:09, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Extended confirmed restrictions

Hello,

Please be aware that all articles related to politics, ethnic relations, and conflicts involving Armenia, Azerbaijan, or both—broadly construed and explicitly including the Armenian genocide—are subject to an extended confirmed restriction. KhndzorUtogh (talk) 23:58, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 22

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Stepanakert, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Khojaly.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:47, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Joaquín Torres-García

The article body of Joaquín Torres-García cites they married in 1909. The other article Manolita Piña cites a marriage year of 1908. I don't have access to those writings; could you help confirm the year and fix appropriately? Cheers, --Engineerchange (talk) 12:20, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

I don't have access to the sources either, unfortunately. Manolita Piña cites a specific date in the article text so I would assume that that is the correct one. Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 12:57, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

I added a citation needed; can't confirm either way is my take. --Engineerchange (talk) 13:09, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Chessrat. Thank you for your work on Corus Chess Tournament 2008. Bastun, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Hi Chessrat. This comment applies to all of your recent additions of 'Corus Chess Tournament' articles. Nice work, much appreciated. I would recommend including them all in appropriate Wikiprojects. Good job!

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

Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 12:46, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Reversing Politically Motivated Page Changes

Hello Chessrat. Thank you for fixing the politically-motivated change on Ariel (Israeli settlement). Unfortunately, other pages, including Judea and Samaria Area and Ma'ale Adummim have been targeted with the same misleading use of the Palestinian flag. If you have the time, I'd recommend making similar reversions on those articles. Thank you. Theirishisraeli (talk) 22:15, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Chessrat. Thank you for your work on Indigenous Embassy, Jerusalem. Klbrain, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Note that was largely an unproosed copy/paste split; see WP:SPLIT for how to move content to a new page.

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

Klbrain (talk) 15:17, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

@Klbrain: May I ask what "unproosed" means? I've searched for it and can't find any information on it. And I'm not sure in what way you believe the split went against WP:SPLIT- the embassy itself is a very clearly distinct topic to the organization and it is standard for embassies to have their own articles so it's a pretty clear case of WP:CONSPLIT. Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 15:24, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

A simple typo! I had meant, of course, 'not proposed'! Even independently notable topics don't need or warrant separate pages, if they can be discussed better in the context of the broader topic. The Indigenous Coalition for Israel is really short, so having more material consolidated there is helpful. So, the formal reasons for the merge are short text and context (not on the grounds of notability). Please also see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia; there were 3 copies of very similar text, the other version previously being at The Friends of Zion Museum#Indigenous People Embassy. Klbrain (talk) 15:33, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Simon Harris (disambiguation)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Simon Harris (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) 16:11, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about Notional results of the 2019 United Kingdom general election by 2024 constituency

Hello Chessrat, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

While your contributions are appreciated, I wanted to let you know that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, Notional results of the 2019 United Kingdom general election by 2024 constituency, should be deleted, as I am not sure that it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia in its current form. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Notional results of the 2019 United Kingdom general election by 2024 constituency.

Deletion discussions usually run for seven days and are not votes. Our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. The most common issue in these discussions is notability, but it's not the only aspect that may be discussed; read the nomination and any other comments carefully before you contribute to the discussion. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Dclemens1971}}. And don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:50, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

1918 election article

Just wanted to say well done for proposing the RM – that article title has been on my list of minor annoyances for a very long time, but I had some very unpleasant experiences with Irish nationalist POV pushers in my early days on Wikipedia and never really fancied dealing with the inevitable flak that would come with it. Thankfully most of the ones from back then seem to have disappeared over the years, but best of luck with the discussion! Number 57 01:05, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Non-admin closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Opinion polling for the next United Kingdom general election

Hi there. I am curious about your decision to close Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Opinion polling for the next United Kingdom general election under WP:SNOW. According to WP:NACAFD, "a closure earlier than seven days may take place if a reason given in either Wikipedia:Speedy keep or Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion applies. Note that, per WP:SK#NOT, this does not authorize WP:SNOW closures." I agree with the outcome but I am concerned the early close may have short-circuited the discussion. Thoughts? Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:33, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@Dclemens1971 Thanks for bringing this to my attention- I had searched through the guidelines to ascertain if there was a rule preventing early closures under WP:SNOW, and evidently overlooked that one. Had I noticed it, rather than performing a non-admin closure I would instead have pinged the AfD creator suggesting they withdraw the nomination, given that their reason for nominating the article for deletion (namely, that no voting intention opinion polls existed) was no longer applicable. Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 21:42, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

After sleeping on it, I thought it would be best to allow other "redirect" !voters to have had a chance to weigh in again, given the new evidence, and for an admin to interpret whether SNOW applied, so I have posted this close at deletion review: Wikipedia:Deletion_review#Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election. No actual disagreement about the ultimate outcome but want to respect the other redirect voices (like mine; I was actually in the process of updating my !vote when it was closed and I saved my change after the actual close happened). Dclemens1971 (talk) 13:03, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi there, just a courtesy heads-up that I've reopened this debate per the 'uninvolved administrator' clause at WP:NACD. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 20:51, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

A trout for you

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

Great Mercian (talk) 22:23, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

Nomination of Jennie (dog) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jennie (dog) 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/Jennie (dog) 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.

Lordseriouspig 07:49, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Southend Council

Hi,

Any chance you could so out the Southend City Council diagram (here: Southend-on-Sea City Council - Wikipedia), it is beyond my ability!

I have updated the political make up, and it is correct as of 8th September 2024. Jamescourtenay (talk) 11:50, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Done. Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 14:27, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Brilliant, thanks! Jamescourtenay (talk) 12:45, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Hidden note on Next United Kingdom general election article

Can I clarify that re-adding that hidden note in my edit to Next United Kingdom general election article was unintentional and I apologise for doing so? I forgot it would have been there in the old revision I edited, and I thank you for correcting my mistake. --TedEdwards 23:31, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:31, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 5

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Regions of the AANES, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Tabqa and Afrin.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:54, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

December 2024

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, articles should not be moved, as you did to Robert Irwin (television personality), without good reason. They should have a name that is both accurate and intuitive. Wikipedia has some guidelines in place to help with this. Generally, a page should only be moved to a new title if the current name doesn't follow these guidelines. Also, if a page move is being discussed, consensus needs to be reached before anybody moves the page. If you would like to experiment with page titles and moving, please use the test Wikipedia. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. As this move has previously been discussed with consensus for current title, I have reverted your move per WP:RMUM. Please make a WP:RM nomination on talk page if you still want the article to be moved. Happily888 (talk) 01:06, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

@Happily888: That's alright if the disambiguation is contested (as is evidently the case given your reversion of the move), but I am curious as to why you started your message with "welcoming me to Wikipedia" when I have been an active user for several years longer than you have? Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 01:14, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Flag of Syria. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Chetsford (talk) 03:34, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi

Due to the fast-moving number of edits involving Syria-related topics I want to ensure that enforcement sanctions related to WP:CTOP are not accidentally applied on an editor.

In this edit [2] you said you've added a source that indicates the Flag of Syria has recently changed. Before making any other edits to WP please clearly identify the source you've added by replying to this message. I was not able to identify the addition of any such source myself but, out of a preponderance of caution, want to check with you first. Thanks! Chetsford (talk) 04:02, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Actually, nevermind. I've had a chance to look at some of your recent edits and I think the interests of the project would be best served by blocking you for a very short period, probably no more than 24 hours. Please let me know if you disagree, ideally before you make any additional edits. Thank you! Chetsford (talk) 04:06, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

@Chetsford: The source was just one of many which exist which report that the Assad government has fallen, which is reported widely. The edit I made was moving the Assad-era flag from the lede to the historic flags section. I'm not sure what the problem is or why you viewed it as appropriate to revert such a large number of people making similar edits. Note that shortly prior to this, consensus had emerged at the Syria article to stop using the Assad-era flag as a current flag too. Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 09:14, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

What was the source? Just go ahead and post a URL so I can check to see if it was in your edit. Also, please wikilink to the consensus that was established prior to the timestamp of your edit. Thanks! Chetsford (talk) 16:08, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

This was the source that I added: https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/syria-rebels-celebrate-captured-homs-set-sights-damascus-2024-12-07/

My edit to Flag of Syria was at 03:51 UTC; the Syria article has not had the Assad-era flag present in the infobox since this edit at 02:51 UTC https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Syria&diff=prev&oldid=1261815662 (and there were many more edits to that article within the following hour indicating a stable consensus had developed) Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 16:25, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

The source doesn't mention the flag at all. It appears you slapped in an unrelated source to game the system by providing a (very thin) veneer of deniability.
Insofar as the claim of a "consensus" based on an edit to the Syria article: the edit you cited occurred less than one hour before your sweeping rewrite of the article [3] and, during the time preceding your edit, was reverted no less than four times by three different editors. There is no believable way an editor with your experience would have construed that to have been the emergence of a stable consensus.
All that said, given the fact that the cadence of problematic edits experienced earlier today has largely abated, the protective utility in the application of user-level discretionary sanctions is no longer warranted. Chetsford (talk) 16:51, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure why you are acting in this way and making baseless accusations of bad faith. There was a strong effective consensus from around 03:00 UTC that the Assad regime had ended and numerous editors got to work updating the various articles to reword articles relating to Syria as a result– see e.g. the quick development of the Ba'athist Syria article which I had started in draftspace earlier and got moved into mainspace by other editors around that time.

The only disputes from around 03:00 onwards were around how articles should be worded (e.g. whether Syria should contain the opposition flag in the infobox or no flag). You're the only editor I have noticed who, long after that point, actively disrupted other editors working on the various updates and thereby incorrectly re-inserting information implying the Assad regime was still in power. Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 17:45, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

You made a sweeping edit to a WP:CTOP article; not on the basis of any new sources (you didn't add any) but because of an alleged "stable consensus" you said you were implementing. When asked to point to that "stable consensus", your proof was an edit [4] made less than 60 minutes prior, and which was reverted at least four times by three different editors [5], [6], [7], [8] in the intervening period.

I was convinced these were disruptive edits by you that no longer required any active intervention since consensus may have, indeed, caught up with the premature edits you were making. And that the matter could be concluded. Your last statement, however, in which you seem to double-down on your earlier enunciated belief that a "stable consensus" existed inclines me to think there may be a more holistic WP:CIR that needs to be examined, though I'd stop short of saying I'm convinced of that at this point. I'll let you know if I have additional questions. Thanks. Chetsford (talk) 18:16, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing out those edits– every time I looked at the main Syria article the regime flag wasn't there, but evidently didn't notice that some editors had tried to reinstate it but been swiftly reverted. As it seems that you weren't the only editor doing so, I now appreciate you weren't acting in an intentionally disruptive manner with your edits. Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 18:42, 8 December 2024 (UTC)