Welcome!

Hello, Wing gundam, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

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

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! PaddyLeahy 18:02, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your comment about the "family tree" of theories. The best place for such comments is on the "Talk" page of the article, which you can access via the discussion tab at the top of each page (but here is a direct link to the talk page relevant in this case: Talk:Theory of everything). So I moved your comment there and provided an answer of sorts. Feel free to respond there. PaddyLeahy 18:02, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know, but I had hoped it would be corrected in context. In any case, I posted a reply to your comment. (posted after debate, so impossible to accurately sign)

A tag has been placed on Will Peters 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 person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. -- Blake01 20:14, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!Thank you!Thank you!Thank you!Thank you!Thank you!

Now it all makes sense!

Headbomb (talk) 04:14, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not at all. They seem confusing and ambiguous, but in actuality few people know the structure of the baryon naming system. If i may comment on your work thus far on the article, i notice that you've added various resonance values for certain heavy baryons, i.e. Sigma0(I=1/2) and Sigma0(I=3/2). I would advise against this, as there are actually a great deal isospin values. It is possible that you may be confusing spin and isospin values, as this chart fails to differentiate between the two (an error i have meant to correct for some time).

I do note your impressive progress, as the last time i viewed this article was several months ago, and i found it both missing information and somewhat disorganized. I would recommend not including higher spin values for the various non-nucleons. For a definitive reference on this matter, there is no better authority than the particle data group. Here is a link to their most recent listings: "click me"; also check the citation on the baryonic nomenclature paragraph for their complete 2006 summary, which discusses in full the complete status of particle physics as of 2006 as well as numerous other topics of interest as of its publication. Wing gundam (talk) 05:14, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've also remarked that the spin values are confusing, and kinda clutter things up. I first added them because the only difference between a proton and a delta was the different spin value, and thus I felt there was a need to distinguish between say a Xi (1/2) and a Xi(3/2) and so I started listing the 1/2 and 3/2 states for each particle. I'll clean it up sometimes this week and I'll let you distinguish between spin and isospin values as you see fit.

Headbomb (talk) 05:27, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, i see. The situation you are describing has somewhat confusing origins, and plagued me for months before i worked it out. It arises from the fact that a baryon has in fact three 'spin-like' numbers to be taken into account: spin, isospin I, and spin parity J^p. Spin can vary between resonances of the same letter group, isospin identifies each letter group (and, thus, by definition cannot vary between constituents), and J^p almost invariably varies between resonances (in integer increments off of the spin, interestingly enough).

protons and neutrons, in ground state, have equal spin and isospin, and so do delta baryons, so it may appear that either of these two are used to differentiate between the two. Lambda and sigma's, however, do not. while they both are available in the fractional spins, they are defined by their integer isospins. However, these numbers are sometimes confused or switched, possibly due to the reader, but the sad truth is that more often than not, due to unreliable material, even that of supposedly reliable and/or highly reputable sources. In such cases, the 1/2 and 3/2 values of spins are noticed for sigma/lambda/other heavy baryons, and assumed to play a fundamental differentiation role as they do with protons and neutrons, and listed as fundamental particles, even though they are in fact energized resonances. Hopefully this will make some sense, and guide you in understanding baryons. Wing gundam (talk) 06:26, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I might also add that it would be unnecessary to list the spin parity number of baryons in addition to the other two, as i think it's identical to the standard spin in the ground state, which is all the list should be listing (there are hundreds of resonances, both confirmed and hypothesized).

Since you already contributed to that page, I'm letting you know that I requested for a Peer Review. If you want to help, that would be peachy. Headbomb (talk · contribs) 21:58, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just dropping a note on your talk page to say hi/bother you. --Corvus coronoides _talk 21:09, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Maxwell's equations, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use your sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. --X_onqN_opp ^Tk 11:32, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up, but I already knew it what a bad edit. Naturally it was a mistake. Thats why i reverted it as soon as it was submitted. --Wing gundam (talk) 18:47, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, but don't forget that when you submit an edit, it immediately becomes visible to everyone consulting the article, and even if you revert it it will always be stored in the history, meaning that everyone can see you did such a weird change. If you only want to see, you can use the Show preview button (actually everyone should use this button before submitting something). If you want to test your edits before submitting to everyone, you should better use your sandbox. Try it ;-) --X_onqN_opp ^Tk 06:59, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm JudgementSummary. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions because it didn't appear constructive. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Wholesale deletion of my work on Clockwork Universe (nearly 80%) in one fell swoop is not conducive to the free and accurate exchange of information championed by wikipedia. Please note that some of the topics are still work in progress and would appreciate your input and will try to come to an accomodation but that, in my opinion, wholesale deletion without a chance to respond, is not right. In any event look forward to working with you in a more productive manner thanks... i.e. the wholesale deletions from 00:17, 22 February 2013‎ Wing gundam(talk | contribs)‎ to 21:38, 21 February 2013‎ Wing gundam(talk | contribs)‎ This is especially true as the article was just now allowed to remain on wikipedia after a week-long discussion about whether it should be eliminated entirely... thanks...

Enough. Your POV essay/OR does not belong in the Clockwork universe theory article. Wing gundam (talk) 05:50, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

—wing gundam 06:13, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:46, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wing gundam,

What source did you get this from:

"'Note that in practice, collapse to a single eigenstate is never observed, as it is impossible to build a measurement apparatus with perfect precision. In these cases, the wave function will partially collapse to a superposition of "close" eigenstates, embodying the imprecision of the measurement.

You put it under "The process of collapse". Where did it come from???

Thanks, Chris — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.186.65.110 (talk) 05:35, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I remember my quantum professor telling me this when I asked how a wavefunction could evolve after collapsing to a position eigenstate (i.e. a dirac delta function), since it obviously would no longer be first order differentiable, so the Schrödinger equation can't really act on it. (Concordantly, the Fourier transform/momentum-space wavefunction would be a flat line). Good point though, that's a really common misconception, and it should be sourced. That sentence should also specify that this imprecision is *not* the same as the fundamental "uncertainty" that results from incompatible operators. Lemme dig up the page number from my quantum textbook (Feel free to add yours if you want) —wing gundam 07:04, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 23:22, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Moving the goalposts.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 02:37, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know! —wing gundam 03:47, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Moving the goalposts.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 03:56, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Talk:Ape/Archive 1#Changes to "Historical and modern terminology" section. If you still want to alter the nature of this section, please seek consensus there first. Peter coxhead (talk) 20:47, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings. Because you participated in the August 2013 move request regarding this subject, you may be interested in participating in the current discussion. This notice is provided pursuant to Wikipedia:Canvassing#Appropriate notification. Cheers! bd2412 T 21:39, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Wing gundam,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Illinois River Energy for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Sulfurboy (talk) 23:51, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:11, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited OpenGL, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Qt and SDL. 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) 09:50, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Top type, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Haskell. 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) 11:42, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Memory management may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• language)|Mercury]], and compile-time reference counting in [[ATS (programming language)|ATS]]).

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 07:46, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Wing gundam,

The Editing team is asking for your help with VisualEditor. I am contacting you because you were one of the very first testers of VisualEditor, back in 2012 or early 2013. Please tell them what they need to change to make VisualEditor work better for you. The team has a list of top-priority problems, but they also want to hear about small problems. These problems may make editing less fun, take too much of your time, or be as annoying as a paper cut. The Editing team wants to hear about and try to fix these small things, too. 

You can share your thoughts by clicking this link. You may respond to this quick, simple, anonymous survey in your own language. If you take the survey, then you agree your responses may be used in accordance with these terms. This survey is powered by Qualtrics and their use of your information is governed by their privacy policy.

More information (including a translateable list of the questions) is posted on wiki at mw:VisualEditor/Survey 2015. If you have questions, or prefer to respond on-wiki, then please leave a message on the survey's talk page.

Unsubscribe from this list • Sign up for VisualEditor's multilingual newsletter • Translate the user guide

Thank you, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:13, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article PureScript 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/PureScript 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. ― Padenton|✉   15:21, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Point-to-Point Protocol, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages MPPC and MPPE. 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) 09:15, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Zero-configuration networking, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ubuntu. 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) 09:50, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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) 16:41, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure where we're at in the WP:BRD cycle - I would appreciate a response to my question here, which I left just over a week ago, about how you reached the conclusion that Scodari's work was WP:NPOV and needed to be removed. I had earlier discussed with another user about how Scodari's work was used in slash literature reviews (and is thus a noted 'anti' view). I would in particular appreciate reliable sources, suitable for inclusion in the article for your assertion that ""Mary Sue" is commonly used to describe major characters, male and female, that are "over the top". " Thanks for your participation. --211.30.17.74 (talk) 03:53, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Wing gundam. 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)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Emma Morano. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. --Marbe166 (talk) 21:48, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Wasn't me. I can't even recall ever editing Emma Morano. Did you click the wrong link? —wing gundam 00:27, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it was you, see here: [1]. --Marbe166 (talk) 09:16, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wasn't me. I can only speculate it was made from one of my computers left unattended (unlikely but possible), or else from a login session I left active somewhere (very unlikely, but possible). Thank you for catching it! —wing gundam 19:19, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Wing gundam. 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)[reply]

Hello Wing gundam. I thought the following book might be of some interest. If you want, you may contact me on my talk page or via e-mail.

• Georgiev, Danko D. (2017). Quantum Information and Consciousness: A Gentle Introduction. Boca Raton: CRC Press. ASIN B077YQCZ7N. ISBN 9781138104488. OCLC 1003273264.

Danko Georgiev (talk) 13:54, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

You are encouraged to change

—<span style="white-space: nowrap;font-family: Georgia, sans-serif;">[[User:wing gundam|<font color="FF0000">wing</font>]] [[User Talk:wing gundam|<font color="0000FF">gundam</font>]]</span> : —wing gundam

to

—<span style="white-space: nowrap;font-family: Georgia, sans-serif;">[[User:wing gundam|<span style="color: #FF0000">wing</span>]] [[User Talk:wing gundam|<span style="color: #0000FF">gundam</span>]]</span> : —wing gundam

—Anomalocaris (talk) 01:03, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Most users are updating their signatures as requested. We hope you will also. —Anomalocaris (talk) 08:35, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. —wing gundam 10:24, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Orders of magnitude (molar concentration) 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/Orders of magnitude (molar concentration) 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. ∯WBG^converse 06:21, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Totally missed the discussion. Ironically, among the majority keep votes, the salient points weren't mentioned: numerical density/molarity is a relatively basal physical dimension, in league with density, energy flow density, resistance, and others; just as lists of orders of magnitude for these physical dimensions quantified by their units of measurement are appropriate for an encyclopedia, so is one for "molar concentration." Several items lacked citations because their values were simple density conversions, but citations for the arithmetic can be found if needed.—wing gundam 10:39, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to do some research on names of colors listed in Wikipedia in various articles about colors, and then included in some less such as List_of_colors:_A–F.

I want to make sure our entries are appropriately and adequately sourced. In some cases, colors have been added in good faith, but with either no sourcing, or an adequate sourcing. Unfortunately, there seem to be situations where another website will pick up information from Wikipedia, and at a subsequent date, an editor may use that site as a source for our entry leading to circular sourcing.

Tracking down exactly what happened is tedious in many cases.

I'm currently looking at the entry for bright pink. I believe you were the first to add it to Wikipedia with this edit on 29 April 2007.

(I will note that the hex value at that time was #FF0080. I do see that the current value is different, so arguably it's not critical to reconstruct the early history, but the editor who changed the hex value hasn't been active in five years, so I thought I would start with you and see if you have anything to add.)

At the time you added the color and the hex value, you included a source. That link is no longer working, but I found a working link close to the date in the Internet archive here. that page does include information on quite a number of colors but I don't see any color names, specifically no mention of bright pink, and I don't see an entry for #FF0080. is it possible I'm missing something?--S Philbrick(Talk) 16:11, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I recall adding it because I had a text listing bright pink as saturated 330°, which is #FF0080 or #FF007F depending on your rounding convention (half up vs. the very uncommon half down); technically the B value is 7F.7F. Many colors do have a preferred coordinate space.

Though "bright pink" isn't mentioned in the Rose (color) article, I had it defined identical to the headline color "rose" (= 330°, 100%, 100%). It seems accurate to say that the "bright pink" I saw and "rose" are synonymous. (And both are apparently distinct from the "rose pink" (= 320°, 60%, 100%) that appears in both articles, which is a 60%-saturated magenta-rose.)

Many websites appear to cite "bright pink" as #FF007F, but this seems to be a reference cycle like you described. —wing gundam 10:17, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Wing gundam. 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)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.
  

-- Amanda (aka DQ) 05:25, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi...

There is already a section below "Exact form" that has exact formulas. This section, "Formulas for prime-counting functions", even has an animated graph that shows that pi(x) can be computed using zeros of the zeta function. Also, the "Exact form" section needs better references. In particular, two of the formulas there do not seem to have been proven! Therefore, I suggested on the Talk page Talk:Prime-counting function that the "Exact form" section be deleted or merged into the other section. If you have thoughts about that, please add them to the talk page. While we appreciate your work to improve the article, it may not be a good use of your time to work on the "Exact form" section. MathPerson (talk) 21:33, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:09, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:Will Peters in 2006.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) 01:00, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.
  

Cabayi (talk) 10:00, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Diatonic scale, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Locrian (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) 14:36, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:41, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article Conceptual programs in physics has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Per discussion at WikiProject Physics, this appears to be an essay containing Original Research by way of synthesis.

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) 20:55, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:22, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:32, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:27, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to other languages.

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:10, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]