User talk:Dillon251992

Nomination of Jacquelyn L. Williams-Bridgers for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jacquelyn L. Williams-Bridgers 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/Jacquelyn L. Williams-Bridgers 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.   // Timothy :: talk  17:48, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of R. W. Peaden

If this was the first article that you 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.

The page R. W. Peaden has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appeared to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appeared to be a direct copy from https://www.pensapedia.com/wiki/R._W._%22Smokey%22_Peaden . GFDL alone is not a compatible license. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition has been be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, you may contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you may open a discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion Review — Diannaa (talk) 12:14, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

GFDL alone is not a compatible license.— Diannaa (talk) 12:15, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up on this. Apoligises for the late response. I'll make sure to keep that in mind. Dillon251992 (talk) 22:22, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Florida legislator pages

Hi, thanks for your recent edits and improvements to Florida legislator pages. I wanted to comment that, in line with Template:Infobox officeholder, legislators who were redistricted and served in multiple district numbers should have one single office in their infobox, with each district number listed in the constituency field. See Nancy Pelosi for an example. Similarly, keep in mind this style note from the template: "Where the use of "same district number" is used for determining "predecessor" and "successor" in any office, but where the area is so altered as to make such a "predecessor" or "successor" of little or no biographical value, the word "redistricted" should be used rather than using names of officeholders whose connection is accidental by virtue of district number, but unrelated to any election contests between officeholders." Thanks! Starrfruit (talk) 13:18, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the feed back. The only thing I don't like about the officeholder with this constituency field is that they don't put the predecessors and successors. I know district locations change but the numbers don't. I'm using this reference https://www.myfloridahouse.gov/FileStores/Web/HouseContent/Approved/Announcements/Uploads/Documents/People_of_Lawmaking_in_Florida.pdf to put down who served in what district. Before 1967, I know that some states like Florida had district names by group numbers and didn't do it in numbers (for example: Dade-(14)). What I could do though is put redistricted for the districts they served on the bottom right (under) the predecessor or successor if that helps. That's just my take on all of this. I also saw on how you had to correct another person for writing in the wrong date for when the person took office. From what I read from Florida's constitution when they reformed it in 1968 onward that the person takes office on the day they win their election which you and I both see. Anyways I appreciate you bringing this up. Dillon251992 (talk) 19:28, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

I know other contributor(s) have been entering successor/predecessor boxes at the bottom of legislator pages, including info for all district numbers notwithstanding redistricting. (Good example is Tom Lee). To me that's a good compromise between giving useful info in the main infobox (knowing the "true" successors/predecessors and whether someone has been meaningfully redistricted) and following the infobox style guide, while also providing the full predecessor/successor info for district numbers, for those who want that info. Is that a good compromise? I'd be happy to open up a broader conversation about it too if there's a good place to do that, but I started doing things this way a few years ago after I found the infobox style note and it made sense to me.

The People of Lawmaking is a great resource and totally comprehensive as far as I know. And yep, legislators' have taken office upon election since statehood actually. A lot of member pages have that wrong still. House districts were numbered starting in 1967, previously reps were elected countywide. Senators have always had numbered districts. Starrfruit (talk) 23:21, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

I think we can compromise on how the predecessor/successor serving in multiple districts can be template better which I agree with as I just realized how easier it is. I'm just so use to doing it in a certain way because I don't like how they don't name the predecessors and it makes it harder for me to find, but I can change and do it this way like this article B. J. Pak. What do you think? I like the way it has the Constituency and the predecessors/successors for each district served.

The people of lawmaking is a great resource. If their are member pages that are wrong like the districts, it would be great if you pointed the ones that are inaccurate. And I do know that the district numbers didn't come until 1967. Like I said before, they use to categorized them by groups, not numbers which I think we both know. It's just hard to find out which group number they served in, so I'm not going to waste time chasing successors/predecessors for that.

Last, I want to know is. Is anyone going to make the districts for house/senate in Florida? I know their was someone who was making Senate districts for a couple states that goes by the user name Blizzardwind. He told me that he had stuff going on which is why he stopped. I have no plans making other districts except the two because I want a good graphic design on the districts maps and he's pretty good at doing that. From what I saw on his talk page about how has good map designs is that he downloads the current district boundaries from the US Census website onto QGIS. So I guess he uses a software to do it. Dillon251992 (talk) 18:46, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

I personally find listing the predecessors/successors for each district number like on B. J. Pak incredibly confusing and non-intuitive. I'd prefer to continue to follow the Infobox Officeholder style guide until there's a broader discussion of revisiting the style. I think having the district boxes at the bottom with predecessors/successors for each district number gives enough information, but having it in the main infobox just doesn't make sense to me, especially since in Florida the numbers have been literally randomly changed and bear no correlation to previous districts.

Making pages for each district hasn't been a priority for me, I don't plan on working on that. I had thought a while ago about making pages for each two-year legislature (like for each congress), but not sure if I'll get to that. I think someone might have started on that. Starrfruit (talk) 15:13, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Oh and group numbers for pre-1967 house members! You can find those in the old House journals, on the "Members and Officers" page for each session. The members are listed by county by order of their group number. Starrfruit (talk) 16:46, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Interesting point. That can be disputed on how someone would read or do an info box. I read the main info box much better than reading district boxes with predecessors/successors at the bottom, but that's just me. Like you said, there could be a much more boarder discussion about it, at another time. I just think that's how most people would read it.

If you're talking about United States Congress (which has already been done) which is different than Florida's House of Representatives sessions. If you are thinking about starting it, you should just combined both the house/senate sessions like how Texas's 85th Legislature session article. I had to fix Texas's 85th session because someone didn't add the list of House of Representatives, which took me several hours to do.

I think I seen the link already, but I do thank you for showing me this. I was hoping for an easier way to read Florida's House Journal but their isn't any easier way. The frustrating part is it takes so long to download. I don't get why Florida's Senate Journal is much more organized than Florida's House journals are. I wish Florida's House took more pride in how they organize their journals. Dillon251992 (talk) 21:13, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Yeah on infoboxes, I just don't see why/how we should deviate from the official style without an open discussion about changing the style guide first ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Starrfruit (talk) 15:51, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

If we talking about the ones that have {s-start}, that's the one I'm open to talking about having no need to use since the infobox is used more. I should had been more clear on what I was saying. My apologies, I'm still a little new, but learn more by the year. Dillon251992 (talk) 04:27, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

November 2020

Hi Dillon251992! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at Valoree Swanson that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia – it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. Marquardtika (talk) 16:46, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

I did not know that. Thank you for letting me know about this. Dillon251992 (talk) 20:55, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

FEC members as part of "presidential administration personnel"

Hi, Dillon251992. I noticed you added some FEC members to the "administration personnel" categories for some presidents. I don't think that they are properly categorized as part of the administration's personnel given that the FEC is an independent agency that has been purposed insulated from political and specifically presidential interference (for example, they are given long terms so that they serve over multiple presidential terms and cannot be removed by a presidential except for cause). So while they are technically part of the executive branch, I don't think they are part of the "administration personnel" in the ordinary sense of the word. Do you know if there has ever been a discussion about how to use those categories? – wallyfromdilbert (talk) 02:59, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Hey, so basically administration personnel, from what I saw was those either appointed by a president or those that worked in that president's administration. It wouldn't matter if it was an independent agency or not. These individuals that I categorized worked for that particular administration. The FEC commissioners are appointed by the president. Also I'm not sure if their is a talk page about how to use those categories, I didn't see one. Dillon251992 (talk) 19:43, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Minor edits

Hi! I see someone has motioned this before, but it seems you are marking edits as minor, when they're not. It's an understandable mistake – I often did the same thing when I was starting out here.

The Wikipedia definition of minor is different to what most of us expect. I reviewed Help:Minor edit many times, trying to decide if the changes I was making were minor. It helped me to think of a minor edit as a change that a reader is unlikely to notice (unless it's reverting obvious vandalism: this also counts as minor). Maybe it fixes a typo, or corrects the format of a reference without adding any new information. It doesn't change or add anything very noticeable to the page, and other editors are unlikely to argue about it.

I hope this helps. If you have any questions, you can reply to me here; I'll keep your talk page on my watchlist for a bit. Happy editing! SnazzyInfinity (talk • contribs) 03:41, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello! I keep checking and I figured someone was going to say something. If you can point out to what minor edits I should had not marked, that would help. I know the other person who wrote me to said something similar as he told me to look at the help guide you linked me which I did. I guess I messed up again did I? If you can show me that would be great. Thanks for the feed back

Dillon251992 (talk) 03:48, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

I mainly meant the one where you added the list of members to Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration. As I said earlier, a good rule of thumb is to think "would the average reader notice this difference?" If it's a notable or noticeable change, then it's probably not minor. If you need anymore help just ask! SnazzyInfinity (talk • contribs) 03:52, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 14

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited National Labor Relations Board, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Brian Hayes.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:35, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Allison Brigati

The article Allison Brigati has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Deputy administrators don't pass WP:NPOL, and not enough in-depth sourcing to pass WP:GNG.

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. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:05, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Sorry for the late response. I added my reason to the discussion on why the article shouldn't be deleted. Dillon251992 (talk) 01:21, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Allison Brigati for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Allison Brigati 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/Allison Brigati 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.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:24, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 25

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Brenda Barton, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bob Thorpe.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:14, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Robert D. Sharp

Hello, Dillon251992. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Robert D. Sharp".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 06:12, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 10

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Reese Clark, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Civil War.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:21, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 17

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Dominic L. Cortese

added a link pointing to Lincoln Law School

George House (California politician)

added a link pointing to Indianola, Oklahoma

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:14, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 29

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cathie Wright, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Old Forge, Pennsylvania.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:11, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 18

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited William H. Poole (politician), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ben Rosenthal.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:55, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 23

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited John C. Begovich, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Amador, California.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 30

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dan McCorquodale, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dan O'Keefe.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: 2004 Connecticut State Senate election (July 5)

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

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:2004 Connecticut State Senate election and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:2004 Connecticut State Senate election, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 07:43, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Dillon251992! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 07:43, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: 2004 Connecticut State Senate election has been accepted

2004 Connecticut State Senate election, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Na-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 16:06, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 13

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Les Mason, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Central Christian College.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:56, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 26

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2020 Kentucky House of Representatives election, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Al Gentry and Michael Meredith.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Dillon251992

Thank you for creating John Snyder (Florida politician).

User:Celestina007, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for creating .

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Celestina007}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

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

Celestina007 (talk) 23:28, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 28

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2020 Ohio House of Representatives election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Monique Smith.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Input needed: Pennsylvania

Hey again Dillon, I stumbled across a lot of Pennsylvania legislative BLP articles, and it looks like the infobox term_start/end dates are set for the first day of session, rather than the day they assume office (and presumably sworn in). I'm assuming I'm all clear on that, per [1], that the start/end dates would be on December 1 of even-numbered years. Right? Just seeing a lot of articles that don't show that, so thought I'd ask for your guidance here. Robert Matzie is one of many examples. --PerpetuityGrat (talk) 15:49, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Hello, thank you for writing on my page. I haven't gotten a chance to work on Pennsylvania. Whoever did that, only did when the session started and not when they were sworn in office, (ex:Joe Biden sworn in January 20, 2021). Just do whatever you think is right and I'll look at it whenever I get a chance. I would follow Ballotpedia on that since they did deep research on that, but they only lists state elections dating back to 2008. Dillon251992 (talk) 19:28, 3 November 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) 00:47, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 29

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Judith Loganbill, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bethel College.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

WP:BLP and WP:DOB

It looks like you're adding a ton of unsourced dates of births to articles about living people and have been doing that for quite a while. Dates of birth for living people must be backed up by one or more WP:RS supporting the date. We take WP:BLP and WP:DOB very seriously and continuing to add unsourced dates of birth to articles may lead to a block. You seem like a fairly accomplished editor and you really should know not to do this. Toddst1 (talk) 01:32, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

I see what you're refering because of your recent edits remove some details of the Kansas State Reps. They aren't unsourced as you claim in WP:RS. It's located here from the Kansas State Legislature Library. It doesn't violate WP:BLP or WP:DOB since they make it public. The only thing I didn't do that I probably should had is to tag it with a reference, since some articles already put it in another sentence. Dillon251992 (talk) 17:36, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

You seem to misunderstand WP:BLP. It doesn't matter if reliable sources exist somewhere else or not. You must cite reliable sources when you add such material to an article. Toddst1 (talk) 23:03, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Michigan State Senate District Members

Hello. I wanted to let you know of something I've been doing. A while ago, you asked me if I was interested in making a list of the Michigan state senators on the articles for the Michigan state senate districts. I knew it was going to be a hard task, and didn't really plan on it at the time. I have since changed my mind and have made some progress in this regard. I've made what seem to be complete lists for districts 32 through 38. I was thinking about the message you sent when I decided to take on the task. Thanks for giving me the idea, and making me think about the challenge. RoundSquare (talk) 04:35, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

Hey, I'm glad you're doing this. Yes it is a hard task and it took me 3 months or more to complete California's districts for both Senate/Assembly. So far, it looks good. I would put the full dates of when those Senators took/left office, although that would take a long time to do, that's up to you though. This is why I like Wikipedia too over Ballotpedia when it comes to this. Ballotpedia doesn't have all state elections dating before 2006, for state legislatures. Anyways, you're welcome for the idea. I hope more people follow this when they start creating other state districts. Dillon251992 (talk) 19:20, 21 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) 01:33, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Thank you so much for your work on the California State Legislature (and other state legislatures too!) - Derpytoucan (talk) 17:06, 10 March 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) 00:49, 28 November 2023 (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) 00:34, 19 November 2024 (UTC)