User talk:Collieman

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

To sign your posts (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).
Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
Follow the Wikipedia:Simplified Ruleset
Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
Remember Wikipedia:Neutral point of view
Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!

Meelar (talk) 21:48, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Yellow Train[edit]

We all have a lot to learn about Wikipedia (even Jimbo Wales I guess) because Wikipedia is always changing.

You could learn all there is to know by reading the rules, how to's, help files, etc, but I found the best way is to look at a few pages and if you see something, just click the edit link and see how it's done. If you still don't know, just do the best you can, somebody will be along in 5 minutes or so to do their best, and so it goes.

Take a look at some of the featured articles which represent the "best of Wikipedia" - this is what we are all aiming for.

-=# Amos E Wolfe ^talk #=- 23:20, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Lac de Cavayere[edit]

Hi there, thanks for your post. No, I don't have any connection to Carcasonne I'm afraid so I hope my amends didn't change the sense of any of the article. I just felt it needed a bit of a wikify, took out some text that veered towards advertising and hopefully just made it more encyclopaedic. Hope that's all right, welcome to Wikipedia! Peeper 10:09, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Removing external links[edit]

Hi Collieman - I'm not sure which (single) edit you're referring to? Whatever, the reasons for removing the multiple links are clear - links to photo sites are not particularly helpful to an article, no matter how lovely the photos. It was also clear that the photos were for sale, with no mention on the site that they are not for profit, and a lot of the links added were pretty tenuous to their subject. As I noted in the reply to the anonymous user (see that talk page), link spam is not just commercial links, but also links used to up a search engine rating or that repeated linking that simply doesn't add value to the articles. Repeated, multiple copies of a link are not particularly helpful for every article that may be in some way related to a site - one link is usually enough in the most appropriate article (if there is one). Having followed the links in question, they were undoubtedly link spam to my mind. Sorry if you felt I was slighting your photos - I'm not - but are links to them really helping the article, simply boosting your ego (or wallet), or just tenuous clutter? I took the latter view. Stephenb (Talk) 17:36, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

wikilinking[edit]

You asked about wikilinking with respect to Acoustic cleaners. I'll need to re-read the article before commenting on it in particularly. Wikilinking is easy. We've got 995,460 articles (as of a couple seconds ago when I checked the main page), so most things you'd link to have an article. Go through and put square brackets around terms that look like they'd help people understand them better, then hit preview and see which are in red. Sometimes you'll have to work out where the article for a red link is stored ( and then you use the notation [[articlename|word]]). Remember, most articles exist, you jut have to figure out the article name. Some of the links will point to disambiguation pages; if it looks like a link might be a disambig page then click on the link in preview, trace it to the correct address, back up and be specific.

Does that help? Is it clear? RJFJR 14:30, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Collieman - just to note that Wikilinking doesn't mean adding a link to your article to every other article you can think of that's even marginally related. It also doesn't mean attempting to funnel readers toward a commercial external link - Wikipedia is not a portal page. Links have to be pretty relevant in each article and preferably follow a logical flow - the reader wants to know more about X, which naturally presents them with links about Y, which leads them onto Z. Also, some articles will link to high-level general concepts, while others will lead to more specific examples and implementations. Read around and you'll probably get a better feel for the way hyperlinking works with an encyclopedic style of writing.

All this to say that I've completed the cleanup of your insertion of acoustic cleaning links (many with associated external links to a commercial purveyor of same). Note that most of those links had been removed by other editors working with the specific pages in question - I chose to follow your trail of breadcrumbs instead. This was link spamming, and unfortunately not a useful addition to most (or all) of the articles where you'd added the link.

I've left the link in silo cleaning and with some misgivings left the one in silo, but you'll need to go back and edit even those additions to describe both pros and cons of the process you're linking to. What's there now is basically an ad, and is unlikely to survive future attention by NPOV-minded editors. It's always better to write things as neutrally and relevantly as possible the first time than it is to depend on other people cleaning them up for you. Have fun, and welcome to Wikipedia. - toh 20:41, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Acoustic cleaning wikify[edit]

Hi Collieman. I removed the wikify tag because I think it is only useful for articles that require a lot of it. I regularly clean up articles from the WP:WIKIFY list, and the list currently contains a few thousand pages. Not very encouraging... So when I see an article that looks ok, that has sections, links, categories, stub tags if needed,... I just take out the wfy tag. Check out the list and you will find articles that *really* need wikifying. Keep up the good work! Piet 22:53, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Acoustic cleaning[edit]

You asked for an opionion on how the Acoustic cleaning article looked. Actually, it looks pretty good to me. The major specific thing I found was the use of the term bridging. It isn't explicitly explained what this is though I think I know. There is a link to bridging but this is a disambiguation page that doesn't really explain it.

While I could follow the article with a little effort I suspect there are other cases where technical terms are being used that general readers might have trouble interpreting. A clearer description of bridging and a check for any other words that need clarifying seems in order. RJFJR 17:45, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:Cavayere2.jpg[edit]

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Cavayere2.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL-self}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Shyam ^(T/C) 14:02, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just place a tag like {{GFDL-self}}, if you can. Thank you --12:14, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Re: Acoustic cleaning image[edit]

Hi, then please update the image description page for those images so they make it clear that all rights have in fact been released for those images, and that we have not simply been given permission to use them in that one article, then restore the no rights reserved template. Is is preferable that you also forward a copy of the permission to "permissions at wikimedia dot org" as described at Wikipedia:Confirmation of permission. Thanks. --Sherool (talk) 12:13, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, does this apply to Image:Acoustic cleaner 2.jpg too? I notice you only updated the Image:Acoustic cleaners.jpg image. Oh and don't subst: the license templates, the template doesn't work properly if you do (the image is put in the "license templates" category instead of the image template due to the way it's set up). --Sherool (talk) 22:57, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

grfty[edit]

grfty means what please? Kittybrewster 17:22, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:V-cemetery.jpg[edit]

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:V-cemetery.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 13:52, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:V-cemetery-2.jpg[edit]

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:V-cemetery-2.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 13:52, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree images[edit]

Additionally, the above images have been listed on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because there is some doubt that the images are indeed {{NoRightsReserved}}. Stifle (talk) 13:52, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:V-cemetery-2.jpg[edit]

Hi, i have reloaded the 2 images and tried to make clear that they are photos i took and that they are free to use on wiki. The route is the same i have used many times and hope this is ok now Collieman 12:36, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect, thank you. Just make sure all images you upload are tagged. Stifle (talk) 16:20, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Acoustic cleaner 2.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Acoustic cleaner 2.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --– Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 19:15, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image problems[edit]

You've uploaded at least three images with false license claims, as far as I can tell. These are:

18:07, 5 November 2006 Collieman (Talk | contribs | block) uploaded "Image:Usbmissiles.jpg" (own photograph)
18:02, 5 November 2006 Collieman (Talk | contribs | block) uploaded "Image:USBshredder.jpg" (Personal photograph.)
19:12, 25 May 2006 Collieman (Talk | contribs | block) uploaded "Image:Knickerbockerglory.jpg" (Knickerbocker Glory , created and photographed by Stephen Caudel,http://www.ice-cream-recipes.com, and released by him under a creative commons attribution licence.)

The first two were found on other websites, as professional product photos, and the third, while you provided a link to the source, the provided source lacked any verficiation of the license, and instead claimed all rights reserved. Don't do this anymore. If you get specific permission from a copyright holder to release their image under a free license, ask them to add the license information to the website where the image came from. If they won't do that, tell them to email permissions@wikimedia.org, including the URL of the original image, and a specific, clear statement of the free license they are putting it under, and a volunteer from that address will get things straighted out. Otherwise, we have to assume, as in these cases, that there is no license. If you upload further falsely licensed material, you will very likely be permanently blocked from editing on Wikipedia. Be aware. JesseW, the juggling janitor 21:25, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Stbeesschool.jpg[edit]

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Stbeesschool.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 14:21, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of "College Valley"[edit]

A page you created, College Valley, has been tagged for deletion, as it meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion; specifically, it is about a real person, group of people, band, club, company, organisation, or web content, but does not indicate why its subject is important or significant.

You are welcome to contribute content which complies with our content policies and any applicable inclusion guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article.

Thank you. Rtphokie (talk) 20:33, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Pont-marengo.jpg[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Pont-marengo.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 are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --Kelly ^hi! 06:15, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Caudel.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Caudel.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 06:29, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Cumberlandsausage.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Cumberlandsausage.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 06:30, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Pugindrawingroom.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Pugindrawingroom.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 06:30, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Earl1.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Earl1.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 06:31, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:CB-1.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:CB-1.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 06:34, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

{Autotranslate|1=File:Knickerbockerglory.jpg|base=Image permission/heading}[edit]

{Autotranslate|1=File:Knickerbockerglory.jpg|base=Image permission} Kelly (talk) 06:33, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 5[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Newton Tors, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Marilyn (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) 14:00, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, Collieman. 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]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Collieman. 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]