Revision as of 18:33, 23 July 2009 editADM (talk | contribs)25,073 edits →Consensus of Cardinals← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 01:13, 19 November 2024 edit undoSmasongarrison (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers730,251 edits Notification: listing of Category:Birth control law and case law at WP:Categories for discussion.Tag: Twinkle | ||
(44 intermediate revisions by 28 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Off and On WikiBreak}} | |||
==Subpages== | ==Subpages== | ||
*] | *] | ||
Line 6: | Line 7: | ||
**] | **] | ||
**] | **] | ||
**] | |||
== WikiWomen's Collaborative == | |||
== Taegyo == | |||
{| style="background:#ffdeb5; border:1px solid #f60; margin:0.5em; padding:0.5em;border-radius: 8px;" | |||
Hey, long time no see. I'm not sure how busy you are or how full your plate is. I've been quite busy off wikipedia, which is why I'm coming to you now. Do you think you could take a look at ] and perhaps clean it up? From a brief read through, it looks like the last sections particularly are full of RS, OR, and neutrality issues. I know you are familiar, to an extent, with this sort of subject matter, and I trust your judgment and experience here on wikipedia. If you don't have time to work on an article clean up, or you find nothing problematic, sorry for bugging you :) Hope you are well.-] </sup>]] 23:48, 1 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
|- | |||
! colspan="2" style="font-size: 150%;" | WikiWomen Unite! <br /> | |||
|- | |||
| <div style="background: #fff;margin-right: 10px;">]</div> | |||
| style="text-align: left;" | Hi '''{{ {{{|safesubst:}}}ROOTPAGENAME}}'''! Women around the world who edit and contribute to Misplaced Pages are coming together to celebrate each other's work, support one another, and engage new women to also join in on the empowering experience of shaping the sum of all the world's knowledge - through the '''WikiWomen's Collaborative'''.<br/> | |||
As a WikiWoman, we'd love to have you involved! You can do this by: | |||
*Liking the and share your tips, projects, and connect with other WikiWomen | |||
*Join the conversation on our | |||
*Reading and writing for our | |||
We can't wait to have you involved, and feel free to drop by our ] (under construction) to see how else you can get involved!<Br/> | |||
<br/>Can't wait to have you involved! ] (]) 04:38, 9 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
|} | |||
<!-- EdwardsBot 0380 --> | |||
== The Anti-Spam Barnstar! == | |||
== Comparison of birth control methods == | |||
{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;" | |||
CCL may not be neutral, but the studies cited on the page are. The problem here is that "Contraceptive Technology" is very biased against natural birth control in favor of physical methods (devices, hormone treatments, etc...). Either way, we're dealing with a biased source. I just wanted to update the article with current information and statistics in an effort to improve the table for the greater good of Misplaced Pages and the readers thereof. I will not revert your edit, as I am not interested in an edit war here, but please consider reinstating the information that I took time to research to be included. Note that I am not affiliated with CCL, but in my research have found them to be a reputable source of information on natural forms of birth control. Thank You ] </font>]]π</font>]] 01:43, 13 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | {{#ifeq:{{{2}}}|alt|]| ]}} | |||
|rowspan="2" | | |||
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Anti-Spam Barnstar''' | |||
|- | |||
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | For your quick response to a potentially large spamming problem on Misplaced Pages and several other articles. Keep up the good work! --] 06:06, 15 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
|} | |||
== WikiWomen's Collaborative: Come join us (and check out our new website)! == | |||
== Beautiful cervix link == | |||
Hi Lyrl... | |||
Thanks for letting me know about posting your image. I posted the new image, with a link to wikipedia on my beautiful cervix site. If you could help me get this posted to the cervix definition on wikipedia, that'd be great-- i am new to this whole editing thing and all the code and Bots are quite confusing, although i think my site is quite educational. | |||
Thanks, BeautifulCervix <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 02:41, 29 November 2008 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
{| style="background:#008080; border:1px solid #40E0D0; margin:0.5em; padding:0.5em;border-radius: 8px;" | |||
Hi Lyrl, | |||
|- | |||
Thanks for being a cervix-information advocate! I changed my page to just say a link to wikimedia, excluding your and chris' names. Seems like the link has been re-posted, denied, discussed, etc...I just commented a little on the talk page about it--we'll see where it goes. I'm hoping for the sake of empowering people to learn about their bodies, folks will let it post again....thanks ] (]) 23:44, 2 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
! colspan="2" style="font-size: 150%;" | WikiWomen - We need you! <br /> | |||
|- | |||
| <div style="background: #fff;margin-right: 10px;">]</div> | |||
| style="text-align: left;" | Hi '''{{ {{{|safesubst:}}}ROOTPAGENAME}}'''! The '''WikiWomen's Collaborative''' is a group of women from around the world who edit Misplaced Pages, contribute to its ], and support the mission of free knowledge. We recently updated our website, created new volunteer positions, and more! <br/> | |||
Get involved by: | |||
*Visiting our ''']''' for resources, events, and more | |||
*Meet other women and share your story in our ''']''' | |||
*Participate at and "like" our '''''' | |||
*Join the conversation on our '''''' | |||
*Reading and writing for our '''''' | |||
*Volunteer to write for our blog, recruit blog writers, translate content, and co-run our Facebook and receive perks for ''']''' | |||
*Already participating? Take our and share your experience! | |||
Thanks for editing Misplaced Pages, and we look forward to you being a part of the Collaborative! -- ] (]) 01:24, 10 January 2013 (UTC) | |||
|} | |||
<!-- EdwardsBot 0437 --> | |||
== Million Award == | |||
== RE definition of "fertility"== | |||
Please see my response to your post on my talk page.] (]) 21:02, 30 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
== Trademark symbol inside citations == | |||
{| style="border: 1px solid red; background-color: #FFF7F7; width: 70%;" | |||
Thanks for the note. I don't really see any reason why trademark symbols should stay inside citations any more than in the article body. ] doesn't say anything about that either. —] ] 06:57, 2 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | ] | |||
|rowspan="2" | | |||
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Million Award''' | |||
|- | |||
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | For your contributions to bring ] (estimated annual readership: 1,017,000) to ] status, I hereby present you the ]. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Misplaced Pages's readers. -- ] (]) 15:35, 29 August 2013 (UTC) | |||
|} | |||
The Million Award is a new initiative to recognize the editors of Misplaced Pages's most-read content; you can read more about the award and its possible tiers (Quarter Million Award, Half Million Award, and Million Award) at ]. You're also welcome to display this userbox: | |||
==Religion and abortion/contraception== | |||
I guess my main complaint about the ''religion and contraception/abortion'' article(s) is that it doesn't address specific views on new forms of contraception/abortion such as female condoms and morning-after pills or things like the discarding and freezing of bad embryos. Also, the views of the RCC are rather specific and have little to do with liberal protestant moralities. I think the best thing to do would be to eventually create an article on '']'' and '']'', which specifically address these issues, when a bit of the controversy cools down. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 23:46, 12 December 2008 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
{{User MAward| Condom}} | |||
:I know you reverted a number of edits by the anon above regarding the new Roman Catholic Church position on various medical topics. There is a dispute underway at ] and since you were involved back on the 12th, I thought you might want to be made aware of this to voice your opinion, if you aren't busy. Thanks.-] </sup>]] 02:34, 30 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
{{-}} | |||
I'm sorry to see you haven't been active for a while, but on the chance that you're still checking this page, I wanted to leave this thanks on behalf of the millions of readers your work continues to help. Thanks for all you've done here, and I hope we'll see you again some day! -- ] (]) 15:35, 29 August 2013 (UTC) | |||
I'm sorry to hear that you have been diagnosed with lymphoma. ] (]) (]) 23:00, 2 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
== Request for comment == | |||
==Condom picture== | |||
I'd just like to point out that Misplaced Pages is ], and the image you keep removing is not particularly more graphic than the line drawing. This is a content dispute, not vandalism: make sure you don't get blocked over it. Thanks. --] (]) 20:09, 24 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by {{noping|Anna Frodesiak}}. Your comments ] is very much appreciated. Many thanks. ] through ] (]) 06:47, 28 May 2014 (UTC) | |||
== Emptied category == | |||
<!-- Message sent by User:Jim Cartar@enwiki using the list at //en.wikipedia.org/Category:Wikipedia_administrators --> | |||
==Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity== | |||
Please see the discussion at ], and feel free to offer your opinion. --] (] Russ) 19:59, 17 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
] | |||
Following a ] in June 2011, consensus was reached to ] (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the ] and the userright will be restored per the ] (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at ]. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. <!-- Template:Inactive admin -->] (]) 02:17, 2 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
== ] == | |||
==Consensus of Cardinals== | |||
Regarding AIDS and condoms, I would think that the current ''consensus among cardinals'' against the use of condoms in those situations actually is official Church teaching. Although Church documents do not really talk about AIDS much, if you look at the article ], you find out that even some of the most moderate Cardinals like ] are against the use of contraception to prevent AIDS. | |||
{{Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2015/MassMessage}} ] (]) 13:09, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
Also, the fact that papal declarations have already been made on the issue actually count as Church teaching, because of the theological concept of ], by which the positions commonly articulated by the Pope and the College of Bishops immediately become Church teaching when they are publicly pronounced in a sufficiently coherent way. | |||
<!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Mdann52/list&oldid=691995604 --> | |||
== ] == | |||
This type of consensus approach is not in any sense unique to the Church and actually applies to other major organizations such as modern States and NGOs. For instance, if you want to know the positions of the U.S. Democratic Party, first you would read party literature, and then if you need more information, you would ask for the views of the party leader (Obama). If that is still not enough, you would ask all the major Democratic representatives in Congress and in the Senate. If a consensus position emerges, then it is the ''de facto'' position of the party in power. | |||
] (]) |
{{Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2015/MassMessage}} ] (]) 13:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | ||
<!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Mdann52/list&oldid=691995604 --> | |||
==Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity== | |||
:You're absolutely right; My edit to the article didn't accurately convey my concept of the RCC's position. My understanding is that the teaching against contraception has such extensive and long-standing support that is has gone beyond a "current teaching" and has become immutable. Contraception, if I understand correctly, is a sin of intent: if a couple has a "contraceptive mentality" while using NFP, they commit the same sin as a couple that uses a barrier method. It's not clear if use of a condom with the intent of preventing disease is actually contraception. | |||
] | |||
Following a ] in June 2011, consensus was reached to ] (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the ] and the userright will be restored per the ] (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at ]. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. <!-- Template:Inactive admin -->] (]) 01:30, 1 September 2016 (UTC) | |||
== Extended confirmed protection == | |||
:Church statements that I have read against condom ''promotion'' (not ''use'' of condoms to prevent disease, but the promotion of such use) do not use a "condoms are immoral" argument. Instead, they say such programs promote promiscuity, which increases disease transmission, and so are counterproductive. That a consensus exists against condom promotion programs does not imply that a consensus exists that an individual's use of condoms as a disease preventative is a sin. | |||
{{ivmbox|1=Hello, Lyrl. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy. | |||
:Even if such a consensus on inherent immorality of condoms (regardless of the intentions of their users) exists, it is relatively new and has greater dissent among theologians than the teaching on contraception. I don't believe this teaching is yet on the level where it should be considered immutable. | |||
] (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned ] was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following ] with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas. | |||
:Does that make sense? If my understanding is correct, I'd like to find a way to convey that in the sexual ethics article. If I'm all off base, I apologize. Either way, thank you for taking the time to explain things to me. ]<sup>] </sup> <sub> ] </sub> 16:25, 22 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
In July and August 2016, ] established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions: | |||
::Opposition to contraception is not a theological dogma, like say the Immaculate Conception or the Assumption, but it is one of the Ten Commandments : thou shalt not commit adultery. That's pretty high up on the values scale. To make an analogy, by using the interpretative system of ], it is almost as if Moses was a previous Pope of the Catholic Church and that his morally infallible commandments were an essential part of the ''magisterium'' of the early Church, the Church of ancient Israel. If the Church were to abandon those commandments, not just adultery but any of them, including stealing or murder, it would be a major attack on her historical and spiritual foundations, and it is likely that the Church would actually begin to disintegrate like the Anglican communion today, which has been really hurt badly by the rejection of the anti-adultery commandment by the Episcopal Church in the United States. ] (]) 17:20, 22 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
* '''Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective'''. It should not be used as a first resort. | |||
* '''A bot will post a notification at ] of each use'''. MusikBot currently does this by updating ], which is transcluded onto the noticeboard. | |||
Please review ] carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you. <br><small>This message was sent to the administrators' ]. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:47, 23 September 2016 (UTC)</small> |2=Padlock-blue.svg}} | |||
<!--Message sent following discussion at WT:PP--> | |||
<!-- Message sent by User:Xaosflux@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Administrators/Message_list&oldid=737471142 --> | |||
==Notification of imminent suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity== | |||
:::We agree that a change in the RCC position on contraception would have severe consequences for the church. Did you have any thoughts, though, on the idea that the use of condoms to prevent disease is not contraception? As I said, I have not seen any definitive statements from Roman Catholic leaders on that issue. If you are aware of any, I would appreciate being pointed to them. ]<sup>] </sup> <sub> ] </sub> 14:30, 23 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
] | |||
Following a ] in June 2011, consensus was reached to ] (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next several days. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the ] and the userright will be restored per the ] (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at ]. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. <!-- Template:Inactive admin -->— ] <sup>]</sup> 23:56, 27 September 2016 (UTC) | |||
==Suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity== | |||
::::All I can say about that is that the expression ''use of condoms'' is almost always defined as contraception, not just by the Church, but also by scientists, health care workers and the wider society. It does not require a declaration of any kind because it is widely understood to be that way. The most authoritative and definitve statement on the issue was certainly a 1990 speech given by John Paul II in Tanzania, where he told his audience that condoms were a sin in any circumstances, even in the context of the unfolding AIDS crisis. ] (]) 14:50, 23 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
] | |||
Following a ] in June 2011, consensus was reached to ] (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions have been removed pending your return. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated, please post to the ] and the userright will be restored per the ] (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at ]. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. <!-- Template:Inactive admin -->— ] <sup>]</sup> 00:28, 1 October 2016 (UTC) | |||
== ] of ] == | |||
] | |||
The file ] has been ] because of the following concern: | |||
:::::First, I do not believe that any application described in the ] is widely understood to be contraception. Even in popular convention, use of a condom does not always mean contraception. Second, theological arguments for condoms as disease prevention are talking about the word ''contraception'' as it is used in Roman Catholic theology, not as it is used by wider society. | |||
<blockquote>unused, low-res, no obvious use</blockquote> | |||
:::::Thank you for the link to the article about Pope John Paul II's speech. I was disappointed to see it just describing the speech, though, and not giving any quotes. It's impossible to tell for sure what theological arguments he was making. ]<sup>] </sup> <sub> ] </sub> 16:40, 23 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be ]. | |||
::::::I suppose that ''using latex'' may not be the same as ''using condoms''... but only to the extent that there is no sexual activity of any kind involved. Paul VI said in Humanae Vitae that all sexual relations need to be open to life, a teaching that is at the heart of the Church's moral theology. If engineers, doctors or merchants have some kind of non-sexual use for the contraceptive material, a usage which could be beneficial for the whole of society, I do not think the Church would really be able to intervene in those types of situations. | |||
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your ] or on ]. | |||
::::::Originally, the Church was essentially against the practice of coitus interruptus, and that was before condoms became popular, so in a sense She thinks condoms are just a sophisticated modern form of coitus interruptus. And regarding dissident theologians and laypeople, please note that the concept of Magisterium does not include either, it only includes Popes, Cardinals and Archbishops, because theologians are essentially regarded as middle men, scholars whose first and foremost task is to explain to the laity and to the general public what the Church believes and teaches, and not just disseminate their own personal views. ] (]) 17:18, 23 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the ], but other ]es exist. In particular, the ] process can result in deletion without discussion, and ] allows discussion to reach ] for deletion.<!-- Template:Proposed deletion notify --> | |||
:::::::For me, referring to condom use by homosexual couples, menopause women, and people who have been sterilized as "using contraception" seems illogical. | |||
:::::::To go back to Roman Catholic opposition to contraception: if it were only the physical parts of the act that were important, hormonal contraception would be acceptable. That hormonal contraceptives are also considered immoral indicates that the theology is not based in the physical nature of the act. And yet, according to CatholicCulture.org, . The reasoning here is based on the intention of the user. | |||
:::::::While the Magisterium provides a framework, theologians are responsible for filling in the details. Use of condoms to prevent disease is not part of the framework. Rather, it is a detail over which theologians in good standing with the RCC may legitimately disagree. ]<sup>] </sup> <sub> ] </sub> 18:01, 23 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
<span style="color:red;font-weight:bold;">This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the ] of each individual file for details.</span> Thanks, ] (]) 01:01, 6 May 2020 (UTC) | |||
:::You have probably heard of the term ] ... a concept which has influenced Church teaching on the matter, a term that designates all non-procreative sexual activity and equates it with masturbation. Regarding infertility, much of Church teaching is apparently based on the story of Abraham's wife ], whose hope was renewed after she was unexpectedly cured from infertility. And of course, Scripture is highly critical of same-sex relations and unequivocally refuses to equate them with heterosexual relations. ] (]) 18:31, 23 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
==] has been nominated for renaming== | |||
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>''']''' has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the ] guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at ''']''' on the ] page.<!-- Template:Cfd-notify--> Thank you. ] <small>] • (])</small> 22:47, 24 June 2020 (UTC) | |||
==] has been nominated for splitting== | |||
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>] has been nominated for splitting. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the ] guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at ''']''' on the ] page.<!-- Template:Cfd-notify--> Thank you. ] 01:13, 19 November 2024 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 01:13, 19 November 2024
Lyrl is busy and is going to be on Misplaced Pages in off-and-on doses, and may not respond swiftly to queries. |
Subpages
WikiWomen's Collaborative
WikiWomen Unite! | |
---|---|
Hi Lyrl! Women around the world who edit and contribute to Misplaced Pages are coming together to celebrate each other's work, support one another, and engage new women to also join in on the empowering experience of shaping the sum of all the world's knowledge - through the WikiWomen's Collaborative. As a WikiWoman, we'd love to have you involved! You can do this by:
We can't wait to have you involved, and feel free to drop by our meta page (under construction) to see how else you can get involved! |
The Anti-Spam Barnstar!
The Anti-Spam Barnstar | ||
For your quick response to a potentially large spamming problem on Misplaced Pages and several other articles. Keep up the good work! --MuZemike 06:06, 15 December 2012 (UTC) |
WikiWomen's Collaborative: Come join us (and check out our new website)!
WikiWomen - We need you! | |
---|---|
Hi Lyrl! The WikiWomen's Collaborative is a group of women from around the world who edit Misplaced Pages, contribute to its sister projects, and support the mission of free knowledge. We recently updated our website, created new volunteer positions, and more! Get involved by:
Thanks for editing Misplaced Pages, and we look forward to you being a part of the Collaborative! -- EdwardsBot (talk) 01:24, 10 January 2013 (UTC) |
Million Award
The Million Award | ||
For your contributions to bring condom (estimated annual readership: 1,017,000) to Good Article status, I hereby present you the Million Award. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Misplaced Pages's readers. -- Khazar2 (talk) 15:35, 29 August 2013 (UTC) |
The Million Award is a new initiative to recognize the editors of Misplaced Pages's most-read content; you can read more about the award and its possible tiers (Quarter Million Award, Half Million Award, and Million Award) at Misplaced Pages:Million Award. You're also welcome to display this userbox:
This editor won the Million Award for bringing Condom to Good Article status. |
I'm sorry to see you haven't been active for a while, but on the chance that you're still checking this page, I wanted to leave this thanks on behalf of the millions of readers your work continues to help. Thanks for all you've done here, and I hope we'll see you again some day! -- Khazar2 (talk) 15:35, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
Request for comment
Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:47, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Misplaced Pages:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 02:17, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages 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) 13:09, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages 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) 13:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Misplaced Pages:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 01:30, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
Extended confirmed protection
Hello, Lyrl. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.
Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.
In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:
- Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
- A bot will post a notification at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.
Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:47, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
Notification of imminent suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next several days. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Misplaced Pages:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. — xaosflux 23:56, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
Suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions have been removed pending your return. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated, please post to the Misplaced Pages:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. — xaosflux 00:28, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of File:Nuvaring with quarter.gif
The file File:Nuvaring with quarter.gif has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
unused, low-res, no obvious use
While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
Category:Sterilization has been nominated for renaming
Category:Sterilization has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:47, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
Category:Birth control law and case law has been nominated for splitting
Category:Birth control law and case law has been nominated for splitting. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. MasonGarrison 01:13, 19 November 2024 (UTC)