User talk:Lightbreather: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 18:46, 26 September 2014 view sourceMike Searson (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers28,704 edits →Seriously?← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 00:13, 19 November 2024 view source MediaWiki message delivery (talk \| contribs)Bots3,139,118 edits →ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message: new sectionTag: MassMessage delivery
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{Archives\|search=yes\|collapsed=yes}}
	{{editnotice
			{{nobots}}
			== Get well soon ==

			Sorry to see the note on the top of this page. At least you were allowed back last year and got in 278 edits. Hope to see you back sometime in 2023. ] (]) 18:30, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
	\| text = <big>I'm an ''intermediate-level editor'' on Misplaced Pages. If I do something questionable, tell me - but nicely please. And point me to a WP policy or guideline, if you have it. - ''Lightbreather''</big>

			:I am back. Worked on (still working on, actually) a few things with my doctors and I'm feeling quite a lot better. Knock wood, it sticks. I created a new article today. Would you like to look it over? It's about Amy Kelly, author of ''Eleanor of Aquitaine and the Four Kings''. It needs a little more work, but I think it's a good start. I'll probably take a break for a bit... Don't want to overdo it. ] (]) ] (]) 22:41, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
	}}
			::Super. If you can improve on that you're a better writer than me. Based on "evidences of seriousness of purpose and promise of success" I recommend you for the honor roll of WikiProject historical biography writers. Prose of this quality has not appeared on Misplaced Pages in many a long day.
			::I took a look at the lead of ] and it cracked me up a bit. After fifteen years of marriage and two daughters her husband agreed to an annulment (heaven forbid royalty ever divorce) on the grounds of ] within the fourth degree (but why was the marriage allowed in the first place, and it took 15 years to figure that out?) So then she just remarries other royalty committing the same crime in the third degree! I can see how that's fodder for a best-selling book (and maybe a TV miniseries too). Sure, take it easy, no need to work harder than you feel up to. – ] (]) 02:48, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
			:::What kicked this off was hubby and I were watching ''The Lion in Winter'' (one of our favorite "Christmas" movies). Then we got to talking about Eleanor. He likes to read historical nonfiction, so I said, You should read ''Eleanor of Aquitaine and the Four Kings''. And I bought him a used copy. So he's sitting there looking at it, and then his phone, and he said, There's no Misplaced Pages article on Amy Kelly. And I said, What? And there you go!
			:::Thanks for the positive feedback. I truly appreciate it. BTW, what is the "Review" process? It doesn't leave anything in the reviewer's history. I've always wondered about that. ] (])
			::::There are multiple review processes. One is ]. Another is ] (see ]). Another is ] (see ] – you too may apply to join the ]). Another is ] (behold that detailed flowchart!). You can see in my that I marked revision 1136740705 of page ] patrolled – that's just a matter of checking a box. I confess I didn't use that flowchart as part of my review process. Your writing is so many levels above the average I see that I didn't think it was necessary. The new page reviewers are a more elite group (currently , plus administrators). And then there's ], which uses a "Curation Toolbar". I have trouble keeping track of it all. That's why there's a disambiguation page! ''']'''. – ] (]) 21:45, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
			:::::I see. I was aware of peer reviews, but not all the others. Thanks for explaining - and for your kind words. ] (])

			== Pending Proposal for Kessler Foundation ==
	{{Archives}}

			Hi. I see you’re a member of the WikiProject Medicine/Society and medicine task force. I’ve made a number of proposals to update the article about ], a charity that supports people with disabilities. Several have been reviewed but a few remain. The request is posted here ]. I have a conflict of interest, and do the edits myself. Would you possibly have time to look at these? I appreciate your time. ] (]) 20:14, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
	== On Civility ==
			:Sorry, I don't remember joining a medicine task force. Good luck with your proposals. ] (])

			== ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message ==
	I came upon your comments ], and while I haven't nearly read all of it, I have to say: I agree with you 110%. There are so few women on here because there are constant battles over insignificantly petty issues that involve either outright insults and nasty language or sarcasm-dripping posts full of in-jokes or other mockery from someone who believes him/herself to be intellectually superior. Civility isn't clear cut, that's true, but the WMF could easily do ''something.'' There could be various "user conduct levels," for example, ranging from green (no violations in the past ''x'' days) to red (you get the idea). Let the green/yellow-green users patrol the red/orange-red ones, and let the latter group get flagged more or something. I suppose some would argue that this would bring about a sort of hegemony or tyranny, but given the transparent nature of the site, I doubt this would be much of a problem, and if it is, there will always be ways to ameliorate it.

			<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #AAA; background-color: ivory; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
	Anyway I just thought I'd leave my thoughts here, along with some encouragement, because we need to be fighting more proactively for these kinds of changes if we want to reverse Misplaced Pages's stagnation in growth.
			<div class="ivmbox-image" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em; flex: 1 0 40px; max-width: 100px">]</div>
			<div class="ivmbox-text">
			Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y\|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data\|2023\|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

			The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. 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 ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
	Have a great vacation! - <span style="font-family:Mistral,'Brush Script MT','MV Boli',calibri;text-shadow:gray 0.1em 0.1em 0.3em;">]]</span> 03:07, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

			If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx\|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:27, 28 November 2023 (UTC)</small>
	:Thanks and double thanks! ] (]) 07:00, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

			</div>
	== GOCE July drive and August blitz ==
			</div>
			<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2023/Coordination/MM/02&oldid=1187132049 -->

			== Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C ==
	{\| style="position: relative; margin-left: 2em; margin-right: 2em; padding: 0.5em 1em; background-color: #dfeff3; border: 2px solid #bddff2; border-color: rgba( 109, 193, 240, 0.75 ); {{border-radius}} {{box-shadow\|8px\|8px\|12px\|rgba( 0, 0, 0, 0.7 )}}"

			<section begin="announcement-content" />
	\| <span style="font-size: 110%;">'''] ] wrap-up'''</span>
			:''] ''

			Dear Wikimedian,
	<div style="float:right; width: 75px; height: 60px;"></div>
	<div style="position: absolute; top: -20px; right: -12px;">]</div>
	<hr style="border-bottom: 1px solid rgba( 109, 193, 240, 0.75 );" />
	'''Participation:''' Thanks to everyone who participated in the July drive. Of the 40 people who signed up this drive, 22 copy edited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available ].

			You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.
	'''Progress report:''' We reduced our article backlog from 2400 articles to 2199 articles in July. This is a new month-end record low for the backlog. Nice work, everyone!

			This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the ] to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.
	'''Blitz''': The ] will run from August 24–30. The blitz will focus on articles from the GOCE's ''']'''. Awards will be given out to everyone who copy edits at least one of the target articles. The blitz will run from August 24–30. ]!

			The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please ].
	Cheers from your GOCE coordinators {{noping\|Jonesey95}}, {{noping\|Baffle gab1978}}, and {{noping\|Miniapolis}}.

			Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.
	{{center
	\| <small>To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from ]. Newsletter delivered by ] (]) 15:11, 19 August 2014 (UTC)</small>
	}}
	\|}
	<!-- Message sent by User:Diannaa@enwiki using the list at http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Guild_of_Copy_Editors/Mailing_List&oldid=621414960 -->

			On behalf of the UCoC project team,<section end="announcement-content" />
	== Your concerns have been taken seriously ==

			] 23:09, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
	Just not on Misplaced Pages. See statement on FARK. It's amazing that Misplaced Pages can't get itself together to do the right thing like other sites have. I wonder why. Actually, I don't wonder at all. Misplaced Pages has always been driven by a conservative, right-leaning libertarian ideology that gives lip service to civil liberties. Anyone who tries to tell you that Misplaced Pages is "liberal" or leans left, hasn't been paying attention. ] (]) 08:28, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
			<!-- Message sent by User:RamzyM (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/search/?title=Universal_Code_of_Conduct/Coordinating_Committee/Election/2024/Previous_voters_list_2&oldid=26721207 -->

			== ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message ==
	:Viriditas, wittingly or otherwise, you have just described Jimbo Wales to a "T". That right-leaning libertarian ideology is exactly what he subscribes to, at least if our bio on him is accurate. It is also what Carolmooredc subscribes to, as per her own website in its various versions over the years. And you wonder why these people choose to ban others from their talk pages? - ] (]) 00:25, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

			<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
	== ANI by CarolMooreDC ==
			<div class="ivmbox-image noresize" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">]</div>
			<div class="ivmbox-text">
			Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y\|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data\|2024\|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

			The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. 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 ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
	Thanks for your comment. It does deserve a response, but I'd like to avoid commenting on the noticeboard thread which I think should be closed. (IOW, I don't want to add to the drama.) Yes, there are disputes that need DR and editing behaviors that need admin review or RFC/U. But putting all three editors into one thread was the wrong approach. CMDC has brought up SPECIFICO on other noticeboards and this is simply another page in the on-going friction between them. (I've urged an ] for them.) Of the two other editors, Two kinds is fairly new with 2,000 edits and one block and Corbet has a good record of editing articles; his block log shows that blocks were usually reverted fairly quickly. (Still, Corbet needs to bite his tongue more often.) But then Carol's own behavior gets thrown into the pot (thankfully that thread got closed quickly). I wish the admins had taken my hint about NOTHERE and closed the mess. Will something constructive come of the thread? I doubt it. The Gender gap project has been around for 10 years now, and this bit of drama on the task force talk page is simply a diversion from what the Project ought to be achieving. (Hopefully a temporary diversion.) IMO a better course of action would be for some of the more senior editors and admins to monitor the project more closely. (For example, SlimVirgin did so to some extent with SPECIFICO.) In accordance with ] purely personal remarks on the talk pages should be hatted, {{tl\|rpa}}'d, or moved to the talk page of the editor who started them. Cheers. – ] (]) 02:02, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

			If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx\|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:13, 19 November 2024 (UTC)</small>
	== RfC: Rebecca Bardoux ==

	Hi, notifying all previous talk participants of an RfC: ] -- ]] 13:45, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

	== stalking ==

	re blowjob, seriously I am not stalking you, although I know you will find it hard to believe. I saw your post at village pump. Although I will admit that when I see your name scroll by I perhaps pay more attention than to the random editor. ] (]) 02:37, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
	:Regardless of what you say, it feels like hounding/stalking to me. ] (]) 03:06, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
	::Well, taking a quick scan through your contribs I can see dozens of recent articles or discussions you are involved in and started that I have not commented on.Where you catch my eye, I do not avoid commenting on your stuff, but I am not hunting you out. On my talk page I said "making waves" I didn't mean that in a negative manner. You are having (or trying to have) influence in many areas. You are making yourself highly visible with lots of wikiproject, noticeboard posts etc. When you advertise your activities like that its inevitable that people will see it and follow up (thats somewhat the point of doing it I think). You aren't making these posts to obscure areas, you are making them in the most heavily trafficked pages of the wiki. ] (]) 03:16, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

	== Sitush-Carol interaction ban ==

	You should know Carol signaled her support for a mutual interaction ban with Sitush. While I understand you do not consider that the best sanction, perhaps it would be good to signal your acquiescence to such a result given that it seems to be the only option that stands a chance at the moment.--] <sub>] ]</sub> 03:49, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

	== Anchors ==

	Copying this from where it was originally:

	::::Not to be unkind, T. - I appreciate thank-yous - but did you see my original reply to you about anchors? I'm really not sure whether the way you used that is how it's meant to be used. I'm not being critical - I'm saying I honestly don't know. You might want to start an "Anchors" discussion at ]. ] (]) 16:54, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

	Thanks, Lightbreather. (By the way, is it OK if I call you LB for short here in future, as the full paraphernalia is really only needed for notification purposes on other pages?) Anyway, yes I did see your reply, and was planning to talk to you about it in due course, but only to ask you did you know of anything even better, or of any specific objections, because as far as I can see they're perfect. I think I ''am'' using them as intended, which is seemingly called ''subsection linking'' in the relevant section (]). They seem potentially extremely useful, but the section on them (already mentioned above) fails to adequately explain their benefits (or alternatively if there are problems it fails to mention them at all) - but presumably that's something I may want to take up on that place's Talk Page (or just be bold and edit it there myself and see what happens).] (]) 21:22, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

	Actually on re-reading, I'm not entirely sure it is what the section means by 'subsection'. But the next section makes clear you can use anchors to link to a row in a table, so I see no reason for not linking to a sentence (which is the logical equivalent of a row in a table), given that it's extremely useful, works, and nobody has said it's forbidden, let alone given a rational reason why it should be. In any case even if it were forbidden by some rule, I'm 100% entitled to take the view that ] (ignore all rules if they prevent you improving the encyclopedia - one of the 5 Principles of Misplaced Pages, though unfortunately seemingly the principle most ignored, except for the even more ignored Civility requirements) would override it in this case.

	Incidentally if you haven't yet restored your own anchor, I see no reason why you shouldn't do so (unless you really don't want to do it). ] (]) 21:50, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

	I've now added a sub-section on ']'. Hopefully nobody will object (or alternatively they'll let me know why it's a bad idea, if it is). And assuming it's a good idea, my thanks to again to you, as it wouldn't have happened without you.] (]) 22:41, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

	== Somewhat qualified apology re 'makes things worse' ==

	Having thought about it, and read about it, I still doubt if it was uncivil, and I'm certain it wasn't "completely uncivil". Nor do I accept that it was some kind of unnecessary addition, as it was necessary (in order not to have a misleading edit summary) to say that I wasn't only reverting due to lack of consensus. However with hindsight I now conclude that I could have said for the first undo something like "undoing today's edits 1 by 1, due no consensus per BRD + removal of vital protection, etc, per Talk" and for subsequent undos something like "continuing today's undos", and that is what I would probably try if there ever is a next time (hopefully there won't be), though I'm not sure it would necessarily be less upsetting in practice (after all, 'removes a vital protection, etc' is just a more specific way of saying 'makes things worse'). But to the extent that I could have done that had it occurred to me that 'makes things worse' would be thought uncivil (something which never did occur to me, though perhaps it should have), I apologize for hurting your feelings, which was never my intention.] (]) 04:52, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

	Afterthought: Incidentally, it would probably still have been necessary for me to say something fairly similar in meaning to 'makes things worse' on the Talk Page (indeed arguably 'removes a vital protection, etc' already does that in my alternative summary), although given enough time there is more space there to use soothing phrases to cushion the blow. But time is not something I felt I had, as I was concerned that another edit by somebody else would go in and have to be undone if I was to be able to undo you, and I didn't want to have to revert any more people than strictly necessary. Or else I'd have had to try 'manual reverting', which had other worrying problems of its own. Plus I was worried, rightly or wrongly, that if the undo wasn't done quickly it might never get done at all, as has happened elsewhere in my experience, with regretable consequences. And those are always going to be the kind of problems a reverter faces, at least when reverting changes in the Policy area. 05:03, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

	:No need to apologize. ''You didn't hurt my feelings.'' I simply believe in following the ] consensus re ], including the last one ''Avoid inappropriate summaries''. But let's not re-hash it, OK? ] (]) 17:09, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

	== rsn ==

	I struck part of my comment at RSN, I feel it was unduly snippy. I apologize. There is much going on both in RL, and on-wiki. In addition to our past friction, I saw some of your recent contribs etc where you are tagging folks for notability that have won major awards and been inducted into the hall of fame, clearly passing ] which made me feel as though you were acting with undue haste - however, even if such is true, two wrongs do not make a right and the issues are not directly related, so I apologize for my snip. ] (]) 03:44, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

	== A7 declines of two pornographic actor articles ==

	*]
	*]

	Neither of these articles should have been tagged with A7 as both have claims of significance, if for no other reason the awards they've won in the industry. Please don't tag articles like these again. If you want to take them to AfD, that's up to you.--] (]) 13:46, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
	:I didn't realize there were more: ] and ]. I'm not going to add any others if I see them, just decline the A7s, but this feels more like a crusade or incompetent tagging. Therefore, consider this a '''warning'''. If I see more of these in the future from you, you risk being blocked for disruptive tagging.--] (]) 13:51, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

	== Seriously? ==

	I thought we were cool and it was water under the bridge.--] - ] 18:13, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

	:Nothing personal, Mike. You gave me a virtual beer, which I appreciated, and been nice to me a few times on other occasions, but as a woman editor, there are some things that I am no longer going to ignore. ] (]) 18:21, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

	::Oh well, whatever. Just goes to show that apologies and trying to reach out and mend fences are useless on here when people keep bringing up old shit. Some live in the past, others live for today. (Yeah, I'm about as smart as my dogs, I live in the moment!) Be well.--] - ] 18:32, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

	:::It's possible that you're a better man than I. I'm not saying you are - but admitting that it's a possibility. ] (]) 18:40, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
	::::It's not about being better, ma'am, but if my stupid and obviously unclever remark did really hurt you to the point where you're still thinking about it months after I said it and you thought my prior apology was a bunch of crap, then I am truly sorry. I'd quote another wise friend of mine who said, "Dude, don't take this serious, it's just the internet", but that would probably offend a group of people still living in their mothers' basements and I'd get the official "Searson is a dirty whore" sanction as a result. :) --] - ] 18:46, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

	== GGTF ==

	Hi Lightbreather, I hope you'll consider restoring your name to the list. We need your energy and ideas! All the best, ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 18:41, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

	{\| class="messagebox" style="width: 90%px; border-color: #5982B6"
	\|-
	\|align="center"\|]
	\|align="left" width="100%"\|
	<div align="center">
	We invite you to join the ''']'''. There you can coordinate with users who are discussing issues that affect the gender gap on Misplaced Pages (including editor interactions and gender bias in articles). If you would like to get involved, consider ] or visit the ]. If you have questions, feel free to contact me or other members of the task force. Happy editing, ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 18:41, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
	</div>		</div>
			</div>
	\|}
			<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2024/Coordination/MM/02&oldid=1258243447 -->

Latest revision as of 00:13, 19 November 2024

Archives

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5	Archive 6
Archive 7	Archive 8	Archive 9
Archive 10	Archive 11	Archive 12
Archive 13	Archive 14	Archive 15
Archive 16	Archive 17	Archive 18
Archive 19	Archive 20	Archive 21
Archive 22	Archive 23	Archive 24

Get well soon

Sorry to see the note on the top of this page. At least you were allowed back last year and got in 278 edits. Hope to see you back sometime in 2023. wbm1058 (talk) 18:30, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

I am back. Worked on (still working on, actually) a few things with my doctors and I'm feeling quite a lot better. Knock wood, it sticks. I created a new article today. Would you like to look it over? It's about Amy Kelly, author of Eleanor of Aquitaine and the Four Kings. It needs a little more work, but I think it's a good start. I'll probably take a break for a bit... Don't want to overdo it. Lightbreather (talk) Lightbreather (talk) 22:41, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Super. If you can improve on that you're a better writer than me. Based on "evidences of seriousness of purpose and promise of success" I recommend you for the honor roll of WikiProject historical biography writers. Prose of this quality has not appeared on Misplaced Pages in many a long day.

I took a look at the lead of Eleanor of Aquitaine and it cracked me up a bit. After fifteen years of marriage and two daughters her husband agreed to an annulment (heaven forbid royalty ever divorce) on the grounds of consanguinity within the fourth degree (but why was the marriage allowed in the first place, and it took 15 years to figure that out?) So then she just remarries other royalty committing the same crime in the third degree! I can see how that's fodder for a best-selling book (and maybe a TV miniseries too). Sure, take it easy, no need to work harder than you feel up to. – wbm1058 (talk) 02:48, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

What kicked this off was hubby and I were watching The Lion in Winter (one of our favorite "Christmas" movies). Then we got to talking about Eleanor. He likes to read historical nonfiction, so I said, You should read Eleanor of Aquitaine and the Four Kings. And I bought him a used copy. So he's sitting there looking at it, and then his phone, and he said, There's no Misplaced Pages article on Amy Kelly. And I said, What? And there you go!

Thanks for the positive feedback. I truly appreciate it. BTW, what is the "Review" process? It doesn't leave anything in the reviewer's history. I've always wondered about that. Lightbreather (talk)

There are multiple review processes. One is Misplaced Pages:Peer review. Another is Recent changes (see Misplaced Pages:Recent changes patrol). Another is Misplaced Pages:Pending changes (see Misplaced Pages:Reviewing pending changes – you too may apply to join the 7,813 reviewers). Another is Misplaced Pages:New pages patrol (behold that detailed flowchart!). You can see in my patrol log that I marked revision 1136740705 of page Amy Kelly patrolled – that's just a matter of checking a box. I confess I didn't use that flowchart as part of my review process. Your writing is so many levels above the average I see that I didn't think it was necessary. The new page reviewers are a more elite group (currently 726 members, plus administrators). And then there's Misplaced Pages:Page Curation, which uses a "Curation Toolbar". I have trouble keeping track of it all. That's why there's a disambiguation page! Misplaced Pages:Reviewing. – wbm1058 (talk) 21:45, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

I see. I was aware of peer reviews, but not all the others. Thanks for explaining - and for your kind words. Lightbreather (talk)

Pending Proposal for Kessler Foundation

Hi. I see you’re a member of the WikiProject Medicine/Society and medicine task force. I’ve made a number of proposals to update the article about Kessler Foundation, a charity that supports people with disabilities. Several have been reviewed but a few remain. The request is posted here Talk:Kessler_Foundation#Kessler Foundation Edit Requests – October 2022. I have a conflict of interest, and do the edits myself. Would you possibly have time to look at these? I appreciate your time. Dogmomma529 (talk) 20:14, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't remember joining a medicine task force. Good luck with your proposals. Lightbreather (talk)

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

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:27, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C

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

Dear Wikimedian,

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

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

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

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

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:09, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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) 00:13, 19 November 2024 (UTC)