User talk:FutureTrillionaire/Archive 3

I raised a question at the articles talk page on possibly marking jihadist-held towns separately from those held by moderate rebels. Your input would be appreciated. EkoGraf (talk) 18:14, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Could you make a suggestion on the issue of Daraya at the talk page that I raised based on a new source that came up today? Thanks! EkoGraf (talk) 14:48, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

I created a new article 2013 Latakia offensive. EkoGraf (talk) 02:44, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Cool, I'll check it out.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 02:49, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

The article is good i planned to make the article but you raced me and you made it,but why does it says to capture the strategic border area.Alhanuty (talk) 03:05, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Strangesad (talk • contribs) 17:34, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello, FutureTrillionaire. You have new messages at Talk:Lithium/GA2.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Double sharp (talk) 11:54, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello. It appears that you have been canvassing—leaving messages on a biased choice of users' talk pages to notify them of an ongoing community decision, debate, or vote—in order to influence WP:ANI. While friendly notices are allowed, they should be limited and nonpartisan in distribution and should reflect a neutral point of view. Please do not post notices which are indiscriminately cross-posted, which espouse a certain point of view or side of a debate, or which are selectively sent only to those who are believed to hold the same opinion as you. Remember to respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building by allowing decisions to reflect the prevailing opinion among the community at large. Bbb23 (talk) 23:54, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	I was very happy to see the Jesus article finally get promoted to FA today. My hearty congratulations! You really should be very proud of yourself. Please accept this as a token of recognition from me. —Cliftonian (talk) 15:22, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! I owe you a debt of gratitude for all your helpful contributions to the article.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 15:30, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

It's really no problem. It was a pleasure to help out and it gives me (and many others) great personal satisfaction to see the Jesus article featured. If there's ever anything else I can lend a hand with, please let me know. Have a great rest of the week. —Cliftonian (talk) 15:48, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Nice! That's very creative. Thank you for your in-depth review. The article was greatly improved because of it.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 17:41, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

I'm very impressed that you managed to get such a high-profile topic to featured status--good work! Mark Arsten (talk) 20:27, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 20:50, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

For taking the time to comment on Batman: Arkham Asylum's FAC process. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 07:03, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Congratulations on getting that article to FA status.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 13:03, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

I sent you an email to avoid edit war, so please check your email. Jiawhein (talk) 02:20, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

How does Jesus score eleven points for TFA/R? Not that you have to worry about it not being selected for December 25 anyway, but it seems to me to just be five points or, if you've never had an FA selected as TFA, six points. ("Main page representation" points can't be enumerated so far in advance.) -- tariqabjotu 19:04, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

@Tariqabjotu: I'm new to the TFA process, so I my calculations might not be correct. The way I calculated this is: 1 point (from date relevant to article topic) + 2 points (widely covered) + 4 points (vital article) + 1 point (me never having an FA selected for TFA) + 3 points (main page representation points) = 11 points. If we remove the main page representation points, the article would still get a total of 8 points. Am I doing this right?--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 19:13, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Hold on, I realized my mistake. I can't have both widely covered and vital article points. Removing widely covered would produce a total of 6 points. I've now changed the points in the Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/pending chart to 6.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 19:29, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for this kind message [1], it is very much appreciated. And thank you for all your tireless work!Jeppiz (talk) 12:08, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

I think the name August 21 2013 ghouta chemical attack will be the best name chosen for the article.Alhanuty (talk) 18:30, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

@Alhanuty: That's fine, but do not cut-and-paste move. The edit history gets lost if you do that. Instead, follow the instructions here: Wikipedia:Moving a page.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 18:37, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the help it really helped me to change article names with all it history records.Alhanuty (talk) 07:52, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Hey, how did you conclude from this article that the attack was now confirmed? The article itself casts doubt into the attacks: ".. to visit the areas allegedly hit with chemical weapons." Mohamed CJ (talk) 16:19, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Template:Syrian civil war infobox has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 00:37, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Please stop deleting facts and putting propaganda there. Thanks in advance. If you do not know how UN-Analysis work stop editing. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.203.78.1 (talk) 00:58, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello. There is a new nomination for Minecraft at Featured Article Candidates that you may be interested in. Deadbeef 19:49, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

I noticed your map on the chemical weapons attacks does not have a skull mark for Jobar. Reports say chemical bombardment also happened there as well. EkoGraf (talk) 21:38, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Map updated. Thanks for catching that. I've also added Muadhamiya, which I forgot too.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 22:56, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

		The Million Award
		For your contributions to bring Jesus (estimated annual readership: 3,445,000) to Featured Article status, I hereby present you the Million Award. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers! -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:28, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

The Million Award is a new initiative to recognize the editors of Wikipedia'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 Wikipedia:Million Award. You're also welcome to display this userbox on your page:

For reaching the highest tier of the award, you've also been added to the Million Award Hall of Fame. If I've made any error in this listing, please don't hesitate to correct it; if for any reason you don't feel you deserve it, please don't hesitate to remove it; if you know of any other editor who merits one of these awards, please don't hesitate to give it; if you yourself deserve another award from any of the three tiers, please don't hesitate to take it!

Thanks again for helping so many readers worldwide; your contributions make a tremendous difference. -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:28, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Incidentally, this is the very first of these awards to be given. For this topic, you deserve the extra honor. -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:28, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Wow. Thanks! --FutureTrillionaire (talk) 01:34, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations from me too! Truly deserved. —Cliftonian (talk) 06:09, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Hey can you self revert just a bit and re-take out lijan and syrian resistance militia. You accidentally undid my edit. Sopher99 (talk) 02:03, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Oops. You're right. I think I fixed it now.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 02:22, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Sopher99 (talk) 02:24, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Hey FutureTrillionaire. I'm contacting you because you're involved in the Article Feedback Tool in some way, either as a previous newsletter recipient or as an active user of the system. As you might have heard, a user recently anonymously disabled the feedback tool on 2,000 pages. We were unable to track or prevent this due to the lack of logging feature in AFT5. We're deeply sorry for this, as we know that quite a few users found the software very useful, and were using it on their articles.

We've now re-released the software, with the addition of a logging feature and restrictions on the ability to disable. Obviously, we're not going to automatically re-enable it on each article—we don't want to create a situation where it was enabled by users who have now moved on, and feedback would sit there unattended—but if you're interested in enabling it for your articles, it's pretty simple to do. Just go to the article you want to enable it on, click the "request feedback" link in the toolbox in the sidebar, and AFT5 will be enabled for that article.

Again, we're very sorry about this issue; hopefully it'll be smooth sailing after this :). If you have any questions, just drop them at the talkpage. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) 21:38, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Given that you've shown interest in eventually nominating China for a GA assessment, I'd just like to ask something. This is just a suggestion, so it's entirely up to you, but do you think it's a good idea to wait until this RfC closes before the GA nomination is made, so that we also have a chance for DYK as well? What do you think? (As far as I know, this article has never been in DYK, as it was created on October 2001, which completely predates DYK itself.) --benlisquare_T•C•E 13:33, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

@Benlisquare: That's a good question. I don't think the article is ready fo GA anytime soon. I was thinking about nominating it for GA sometime in October. I'm guessing the RfC will be closed by then. I think it will be nice for the article go get a DYK. So, if the RfC doesn't close by October, I'm willing to wait. --FutureTrillionaire (talk) 16:20, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

...about the deletion of the montage I made for the article 2012 Benghazi attack. -- Cirrus Editor (talk) 23:29, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

I don't know if you are aware, but community sanctions (1RR broadly defined) on Syrian civil war articles were approved to cover the entire Syrian civil war topic from August 31 - see Talk:Syrian civil war/General sanctions. I remember you had opposed the inclusion of all topic articles under the sanctions (except Syrian civil war, Syria and infobox), but i guess that extensive edit-warring due to 2013 Ghouta attacks and public interest due to possible US attack required immediate implementation, decided by arbitrators to cover the whole civil war topic. I highly value your opinion, and i tried to be neutral in the sanctions procedure (whether to put all topic articles or just few articles). I apologize if the approved sanctions will interfere in you very much positive editorial contributions.Greyshark09 (talk) 11:27, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Dear FutureTrillionaire,I only moved but not edited or deleted bahai's part inside other views.because there are huge differences between top three Abrahamic Religions and others like Bahai's or Sabians or etc, by these factors : number of followers, historical precedence, habitual rules ( JURISPRUDENCE ), ...it is better to put them in a secondary religion list because there are a dozen of this kind of religions.best regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki hamze (talk • contribs) 17:50, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

First, discuss this on the article talk page, not here. Second, it doesn't matter. The section says "Religious perspectives" not "Abrahamic religious perspectives".--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 19:24, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Kirill ^[talk] 16:59, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Heres evidence that Alawites are Shia [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8] etc. I could easily find scores more such sources. Please do some research before making such claims. Pass a Method talk 14:46, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

I have done my research. As for our sources, failed verification. Your sources don't support your argument. Anyways, discuss this issue that the thread at the Syrian civil war talk page, not here.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 15:15, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Syrian_civil_war#Massive_changes_by_User:FutureTrillionaire --Z 08:55, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

If you have some spare time, would you care to do a review for God of War: Ghost of Sparta? --JDC808 ♫ 05:33, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, my classes this semester are insanely hard. I don't have a lot of free time left for WP :( --FutureTrillionaire (talk) 20:11, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Just a quick question: How far do you estimate this article is from meeting GA criteria? Do you think it's close to becoming ready? The DYK RfC has passed, so you can feel free to nominate the article for a GA assessment at any time, whenever you feel that it is ready, and don't have to worry about waiting for anything. Once it passes, I'll then take it to DYK as well. --benlisquare_T•C•E 09:46, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

@Benlisquare: If I were to review this article, I would say it meets all the GA criteria except for 3b and 2b. The article is still very long compared to other GA/FA country articles. Part of this reason is that some sections contain too much details. For example, too much of the history section is spent on describing the Qing dynasty and modern China (see WP:recentism). The demographics section doesn't need an entire paragraph detailing the sex ratio in China. The India article only discusses that in one sentence. Also, the article has some sourcing issues. I've spot-checked a few sources, and some of them don't support the statement in the article. For example, the statistic "roughly 300 million Chinese do not have access to safe drinking water" is not found in the source. I'm not spending as much time as I would like on WP due to my difficult courses, but I'll try to work on these issues and hopefully nominate this article by mid or late October.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 13:40, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

@Benlisquare: Sorry, change of plans. The article has more problems than I had expected. Also, I got a lot of coursework from my classes. I probably won't be able to nominate the article until sometime in November or December :( --FutureTrillionaire (talk) 22:32, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Don't sweat it, there's no rush. --benlisquare_T•C•E 03:54, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Greetings. Because you participated in the August 2013 move request regarding this subject, you may be interested in participating in the current discussion. This notice is provided pursuant to Wikipedia:Canvassing#Appropriate notification. Cheers! bd2412 T 21:29, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello FutureTrillionaire, thank you for your message at my talk page. I understand your concerns about possible plagiarism, but please be assured that it is unlikely that a single, short sentence from a multi-page document would infringe someone's copyright. Alternatively, why not re-write the text instead of removing it?

Also, if you have issues with my edits, please join me at Talk:China instead -A1candidate (talk) 00:02, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Esteemed Wikipedia colleague: a discussion has been started at Talk:Syrian civil war#Section 2 (Events): five chronology-problems, concerning problems in section 2 of Syrian civil war. I invite you to give us your opinions on suggestions brought forward in that discussion, for as far as those suggestions don’t leave you indifferent. Corriebertus (talk) 15:02, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Per the article at North Korea, the DPRK amended its constitution in 2009, completely dropping all mentions of communism, and placing emphasis on Juche and Songun. The article includes this reference from Reuters. --benlisquare_T•C•E 19:20, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

@Benlisquare: That's interesting, but the CIA World Factbook states that NK is a "Communist state one-man dictatorship". Other recent sources that call NK a communist state exist. I think the best solution is to not specify the number of communist states in the world in this article, because the GA criteria requires citations for statistics, and I can't find a source that states that there are only 4 of them in the world.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 22:52, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Just to let you know that there is space at WP:TFAR for Jesus to be nominated for Christmas Day, if that's still something you'd like. Regards, Bencherlite^Talk 09:53, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for reminding me! I almost forgot about this. I've now added the nomination.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 17:49, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Making it right now. :) EkoGraf (talk) 15:27, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Done. Battle of Qalamoun EkoGraf (talk) 15:48, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

If your analyte is a protein (or anything else with a mixture of different titratable groups), then you're very likely inverting its charge at low enough pH. Since the capillary is silica (negatively charged, if it was low enough pH that it was uncharged there wouldn't be any EOF at all), your protein of interest might be interacting nonspecifically with the capillary wall once it's positive (ie. below it's isoelectric point) resulting in longer retention times.(+)H₃N-Protein\Chemist-CO₂(-) 17:34, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Interesting, thank you! I got a final exam to prepare for for my analytical chemistry class.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 21:59, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Keywords here are "might" and "if". You'll certainly start to reduce the EOF if you go to low enough pH, since you'll reduce the charge density of the silica. So it's really a mixture of both things. (+)H₃N-Protein\Chemist-CO₂(-) 05:15, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Just a heads up that the Syrian islamic front dissolved their entire organization, as did the SILF Sopher99 (talk) 21:52, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Hey some guy added a section onto the Syrian Civil War page called "shelling of peaceful quarters" , where he uses a bunch of Russian sources to say that "oppposition terrorists" are always the ones shelling peaceful neighborhoods according to residents.

Its really undue and POV pushing, can you remove it? I would my self but I am topic banned until the 18th. Sopher99 (talk) 17:16, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

• than the TV station or newspaper from Russia worse than the TV station or newspaper from the USA or do I now delete all the sources from the United States in the same article in RU-wiki

?????--Rqasd (talk) 17:41, 14 December 2013 (UTC)there's many things that they say JOURNALISTS who have been on the scene for over half a year, everything is caught on camera, and there a few press sources which speak journalists, and some say only just people. they can't all be inaccurate? or can I not in that section of the article wrote?on the talk page of the article is created me in advance topic.--Rqasd (talk) 17:45, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Normally when something huge like China appears in the GAN queue, it's somebody's driveby nomination that can be failed in minutes for outstanding cleanup tags--and then I saw your name and realized it was legit. Regardless of what happens in an eventual review, thanks for all you do on huge topics like this one. -- Khazar2 (talk) 16:56, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind words! Editing high profile articles is not easy, but it's definitely worth it. Hopefully, the WP:Million Award will encourage more contributors to work on popular articles.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 17:20, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

My pleasure! I'll try to give this one a review a week or two from now unless someone else grabs it in the meantime. -- Khazar2 (talk) 21:30, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article China you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- Khazar2 (talk) 15:30, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Just a respectful reminder, Edit Warring is forbidden on the wiki. You have reverted the content you are currently disputing 5 times in the past 48 hours, which puts you in violation of the three revert rule, a blockable offense. I understand that the dispute is frustrating, and I have also reminded the editor you are arguing with of relevant policy, but your reverting needs to stop now and not start again until this dispute is resolved, because otherwise you won't stand a chance if someone decides to take things to a higher level of dispute resolution. -- LWG ^talk 15:44, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

It looks like you are in a bit of an edit war on Jesus. We need to move discussion on to the talk page instead of reverting. If you could help get the set up, I'd definitely appreciate it. I'll let some of the other users involved know as well. Prodego ^talk 02:15, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

look. if you are against such a contribution (if you are against this editing). please. detailed answer why. in order not to initiate administrative proceedings.--Rqasd (talk) 16:31, 17 December 2013 (UTC)you have reverted the edit, said - Undoing pov pushing and use of unreliable sources.

I changed the edits. now there is no such problem? pov?

unreliable sources - it is impossible. all sources is very authoritative media, they work *news*, worldwide, many years. if you do not have a source that ITAR-TASS's a lie (specifically those articles that I used), if you have no source (*battle for Syria* it's a lie). you can't delete my edits. it is outside the rules.in addition, I give the translation. I give references are free from copyright. in addition, the recording of TV ether (news release) this is the authoritative source. this is a verifiable source. moreover, *the battle for Syria* is a documentary film. other sources (if there are sources without translation tell me and I mend). but you can't simply delete all at once.my sources have become in Wikipedia. you can read about them that is large media (news)Rqasd (talk) 11:47, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

		The Christianity Barnstar
		For having the most number of edits on the Jesus article. I know edits aren't everything, but you may have seen this book, which highlights the significance of your work. StAnselm (talk) 00:12, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! It's amazing how Wikipedia is used to generate that list.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 00:56, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

The article China you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:China for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:40, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

The article China you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:China for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- Khazar2 (talk) 11:22, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

This is a note to let the main editors of Jesus know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on December 25, 2013. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask Bencherlite (talk · contribs). You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/December 25, 2013. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Jesus (7–2 BC to 30–33 AD) is the central figure of Christianity, whom the teachings of most Christian denominations hold to be the Son of God and the awaited Messiah of the Old Testament. Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that a historical Jesus existed, although there is little agreement on the reliability of the gospel narratives and how closely the biblical Jesus reflects the historical Jesus. Most scholars agree that Jesus was a Jewish preacher from Galilee, was baptized by John the Baptist, and was crucified in Jerusalem on the orders of the Roman prefect, Pontius Pilate. Christians believe that Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of a virgin, performed miracles, founded the Church, died by crucifixion as a sacrifice to achieve atonement, rose from the dead, and ascended into heaven, from which he will return. The great majority of Christians worship Jesus as the incarnation of God the Son, the second of three Persons of a Divine Trinity. A few Christian groups reject Trinitarianism, wholly or partly, as non-scriptural. In Islam, Jesus is considered one of God's important prophets and the Messiah. (Full article...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello. I want to thank you for starting that RfC. The voting could have gone either way, and it still might swing in the other direction. But as a matter of process, I think it is awesome of you to have put out that call.

I also want to apologize for harshness in the other point I was trying to make over there. I am sure that I could have been more tactful in how I did that. I will strive to be more compassionate in the future. The other concern is that in all that I did communicate, I voiced no appreciation for the time and energy you put into editing Wikipedia for the purpose of making it better. I do have a great appreciation for that aspect of your efforts.

Maybe someday there will be a compensation structure for all of this valuable time invested, and that would help you get to your goal of becoming a Future Trillionaire!--Tdadamemd (talk) 21:36, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

I want to apologize too. I should not have continued the edit war, should have been more polite, and should have started that RfC sooner. I will try to keep a cooler head in the future.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 22:18, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you both! Cheers! Prodego ^talk 01:49, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Actually Future, there was one other bombing in Volgograd in 2013. 2013 Volgograd bus bombing. So it would be better that you revert the name back to previous one. EkoGraf (talk) 13:38, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Oops. Thanks for letting me know! Done.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 13:40, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Your opinion would be appreciated here [9]. EkoGraf (talk) 13:40, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello and sorry to bother you, i've just created two templates: one for the Islamist unrest in Egypt and another for the Sinai insurgency. When i add them to their respective pages a problem seems to occur and a bar with "Documentation" shows up in the article. Those are my first two templates so i'm not really familiar with everything related to them. Can you please help me figure out the reason behind this mess?Finally, i would be grateful if you gave us your opinion in this discussion. Thanks and sorry again. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 21:04, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

No problem. The Documentation thing is not necessary for campaignbox templates, so I removed them. As for the discussion, sorry, I'm not familiar with the how the coup in Egypt went down.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 21:30, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! Will i face similar issues in the future in case i ever create another template? Fitzcarmalan (talk) 21:46, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

I am considering that we should remove both the Shabiha and Jaysh al-Sha'bi from the infobox because I have come to be of the strong belief that both organisations have been merged into the NDF. A year ago when the NDF just showed up we got conflicting reports saying that these two were part of the NDF, that they were merging into the NDF or were even totally separate from them. However, since than we have almost had no mention of the two organisations and the pro-government militias have generally been referred to as the NDF by SOHR and others. Would you agree with this? EkoGraf (talk) 16:33, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

@EkoGraf: I agree that Shabiha and Jaysh al-Sha'bi are no longer active. I believe that members of those groups have joined the NDF. But I'm not sure if they should be removed from the infobox. The infobox should show the belligerents that are or were involved in the conflict. But then again, we removed a lot of the now defunct rebel groups/coalitions from the infobox, so I guess we can do the same for Shabiha and Jaysh al-Sha'bi.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 16:55, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Hmmm, how about than that we put in brackets beside the NDF in small font Shabiha and Jaysh al-Sha'bi? This would be in line with sources calling the NDF an umbrella group. EkoGraf (talk) 17:35, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

@EkoGraf: We could do that. But I was thinking about creating collapsible lists containing former belligerents, one for both the government side and one for the rebel side. We can put Shabiha and Jaysh al-Sha'bi in one of those lists. I don't think the NDF is an umbrella group. This WSJ article seems to imply that it is a separate group from the Shabiha:"Unlike the ad hoc pro-regime militia known as the Shabiha that was mobilized at the start of the war, members of the defense force are licensed, armed and paid by the state."--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 17:49, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

That article, at least to me, implies and talks about the Shabiha in a past tense as if they are no longer active. EkoGraf (talk) 17:54, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

I do the first version as we just said. As for the collapsible list, yeah that may be ok, you write it up, and we note beside these two that they were merged into the NDF. The collapsible rebel list can include those 2-3 groups that were merged into the Islamic Front. Although considering those were the only notable rebels were removed from the list maybe we do not make a colapsible, better yet to do the same thing as with the NDF. List them in brackets and small font beside the IF. EkoGraf (talk) 17:57, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

That would be SILF and SIF. EkoGraf (talk) 18:03, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

I am thinking of cutting down the Aleppo battle article a bit. Mainly to remove reports of individual non-notable incidents that happened on a daily basis. This would be most of the SANA reports. I wouldn't remove all of the SANA reports. I would leave notable claims like capture of territory or killing of major rebel leaders. But reports of simple clashes or raids I would remove. Do you agree? EkoGraf (talk) 20:37, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

For a battle that has been a stalemate for long time, the article is definitely too long. I agree that non-notable incidents should be removed.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 15:42, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Forced abortions are well sourced and a human rights violation. I hope you will allow more balance to this article by allowing some criticism. I would hate to have to add a NPOV tag to this section of the article. Glennconti (talk) 16:18, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Hey! Happy new year :) Would you mind taking a look at my latest FAC? — ΛΧΣ^{21 Call me Hahc21} 16:49, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

I wouldn't trust that claim because we got multiple reports confirming hundreds of dead. EkoGraf (talk) 16:10, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your edits and contributions on Religion in China article. I agree that given the majority of these statistics are already in the Demographics section, there is no need for such extensive content in the lede. However, I kept a brief mentioning of it in the lede (a sentence); hopefully the anonymous user won't restore the whole thing again.--Thomasettaei (talk) 19:28, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Would appreciate comments from neutral editor on inclusion for gripe site section at Talk:Optical_Express. Thanks Hardlygone (talk) 11:52, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi,

Would you change Yemen and Somalia to the orange color now since they are not major wars?Thanks.Derek Bergquist  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.192.188.203 (talk) 18:33, 27 January 2014 (UTC) 

It's that time again! Starting on March 1, there will be another GAN Backlog Drive! There will be several changes compared to previous drives:

• This drive will introduce a new component to it; a point system. In a nutshell, older nominations are worth more points than newer nominations. The top 3 participants who have the points will be awarded the Golden, Silver, or Bronze Wikipedia Puzzle Piece Trophy, respectively.
• Unlike the December 2013 Backlog Drive, earning an additional barnstar if you reached your goal has been removed.
• The allowance to have insufficient reviews has been lowered to 2 before being disqualified.
• An exception to the rule that all reviews must be completed before the deadline has been created.

Also, something that I thought I would share with all of you is that we raised $20.88 (USD) for the WMF in the December 2013 drive. It may not sound like a lot but considering that that was raised just because we reviewed articles, I would say that's pretty good! With that success, pledges can be made for the upcoming drive if you wish.

More info regarding the drive and full descriptions regarding the changes to this drive can be found on the the drive page. If you have any questions, feel free to leave a message on the drive talk page.

I look forward to your participation and hope that because of it, some day the backlog will be gone!

--Dom497

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:58, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Panam2014 made a move request here. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 13:34, 25 February 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panam2014 (talk • contribs)

The March 2014 GAN Backlog Drive has begun and will end on April 1, 2014! Sent by Dom497 on behalf of MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:01, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Gah, you're right. Changing now. Thanks for the note. -- Fuzheado | Talk 21:47, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello again! Your map of Russia was in an article by the Washington Post! That's awesome! Here's the Press Barnstar! a> monochrome_monitor.exe/ 14:17, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Is there a way to move the article back to "unrest" instead of "unrests"? I hope it is possible because the current title is grammatically incorrect somehow. The reason for this was a disruptive move by User:Qjahid that made it hard to move back, and before i made a technical request, another user moved it to "uprising" as a compromise. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 23:26, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Colleague, I have at earlier times noticed and remarked on your sound vision on our article ‘Syrian Civil War’, but this time I’m displeased at your stance on ‘Talk:Siege of Homs’ on 22May2014. Can the fact that some word (‘siege’) is being (vaguely) used in some film review be decisive for the naming of an encyclopedia article? Should it be in the case of Homs 2011–2014? Should any vague use of the word ‘siege’ in relation to Homs decide over the naming of an encyclopedia article? Should any calling a ‘siege’ what obviously is no ‘siege’ decide over the naming of an encyclopedia article so as to reinforce such misunderstanding? How does Wikipedia have to react on editors who say they “oppose” a (motivated) title correction but bring forward no argument for their opposition? (See also my comments on that page: ‘Talk:Siege of Homs’.) --Corriebertus (talk) 16:12, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Oh,i really didn't realize that.Alhanuty (talk) 02:40, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Colleague, on 12June you wrote in some Discussion section: “TL;DR…”. What was too long? After which standards? What did you not read? Most of all: what does that all contribute to the discussion pursued in that section? --Corriebertus (talk) 08:05, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Colleague, on 12June in this Discussion you accused me of making a personal attack. A glance at Wikipedia:No personal attacks and Wikipedia:No personal attacks#What is considered to be a personal attack? tells me that ‘personal attack’ is a subjective qualification, having to to with ‘not constructive discussion’, ‘not helping to make a point’, deterring users from working on Wikipedia, etc. Could you please inform me, what you considered to be my personal attack, and why? --Corriebertus (talk) 08:18, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Your opinion would be appreciated on a discussion an editor has requested (rather at length I would say) here ‘Talk:Syrian Civil War#Problems and errors in our presentation of events April–May2011 in Daraa, Homs, Baniyas’. EkoGraf (talk) 15:28, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, that was very poorly handled by the closing Administrator. The SECOND more recent Move Request was closed, and from the msg's I'm getting, most of us thought the issue was closed, especially since (disruptive) user Ezzex had tried in a 3rd Section to bring it up again and it had been squashed. That's what happens when a TP is not archived often enough - I certainly was no longer looking for any new RM. Oh, well.

The matter at hand is, we have a technical military operation article (aka Barbarossa, Citadel, Battle of Adrianopolis, etc.) that has been hijacked for a wider article on the never-ending Arab-Jew conflict. Is it feasible to open up a strictly military article on Operation Protective Edge now, move the pertinent technical aspects away from the newly re-titled article, and also allow this article to get into the more detailed military aspects (type of weapons, battle statistics, etc.) - or will some Wiki lawyer try to squash it and/or incorporate the material back into the Gaza Conflict 2014 article? I don't want to go to the effort if the usual reactionaries go hoo-ha over it. Thanks. HammerFilmFan (talk) 16:31, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Media coverage of the 2014 Israel–Gaza conflict, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://tokyoroseinlalaland.blogspot.com/2014/07/gaza-media-coverage-criticisms.html.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 13:48, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi. I have reverted your edit for the reasons given here. Kingsindian (talk) 14:53, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Hey, Future, how's it going! I was wondering if you could help me with Sleeping Dogs (video game) since I really need help with it. Ever since I joined Wiki I have been trying to tackle the article alone but I can't seem to do it by myself wit the amount of experience I have. Is there any way you could help me take it to GA? I know you usually only edit biography related articles, but this one is rated B class so it should be an easy thing for both of us. What do you think? Thanks for everything in advance, URDNEXT (talk) 13:06, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Please expand Northern Iraq offensive (August 2014) as you see fit. Thanks! EkoGraf (talk) 14:58, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello everyone! Hope you've all been having a great summer!

TheQ Editor recently proposed the idea of having another Backlog Drive in either September/October or November/December of this year. For those of you who have participated in the past two drives you know I was the one who organized them, however, come September, this will be my most important year in school so I will not be able to coordinate this drive (if it happens). TheQ Editor has volunteered to be a coordinator for the drive. If any of you would like to co-coordinator, please notify TheQ Editor on his talk page.

If you would be interested in participating in a Backlog Drive sometime before the end of this year, please notify TheQ Editor. Also, make sure to specify what month(s) work best for you.

At the time this message was sent out, the backlog was at 520 nominations. Since May, the backlog has been steadily increasing and we are currently near an all time high. Even though the backlog will not disappear over one drive, this drive can lead to several others which will (hopefully) lead to the day where there is no longer a backlog.

As always, the more participants, the better, and everyone is encouraged to participate!

Sent by Dom497--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:52, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

here, cheers. Thanks for all the edits. In ictu oculi (talk) 15:33, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. See [10]

Let me apologize for my gruffness at the Talk:Jesus page, and for the AN3. I should have just asked you to discuss, rather than pushing the issue. Fearofreprisal (talk) 03:33, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

I made some changes in the casualties section of the infobox to cut down a bit on the info and make it more presentable and readable. Hope it looks OK now? EkoGraf (talk) 21:56, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Dear friend, I noticed that you made this edit on article Jewish insurgency in Palestine. I would like to mention that the topic on insurgency timeline was discussed with no consensus, and eventually one user forced his opinion as me and some other guys refused to edit-war him. The point is that the Jewish insurgency is dated by literature to 1944-1947 (or 1945-1947, when Haganah joined [11]), while some attempted to picture that several violent incidents between the Jewish underground and the British forces in the final months of the Arab Revolt in Mandatory Palestine (1936-1939) should be "linked" with the 1944-47 insurgency, "as if" it was one prolonged event of struggle from 1939 all the way to 1944 and to 1947. I strongly object this WP:OR opinion, and especially i object it since it was introduced with no sourcing. Please notice that the timeline is sourced and it says 1945-47, and NOT 1939-47. Please self-revert per WP:GF.GreyShark (dibra) 23:12, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Dear user, you input is required on the question whether adding Israel as 5th belligerent to Syrian Civil War maps is legitimate, due to you previous participation on Syrian map module in June 2013. Please discuss it at talk:Syrian Civil War#Adding Israel as belligerent on Syrian Civil War maps.GreyShark (dibra) 09:02, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

This is a dishonest and non neutral comment and inappropriate canvassing. The discussion is not to ad Israel as 5th belligerent to Syrian Civil War maps, but to show that in a map showing the "Current military situation in Syria" Israel is occupying the Golan heights. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 13:05, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

As a courtesy I'm not blocking you for your 1RR violation, but please remember that Iraqi insurgency (2011–present) has a 1RR per 24 hours restriction. Dougweller (talk) 21:01, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Done. Check out the new lead and talk page. EkoGraf (talk) 15:03, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.  Dougweller (talk) 08:48, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Dear Future Trillionaire,

we are students from Germany and we saw your world map including the different colours depending on the level of conflict.We also saw, that you have updated the version every time, something has changed. Our questions is, if you have done this manually or if you´ve got a database for example a csv.?So if you have a database in the background we want to ask if it is possible, that we can use this csv. for our university project?That would be really great.

An early reply will oblic :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.196.158.103 (talk) 13:29, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Jesus
Thank you, Jimmy, for quality articles such as Jesus and The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, avoiding clutter and contradiction, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:26, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

A year ago, you were the 703rd recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:33, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi. I note you were the reviewer when Jill Valentine was last listed as a good article nominee. I agree with your decision to fail the article at that time, however, after having made over 150 edits to the article (including removing the overwhelming majority of the sources you listed as un-reliabel), I now believe it meets GA standards, and have re-nominated it. Don't feel obligated, but I just thought i'd let you know I have addressed your concerns and have re-nominated the article, should you wish to review it again. Have a nice day. Freikorp (talk) 07:06, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Could I get an opinion on this Talk:Vietnam War#US casualties in the infobox? Thanks! EkoGraf (talk) 16:20, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:58, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Just wanted to let you know. Despite the rename proposal going through with a 100% consensus, editor RightCowLeftCoast has jumped in again within a day of the discussion being closed and the article renamed and has requested the article name be returned to before and plus merge the 2015-present article into the 2001 one. Your arguments and opinion from before would be appreciated once again at the talk page. Cheers! EkoGraf (talk) 20:51, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

See Talk:Ghouta_chemical_attack#Removal_of_user_created_map_under_WP:OR Mnnlaxer (talk) 20:13, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing my reference formats. I've been using the same templates for years, as you can tell. It's time I get with the program. Thanks again. Jonathan Tweet (talk) 03:40, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Cities and towns in the war in Iraq and the Levant". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 19 July 2015.

The request for formal mediation concerning Cities and towns in the war in Iraq and the Levant, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

Please see the talk section for 'China'.

I will add the additional international perspective that amplifies the credibility of the earlier reference. The section as it stands makes the point that China is making strides in defense, but regional and considerable powers such as Japan have already reacted to Chinese mil advances. The perspective of Australia et al could also be added. Church of the Rain (talk) 04:05, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Reall sorry for the late reply. I didn't see your message until now, somehow missed your notification. Now. Thank you for your praise, this subject has always been something I am interested in and have always researched it, since high school and all through university. Its not that much depressing to me. Probably because I always had a realistic view of the world around us thanks to the death of my father in the Battle for Vukovar in 1991. Some would call me a pessimist, but I'm simply a realist. Cheers! EkoGraf (talk) 20:16, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

You seem to think so? Do you have evidence? I try to stick with acknowledged experts, and I've never heard of Licona. I like that he can't take Matthew 27 literally, and I'd support you citing him in a Christian section, but what's your evidence that we should cite him in the historical section? Thanks in advance. Jonathan Tweet (talk) 04:26, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

I guess I need to ask the same thing about Ludemann and Habermas. And why Erhman is taken to represent scholarship at large on the messiah issue. Andy maybe why you cite Ehrman when he agrees with you (probably secretly said he was the Messiah) and not when he disagrees (no resurrection). Jonathan Tweet (talk) 13:20, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

See Talk:Jesus for my comments on these changes. Jonathan Tweet (talk) 16:42, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:50, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

I'm sure you honestly see the Gospels section as neutral, and I'm not asking you to change your opinion. I am asking you to abide by good WP practices, which is not to remove a POV tag when it's under discussion. Thanks. Jonathan Tweet (talk) 15:36, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

I appreciate your input on my suggestions. I assume that, this being an article documenting an ongoing current event of high importance, any changes of the scale proposed above would require a broad consensus in order to be implemented. Would you be interested in collaborating on creating a template for splitting/removal of contents, to be posted to the forums or article talk page for discussion? Please PM me regarding this. Helmut von Moltke (talk) 04:21, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Your username is interesting!! PlanetStar 07:28, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Let's hope we can finally reach consensus. Jonathan Tweet (talk) 16:04, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

The issue regarding some citation tags are resolved now. It's been a year since you initiated its reassessment, and the article has seen lot of changes since then. Please do the needful ASAP. Thank you. Yashthepunisher (talk) 09:58, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi FutureTrillionaire, I work on the Wikimedia Blog for the WMF and would like to ask you a few questions about The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion before its 10th anniversary this weekend. I'd appreciate replies asap because I'll be on a plane tomorrow, and either I or my colleague Joe will have very little time to write this up—I apologize for the late notice. :-)

Dear FutureTrillionaire! Can you help us draw a map of the Urals to the global Wiki-Ural competition? About Ural (general means): Ural (region) (Ural Federal District + Ural economic region + Ural geographical region:Ural Mountains:Russia+Kazakhstan). — Best Regards, Niklitov (talk) 22:47, 5 October 2016 (UTC) (Member of Wikimedia RU)

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge and Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like South East Asia, Japan/China or India etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. At some stage we hope to run some contests to benefit Asian content, a destubathon perhaps, aimed at reducing the stub count would be a good place to start, based on the current Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon which has produced near 200 articles in just three days. If you would like to see this happening for Asia, and see potential in this attracting more interest and editors for the country/countries you work on please sign up and being contributing to the challenge! This is a way we can target every country of Asia, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 02:04, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello, FutureTrillionaire. 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)

Hi you have made certain edits in China article regarding its religion. Please don't forget to put religious stats in the infobox and it must be in sync with the pie chart. Make necessary changes which are required in the "religious section" of the China article.--Anandmoorti (talk) 17:42, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator.Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:21, 19 February 2017 (UTC)