User talk:Garycompugeek: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→ArbCom 2017 election voter message: new section Tag: |
|||
| (22 intermediate revisions by 13 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Armitage wants to see you before you flatline. |
Armitage wants to see you before you flatline. |
||
{{Archive box|[[User talk:Garycompugeek/Archive 1 Feb08-Jun09|Archive 1 Feb08-Jun09]] |
{{Archive box|[[User talk:Garycompugeek/Archive 1 Feb08-Jun09|Archive 1 Feb08-Jun09]] |
||
[[User talk:Garycompugeek/Archive 2 Jun09-Jun10|Archive 2 Jun09-Jun10]]}} |
[[User talk:Garycompugeek/Archive 2 Jun09-Jun10|Archive 2 Jun09-Jun10]] [[User talk:Garycompugeek/Archive 3 Jun10-Jun12|Archive 3 Jun10-Jun12]]}} |
||
== |
== [[WP:ACE2015|ArbCom elections are now open!]] == |
||
Hi,<br> |
|||
[[File:Redaktor Wikipedia 600px.png|right|130px]] |
|||
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current [[WP:ACE2015|Arbitration Committee election]]. The [[WP:ARBCOM|Arbitration Committee]] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia [[WP:RFAR|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 [[WP:BAN|site bans]], [[WP:TBAN|topic bans]], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The [[WP:ARBPOL|arbitration policy]] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to [[WP:ACE2015/C|review the candidates' statements]] and submit your choices on [[Special:SecurePoll/vote/398|the voting page]]. For the Election committee, [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 13:48, 24 November 2015 (UTC) |
|||
Hello. Your account has been granted the "<tt>reviewer<tt>" userright, allowing you to [[WP:Reviewing|review other users' edits]] on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a [[WP:Pending changes|two-month trial]] scheduled to end 15 August 2010. |
|||
<!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Mdann52/list&oldid=692203726 --> |
|||
== [[WP:ACE2016|ArbCom Elections 2016]]: Voting now open! == |
|||
Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not [[wp:autoconfirmed|autoconfirmed]] to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only [[Special:StablePages|a small number of articles]], similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at [[Special:OldReviewedPages]]. |
|||
{{Ivmbox|Hello, Garycompugeek. Voting in the '''[[WP:ACE2016|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. |
|||
When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious [[WP:VAND|vandalism]] or [[WP:BLP|BLP violations]], and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see [[Wikipedia:Reviewing process]]). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found [[WP:Pending changes|here]]. |
|||
The [[WP:ARBCOM|Arbitration Committee]] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the [[Wikipedia:Arbitration|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 [[WP:BAN|site bans]], [[WP:TBAN|topic bans]], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Policy|arbitration policy]] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. |
|||
If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. <!-- Template:Reviewer-notice --> [[User:Courcelles|Courcelles]] ([[User talk:Courcelles|talk]]) 01:48, 17 June 2010 (UTC) |
|||
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2016/Candidates|the candidates' statements]] and submit your choices on '''[[Special:SecurePoll/vote/399|the voting page]]'''. [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC) |
|||
== Wikipedia_is_not_a_pop_up_book == |
|||
|Scale of justice 2.svg|imagesize=40px}} |
|||
<!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52 bot@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Mdann52_bot/spamlist/29&oldid=750609337 --> |
|||
== RC Patrol-related Proposals in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey == |
|||
{{talkback|Talk:Rorschach_test#Wikipedia_is_not_a_pop_up_book}} |
|||
[[File:Magic Wand Icon 229981 Color Flipped.svg|thumb]] |
|||
==The Four Lords of the Diamond Series== |
|||
<big>'''''Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!'''''</big> |
|||
I've made some sweeping changes, taking the small synopsis for the three books shown and replacing/expanding them. Just giving you the heads up on that, one Chalker fan to another. [[User:Alexandria177|Alexandria177]] ([[User talk:Alexandria177|talk]]) 13:53, 12 September 2010 (UTC) |
|||
This is a '''one-time-only''' message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the '''[[meta:2016 Community Wishlist Survey|{{nowrap|2016 Community Wishlist Survey}}]]''' that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for: |
|||
I added some references, some sections, and added the "Medusa: A Tiger by the Tail" entry. [[User:Alexandria177|Alexandria177]] ([[User talk:Alexandria177|talk]]) 16:03, 12 September 2010 (UTC) |
|||
::I got your message, thank you! [[User:Alexandria177|Alexandria177]] ([[User talk:Alexandria177|talk]]) <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|undated]] comment added 23:57, 24 May 2011 (UTC).</span><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
# [[meta:2016 Community Wishlist Survey/Categories/Moderation tools#Adjust number of entries and days at Last unpatrolled|Adjust number of entries and days at Last unpatrolled]] |
|||
# [[meta:2016 Community Wishlist Survey/Categories/Editing#Editor-focused central editing dashboard|Editor-focused central editing dashboard]] |
|||
# [[meta:2016 Community Wishlist Survey/Categories/Watchlists#"Hide trusted users" checkbox option on watchlists and related/recent changes (RC) pages|"Hide trusted users" checkbox option on watchlists and related/recent changes (RC) pages]] |
|||
# [[meta:2016 Community Wishlist Survey/Categories/Mobile and apps#Real-Time Recent Changes App for Android|Real-Time Recent Changes App for Android]] |
|||
# [[meta:2016 Community Wishlist Survey/Categories/Moderation tools#Shortcut for patrollers to last changes list|Shortcut for patrollers to last changes list]] |
|||
Further, there are [[meta:2016 Community Wishlist Survey/Categories/Watchlists|more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general]] that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis) |
|||
==Removal of current literature== |
|||
Your removal of current literature and replacing it with stuff from 20 years ago is completely inappropriate. [[User:Jmh649|<span style="color:#0000f1">'''Doc James'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Jmh649|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Jmh649|contribs]] · [[Special:EmailUser/Jmh649|email]]) 15:42, 11 June 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:Of course I disagree and feel your removal of three paragraphs from the intro is completely inappropriate for reasons already explained on [[talk:circumcision]]. [[User:Garycompugeek|Garycompugeek]] ([[User talk:Garycompugeek#top|talk]]) 16:11, 11 June 2011 (UTC) |
|||
Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016. |
|||
==AN/EW== |
|||
FYI, I've reported your recent edit warring [[WP:AN/EW#User:Garycompugeek reported by Jakew (talk) (Result: )|here]]. [[User:Jakew|Jakew]] ([[User talk:Jakew|talk]]) 20:52, 14 June 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:I haven't reverted 3 times in a 24 hour period and I have been talking on the discussion page AND Doc's changes do not have consensus. Curious why you didn't report him also? [[User:Garycompugeek|Garycompugeek]] ([[User talk:Garycompugeek#top|talk]]) 21:06, 14 June 2011 (UTC) |
|||
<small>Note: You received this message because you have transcluded {{tl|User wikipedia/RC Patrol|}} (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.</small> |
|||
== Notification of [[WP:AN/EW]] report == |
|||
Best regards, {{u|Stevietheman}} — <small>Delivered: 01:10, 8 December 2016 (UTC)</small> |
|||
<!--Sent per Special:PermaLink/753582870#Request_for_mass_message_delivery:_December_6.2C_2016 at WT:MMS--> |
|||
<!-- Message sent by User:Xaosflux@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Stevietheman/RCPatrollers_list&oldid=753533319 --> |
|||
== ArbCom 2017 election voter message == |
|||
[[File:Ambox content.png|left|link=]] Hello '''Garycompugeek''',<br /> |
|||
This is an automated friendly notification to inform you that you have been reported for '''''Violation of the [[Wikipedia:Edit warring|Edit warring]] policy''''' at the [[WP:AN/EW#User:Garycompugeek_reported_by_User:Jakew_.28Result:_.29|Administrators' noticeboard]].<br /> |
|||
If you feel that this report has been made in error, please reply as soon as possible on the [[WP:AN/EW#User:Garycompugeek_reported_by_User:Jakew_.28Result:_.29|noticeboard]]. However, before contesting an Edit warring report, please review the respective policies to ensure you are not in violation of them. |
|||
~ [[User:NekoBot|NekoBot]] <small>([[User_Talk:NekoBot|MeowTalk]])</small> 20:59, 14 June 2011 (UTC) <small>(False positive? [[User:NekoBot#False_Positive|Report it!]])</small> <!-- Template: User:NekoBot/3RRAttn --> |
|||
{{Ivmbox|Hello, Garycompugeek. Voting in the '''[[WP:ACE2017|2017 Arbitration Committee elections]]''' is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. |
|||
If I am in violation so is Doc James. I am trying to discuss on the talk page and have no wish to edit war. [[User:Garycompugeek|Garycompugeek]] ([[User talk:Garycompugeek#top|talk]]) 23:18, 14 June 2011 (UTC) |
|||
The [[WP:ARBCOM|Arbitration Committee]] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the [[Wikipedia:Arbitration|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 [[WP:BAN|site bans]], [[WP:TBAN|topic bans]], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Policy|arbitration policy]] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. |
|||
== current lead == |
|||
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2017/Candidates|the candidates]] and submit your choices on the '''[[Special:SecurePoll/vote/400|voting page]]'''. [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC) |
|||
Do you agree that the current [[circumcision]] article seems to be promoting the surgery? It looks non-neutral to me [[User:PassaMethod|<font color="grey" face="Tahoma">Pass a Method</font>]] [[User talk:PassaMethod|<font color="orange" face="papyrus">talk</font>]] 12:18, 16 June 2011 (UTC) |
|||
|Scale of justice 2.svg|imagesize=40px}} |
|||
:Agreed. Its very one sided at the moment and pretty much reads that you should be circumcised to prevent HIV. First of all you practice safe sex to prevent HIV or any STD. These figures only apply to the third world contries/areas that do not practice safe sex. In essence and restrospectively we are suggesting that you just have to get circumcised and you will no longer have to practice safe sex. Completely false for you can easily get HIV/STDs and still still be circumcised its just a slightly lower percentage because a circumcised penis has less surface area. [[User:Garycompugeek|Garycompugeek]] ([[User talk:Garycompugeek#top|talk]]) 20:57, 16 June 2011 (UTC) |
|||
<!-- Message sent by User:Xaosflux@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2017/Coordination/MMS/04&oldid=813406758 --> |
|||
::Which editors are mainly responsible for this biased pro-circumcision editing? Is it only Jakew and Jmh649 or are there others involved? [[User:PassaMethod|<font color="grey" face="Tahoma">Pass a Method</font>]] [[User talk:PassaMethod|<font color="orange" face="papyrus">talk</font>]] 08:44, 17 June 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:::Typically Jake, Avi, and Jayjg. Looks like Doc is the new front man. [[User:Garycompugeek|Garycompugeek]] ([[User talk:Garycompugeek#top|talk]]) 16:42, 17 June 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::::Jayjg said [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:PassaMethod&diff=434680031&oldid=434618585#Templating_regular_editors here] that he made only 4 edits to that article in 9 months aftr i sent him and Jakew a [[WP:OWNER]] warning. But i agree with you about Doc who contrary to admin conduct appears to engage in [[WP:Tag team]]. Do you think i should send Doc a [[WP:OWNER]] warning notice? [[User:PassaMethod|<font color="grey" face="Tahoma">Pass a Method</font>]] [[User talk:PassaMethod|<font color="orange" face="papyrus">talk</font>]] 16:54, 17 June 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Doubt it will do any good. I've work with Doc before and he understands wikipedia's rules. He will not back off as long as he has a couple of admins backing him, however he will usually listen to reason. Balance must be restored. The problem with circumcision is that both sides firmly believe they are in the right so our job is try to maintain a proper balance of the pros and cons of the issue, to highlight the controversy, and give a brief synopsis of prevalent medical opinion. The intro is no longer conveying that and consequently very unbalanced. [[User:Garycompugeek|Garycompugeek]] ([[User talk:Garycompugeek#top|talk]]) 19:31, 17 June 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:::::: Maybe we can try an RfC to revert it to the old version. The old version was more balanced. Plus, the current refs negate the fact that the HIV prevention is limited to an African study. |
|||
:::::: There are enough editors that disagree with the current tag-team, as you can see by the amount of talk-page complaints and amount of reverts. I think it has gone on for long enough. Jakew, Avi and Jayjg have been edit-warring on this page since at least 2008. I think our final option will be to go for a dispute resolution or arbitration. What you think? [[User:PassaMethod|<font color="grey" face="Tahoma">Pass a Method</font>]] [[User talk:PassaMethod|<font color="orange" face="papyrus">talk</font>]] 20:09, 17 June 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::Yes but I hope it doesn't have to go that torturous route. Perhaps logic and reason will prevail. Do what you must to restore balance my wiki friend. I will be watching and help out when I can. [[User:Garycompugeek|Garycompugeek]] ([[User talk:Garycompugeek#top|talk]]) 20:49, 17 June 2011 (UTC) |
|||
As state I am happy to review the evidence. I have no personal opinion on this topic and am only here to write an encyclopedia based on the best available resource. A couple things I did not like about the previous version 1) long quotes 2) references to old sources (things have changes since a number of RCTs have come out from a scientific perspective) ie. it is now more than a religious practice. Finally I am not fond of people removing a summary of the most current scientific position on a topic. This is against consensus developed in many other areas. So if we can agree to use reviews / major governmental positions published in the last 5 years we can hopefully work together. I have no problem with using papers from the sociology literature to cover aspects of the controversy. [[User:Jmh649|<span style="color:#0000f1">'''Doc James'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Jmh649|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Jmh649|contribs]] · [[Special:EmailUser/Jmh649|email]]) 22:18, 23 June 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:Even though we are at odds over one issue, I have enjoyed working with you in the past and hope we can come to an agreeable solution. [[User:Garycompugeek|Garycompugeek]] ([[User talk:Garycompugeek#top|talk]]) 16:34, 25 June 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::Agree. Same here. Hopefully we can find a way to accommodate my two main concerns. I have no concerns with adding a few lines regarding controversy just wish that it is supported by better / more current sources. Will look when I have time unless you beat me to it.[[User:Jmh649|<span style="color:#0000f1">'''Doc James'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Jmh649|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Jmh649|contribs]] · [[Special:EmailUser/Jmh649|email]]) 20:11, 25 June 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:::Looks like you have turned into a [[WP:SPA]]. You would do well branching out.[[User:Jmh649|<span style="color:#0000f1">'''Doc James'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Jmh649|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Jmh649|contribs]] · [[Special:EmailUser/Jmh649|email]]) 21:12, 5 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::::and you have turned into an edit warrior who apparently doesn't accept wikipedia's definition of a paragraph. I have limited time these days to edit and what I do with my time is my business, construe it how you will. [[User:Garycompugeek|Garycompugeek]] ([[User talk:Garycompugeek#top|talk]]) 14:35, 6 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Sorry to see that you take this as a threatening posture. All the best. [[User:Jmh649|<span style="color:#0000f1">'''Doc James'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Jmh649|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Jmh649|contribs]] · [[Special:EmailUser/Jmh649|email]]) 02:31, 9 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::::::Insults and threats typically rub me the wrong way. Edit warring over a paragragh mark. Very disappointing Doc. [[User:Garycompugeek|Garycompugeek]] ([[User talk:Garycompugeek#top|talk]]) 19:32, 11 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::Yes I too agree that it is disappointing.[[User:Jmh649|<span style="color:#0000f1">'''Doc James'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Jmh649|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Jmh649|contribs]] · [[Special:EmailUser/Jmh649|email]]) 20:36, 11 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
Hello, It appear the article has been hi-jacked by pro-surgery people, lets get together sometime and find some consensus in restoring it to a NPOV.[[Special:Contributions/174.28.162.94|174.28.162.94]] ([[User talk:174.28.162.94|talk]]) 06:55, 20 January 2012 (UTC) |
|||
:Yes that has been the case since [[user:Jakew|Jakew]] got involved. His edit count of [[Circumcision]] is many times that of all other editors combined. If you plan on sticking around and helping, create a user page so we don't refer to you as the anon ip. All help is appreciated but try to be neutral and familiarize yourself with our [[wp:LOP|rules and policies]]. There are two sides to the story and both must be well documented. [[User:Garycompugeek|Garycompugeek]] ([[User talk:Garycompugeek#top|talk]]) 14:37, 20 January 2012 (UTC) |
|||
Hello, I'm behind you . I've been editing under 174.28.162.94 . I was planning on just fixing stuff anonymously. Apparently, the three Puppeteers feel they own the article and revert anything based on their minority, but heavily active consensus. I'd like to get that article fixed with clear presentations of both sides of the issue. [[User:Gsonnenf|Gsonnenf]] ([[User talk:Gsonnenf|talk]]) 15:54, 20 January 2012 (UTC) |
|||
Hi Gary, I just thought you should know that Jayjg has tried to recruit his friends to defend his articles in the past. http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2007-December/087744.html . I think its a bit unfair that other editors are kept out by a close circle of regular editors who defend each other. [[User:Gsonnenf|Gsonnenf]] ([[User talk:Gsonnenf|talk]]) 17:04, 22 January 2012 (UTC) |
|||
== Muhammad == |
|||
Thanks! Too lazy to do it myself. [[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] ([[User talk:Johnbod|talk]]) 21:27, 10 November 2011 (UTC) |
|||
==Restoring misinformation== |
|||
Gary, your [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Circumcision&curid=8718425&diff=466864152&oldid=466775422 edit] cited a source that says: |
|||
:The strong evidence that male circumcision substantially reduces the risk of HIV infection is summarized below. [...] In summary, randomized clinical trials of almost 11,000 men found that male circumcision was associated with 58% reduction in HIV infection risk in the “intent-to-treat” analysis and 65% reduction in HIV infection risk in the “as-treated” analysis. These findings were perfectly consistent with the observational study data. |
|||
And presented this as: |
|||
:There is limited evidence that circumcision reduces the risk of [[HIV]] infection in heterosexual men in populations that are at high risk by approximately 2%. |
|||
Please don't restore misinformation again. It arguably counts as vandalism per [[Wikipedia:VAND#Sneaky vandalism]], but in any case your edit was harmful to the encyclopaedia. [[User:Jakew|Jakew]] ([[User talk:Jakew|talk]]) 16:23, 20 December 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::I would support this as a warning. People who change content to what the ref "does not say" is vandalism. I come across a great deal of it. People change words to their opposites, people change numbers, etc... [[User:Jmh649|<span style="color:#0000f1">'''Doc James'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Jmh649|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Jmh649|contribs]] · [[Special:EmailUser/Jmh649|email]]) 20:41, 20 December 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:::Your both guilty of applying your own personal [[WP:OR]]/[[WP:SYNTH]] to a number of edits on [[Circumcision]], please stop vandalizing the encyclopedia. [[User:Garycompugeek|Garycompugeek]] ([[User talk:Garycompugeek#top|talk]]) 16:34, 22 December 2011 (UTC) |
|||
{{talkback|Jakew}} |
|||
Gary, a lot of people are grateful for your work here, including me. [[Special:Contributions/50.116.32.33|50.116.32.33]] ([[User talk:50.116.32.33|talk]]) 20:53, 21 February 2012 (UTC) |
|||
== February 2012 == |
|||
[[Image:Stop hand nuvola.svg|30px|left|alt=|link=]] Your recent editing history at [[:Circumcision]] shows that you are currently engaged in an [[WP:EDITWAR|edit war]]. '''Being involved in an edit war can result in you being [[WP:BLOCK|blocked from editing]]'''—especially if you violate the [[WP:3RR|three-revert rule]], which states that an editor must not perform more than three [[WP:REVERT|reverts]] on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. |
|||
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's [[WP:TALK|talk page]] to work toward making a version that represents [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant [[Wikipedia:Noticeboards|noticeboard]] or seek [[Wikipedia:Dispute resolution|dispute resolution]]. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary [[Wikipedia:Protection policy|page protection]]. <!-- Template:uw-3rr --> [[User:Jayjg|Jayjg ]]<sup><small><font color="DarkGreen">[[User_talk:Jayjg|(talk)]]</font></small></sup> 16:55, 22 February 2012 (UTC) |
|||
:And specifically, you've already violated [[WP:3RR]]. Please revert yourself before you are blocked. [[User:Jayjg|Jayjg ]]<sup><small><font color="DarkGreen">[[User_talk:Jayjg|(talk)]]</font></small></sup> 16:55, 22 February 2012 (UTC) |
|||
== Compromise 3 == |
|||
What do you think of compromise 3, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Circumcision#Compromise_3 here] [[User:PassaMethod|<font color="grey" face="Tahoma">Pass a Method</font>]] [[User talk:PassaMethod|<font color="orange" face="papyrus">talk</font>]] 16:55, 22 February 2012 (UTC) |
|||
:I can live with it. [[User:Garycompugeek|Garycompugeek]] ([[User talk:Garycompugeek#top|talk]]) 17:09, 22 February 2012 (UTC) |
|||
==FYI== |
|||
Please see [[WP:AN/3RR#User:Garycompugeek reported by Jakew (talk) (Result: )]] [[User:Jakew|Jakew]] ([[User talk:Jakew|talk]]) 16:58, 22 February 2012 (UTC) |
|||
<div class="user-block"> [[Image:Stop x nuvola with clock.svg|40px|left|alt=|link=]] You have been '''[[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked]]''' from editing for a period of '''24 hours''' for your [[WP:DE|disruption]] caused by [[WP:EW|edit warring]] and violation of the [[Wikipedia:Three-revert rule|three-revert rule]] at [[:Circumcision]]. During a dispute, you should first try to [[Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines|discuss controversial changes]] and seek [[WP:CON|consensus]]. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek [[WP:DR|dispute resolution]], and in some cases it may be appropriate to request [[WP:PP|page protection]]. If you would like to be unblocked, you may [[Wikipedia:Appealing a block|appeal this block]] by adding the text <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include the "tlx" argument. -->{{tlx|unblock|2=reason=''Your reason here ~~~~''}} below this notice, but you should read the [[Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks|guide to appealing blocks]] first. --[[User:Crazycomputers|Chris]] [[User talk:Crazycomputers|(talk)]] 17:03, 22 February 2012 (UTC)</div>{{z10}}<!-- Template:uw-3block --> |
|||
{{unblock reviewed | 1=Sorry didn't realize that was a 4th in 24hrs. I self reverted before you blocked me.[[User:Garycompugeek|Garycompugeek]] ([[User talk:Garycompugeek#top|talk]]) 17:06, 22 February 2012 (UTC) | decline=*All* edit warring is prohibited. The 3RR rule is not an "allowance" that you can use up and then stop at the brink, but is just a "bright line" offence that gets an immediate block. To be unblocked, you will need to commit to not edit-warring at all, not just to avoiding 3RR -- [[User:Boing! said Zebedee|Boing! said Zebedee]] ([[User talk:Boing! said Zebedee|talk]]) 18:36, 22 February 2012 (UTC)}} |
|||
:By my count, you were at a 5th before self-reverting, though I am not going to decline your request since I was the one who placed the block. --[[User:Crazycomputers|Chris]] [[User talk:Crazycomputers|(talk)]] 17:10, 22 February 2012 (UTC) |
|||
::Thank you Chris. Very embarassing. Never been blocked before. Happy polly logies. [[User:Garycompugeek|Garycompugeek]] ([[User talk:Garycompugeek#top|talk]]) 17:13, 22 February 2012 (UTC) |
|||
::Strictly speaking, it was the 6th ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Circumcision&diff=prev&oldid=478253484 this] was also a revert of an earlier edit joining the two paragraphs). But I didn't include it in my report. [[User:Jakew|Jakew]] ([[User talk:Jakew|talk]]) 17:14, 22 February 2012 (UTC) |
|||
:::Jakew, you were right to omit that one -- since he made two reverts that were consecutive with no edits in between by another editor, those two diffs together count as one revert. --[[User:Crazycomputers|Chris]] [[User talk:Crazycomputers|(talk)]] 17:19, 22 February 2012 (UTC) |
|||
::::Thanks, Chris: I hadn't noticed that. It is 5 after all, then. [[User:Jakew|Jakew]] ([[User talk:Jakew|talk]]) 17:30, 22 February 2012 (UTC) |
|||
:::Good because I was only adding a space to make a separate paragraph hardly a another revert. [[User:Garycompugeek|Garycompugeek]] ([[User talk:Garycompugeek#top|talk]]) 17:20, 22 February 2012 (UTC) |
|||
::::It's a revert if you undo a previous edit (the edits in question being to join two paragraphs). Minor, but still a revert. And you must admit, you reverted it a number of times: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Circumcision&diff=472283017&oldid=472273046] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Circumcision&diff=471899559&oldid=471889983] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Circumcision&diff=465460109&oldid=465195990] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Circumcision&diff=443224007&oldid=443148586] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Circumcision&diff=442591466&oldid=442578623] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Circumcision&diff=442562242&oldid=442372811] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Circumcision&diff=441012124&oldid=441002799] [[User:Jakew|Jakew]] ([[User talk:Jakew|talk]]) 17:27, 22 February 2012 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Of course I admit it. That's why I self reverted before the block. [[User:Garycompugeek|Garycompugeek]] ([[User talk:Garycompugeek#top|talk]]) 18:04, 22 February 2012 (UTC) |
|||
:{{ec}} For reference, here is my evidence: |
|||
:*[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Circumcision&diff=478118736&oldid=478072721 First revert] |
|||
:*[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Circumcision&diff=478122436&oldid=478120398 Second revert] |
|||
:*[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Circumcision&diff=478125385&oldid=478123961 Third revert] |
|||
:*[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Circumcision&diff=478253095&oldid=478252143 Fourth revert] |
|||
:*[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Circumcision&diff=478272303&oldid=478266285 Fifth revert] |
|||
:*[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Circumcision&diff=478274650&oldid=478272303 Self-revert] |
|||
:--[[User:Crazycomputers|Chris]] [[User talk:Crazycomputers|(talk)]] 17:17, 22 February 2012 (UTC) |
|||
{{unblock reviewed|reason=I have no wish to edit war. I reverted twice yesterday and twice today but did not realize it was within the 24hr period. I have been using clear edit summaries and the article's talk page. [[User:Garycompugeek|Garycompugeek]] ([[User talk:Garycompugeek#top|talk]]) 20:18, 22 February 2012 (UTC) |
|||
|decline=Once again, 3RR is not a license to edit war as long as it's fewer than 4 reverts per day. [[User:MaxSem|Max Semenik]] ([[User talk:MaxSem|talk]]) 20:40, 22 February 2012 (UTC) |
|||
}} |
|||
Yes, you are missing the point that edit-warring is nothing to do with 24-hour periods, and any multiple reverts can be considered edit-warring. If you make a change and someone reverts it, you need to then discuss it on the Talk page and not re-revert unless you can get a consensus - there is no entitlement to revert twice. -- [[User:Boing! said Zebedee|Boing! said Zebedee]] ([[User talk:Boing! said Zebedee|talk]]) 20:44, 22 February 2012 (UTC) |
|||
::Tell that to [[User:Avi]] or does being a [[WP:Crat]] exempt his behavior? At least I was using the talk page. [[User:Garycompugeek|Garycompugeek]] ([[User talk:Garycompugeek#top|talk]]) 21:04, 22 February 2012 (UTC) |
|||
:::Gary, I believed you made an error when you returned that information, as the accepted procedure is to keep the page as it was prior to the contentious addition or deletion when an RfC is in place, IIRC. You changed it back, and I thought you did so because you forgot that you yourself made the original change in early February, and I pointed that out in the summary of my second correction. When you continued to revert, I realized you were actually edit-warring, and so immediately disengaged. You had made reversions both prior and subsequent to my edits, and it is pretty clear that you ''were'' actively edit warring, unlike pretty much anyone else in that list. Having extra wiki responsibilities gives one absolutely no extra absolution from following policy and guideline. -- [[User:Avraham|Avi]] ([[User talk:Avraham|talk]]) 20:16, 27 February 2012 (UTC) |
|||
::::Avi are you trying to say that you thought my addition to the medical summary section in February was actually the to the lead of the article? [[User:Garycompugeek|Garycompugeek]] ([[User talk:Garycompugeek#top|talk]]) 14:38, 29 February 2012 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Yes, and it seems I was mistaken. -- [[User:Avraham|Avi]] ([[User talk:Avraham|talk]]) 14:45, 4 March 2012 (UTC) |
|||
I am astonished that TWO uninvolved administrators would block a veteran editor who has ''never'' been blocked before, even after a self revert and apology before the block, plus a simple history check would have verified that I was in fact correct as Avi grudgingly admits after the fact and the block. [[User:Garycompugeek|Garycompugeek]] ([[User talk:Garycompugeek#top|talk]]) 14:56, 7 March 2012 (UTC) |
|||
:Where do you see any grudge? -- [[User:Avraham|Avi]] ([[User talk:Avraham|talk]]) 18:19, 7 March 2012 (UTC) |
|||
::As a adverb Avi. Grudgingly definition = done, given, or allowed unwillingly, reluctantly, or sparingly. As in your actions contributed to me being blocked and your admission certainly would have been nice before the block or when I asked to be unblocked. [[User:Garycompugeek|Garycompugeek]] ([[User talk:Garycompugeek#top|talk]]) 18:43, 7 March 2012 (UTC) |
|||
:::But at the time of the block I was under a misconception, as you demonstrated earlier, and under that misconception, you ''were'' edit warring. By the time you corrected me you were already unblocked. As much as I have wished many times in my life to change the past, I am unable to do that :) -- [[User:Avraham|Avi]] ([[User talk:Avraham|talk]]) 18:59, 7 March 2012 (UTC) |
|||
::::Ok Avi, apology accepted. Since we agree I did not add the KNMG statement and records clearly demonstrate Lizardwizard did 10 months ago, would you be so kind as to add it back to the lead of the article? There was never any consensus to remove it, which was what started the latest round of edit warring and page protection plus the RFC also clearly demonstrates no consensus for Jake's proposed change. [[User:Garycompugeek|Garycompugeek]] ([[User talk:Garycompugeek#top|talk]]) 20:26, 7 March 2012 (UTC) |
|||
:::Personally, as I've said on the talk page, I don't believe the KNMG statement belongs in the lede of the article, and would be a POV violation of UNDUE if it was, so please forgive me if I don't add it back unless we all reach a consensus on the talk page that it is appropriate. -- [[User:Avraham|Avi]] ([[User talk:Avraham|talk]]) 17:05, 9 March 2012 (UTC) |
|||
::::Your assertion of [[WP:UNDUE]] holds little weight Avi. The policy statement is clear and concise and correctly summerizes the prevalent world medical opinion regarding circumcision. To not unclude it would violate [[WP:NPOV]] policies. I assume you feel the AMA policy statement it replaced was UNDUE also, a statement we have had in the lead for years until a more current one could be found to take its place. Where were your objections 10 months ago when Lizardwizard added it? [[User:Garycompugeek|Garycompugeek]] ([[User talk:Garycompugeek#top|talk]]) 17:49, 9 March 2012 (UTC) |
|||
== User:Jakew's website? == |
|||
Hi Gary. I've been aware of the single-minded dedication since the early 90s. I got totally shot down in WP:COIN. The person there felt that although there may be COI, since he was not using his own articles, so what. The 'so what' part I feel he is missing, is that so few can actually edit the article. One singular point of view does not contribute to NPOV. [[User:Tftobin|Tftobin]] ([[User talk:Tftobin|talk]]) 19:25, 24 February 2012 (UTC) |
|||
I don't understand what the WP:COIN editor was missing, but you can't get blood from a stone. [[User:Tftobin|Tftobin]] ([[User talk:Tftobin|talk]]) 19:25, 24 February 2012 (UTC) |
|||
So, what's [[User:Jakew]]'s website? You've referred to it a few times, but I haven't seen a link to it. Thanks! [[User:Banaticus|Banaticus]] ([[User talk:Banaticus|talk]]) 00:28, 27 February 2012 (UTC) |
|||
:Hi Banaticus. [[User:Jakew]]'s website is [http://www.circs.org/index.php/Home_page]. [[User:Garycompugeek|Garycompugeek]] ([[User talk:Garycompugeek#top|talk]]) 19:00, 27 February 2012 (UTC) |
|||
==Substing User Talk Templates== |
|||
Hi there! When using certain templates on talk pages, such as welcome templates and user warnings, don't forget to [[Wikipedia:Template substitution|substitute with text]] by adding '''subst:''' to the template tag. For example, use {{tlsf|welcome}} instead of {{tlf|welcome}}. This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template. If you need any further help on the matter just ask me on my [[User_Talk:Addshore|talk page]]. Cheers.'''[[User:Addshore|<span style="color:black;">·Add§hore·</span>]]''' <sup>[[User_talk:Addshore|<span style="color:black;">T<small>alk</small> T<small>o</small> M<small>e</small>!</span>]]</sup></span> 01:44, 6 March 2012 (UTC) |
|||
==No worries== |
|||
I respect your work here. No harm done and look forwards to seeing you expand your attention to other areas. :-) --[[User:Jmh649|<span style="color:#0000f1">'''Doc James'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Jmh649|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Jmh649|contribs]] · [[Special:EmailUser/Jmh649|email]]) 01:22, 20 April 2012 (UTC) |
|||
== Dispute resolution for [[Circumcision]] == |
|||
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at [[Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard]] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "[[Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard#Circumcision|Circumcision]]". Thank you. [[User:Tftobin|Tftobin]] ([[User talk:Tftobin|talk]]) 19:00, 28 April 2012 (UTC) |
|||
==FYI== |
|||
Please see [[WP:AN/EW#User:Garycompugeek reported by Jakew (talk) (Result: )]] [[User:Jakew|Jakew]] ([[User talk:Jakew|talk]]) 17:42, 8 May 2012 (UTC) |
|||
:Jake you are starting to develop a disturbing pattern of harassment. [[User:Garycompugeek|Garycompugeek]] ([[User talk:Garycompugeek#top|talk]]) 12:52, 9 May 2012 (UTC) |
|||
== A barnstar for you! == |
|||
{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;" |
|||
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | [[File:Original Barnstar Hires.png|100px]] |
|||
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Original Barnstar''' |
|||
|- |
|||
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | You have reverted a lot of vandalism lately. Thanks for all your contributions [[User:Pass a Method|<font color="grey" face="Tahoma">Pass a Method</font>]] [[User talk:PassaMethod|<font color="grey" face="papyrus">talk</font>]] 03:35, 16 May 2012 (UTC) |
|||
|} |
|||
Thanks! [[User:Garycompugeek|Garycompugeek]] ([[User talk:Garycompugeek#top|talk]]) 13:24, 16 May 2012 (UTC) |
|||
==Talkback== |
|||
{{talkback|Zad68|ts=15:02, 24 May 2012 (UTC)}} |
|||
<code>[[User:Zad68|<span style="color:#D2691E">'''Zad'''</span>]][[User_Talk:Zad68|<span style="color:#206060">''68''</span>]]</code> 15:02, 24 May 2012 (UTC) |
|||
== Nandi Siegfried is a South African Cochrane Collaboration Using reviews to inform health care decisions in poor countries == |
|||
Nandi Siegfried is a South African public health specialist and has been an active member of the Cochrane Collaboration since 1998. She served as co-director of the South African Cochrane Centre until March 2004. Nandi is the Deputy Co-ordinating Editor of the Cochrane HIV/AIDS Review Group (CRG) and in partnership with the CRG established the successful African HIV/AIDS Mentoring Programme which aims to increase the number of HIV/AIDS reviews relevant to the African region. |
|||
'''Presentations: Using reviews to inform health care decisions in poor countries: achievements and challenges''' |
|||
//////////////////////// |
|||
Nandi Siegfried is a South African Cochrane Collaboration Using reviews to inform health care decisions in poor countries |
|||
Male circumcision for prevention of heterosexual acquisition of HIV in men |
|||
Nandi Siegfried1,*, |
|||
Martie Muller2, |
|||
Jonathan J Deeks3, |
|||
Jimmy Volmink4 |
|||
Editorial Group: Cochrane HIV/AIDS Group |
|||
Published Online: 7 OCT 2009 |
|||
Nandi Siegfried is a South African public health specialist and has been an active member of the Cochrane Collaboration since 1998. She served as co-director of the South African Cochrane Centre until March 2004. Nandi is the Deputy Co-ordinating Editor of the Cochrane HIV/AIDS Review Group (CRG) and in partnership with the CRG established the successful African HIV/AIDS Mentoring Programme which aims to increase the number of HIV/AIDS reviews relevant to the African region. |
|||
Presentations: Using reviews to inform health care decisions in poor countries: achievements and challenges |
|||
Martie Muller, Statistician and associated member of the SA Cochrane Centre, Medical Research Council, Cape Town and senior scientist at the Institute for Maritime Technology, Simon’s Town. Areas of interest: biostatistics, meta-analysis, diagnostic test accuracy, functional data analysis, spatio-temporal modeling. |
|||
Jimmy Volmink is the Head of the Department of Primary Care at the University of Cape Town, South Africa. He previously worked as the Director of Research and Analysis at the Global Health Council in Washington DC, USA and as the director of the South African Cochrane Centre located in Cape Town, South Africa. He serves on committees and advisory boards of various international organizations, including the Cochrane Collaboration and the World Health Organization. He is an editor of the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group and has authored numerous journal articles and book chapters. |
|||
Jon Deeks is Professor of Biostatistics, Director of the Birmingham Clinical Trials Unit, and leads the Biostatistics, Evidence Synthesis and Test Evaluation Research Group in the School of Health and Population Sciences, where he also holds a position of Joint Research Lead. |
|||
In the case of circumcision trials it was not possible to blind personnel delivering the intervention or the participants. It is possible, however, to blind the assessors, and we therefore only rated the blinding of assessors as adequate, inadequate, or unclear. Participants and study personnel could not be blinded to the allocated interventions (circumcision or not). It is unclear whether this lack of blinding could influence the outcome (HIV status) via, for example, sexual risk behaviour or differentiated treatment by study personnel. |
|||
Attrition was high in all three trials. We rated the risk of bias due to incomplete outcome reporting as moderate in all three trials, as acceptable statistical survival analysis techniques were used to estimate HIV event distribution over time by accumulating for staggered enrolment and incomplete discrete follow-up. |
|||
Other potential threats to validity |
|||
All three trials were stopped early due to data-dependent processes (formal-stopping rules), and this may have introduced a risk of bias to the studies. |
|||
Feedback from Elizabeth Royle, 8 May 2009 |
|||
Summary |
|||
In the What's New section the authors make the following statement: "Update of previous review of observational studies; now contains data from three large RCTs. Evidence conclusive and no further updates required." |
|||
I appreciate that this review may provide very clear results, but would question the validity of the assertion that no further updates are required. My understanding is that large effect sizes tended to ameliorate over time as more trials are performed and incorporated into meta-analyses. This may be due to an initial publication bias of trials with positive results followed by publication of those with less clear or negative results over time. At any rate, in this case, whether the effect size is reduced through the updating process or becomes even more significant, I do believe that the review authors have an obligation to perform updates on a regular basis in order to ensure that their review incorporates all the available data, and continues to provide the best evidential basis for future healthcare policies in this area. |
|||
[[Fearless]] [[Special:Contributions/190.200.132.100|190.200.132.100]] ([[User talk:190.200.132.100|talk]]) 00:52, 28 May 2012 (UTC) |
|||
[[Fearless]] [[Special:Contributions/190.200.132.100|190.200.132.100]] ([[User talk:190.200.132.100|talk]]) 00:52, 28 May 2012 (UTC) |
|||
== Highlight == |
|||
To make the votes easier to count ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#1_revert_proposal_for_circumcision here]), can you please highlight your support with a prefer like this "'''support'''"? Thanks [[User:Pass a Method|<font color="grey" face="Tahoma">Pass a Method</font>]] [[User talk:PassaMethod|<font color="grey" face="papyrus">talk</font>]] 17:12, 29 May 2012 (UTC) |
|||
Latest revision as of 21:08, 3 December 2017
Armitage wants to see you before you flatline.
|
Archive 1 Feb08-Jun09 Archive 2 Jun09-Jun10 Archive 3 Jun10-Jun12 |
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) 13:48, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
[edit]
Hello, Garycompugeek. 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)
RC Patrol-related Proposals in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey
[edit]
Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!
This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:
- Adjust number of entries and days at Last unpatrolled
- Editor-focused central editing dashboard
- "Hide trusted users" checkbox option on watchlists and related/recent changes (RC) pages
- Real-Time Recent Changes App for Android
- Shortcut for patrollers to last changes list
Further, there are more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis)
Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.
Note: You received this message because you have transcluded {{User wikipedia/RC Patrol}} (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.
Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 01:10, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
[edit]Hello, Garycompugeek. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)