User talk:Jdickinson

Your account will be renamed

Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Jdickinson. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Jdickinson~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours,
Keegan Peterzell
Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation

00:49, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:02, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the 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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Christina Kokubo edit

I noticed your edit on Christina Kokubo with the accompanying edit summary, "Assuming American English, the period should be inside the quotation marks."

As I read MOS:INOROUT, Wikipedia's Manual of Style indicates that in this situation the period should follow the closing quotation marks. Perhaps I am missing something.

On a related topic, are quotation marks needed there? I don't think we would usually put a theater's name in quotation marks. Eddie Blick (talk) 01:26, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good call, I think! At a glance, it seems you are correct. I'll look more closely and act accordingly. I've made well-received changes before, on the basis of whether American or British English dominates a particular article; but I'm not prepared to cite chapter and verse, and I think this guideline probably trumps any of that.

Likewise the theater name issue. I confess I did not think at that level. I saw that punctuation and got tunnel vision!

Thank you for taking the time to get in touch.

Jdickinson (talk) 03:35, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Keeping up with style matters can be difficult. I appreciate your interest in improving Wikipedia. Eddie Blick (talk) 23:56, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the 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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

National varieties of English

Hello. In a recent edit to the page Simple Minds, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, India, or Pakistan, use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the first author of the article used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 11:57, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your thoughtful explanation!

I understand (and mean to respect) deferring to national varieties of English. But is “oriented” good practice in both dialects? Is it not British English? (What I’ve looked at tells me that “orientated” is “generally considered an error in American English" but doesn’t tell me how “oriented” rates in British English. This doesn’t mean the latter is acceptable, I guess, so there’s a leap or at least a step of faith there.) If so—if “oriented” does work in both British and American English—then why not opt for it, as the more compact common denominator?

Another way of thinking about it is: Did I really change from one version of English to another? (And maybe I did! I stand corrected!) Or did I change from one British English option to another, which happens to also be American English?

Is it a usage issue? Is “oriented” valid British English, but just weird somehow? Infrequently heard?

Thanks.

Jdickinson (talk) 18:32, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]