Yilku1

Election results

Please stop reverting without proper explanation. How are the results that you removed and I restored wrong? They aren't. Display name 99 (talk) 17:03, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

@Display name 99: In those states voters didn't vote for a candidate for president, they voted for presidential electors individually, so not all presidential electors got the same amount of votes. Nixon and McGovern weren't candidates, the presidential electors were. Yilku1 (talk) 17:55, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

The intent of the people voting for the electors was to vote for certain candidates for president. From your version, it is almost impossible to tell how much success a presidential candidate had a given contest, and that is what readers will most want to see. If you want to add information about the success of electors, go ahead. I'd have no issue with you adding an extra table. But don't override the information already there. Display name 99 (talk) 18:21, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

@Display name 99: There is the infobox already showing the most voted presidential elector results. Yilku1 (talk) 18:37, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

It fails to give a complete tally. If I want to see the percentage of votes that a third party candidate won, I cannot see it from the infobox. Display name 99 (talk) 19:35, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

@Display name 99: You can add the percentages in the tables then, dont' delete everything. Yilku1 (talk) 20:12, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

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) 01:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Heads up re your changes to US presidential election articles

I noticed that you recently added an "Electoral College selection" to a number of US presidential election articles. The information in the added section isn't sourced, and I couldn't find any evidence for it. If you can't add a citation I'm going to revert these. Regards, Dan Bloch (talk) 23:02, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

@Danbloch: The source is in the election article for the presidential election in Georgia. Yilku1 (talk) 23:06, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

You're misreading the sources. The electors are described as at large or representing individual districts, but the voting for each of them is statewide. Note how the number of votes for all the Democratic electors is about 455,000 and for all the Republican electors is about 273,000. Dan Bloch (talk) 23:34, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

That's from 1960 United States presidential election in Georgia. I'm not sure what article you had in mind. Dan Bloch (talk) 23:37, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

@Danbloch: It's hard to tell because there is literally no info about individual elector votes on the internet. The only place where they are shown is if the state Official Register is digitalized. Yilku1 (talk) 23:52, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

If you look at [1], one of the sources from 1960 United States presidential election in Georgia, you can see that the votes for individual representatives range from 24,000 to 80,000, while the combined number of votes in each of the races for electors is about 728,000. This is pretty clear evidence that the elector votes are statewide.

But even if that weren't the case, inferring that the state is using the congressional district method from vote totals would be WP:OR. Dan Bloch (talk) 00:14, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

@Danbloch: I hadn't noticed that. The only way to be sure is to read the election law from that time, a thing that is almost impossible. Yilku1 (talk) 00:46, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

But that takes us back to where we started. Without a reliable source, Wikipedia shouldn't say that Georgia elections used the congressional district method. Dan Bloch (talk) 01:24, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

List of parks and open spaces in the London Borough of Croydon

Hi. I am just wondering why you changed the units in the table. Was there a problem with the previous format? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:45, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

@MSGJ: Yes. It didn't have metric units. Yilku1 (talk) 13:49, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Okay, fair enough, I understand — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:40, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

By-election maps

Hi, I notice you're removing a lot of maps from by-elections. This got challenged at 2019_Brecon_and_Radnorshire_by-election but you simply reverted the challenge without talking about it. Once you've been bold, and been reverted, it's time to discuss before reverting-the-reversion (that's the start of an edit war). Since opinions clearly differ on this, and a lot of by-election articles do contain maps, may I suggest seeking discussion somewhere appropriate, such as Wikipedia:WikiProject_Politics_of_the_United_Kingdom, before unilaterally deleting any further maps? Elemimele (talk) 16:07, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

@Elemimele: The discussion here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Elections and Referendums#Non-map images in infobox's map section. Yilku1 (talk) 17:27, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Okay, thanks! That's fair enough, I apologise for reverting you at Brecon and Radnorshire. I was ambivalent about the maps; in the cases I checked, hovering on the name of the region brought up the same map anyway. It's helpful for readers to be able to find a map somewhere, but I agree it doesn't have to be in the info-box. Many best wishes! Elemimele (talk) 20:19, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution (second request)

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Maplewashing into Racism in Canada. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 18:14, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

November 2023

Please do not add or change content, as you did at A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. DonIago (talk) 19:22, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

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) 00:42, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Edit summaries ...

... are helpful in situations like this. Ed ^{[talk] [OMT]} 17:47, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

1912 Monegasque general election moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to 1912 Monegasque general election. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:52, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

@Significa liberdade: Do people here even read the articles before saying there are no sources? What is that in the bottom that says "Source: Journal de Monaco". Yilku1 (talk) 13:10, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Yilku1! In the previous message, you'll see that I indicated the articled "needs more sources", not that it doesn't have any sources. This particular article is reliant on a single source. Per the general notability guidelines, articles should be include more than one reliable, secondary source. If you believe the article is ready for the main space, you can submit it through Articles for Creation to have someone else review it. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 15:37, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1912 in Monaco

A tag has been placed on Category:1912 in Monaco indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:00, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:People's Democratic Party of Tajikistan.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:People's Democratic Party of Tajikistan.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:35, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

1955 Monegasque general election moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to 1955 Monegasque general election. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back.  // Timothy :: talk  08:17, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

@TimothyBlue: is this bot? the article LITERALLY has a source, what are you talking about? Yilku1 (talk) 15:52, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 3

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 1998 Vanuatuan general election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page George Wells.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Just wanted to say great work on the election result details for Monaco, the Cook Islands and Vanuatu! Number 57 20:16, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! --Yilku1 (talk) 13:35, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

By the way, I think there is a transposition error in the Chamber results on 2009 Argentine legislative election. I was converting them to {{Election results}} and noticed the total number of votes for parties is 990 higher than the stated total valid votes. If you can find it, I will add the converted table. Cheers, Number 57 01:57, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

@Number 57: the total number of votes for parties is 19,616,701 the same as valid votes. Yilku1 (talk) 02:33, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Ah, I've no idea how it happened, but I had the Broad Front listed twice with 5,900 votes instead of once with 5,900 and once with 4,910. Should those two rows be combined though? Number 57 10:52, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

@Number 57: It is because there are 2 parties that have the same translation. One is the party Frente Grande and the other was Frente Amplio, the name used by the Front for Victory in La Pampa. Yilku1 (talk) 15:02, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

April 2024

Please refrain from adding, removing or changing genres, as you did to Village Green (song), without providing a source or establishing a consensus on the article's talk page first. Genre changes to suit your own point of view are considered disruptive. Thank you. Tkbrett (✉) 12:02, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Category:Election and referendum articles with incomplete results

Hello – I wasn't sure why you were removing this from articles where the invalid votes and/or registered voters figures were missing, but just an FYI as to why I am undoing the removals. Cheers, Number 57 02:02, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

@Number 57: I didn't think of registered voters. Yilku1 (talk) 04:54, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Yilku1. Thank you for your work on 1937 Monegasque general election. Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good day! Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia by writing this article. I have marked the article as reviewed. Have a wonderful and blessed day for you and your family!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 02:51, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Just wanted to say thank you for your continued high volume of work adding more details to election articles! Number 57 23:44, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! Yilku1 (talk) 00:05, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

A goat for you!

Village Green by The Kinks is absolutely a Baroque Pop song and sources confirm this. The guy who keeps reversing your edits did the same thing to me and treats that article like it's his personal property.

Treydaprogdude (talk) 20:20, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Edit on Mireille Laufilitoga

Hi! Wanted to check in about a recent edit you made on Mireille Laufilitoga. Appreciate your cleanup of the infobox there! But the source previously cited there indicates she was reelected in 2022, which you changed. I know it would be preferable to have a secondary source, but this is difficult with the limited media environment on Wallis and Futuna. Do you have a different source to confirm she was not in fact reelected? Thanks! Bookworm-ce (talk) 14:25, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

@Bookworm-ce: Candidate list for the 2022 elections and the 2022 election results. Mireille Laufilitoga was the first candidate of "Ta'ofi kite lelei fakatahi" in Mua and finished 5th place. Yilku1 (talk) 16:12, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Gotcha, thank you for catching! I'll update the lead section to be past tense in that case. Bookworm-ce (talk) 14:08, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to the DCWC!

See a    "developing" or    "least developed" country? Write about it to earn points!

Welcome to the 2024 Developing Countries WikiContest, Yilku1! The contest is now open for submissions. List your work at your submissions page to earn points. If you haven't done so already, please review the following:

• Got open nominations? List them at review requests.
• Looking for a topic to work on? Check out suggested articles and eligible reviews.
• Not sure if your article qualifies? See the guidelines for more information or contact a coordinator for verification.
• New to Wikipedia? Many experienced editors are part of this contest and willing to help; feel free to ask questions about the contest on the talk page.
• Know someone else who might be interested? Sign-ups remain open until 15 July, so don't hesitate to invite other editors!

On behalf of the coordinators, we hope you enjoy participating and wish you good luck! If you have any questions, please leave a message on the contest talk page or ask one of the coordinators: Ixtal (talk · contribs), sawyer777 (talk · contribs), or TechnoSquirrel69 (talk · contribs). (To unsubscribe from these updates, remove yourself from this list.) Sent via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 00:01, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

DCWC August update

The 2024 Developing Countries WikiContest has now been running for a month, and we've already seen some momentous improvement in the quality of many articles about underrepresented subjects! So far, our top-scoring participants are:

• Magentic Manifestations (submissions) – 338 points, mainly from nine good articles. He's a contender for the "most submissions for a single country" specialty award, with nine submissions for India.
• Arconning (submissions) – 305 points, including from six seasonally-appropriate Olympics-related good articles.
• Generalissima (submissions) – 290 points, the bulk from her featured article about Greenlandic interpreter Qalaherriaq and two China-related good articles.
• AirshipJungleman29 (submissions) – 245 points, mostly from the achievement of bringing Genghis Khan to featured status.
• Thebiguglyalien (submissions) – 144 points from three good articles, including two about Kiribati elections, and four reviews of good article nominees.

Looking for ways to climb up the leaderboard yourself? Help out your fellow participants by answering a few review requests, particularly the older entries. Several more nominations needing attention are listed at eligible reviews, and highlighed entries receive a 1.5× multiplier! The coordinators would like to extend a special thanks to Thebiguglyalien (submissions) for his commitment to keeping these review pages up to date.

If you have any questions, please leave a message on the contest talk page or ask one of the coordinators: Ixtal (talk · contribs), sawyer777 (talk · contribs), or TechnoSquirrel69 (talk · contribs). (To unsubscribe from these updates, remove yourself from this list.) Sent via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 14:24, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Gaza genocide

This message of yours that I removed is completely unacceptable, doubly so in a contentious topic. If you weren't before, be aware that the Arab-Israeli conflict is a contentious topic and further disruption like this will result in sanctions. Isabelle Belato ^🏳‍🌈 01:03, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

The caste again protecting their own, thanks for reaffirming what I said. Yilku1 (talk) 01:41, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

August 2024

To enforce an arbitration decision, and for disruptive editing and personal attacks on the page Talk:Gaza genocide, you have been blocked from editing Wikipedia for a period of 72 hours. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions.

If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~}}. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard, I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page. 

Isabelle Belato ^🏳‍🌈 04:35, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

---

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Yilku1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

So now you can't criticise admins, can you tell me which rule is that? Criticising admins is not a personal attack, is not based on race, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, age, religious or political beliefs, disability, ethnicity, or nationality. Answering a comment about admins and adding my comment back because other user removed it is not disruptive editing. Yilku1 (talk) 16:17, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Stuff like "Wikipedia admins are all the same, all white wealthy sub-urban Americans that hate Israel and anything right of Marx" is a bigoted utterance; that you think it isn't is your problem, not ours. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 17:06, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Yilku1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

"that you think it isn't is your problem, not ours" That is why I removed it and posted it again without it. Just like recommened: WP:REMOVEUNCIVIL. But I wasn't benned because that comment. They banned be because I posted my comment criticing admins. Again, what rule says you can't criticise them? Yilku1 (talk) 19:36, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Decline reason:

You are blocked as an arbitration enforcement action. You don't address that in your unblock request. Yamla (talk) 22:00, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Yilku1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

"You don't address that in your unblock request". It says I am blocked "for disruptive editing and personal attacks". Did you even read my first appeal?

"Criticising admins is not a personal attack, is not based on race, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, age, religious or political beliefs, disability, ethnicity, or nationality. Answering a comment about admins and adding my comment back because other user removed it is not disruptive editing."

And if you think it's because the "bigoted utterance", that is why I removed it and posted it again without it. Just like recommened: WP:REMOVEUNCIVIL.

Yilku1 (talk) 22:55, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Decline reason:

I am beginning to think the block is too short. A personal attack does not have to fall into the categories you mention. You seem to think your conduct is fine. I would suggest a different approach for your next unblock request. PhilKnight (talk) 09:57, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Yilku1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

"A personal attack does not have to fall into the categories you mention." Then link the rule that does fall in it.

4 admins and still none showed me what rule says you can't criticise admins. Do we have some Lèse-majesté in the site? Yilku1 (talk) 13:15, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Decline reason:

I'm happy to receive criticism, but not racist attacks nor attacks purely based on your assumptions/speculations/stereotypes about the social status of other users. Good block- and you will quickly lose access to this page should you persist. 331dot (talk) 18:08, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Yilku1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Do you even read what I posted before declining? What is racist or about social status of other users about this?

"All decisions are taken by the same small caste of users everytime, if you try to do something different they will all come help eachother and shut down any opposing views and there is nothing you can't do. They literally did it to my previous comment. It's a big club and you ain't in it."

Again. I ask someone to just LINK THE RULES THAT THIS BREAKS. And before someone comes again WITHOUT READING. The racist quote I posted is not why I was banned. They benned me AFTER I removed the racist quote. Yilku1 (talk) 18:54, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Decline reason:

This is not a WP:GAB-compliant appeal, it's a misuse of the appeal template to continue a conversation. Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:14, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

{{unblock}}

I have voided your unblock request, because your block is over. PhilKnight (talk) 15:02, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

@Isabelle Belato: @Jpgordon: @Yamla: @PhilKnight: @331dot: @Ponyo: I'm again asking for some of you to please tell me what rule does this breaks to get banned for 3 days. --Yilku1 (talk) 00:33, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

I blocked you for edit-warring a WP:NOTFORUM post containing personal attacks to the talk page of a contentious topic. The reason I didn't block for a longer period of time is because you at least didn't repost the bigotry. Isabelle Belato ^🏳‍🌈 00:52, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

DCWC September update

The Developing Countries WikiContest has now been running for two months, and we've seen tremendous improvement in the encyclopedic coverage of several underrepresented areas from a wide range of editors! The coordinators would like to highlght some of the newer faces who have been making notable contributions in the contest, including but by no means limited to:

• Arconning (submissions) – 386 points, with several good articles primarily relating to the Olympics
• Vigilantcosmicpenguin (submissions) – 141 points, who created multiple articles about abortion rights and laws in African countries
• TheNuggeteer (submissions) – 126 points, who has contributed to several articles associated with the Phillippines
• Jaguarnik (submissions) – 125 points, with several good article reviews and an appearance in the In the news section of the Main Page
• Averageuntitleduser (submissions) – 119 points, and has written about several Haitian topics and historical figures.

Only one month remains until the end of the contest, so it's time to make your remaining nominations! Please consider answering some review requests, particularly the older entries, as a way of helping out your fellow participants and moving up the leaderboard. Good luck!

If you have any questions, please leave a message on the contest talk page or ask one of the coordinators: Ixtal (talk · contribs), sawyer777 (talk · contribs), or TechnoSquirrel69 (talk · contribs). (To unsubscribe from these updates, remove yourself from this list.) Sent via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 22:00, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

DCWC closing update

The 2024 Developing Countries WikiContest has come to a close! After a thrilling finish to the event with a slew of submissions on the final day, we have our winners. With 608 points, Thebiguglyalien (submissions) comes in third with his series of Kiribati and Botswanan submissions; BeanieFan11 (submissions) flies into second place at the last second with 771 points after a string of good articles about sportspersons; and after leading for much of contest's three months, Generalissima (submissions) finishes with a whopping 798 points to take home the Gold Belt Buckle. Congratulations to our winners!

In addition to his spot in the top three, BeanieFan11 (submissions) also wins the special awards for submitting under the most countries (44 countries) and for writing the most articles about women (15 Did you know? nominations)! Magentic Manifestations (submissions), after making 16 submissions under the Indian flag—15 of them good articles—receives the awards for most submissions for a single country and most featured or good articles promoted. For their submission of one FAC review, five FLC reviews, and 20 GAN reviews, Simongraham (submissions) wins for most article reviews.

The results of the contest have far exceeded any expectations the coordinators had for it at the beginning: among the submissions to the event were 3 FAs, 10 FLs, 88 GAs, dozens of article reviews of every kind, and more Did you know? submissions than we can count! Regardless of your level of participation, every contestant can be proud to have contributed towards a major step in countering the systemic bias on Wikipedia. Every year, millions of readers and editors around the globe use Wikipedia to educate themselves and communicate with others about parts of the world that often receive less attention than they deserve. Thank you for participating with us in the contest and contributing to this effort. The DCWC will return next year and we look forward to seeing you contribute again! However, before that...

We need your feedback! Join the conversation on the talk page to discuss your reflections on the contest (even if you didn't participate!) and help us make it better.

If you have any questions, please leave a message on the contest talk page or ask one of the coordinators: Ixtal (talk · contribs), sawyer777 (talk · contribs), or TechnoSquirrel69 (talk · contribs). (To unsubscribe from these updates, remove yourself from this list.) Sent via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 19:02, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Botswana Democratic Party.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Botswana Democratic Party.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:15, 1 November 2024 (UTC)