User talk:.js

Hi!

My name is Victor and I'm a storyteller and video producer for the Wikimedia Foundation. I'll be looking to capture stories about Wikimedians at Wikimania in London in a week. Here is an example of the kind of thing that I'm aiming to do. I saw that you're attending Wikimania and I was wondering if you might have some time to talk about what do you on Wikimedia projects. Your video work is interesting! Anyway let me know if you are interested, I'll be at Wikimania from the 6th-10th of August and would need maybe 30 minutes of your time. I can answer any questions you may have. I’m best reached at vgrigas(at)wikimedia.org

Thanks!

Vgrigas (talk) 15:51, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JS,
There is a proposal at 5 pillars that I would appreciate your comments on. It's at: Real world style consensus.
Thanks, Scott P. (talk) 00:24, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Articles containing video clips, which you contributed to, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. — xaosflux ^Talk 04:12, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Peace for Paris fairuse 99px.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:58, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Peace for Paris fairuse 99px.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:35, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Reactions to the November 2015 Paris attacks, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tagesschau. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:19, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Songs about Wikipedia/Wiki Bells, a page you created, has been tagged for deletion, as it meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion; specifically, it is vandalism.

You are welcome to contribute content that complies with our content policies and any applicable inclusion guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article.

Thank you. Dat Guy^Talk_Contribs 15:01, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators. Katie^talk 21:09, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is some test abuse to demonstrate a concept, so there — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.155.53.170 (talk) 22:20, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I know very little about templates and wiki-markup. Just enough to get me by. Do you know if there is a way too keep your message at the very bottom, so that any further messages appear just above it? If that is at all possible, I think it would cause more people to see it even after they post their own inquiry. Zaereth (talk) 02:10, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Very welcome :) I don't know of such a possibility, you only could ask an admin to block the page I guess. :( --.js 02:17, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well it was just a thought. I'll check with Materialscientist, because if anyone knows it's probable him. I think blocking would be extreme, but more people are likely to read the bottom of the page than the top. Thanks again, and have a good day. Zaereth (talk) 02:22, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think of this? via User talk:Henrik/Editnotice. --.js 02:37, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good to me. Thanks again. Zaereth (talk) 02:40, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi .js. I reverted your edits to Template:Centralized discussion/core, and I wanted to let you know why. The text that originally read "Discussions" was actually header text for the list of discussions below it. It wasn't originally intended to be a link, so it's not "dead" in any way. Also, I noticed the link you replaced it with was WP:WikiProject Democracy. That page has a lot of good links to valuable discussion venues on Wikipedia—the only problem I have is the name of the project. While I do agree that Wikipedia has democratic structures and that it would serve us well to enhance them, we ought to keep in mind that we do still have a policy that says "Wikipedia is not a democracy".

Our primary goal is to build an encyclopedia. For most issues, like how a sentence should read, or where to place an image, informal discussions on talk pages are the most suitable. For the bigger and broader issues, like who should be on the next Arbitration Committee, or whether the Wikimedia community trusts a recently appointed board member, voting and formal discussion processes are more suitable. It might confuse editors (newer ones especially) to find a contradiction between the NOT#DEM policy and the fact that we have a link that says "Democracy" in such a highly-visible template as WP:CENT, which is why I don't think it's the best choice. Mz7 (talk) 05:19, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For this... wow... 13 years old edit :) Anthere (talk)

reverted your comments at afd since someone already closed it while you were writing it, sorry mate --allthefoxes ^(Talk) 04:31, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. I think it is missing the SOPA vote present on the 300 voters list? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:54, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:Television. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia:Television redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. BDD (talk) 16:06, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Founder's seat. Since you had some involvement with the Founder's seat redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. . * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:45, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:16, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Alice Wiegand. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 February 21#Alice Wiegand until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 12:27, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Former Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees members has been nominated for upmerging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. RevelationDirect (talk) 00:38, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]