User talk:Muriel Gottrop~enwiki

This user may have left Wikipedia. Muriel Gottrop~enwiki has not edited Wikipedia since November 5, 2007. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Wikipédia
Eu contribuo para a Wikipédia lusófona.

I support Portuguese Wikipedia with my contributions.

It's more likely that I read any messages if you leave them here.

Tertia Aemilia

I wrote an article on Aemilia Paulla, wife of Scipio Africanus. You wrote an article on Cornelia Africana with some nice pictures. I am looking for pictures like this I could add to my article or a possible new article on Cornelia Major. Do you know of any such pictures that might work on these articles? I'll watch for your answer here. --Doug ^talk 14:40, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A flower...

Please use edit summaries

Hello. Please be courteous to other editors and use edit summaries when updating articles. The Mathbot tool shows your usage of edit summaries to be very low:

Edit summary usage for Muriel Gottrop: 47% for major edits and 0% for minor edits. Based on the last 150 major and 150 minor edits in the article namespace.

Using edit summaries helps other editors quickly understand your edits, which is especially useful when you make changes to articles that are on others' watchlists. Thanks and happy editing! --Kralizec! (talk) 16:28, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dont you have nothing better to do? Like... writting articles??? muriel@pt 14:22, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Muriel, the page you listed won't let me save the text. If you could, please post this to that page.

The correct title for Eugenie is "Princess Eugenie of York", never Eugenie, Princess of York. The latter would be correct only for a divorced wife of a 'Prince of York'.

The children of royal peers are always titled Prince/ss [name] of title. Prince William's title is Prince William of Wales, as confirmed in the court circular and by Buckingham Palace and Clarence House.

Thus, before becoming queen, Queen Victoria was Princess Victorian Alexandrina of Kent. The current queen before her father became king was Princess Elizabeth of York. The current Prince of Wales before his mother became queen was given the courtesy title Prince Charles of Edinburgh by King George VI. That is also why the wife of Prince Michael of Kent is Princess Michael of Kent, never ever Michael, Princess of Kent. She would be Michael, Princess of Kent if she and her husband divorced, though she might with the Queen's permission use her own name instead of 'Michael'. FearÉIREANN\^(caint) 17:55, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, FearÉIREANN\^(caint) 17:55, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FA Review of Charles Ives

Charles Ives has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. MrPrada 08:44, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Happy birthday, Amiga!

Hello, Muriel! Hopefully I've got in first this time to wish you a very happy birthday. I hope life is treating you well in Portugal or wherever you are now, and wish you many happy returns for many years to come.

An old fan, David Cannon 02:08, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

British monarchs' family tree

Hello, Muriel. Just letting you know of 'two' errors on the 'family tree' map (under Victoria & descendants). 1- Elizabeth II succeeded the throne in 1952 (was crowned in 1953); 2- Victoria, princess royal married Frederick III of Germany (not his father, William I). Cheers. GoodDay 22:11, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, 'Henry Stuart, Prince of Wales' was born in 1594 & some of the 'accession dates' are mistakenly 'coronation dates'. GoodDay 22:15, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of List of young people in history

List of young people in history, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that List of young people in history satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of young people in history and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of List of young people in history during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. J-stan ^Talk_Contribs 02:48, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: The young people

I have nothing against you, or for that matter anyone on the project. I saw a list of indiscriminate info, and thought it didn't belong on Wikipedia. I think this isn't a good reason to leave, but I respect your right to leave. Please don't take the deletion of your page personally. J-ſtan!^Talk_Contribs 23:29, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, in that case, welcome back! Second of all, only the list was deleted. The information is still on Wikipedia, just not collected together in that way. If you wanted to stop the deletion, you should have voiced your opinion. J-ſtan!^Talk_Contribs 02:37, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question

If I understand your question correctly, the answer is yes. Image copyright templates can be removed or changed by any editor, including the uploader. Accurate tags should not be removed, of course. If you want me to look at any particular image, I'd be happy to do so. Good luck! -- But|seriously|folks 01:28, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You could instead tag them with {{Db-author}}, and they would probably get deleted, as long as they're not obviously useful. I looked at your upload log, though, and there's only one image, and it's not a family tree. Were they uploaded under a different ID, or have they been moved to commons maybe? -- But|seriously|folks 12:10, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I see them in your contribs. Interesting question. The charts are definitely useful but have some major deficiencies: They are in a format that cannot be easily edited, they lack citations and may include OR and they contain erroneous information. We're not allowed to withdraw licenses, especially where others have uploaded modified versions. I recommend that you nominate them for deletion (all in one nom), explain that you are the original creator and set forth the deficiencies. I would certainly support deletion under the circumstances. Please let me know what you think of this idea. -- But|seriously|folks 05:57, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hi

Been playing with English monarchs family tree ... what do you think? Victuallers (talk) 18:40, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Family trees

What font did you use to do the family tree? And what font size? I am creating a huge project linking the royal families of Europe based on your diagrams. Also what are your sources? User talk:thelivinglegend —Preceding comment was added at 17:07, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Image:NunoAlvaresPereira.jpg

A tag has been placed on Image:NunoAlvaresPereira.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I8 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is available as a bit-for-bit identical copy on the Wikimedia Commons under the same name, or all references to the image on Wikipedia have been updated to point to the title used at Commons.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:NunoAlvaresPereira.jpg|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Sdrtirs (talk) 01:34, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with Image:JoaoVIPortugal.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:JoaoVIPortugal.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 13:24, 10 April 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sdrtirs (talk) 13:24, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with Image:NunoAlvaresPereira.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:NunoAlvaresPereira.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 14:59, 10 April 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sdrtirs (talk) 14:59, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with Image:Tavora.png

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:Tavora.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 16:02, 10 April 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sdrtirs (talk) 16:02, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Anne-genevieve.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Anne-genevieve.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 07:16, 22 April 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Kelly ^hi! 07:16, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with Image:Rainytree3.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:Rainytree3.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 21:32, 26 August 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sdrtirs (talk) 21:32, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with Image:Myoffice.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:Myoffice.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 21:34, 26 August 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sdrtirs (talk) 21:34, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File:LouisFrancisIConti.jpg missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:LouisFrancisIConti.jpg is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers. If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:14, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:LouisFrancisIConti.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:LouisFrancisIConti.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 14:35, 8 July 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:35, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:France-1stCarolingians.png missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:France-1stCarolingians.png is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:13, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:France-2ndCapet.png missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:France-2ndCapet.png is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:18, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:France-3rdValois.png missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:France-3rdValois.png is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:22, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kings of England family tree listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Kings of England family tree. Since you had some involvement with the Kings of England family tree redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Bill Oversixty (talk) 15:09, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Family trees software?

Hi, what software do you use t make your family trees? Thanks. --O'Dea (talk) 01:59, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Dacia

Hi, I saw that you collaborated on articles related to Dacia and thought this could be of interest: WikiProject Dacia is looking for supporters, editors and collaborators for creating and better organizing information in articles related to Dacia and the history of Daco-Getae. If interested, PLEASE provide your support on the proposal page. Thanks!!--Codrinb (talk) 04:05, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:French-monarchsBourbon.png needs authorship information

Dear uploader:

The media file you uploaded as File:French-monarchsBourbon.png appears to be missing information as to its authorship (and or source), or if you did provide such information, it is confusing for others trying to make use of the image.

It would be appreciated if you would consider updating the file description page, to make the authorship of the media clearer.

Although some images may not need author information in obvious cases, (such where an applicable source is provided), authorship information aids users of the image, and helps ensure that appropriate credit is given (a requirement of some licenses).

If you created this media yourself, please consider explicitly including your user name, for which: {{subst:usernameexpand|Muriel Gottrop~enwiki}} will produce an appropriate expansion,
or use the {{own}} template.

If this is an old image, for which the authorship is unknown or impossible to determine, please indicate this on the file description page.

If you have any questions please see Help:File page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:51, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of List of drowning victims

The article List of drowning victims has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable intersection of topics. Several irrelevant examples, no sources.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 21:05, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Counts of Leuven

Counts of Leuven, which you created, has been nominated to be moved. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments here. Moonraker (talk) 06:02, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Roman usurper for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Roman usurper is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roman usurper until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. ReformedArsenal (talk) 19:30, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of Roman usurpers for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Roman usurpers is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Roman usurpers until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. ReformedArsenal (talk) 19:32, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of change

Hello. You are receiving this message because of a recent change to the administrator policy that alters what you were told at the time of your desysopping. The effect of the change is that you will not longer be able to request restoration of the tools because of your prior inactivity. You have until December 30, 2012 to request restoration or else the policy will prevent you from doing so in the future; you would need to seek a new WP:RFA. Until December 30, you can file a request at WP:BN for review by the crats. Thank you. MBisanz ^talk 04:22, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(delivered by mabdul 22:15, 3 December 2012 (UTC))[reply]

Nomination of List of unusual deaths for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of unusual deaths is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of unusual deaths (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Horologium (talk) 04:30, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of unusual deaths for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of unusual deaths is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of unusual deaths (3rd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. p b p 00:29, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of unusual deaths for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of unusual deaths is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of unusual deaths (7th nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 16:26, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of unusual deaths for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of unusual deaths is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of unusual deaths (7th nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 17:32, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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 Muriel Gottrop. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Muriel Gottrop~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

01:41, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed

This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: Special:GlobalRenameRequest. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk)

16:39, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 08:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]