User talk:Bogbumper

Welcome!

Hello, Bogbumper, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! DS (talk) 19:09, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Say! Would you like to become a member of WikiProject Equine? I see you are coming up to speed pretty quick on article editing and made some good contributions. Montanabw^(talk) 02:25, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would second this invitation! It looks like you're picking up the nuances of WP fairly quickly, which can be hard at times. The horse articles need a lot of work, so please feel free to jump in. If you need any help, don't hesitate to ask myself or Montanabw! We usually don't bite... *grin* Dana boomer (talk) 15:11, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much. I'm just a nerdy editor :o) I've joined WikiProject Equine and I'll see where I can help out.Bogbumper (talk) 21:06, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to see you on board! I actually DO bark a lot and bite a little, but its just because I'm anal, not mean. No teeth in the bite. (LOL!) When in doubt, feel free to ask questions on the talk page or to any of us other wikiproject members. Me, Dana and Ealdgyth are probably the most active, but Getwood and Cgoodwin are around a lot too. Montanabw^(talk) 21:57, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reece Shearsmith

It seem like it's a content dispute in Reece Shearsmith. The main issue is his given middle name. It looks to be cited, though not overwhelmingly well. Could you expand the Ancestry.com reference so it points to his entry? Sometimes imdb isn't entirely reliable: their data is contributed as well, and it's not clear how they validate it. Maybe there's another reference you could add too?

It can be difficult working with an anonymous contributor, as this particular editor has appeared at 4 different IP addresses in 6 days of editing—so far. Are you sure Reece's middle name isn't William? —EncMstr (talk) 16:53, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Subscription-based cites are allowed, but obviously not preferred. Some Googling came up with this which says it's Wayne, and these ([1] [2] [3]) which say it's William. Perhaps the best course is to document both. —EncMstr (talk) 21:18, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MOS thoughts

Hi Bogbumper. Just wanted to let you know that the wikigods at the moment are sending bots through all the articles and generally taking out most wikilinks to dates. As a rule, the only time to wikilink dates is if for some reason that date is particularly significant in and of itself, or when you need a date to translate into different international formats, such as 16 June 2008 versus June 16, 2008. I can never remember how it works, but wikilinking month day and year somehow interacts with people's wikipedia prefs to format the date automatically for their nation. Noticed you are going to a lot of work to wikilink dates at the same time I see bot edits removing them from other articles. I honestly don't think it's a moral issue, but thought I'd give you a heads up. There's a guideline on all this somewhere, I looked at it a year or so ago... Montanabw^(talk) 04:42, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I have too! Apparently this is one of those things where "community consensus" has changed over the last couple of years. I don't see it as a big deal either way, my rule of thumb is usually to just check the guidelines and see what they have decided this week...and if it isn't too big a hassle, I do it. When it is too big a hassle, I do whatever and proceed until apprehended! (Which occasionally happens, LOL!) Montanabw^(talk) 19:13, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Noticed that lightbot is already going through the articles...most of the time, there is no sense arguing with a bot! LOL! Oh, another thing, you can wikilink a plural just by adding an "s" after the end of the brackets, it is preferred. Also do not have to capitalize the first letter to make the link work, as a rule, if you can avoid a piped link without the article looking weird, try to do so. For example [[warmblood]]s, [[warmblood]]ed, and [[warmblood]] all take you to Warmblood but you may need a piped link if you want to say [[warmblood|great big horses]] (LOL!) Montanabw^(talk) 20:05, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A mission, if you choose to accept it

Hi Bogbumper,

Someone made some significant additions to Albanian (horse), but they didn't do a real great job at it. The thing needs wikilinking, proper section formatting, wordsmithing, etc. Thought with the cleanup I've been seeing you do on other breed articles, maybe you'd like to take a run at this one, it needs serious help! If you want to tackle it, I'll peek by later to see how things are going! Good luck! Montanabw^(talk) 04:35, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doing great!

Wanted to let you know that you are doing a GREAT JOB of cleaning up, organizing and fomatting all those breed articles! (List of horse breeds has only about 350 entries...LOL!) I've been making a few little tweaky edits here and there, but mostly there's not much I am changing -- more that I see preexisting content that I want to change than anything you have done. By the way, I particularly like that you are simply organizing and wikilinking existing content first, before doing any substantial changes. That makes it real easy for other editors because we don't have to sort through what's changed and what's just reorganized. Anyway, pat on the back, high fives and YOU ROCK! Thanks for all you do! Montanabw^(talk) 16:14, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another mission

Yili horse. New anon IP edits, not bad, but needs wikilinks, and I personally tend to cut stuff that is a trait of any good riding horse (my favorite being one breed article a while back where an editor was hung up that the horses could swivel their ears, not getting that ALL horses swivel their ears! LOL!). Go have fun, it's only a paragraph long! Montanabw^(talk) 03:28, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And yet another! If you want a real challenge, see American creme and white horse registry. It's horrible, I don't even know where to start. Anything is an improvement! (LOL) Montanabw^(talk) 03:13, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

House of Commons

The article for House of Commons covers all of the Houses of Commons that there have been around the world. It would b more useful to link to the House of Commons of the United Kingdom, which is what I think you mean to link to. Thanks. Ground Zero | t 10:40, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Feedback, please

Hello there Bogbumper! Thanks for the contact, I'd be happy to help. From the looks of things, I'm fairly confident you're familliar with the WP:UKCITIES guideline about layout and content etc. UKCITIES is a really helpful guideline, but can't always hit the spot for taking articles to higher or highest standards.

I did a little bit of tidying (just cosmetic and flow stuff), but I think you have the basic material in there for these to be considered small "start" or "C" class articles, rather than stubs. What would I recommend from here though? Well, for me, it's just a matter of transforming them from short overviews, to the most comprehensive and accessible webspace about these villages the internet has to offer, and that means beefing the pages up with more content. The best sources for settlement articles are ALWAYS local history books; there simply isn't anything of there quality on the internet in my experience. And so if you're as hooked as I am, then that means you may need to take a trip to the local bookstore or library. There are some good online sources around, particularly:

It is also invaluable to get other users involved through an article's development. User:Seahamlass managed to get the Navenby page to featured article status in a very short time (my first took 2 years!), and she may be able to share her thoughts. Whilst User:Rjgibb also did the same with his Wormshill article (both Navenby and Wormshill are featured articles about English villages).

Does that help at all? Hope so, :) --Jza84 | Talk 01:26, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice

Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 23:14, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to WP:BIRDS!

Hi, and welcome to the Birds WikiProject! As you've probably guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of bird-related topics.

A few features that you may find helpful:

Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
Most important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.
The project has several departments, which handle article quality assessment, detailed article and content review, outreach, and other tasks.
If you're looking for something to work on, there are many articles that need attention.
Read our current newsletter, and sign up for (or opt out) of future issues.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask any experienced member of the project; we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! MeegsC | Talk 13:47, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Birds November newsletter

The November 2024 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by TinucherianBot (talk) 07:39, 11 November 2008 (UTC) [reply]

You might find this fun

Bogbumper, There is a high school student who did an upgrade of Banker Horse for a class project, collaborating with other wikipedia editors (like me). It is now listed at Peer review and because apparently the entire class flooded PR with about 20 simultaneous requests, they asked if WikiProject Equine would help review this particular article. Myself, and some of the other most active horse article editors helped a bit so are sort of COI on doing a neutral review, so I'm asking some of the other horse article editors if they'd like to take a look-see at the article and comment at the peer review page. This was a great kid to work with and a neat thing for a school to do as an assignment. You did a lot of cleanup on horse breed articles, and hence I thought you might be interested. So if you can help out, Thanks in advance! Montanabw^(talk) 20:19, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Woodcock

Hi Bogbumper: I'm happy to have a look at the Eurasian Woodcock article; however, it's likely to be a couple of weeks before I can really do it any justice. I'm in the wilds of Madagascar at the moment (first hotel with internet for two weeks, and I'm only here for a night), and won't be back to regular connections until mid-December. l promise to have a good look then! MeegsC | Talk 15:55, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Katie: I'm so sorry! I'll try to have a look this week. MeegsC | Talk 21:49, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Black-tailed Godwit

Hi Katie, can't understand why you've removed my video-clip of the Godwit, I use Firefox and it displays perfectly on most PC's that I use. It's very easy to delete content that you don't like but try creating some. I've spent a lot of time filming, editing and uploading these clips to improve these articles. Aviceda talk 10:14, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. It's not that I don't like the video! I first tried to view it in Firefox on my Mac at home, then in IE and Firefox on my PC at work, and it doesn't work for me at all, even though I've installed the required plug-ins. I don't see the video, I just get the progress bar in the middle of where the video should be. Bogbumper (talk) 14:13, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please also check your browser font size setting. The taxo box width parameter is best left out so that the user preference settings are honoured (see Wikipedia:Taxobox_usage#Images). Shyamal (talk) 14:49, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Birds February newsletter

The February 2009 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. MeegsC | Talk 21:27, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bulk adding refs

What's the point in adding the {{refs}} tag to all of the Cambridgeshire village articles? Might it not be better to actually find some references and improve the articles rather than do a fly-by tagging? Or are you intending to return to those articles and work on them? Rich257 (talk) 09:14, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Precision on co-ordinates

Please be careful about being overly precise about co-ordinates. The rule of thumb is that the precision should be no more than 1/10th of the size of the object. So for a village like Arrington specifying the co-ordinates to about 60 centimetres (24 in) doesn't really make sense. Thanks, Rich257 (talk) 17:07, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Birds March newsletter

The March 2009 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:31, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Birds April newsletter

The April 2009 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. MeegsC | Talk 15:28, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Birds May newsletter

The May 2009 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Newsletter delivery by xenobot 06:03, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Birds June newsletter

The June 2009 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Newsletter delivery by xenobot 13:48, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speed of the Eurasian Sparrowhawk

In this edit you introduced the sentence: "This species [i.e., the Eurasian Sparrowhawk] can fly 2-3 km per day but rises above tree level mostly to display, soar above territory and to make longer journeys." That can't be correct. If some birds from colder regions of north Europe migrate to north Africa for the winter, they have to cover a substantially larger distance per day. --Lambiam 19:43, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Northamptonshire

Hi Bogbumper! A Wikipedia:WikiProject Northamptonshire has now been created. If you wish to help out improving articles relating to anything in the county, please don't hesitate to go to the page and sign up!--Kudpung (talk) 13:50, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Birds August newsletter

The August 2009 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Newsletter delivery by –xeno ^talk 02:17, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Northamptonshire

Hi Bogbumper! A Top Priority article you have been involved with has many issues and urgently needs improving. If you can help with these issues please see Talk:Northamptonshire, address the different points if you can, and leave any comments there. (This is a generic message. if it has been placed on your talk page inadvertantly, please ignore it.) --Kudpung --Kudpung (talk) 23:08, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

TUSC token 1446a927d8ad99d64d52b6cefa4f8b5a

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Cambridge meetup 14 November

Another Cambridge meetup is set for the afternoon of Saturday 14 November. Please contribute to the page and come along if you can. Charles Matthews (talk) 20:15, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sparrowhawk

Hi Katie, good luck with the Sparrowhawk GA. I won't review it myself because I've made too many edits to it to be considered neutral, but it looks pretty good. Any plans to take it to FA eventually? Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:21, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a map caption. I looked at the images, and a couple may be problematic. It isn't obvious to me that the blue tit is GFDL, and the collared dove uploader appears to differ from the author. I ran dablinks and checklinks, no problems at all there Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:18, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is it ever called Northern Sparrowhawk? I'm not sure whether it's a requirement at GA, but at FAC the units will need imperial conversions for the poor old yanks. Similarly, there are some problems with the refs. On-line versions of real journals do not need an access date, since they are unchanging, but web links like the BTO page need a publisher, even if it's obvious. There are also some inconsistencies in formatting. I'd recommend using citeweb, citejournal and citebook templates, which guarantee consistency, but they are not obligatory. Again, I'm not sure whether consistency of referencing is needed at GAN. If you intend to push this to FA, a much bigger hurdle, make that clear if you can when you have a GA reviewer. Some reviewers will give comments to indicate what they think needs to be done for FAC Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:35, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for your comments... It's the first article I've really done a huge amount with, so it's all a bit of a learning experience for me. I haven't thought about FA. I'm sure there's lots that could be improved (I realised that I haven't mentioned vocalisations at all!); I've got a copy of Ian Newton's The Sparrowhawk monograph out of the library but have yet to delve in! It'll be interesting to see what other people make of it. I was considering changing using templates for all the refs (not something I've done before) so perhaps I should do that. Bogbumper (talk) 21:03, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've just gone through the alt text, but you might want to check or improve. Alt text is to describe the image to a person with sight problems via their text reader. It should not repeat the caption, add information which is not in the image (eg the location of the wood) or use words like "image of". It should just describe the picture.

OK, thanks for that guidance. Clearly I didn't *get* alt text on my first attempt. I'll know better next time. Bogbumper (talk) 11:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What I sometimes do, as in Ruff is to separate the books as References, and leave web and journal sources under Notes. For books you can then put eg Hayman (1986) p. 29 as the ref, which will obviously appear in the Notes section. Alternatively, you could retitle your References as Notes, just put Ian Newton's book as the Reference section, and reference the separate pages in Notes. I think that is reasonable because it is obviously the major standard text for this species Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:10, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. For now, I've changed 'References' to 'Notes' and put Newton and HBW in References (those are the two books from which I needed to cite separate pages). Would it be preferable to put all the books under References, as you suggested (which would take a while longer) or will I get away with what I've done?! Bogbumper (talk) 15:53, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can't see why the current scheme shouldn't work, and if your reviewer comments, you have the other option as plan B Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:00, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Autoreviewer

Hi Katie, after reading one of your articles at newpage patrol, I was surprised to see that an editor who has contributed as well as you have for such a long time hadn't already been approved as an wp:Autoreviewer. So I've taken the liberty of rectifying that. Ϣere SpielChequers 16:44, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much; I didn't even know such a thing existed!! Bogbumper (talk) 16:48, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're very welcome. Autoreviewer is a relatively new system, it was started in June this year, though it had an informal predecessor. I suspect that quite a few ofour contributors are unaware of it, which is why I've started checking out people like you who create the sort of articles that leave me wondering why those articles are not already marked as patrolled. Ϣere SpielChequers 17:47, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Worcestershierre, Warwickshierre, and Everyshierre

Hello Bogbumper! A non-British user seems to be attempting to suggest that the Brits are not pronouncing their own British place names correctly, and appears to believe that it is a policy of Wikipedia to instruct the Brits, through the use of the IPA, how British English should be pronounced. He/she also seems to be of the opinion that it is Wikipedia policy to regard British English by default as a rhotic language, which it is not. Some British Wikipedians are trying to avoid an edit conflict and have requested my support. I have added my comments to the debate the non-British user has has started in defence of his/her multiple, WP:BOLD? changes to IPA pronunciations of British place names. As a professional linguist I accord every version of English its own particular merits and my position here strictly concerns the way in which the IPA is interpreted and applied in the Wikipedia, and how the current policy may need to be changed through a truly representative consensus. If you would like to help resolve this issue, please see User talk:Kudpung#IPA, RP, etc. and User talk:Lfh#Warwickshire to get the background. Maybe you could then chime in with your views on the subject at Wikipedia talk:IPA for English#Rhoticity in place names. Thanks. --Kudpung (talk) 18:57, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sparrowhawks

Hi Bogbumper: Sorry for the long delay in finishing your review! I think you're mighty close. The only thing I'd ask you to do before I give you the GA is expand the lead a little bit. It's supposed to be a brief summary of the major elements of the article, and right now it doesn't do that. (I've put a few things I think you should add onto the GA review page.) I won't ask for anything else, as this is already WAY past what many GAs are. (I've been nosing around, and have decided I've been far too picky; I think I've been pushing it towards FA — and it's close to being there!) hope you don't mind that I've done some tweaking on the prose. Feel free to change things back if you think I've made things less clear or otherwise changed the meaning of what you'd written. MeegsC | Talk 02:25, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MeegsC. Thanks for your reply - I was more worried that people were waiting for me to do something, but I wasn't sure what! You're quite right about the intro; I'll get onto that in the next couple of days. So do we go for FA next...? Thanks. Bogbumper (talk) 07:18, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely! MeegsC | Talk 13:34, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Bedfordshire

Hey,

You are listed as a member of WikiProject Bedfordshire, a project that I am currently trying to revive. Please have a look at the projects talk page for an explanation. If you would still like to participate, please could you leave a note on my talk page. Thanks, Acather96 (talk) 20:11, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or 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 here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 19:02, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP Northamptonshire

Hi Bogbumper just to let you know some Northamptonshire articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release (which I never herd of until today). It can be seen here. It just advises to make some Northants articles better and I'm currently working on Northamptonshire/Kettering which is coming along nicely, but help would be appreciated, best Likelife (talk) 16:09, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Christmas Card

File:Wikisanta-no motto.png

Merry Christmas

At this festive time, I would like to say a very special thank you to my fellow editors, and take the time to wish you and your loved ones a very Merry Christmas, and a Happy New Year. And, in case you can't wait until the big day, I've left you each three special presents, click to unwrap :) Acather96 (talk) 10:10, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Green and Yellow Present.gif

File:Yellow and Red present.gif

File:Blue and Red Present.gif

TUSC token e57c87c9b836743cfe786ba147bdc8e6

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Eurasian Sparrowhawk

Why have you deleted my photo File:Eurasian Sparrowhawk.JPG from Russian areal of distribution? --Владимир Шеляпин (talk) 08:34, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Владимир Шеляпин. I removed it from the page for a couple of reasons. It doesn't show anything new - there's already a photo of a juvenile Sparrowhawk on the page. Also, we don't have room for a photo from each country, so it doesn't matter where it was taken. Hope you weren't offended, but I see you've reinstated it anyway... Bogbumper (talk) 14:38, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bogbumper, i've reinstated photo only after 5-day waiting of your answer. I just would like to illustrate the words "it can be seen in gardens and in urban areas". If you look at the coordinates, you can see that it was sitting 20 meters from the five-story building. It is curious, is not it? --Владимир Шеляпин (talk) 07:44, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Sorry for the late reply, but I don't log in to Wikipedia every day.Bogbumper (talk) 20:18, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Science lovers wanted!

Hi! I'm serving as the wikipedian-in-residence at the Smithsonian Institution Archives until June! One of my goals as resident, is to work with Wikipedians and staff to improve content on Wikipedia about people who have collections held in the Archives - most of these are scientists who held roles within the Smithsonian and/or federal government. I thought you might like to participate since you are interested in the sciences! Sign up to participate here and dive into articles needing expansion and creation on our to-do list. Feel free to make a request for images or materials at the request page, and of course, if you share your successes at the outcomes page you will receive the SIA barnstar! Thanks for your interest, and I look forward to your participation! Sarah (talk) 01:51, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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) 13:39, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Bogbumper. 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)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Bogbumper. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]