User talk:Crasshopper

Hi, I rebutted your manual of style edits. I think you misunderstand what mathematicians mean when they say "Its easy to show...". It is not a belittlement of the reader and must not be taken as such; it is rather a statement about the length of a proof, the excercise of which is left to the reader. linas 04:28, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

:I replied to your note on my talk page. But I liked my reply so much, that I'm posting a copy here:

:In mathematics, there is an immense raft of specialized jargon. The phrases "Clearly," "Obviously," and "It's easy to show that ..." are a part of that jargon. Although they resemble the English language, thier true meaning is subtle.

:Mathematicians often encounter head-scratching claims in the papers they read, claims that make them stop and wonder "what does this mean?", and "how could this possibly be true?", or "how could the author presume such a thing without any justification whatsoever?". These head-scratchers come in two basic varieties: the simple, forehead-slapping, "duhh, of course" kind, and the complicated kind. These two types can be very hard to tell apart, and one can loose hours or days on them. There are some well-known stories of strong mathematicians who spent weeks on problems only to wake up in the middle of the night with a "duhh of course" inspiration. The phrases "Clearly," "Obviously," and "It's easy to show that ..." are used to indicate to the reader that what follows is of the forehead-slapping variety. They do not imply that what follows is somehow "easy"; its usually not -- if it was actually easy, then the author wouldn't need to coach the reader with this "com'on you can do it" pep-talk.

:Yes, texts that use these phrases may seem intimidating, but that comes from an unfamiliarity of math jargon. No one expects that the claim following an "Obviously..." will be obvious to anyone wihout years of preparation. linas 21:14, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading :Image:Crasshopper.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{tl|GFDL-self}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{tlp|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 media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Shyam ^(T/C) 13:29, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading :Image:Jchallifour.JPG. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an arguement why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{tl|GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{tlp|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 media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Shyam ^(T/C) 18:54, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

regarding [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulysses_%28novel%29?diff=cur&oldid=prev this] edit, all info entered into wikipedia must be verifiable. Unless you can cite this fact, it's gonna have to go. --Bachrach44 18:51, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia policy forbids WP:OR. --Bachrach44 19:09, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading :Image:Taleo-software-error-screen.jpg. 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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 18:40, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Text 148

The two moons Shri Krishna Chaitanya and Shri Nityananda are my life and soul. I, Vrindavana dasa, sing the glories of Their feet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.132.82.156 (talk) 14:04, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Image:Information.svg Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, please do not add promotional material to articles or other Wikipedia pages, as you did to :Convergent series. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you.{{PAGENAME}} JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 02:42, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

The mentioned edit to Convergent series was not a soapbox, autobiographical, advertising, propaganda, opinion, recruitment, or scandalous. It was neutral and relevant.

I am not a new user; I have been editing Wikipedia for over half a decade.

Crasshopper (talk) 05:47, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

: As noted at WP:ELNO links to blogs should usually not be added to Wikipedia. This is especially true of your own blog, and especially true of one which is largely promotional, as implied even just by the name that appears in the article, "hire me because I'm smart". But it would be true just because it's a blog, and I've removed and seen links to blogs removed just because they are links to non-notable blogs, Wikipedians or not. --JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 08:41, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

:: The title of the blog is not permanent (will change to Anti Bourbaki Blog or Human Mathematics or ... something else) and if you read beyond the self-mocking title you would notice that >50% of the posts are genuine mathematics. The content I linked to is "minimal, meritable, and directly relevant to the article". Any undergraduate learning series for the first time should know the heuristic break-points mentioned in the linked material. Moreover, since the breakpoints are subjective, they cannot be included in the scientific discussion of series (as WP:ELMAYBE requires).

::Tumblr provides a convenient CMS; a "blog" like you're talking about discusses personal material, not science.

::Crasshopper (talk) 09:06, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

:::A blog can be on anything, which is part of the problem with them: they can range from only containing authoritative postings fit for publication (some are made into books) to personal nonsense, with everything in between. There are so many of them that that they would overwhelm many articles if added. And unlike say content in text books and peer reviewed journals there's no easy way to assess the quality or reliability of most of them. So the default is to exclude them. And that is before the other concerns, that your blog is largely promotional, even in the domain name, and that adding it yourself is a conflict of interest.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 15:58, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

::::You'll notice that I haven't re-added the link during this discussion. The blog title and domain name are going to change; the current status is a self-mocking holding name until I think of an actual name for it. Eventually the content won't be in sequential "blog" format either. But all of the decoration is irrelevant. The math is correct, it's neutral, and it's useful to those who would be looking at Convergent series. It's verifiable by anyone who has taken college calculus and does not need to appear in a journal. You are welcome to judge a book by its cover if you wish, though. Crasshopper (talk) 17:35, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Please do not add "new books coming out" until they have actually been published. the relevant policy is that Wikipedia is not a Crystal ball. Please be very careful with this article, for which there have been repeated concerns of promotionalism and NPOV. I am trying as an administrator to ensure that it is the strongest article that meets our rules; articles that list an excessive number of works, especially unpublished or minor works, do not give a strong impression. FWIW, I have no particular interest in him or his subject(s), one way or another, but I do quite a bit of work here making sure we do not descend into promotionalism. DGG ( talk ) 05:50, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

:Fair enough. If you want to take it down, be my guest. Crasshopper (talk) 18:53, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited Kimbo Slice, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Haymaker (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:44, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited Ladder operator, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dirac (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:23, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

==Jacopo Saltarelli==

Weasel words/Original research: I'm having a bit of a problem with this. It was me who added the statement that the quoted author had "probably overlooked" the fact hat although "the "profession of model" didn't exist (if by "model" you mean clothes-horse) , that there were artists' models, professional or not. It can be reasonably presumed that when Saltarelli is described in literature as a "model", the sort referred to is an artists model, not a photographic or catwalk model. However,the statement has been quoted and reliably refrenced. So, as an art historian who knows that artists used models, I either have to delete the referenced statement because, it is erroneous, or counter it with something that looks like mere opinion.

In your opinion, should I delete the stupidity, or turn my comment into a footnote, or simply state that what is meant is "artists' model"?

Amandajm (talk) 06:40, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

:The only reason that it requires qualifying is that an editor has put into the article a statement that a particular author says that the "profession didn't exist". The statement has a reference. Other books call him a "model".

:The difficulty is that the statement that the "profession" of model didn't exist may well be true, but that doesn't mean that Saltarelli wasn't a model. He may not have been a "professional" prostitute any more than he was a "professional" model. He seems to have been an apprentice goldsmith, who earned a bit of money on the side. Regardless of whether people modelled as profession, it is a fact that people modelled for artists and were almost certainly paid to do it. We know that Leonardo searched the streets of Milan, looking for someone to use as a model for Judas in the Last Supper.

:I find this all a bit annoying. Saltarelli has virtually no entity except as someone who may or may not have solicited Leonardo, and a number of other people, for sex. That is all we know. He is entirely non-notable! The matter of whether he was or wasn't a professional model really isn't very important.

:Amandajm (talk) 17:01, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

::Th word "profession/al" ought not be mentioned. Whether or not any type of modelling was perceived as a "profession" is a red herring. Saltarelli could have modelled for artists and been paid for it on a purely casual basis. To imply it was his "profession" discounts the fact that he seems to have been an apprentice goldsmith. Regardless of whether he was a goldsmith, he could have modelled for artists on a purely casual basis. Whetehr the "profession" existed ought not to have been introduced to the article. It is irrelevant. Amandajm (talk) 14:34, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited The Corporate Executive Board Company, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Forrester (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:45, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited Pointless topology, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Meet and Join (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:58, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited Non-wellfounded mereology, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Jesse Hughes and Larry Moss (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 13:42, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Maputsoe, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Camptown (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:24, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

:Finite type invariant (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

::added a link pointing to Immersion

:Spray (mathematics) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

::added a link pointing to Quasilinear

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:18, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Non-standard analysis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fluxion (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:25, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Re [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dessin_d%27enfant&curid=1585922&diff=548779598&oldid=543985100 this edit summary]: please see the part in WP:SPS where it says that self-published material by "an established expert on the subject matter" may be considered reliable. In this case, I think that Lieven Le Bruyn (a professor of mathematics in Antwerp) is such an expert. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:49, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kamala Harris, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Donald Harris (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 18:15, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

hey bro, I've responded on my talk page :-) -- — Keithbob • Talk • 16:12, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

I don't see it. Crasshopper (talk) 23:43, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello. I don't know exactly what you had in mind as the scope of this article but it isn't clear to me and it might be helpful for you to comment at Talk:List of algebras. Spectral sequence (talk) 12:53, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tensor product of modules, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bilinear (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 13:15, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Amadeus VI, Count of Savoy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ecu (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 19:59, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Clayton M. Christensen, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tata (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 08:51, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Singularity theory, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Singular points. 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) 09:20, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nielsen BookScan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page BJ's. 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) 11:28, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Galois cohomology, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cocycle. 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) 15:22, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cayley–Hamilton theorem, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Scalar. 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) 10:44, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Please Help!

Recently, Tking 1974 added an "other uses" page to the "expense ratio" page that is very clearly for a term with an entirely different meaning, "operating expense ratio". Rather than just delete that particular edit, I added information that provided a very clear distinction between the terms "expense ratio" and "operating expense ratio". Mean as custard, in my opinion, improperly removed my contributions. Since operating expense ratio has a distinctly different definition, I believe either my edit should be reinstated, or the "other uses" section deleted entirely from that article.

Very clearly, at the very least, the additions I had provided should be included with the other uses section that was added....and possibly a new page with "operating expense ratio" as a title should be added.

Thank You,

pokermatters — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pokermatters (talk • contribs) 20:45, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

{{Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2015/MassMessage}} MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:04, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

{{Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2015/MassMessage}} MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

{{Ivmbox|Hello, Crasshopper. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

|Scale of justice 2.svg|imagesize=40px}}

{{Ivmbox|Hello, Crasshopper. 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)

|Scale of justice 2.svg|imagesize=40px}}

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Derived algebraic geometry, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Homology ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Derived_algebraic_geometry check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Derived_algebraic_geometry?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 09:24, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Uniform Resource Identifier, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jabber ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Uniform_Resource_Identifier check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Uniform_Resource_Identifier?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:11, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

{{Ivmbox|Hello, Crasshopper. 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)

|Scale of justice 2.svg|imagesize=40px}}

{{Ivmbox|Hello, Crasshopper. 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)

|Scale of justice 2.svg|imagesize=40px}}