User talk:Graibeard

Hi! welcome to Wikipedia!

Hope you enjoy contributing to Wikipedia. Be bold in editing pages. Here are some links that you might find useful:

Try the Tutorial. If you have less time, try Wikipedia:How to edit a page.
To sign your posts (on talk pages, Articles for deletion page etc.) use ~~~~ (four tildes). This will insert your name and timestamp. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes).
You can experiment in the test area.
You can get help at the Help Desk
Some other pages that will help you know more about Wikipedia: Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:Civility, Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not

I hope you stick around and keep contributing to Wikipedia. Drop us a note at Wikipedia:New user log.

-- utcursch | talk to me

Marking out (disambiguation)

Both entries on this disambiguation page seem to lead to almost duplicate articles about wrestling.

Marking out and Marking out (professional wrestling).

I don't think that is what you intended is it? hydnjo talk 01:46, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

You're on the ball ;-), I'll reply at your talk page --Graibeard 02:01, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I found your additions to the caliper page very interesting and and amazingly swift. -- Diomidis Spinellis 14:38, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Move tab

Hi Graibeard, welcome to Wikipedia! When you want to move an article (Marking out -> Marking out (professional wrestling)) please use the "Move" tab that appears on the top of the screen, near the "edit this page" and "history" tabs. Simply copying the text is bad, because it makes it look like you wrote the article yourself.

Also, instead of using <br> to separate paragraphs, you should simply use a blank line. See Wikipedia:How to edit a page for more information.

Finally, if you plan to upload more images, I recommend you put them at the Commons. That's an area especially for free images; the benefit of putting them there is that the non-English editions of Wikipedia can then use them too.

Again, welcome! dbenbenn | talk 18:23, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Also, the "Move this page" may be located in the sidebar depending on the "Skin" you have selected in your preferences (MonoBook/Top - Classic/Side). Happy editing, hydnjo talk 22:21, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Ah, point taken regarding the copy -> move causing lost history, I didn't think that one through to well! My apologies for the extra work it caused. Unfortunately, the "move" tab throws up the following error for me:-

Not logged in
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
You must be a registered user and logged in to move a page. You may also list a page at Wikipedia:Requested moves.

This of course doesn't seem correct as I am logged in and everything else appears to function correctly. Opening a fresh browser session with Mozilla 1.7.6 gives the same error -- this browser is Firefox 1.0.2.

I'll also take your advice regarding the Commons and images, I didn't fully comprehend the difference. I did follow the suggested link but the (no fair use!) comment on the Special:Upload page threw me. Looking further afield, I've found this discussion at Fair use issue which will perhaps explain the intention. -- Graibeard 23:42, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The error is a (somewhat futile) attempt to combat page move vandilism. The move tab is disabled for new users; it will start working for you in a month or two.

By the way, is a hand scraper different from a chisel? dbenbenn | talk 05:32, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

And first things first, I was pleasantly suprised by the Exceptional Newcomer Award, Thank you. When this short Easter break is over the rate of my contributions will obviously taper off but I hope to continue doing my small part.

A chisel and a scraper are closely related however I believe they are different enough to warrant the separation. A scraper literally scraps material off, it's a low volume process. They require a keen edge to work but you'd be hard pressed to do yourself a real injury, although no doubt more than a cold chisel would. I can see how they appear similar but if I was searching for a scraper reference, I wouldn't look under chisel. Scraping, plain bearings, white metal, babbit would be my first searches. With all that said and now that you have me thinking about it, a reciprocal link between the two pages probably wouldn't be amiss, as it could be convincingly argued that they are in the same family. -- Graibeard 09:16, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

If you try that "move tab" again, you'll get a slightly more helpful error message now. Thanks for pointing out that problem. dbenbenn | talk 09:22, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Links

Re:tap wrench: I fixed a few links that you entered. Note that generally the singular is used for an article reference, and also that there are two ways to modify what is presented to the user - for a simple "s" "ed" or "ing" ending, [[reamer]]s shows as reamers while for other endings like "ied" for 'y" and complex synonyms, [[reamer|reaming tools]] shows up as reaming tools. If a link appears unsatisfied in your preview you can enter it into the search box, whence it will not be found, but then can be re-entered into a search page presenting a WP-specific Google search, to find a relevant article reference.

Welcome to Wikipedia - Leonard G. 00:47, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Ah, a typo on my part by the looks of it. I'm creating a few dead links as I go so I don't always pick up on my typos, the intention is to create stubs so that others may pick up on them.

I've currently got two edits going at the moment, one of which is a reamer stub. Your heads up however has alerted me to the existing page so I'll add to that one instead. Thanks for the feedback and welcome -- Graibeard 01:18, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

industrial processes stub

Graibeard, I think what you're saying makes sense. If you're taking that approach, then the suggestion by User:Grutness for changing the name of the stub category to Category:Industrial process stubs would work well, since you would continue with tools (blow torch, lathe, etc.) and I could continue with processes (sand casting, electron beam welding, etc.). I believe things like that can fit under technology, and are distinct from tools. There is the industrial processes category, plus a bunch of obscure welding techniques and casting processes that should be categorized, and I don't think those fit under tools. Do you agree? --Spangineer ∞ 12:26, Mar 28, 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, I think I'd like to split up chemical and pyro types of alterations to materials from purely mechanical alterations of materials... Sound like a plan? Ideas on how to go about it? I took over the Category:Industrial processes which had a set of like 5 or 10? different things in it, meshing both of them, so I wrote the header for it to reflect both types of alterations. I'd like to split 'em, but what should we call each one?

~ender 2005-10-25 11:25:MST

Hi Graibeard - there is now a new stub - {{Industry-stub}} for industry in general and industrial processes in particular. Manufacturing-stub remains as a soft redirect to it. The stubs end up in Category: Industry stubs. The wording on the Industrial processes category makes the difference between the processes and the tools quite clear, BTW - turning, welding, smelting, etc are processes - the things used to do those processes (lathes, cutters, crucibles) are tools, so industry-stub and tool-stub should complement each other well. Grutness|^hello? 00:18, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Image scale

Hello again, Graibeard. I love your gallery. But I don't have any idea about the size of the squares in Image:SquareEngineersMachinist.jpg. A suggestion: consider including some mundane object for reference. See Image:Wooden pallet with glove.jpg for an example. Cheers, and keep up the good work! dbenbenn | talk 02:45, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Galleries on Drill bit?

Just to let you know (in case you're not checking/watching the page), I had a couple questions about using galleries for Drill bit, which I posted on the article's talk page. Thanks! Bushytails 18:01, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Metalworking wikiproject? Consolidation of metalworking pages?

Since you seem to know a fair bit about machining, any chance you'd want to help work on trying to make the whole of the metalworking/milling/etc sections try to seem a bit more coherent? I've been adding links left and right, and finding pages I didn't even know existed due to their not being linked anywhere. For example [[endmill], which until I added a bunch of links to it, had none... who knows how many more are out there that I haven't found. Perhaps start a wikiproject for metalworking? I don't see any wikiprojects even remotely related. A coherent page layout and a footer template listing other metalworking fields and subfields would go a long way to improving the usefullness of the articles, as would removing some of the current substantial (and often conflicting!) duplication between articles. If you think organizing a bit to work on the pages is a good plan, I'll throw up a wikiproject page... if not, I'll just keep trying to link things together and fill in the gaps. Thanks, Bushytails 05:35, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re Metalworking article. Well done (RJP 14:44, 10 October 2005 (UTC))[reply]

Lost city

Thanks for reverting the edits of the anonymous person trying to insert New Orleans into the above article. There have been several anonymous IPs trying to put it in for the last couple of days, and I'm thinking it's trolling by a single person, so I'd appreciate it if you could help me keep an eye on the article. --Centauri 09:57, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Broach

Thanks for the advice... now I know what that move tab does!

I am just trying to put a suggestion on the discussion page for Broach that it be turned into a disambiguation page. However when I click discussion it links me to the discussion page for Broach (metalworking). Is that right because it is simply a redirect or is that a problem. Do you think Broach should be changed to...?

Broach may mean:

Broach: A metalworking tool with a series of chisel points mounted on one piece of steel.
Brooch (or broach): Decorative item designed to be attached to garments.
Broach: A sudden instability in the heading of a sailboat when sailing downwind.

Malcolm Morley 21:09, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers, I think I have done it all. Thanks very much for your help. I even added the Indian place name which has more links than sailing, metalwork and jewellery all put together! Malcolm Morley 23:01, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You're long overdue for one of these...

This Tireless Contributor Barnstar is for the remarkably good articles you keep writing... Enjoy! Bushytails 04:36, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, how about that! :) Accepted and appreciated. Thanks also to those who come and fix the tpyos, dud links, and clarify the fuzzy wording. — Graibeard 05:01, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Metalworking WikiProject

Sorry for the lack of assistance with metalworking articles of late... In addition to having way too much real-life stuff to do (now my car is out of order too... grrrr), I've been working on a pet project article with most of my wiki-time, that should be done pretty soon and I'll get back to metalworking... have another night's worth of photos to take, one more section to write (which will bring it to about 15 pages length if you printed it), and some photoshopping, then the day of trying to get it on DYK and/or featured article, updating pages to point to it, and dealing with vandalism....

THEN I'll try to spend more time on metalworking. :) Bushytails 18:25, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wootness, my pet article that I've been working on for two weeks (complete with taking over 400 photos!) seems to be done... I'll get back to metalworking now. :) Bushytails 07:34, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, if I become an admin, that's probably even less time I'll have for metalworking. :) Bushytails 21:04, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

From Enjiniahdesu 18:10, 20 October 2005 (UTC) :[reply]

Great edits on the stamping articles. I was surprised to see that no articles existed on that topic! I feel lucky to be able to initiate that project on Wikipeida. I realize that could add a ton more information. From your bio, I gather that you could as well, time permitting! I have an idea to start adding material bit by bit over time. That would be funny if I was talking about drills! I hope I entered this comment properly.

Vandalism thankies

Thanks for the revert on my user page... noticing it gets vandalized more often the more vandalism I fix. :) Thanks again, Bushytails 18:12, 24 October 2005 (UTC).[reply]

Hategories

"- [[Hategory:Hobbies]] + [[Category:Hobbies]]"

Gah! *kicks self*. it was originally "category:hobbies", and I went to make it look nice and capitalize the first letters, even though it doesn't matter... this is what I get for editing while tired, I guess. I'm glad someone's paying attention to what I'm doing, as I don't seem to be! :) Bushytails 19:07, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Linux protection

The editor uses one IP at a time. One IP can be blocked on sight in this case, without needing the 3RR. I don't think we need to prevent all anons editing if blocks have not even been tried properly yet. -Splash^talk 15:46, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tip

Thanks for the tip on moving pages. For some reason, I thought that feature was only available to administrators. I will use it in the future. The Hollow structural steel page didn't have much of a history yet, though, so I'd rather just leave it than go through the cut and paste work. Will you let me off with a warning? --Yannick 00:07, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hollow structural section

I've merged the histories of the copied/pasted article, and all edits have been combined here, in chronological order, thus everything has been preserved. — FREAK OF NUR_xTURE (TALK) 01:28, Jan. 18, 2006

Rebate

G'day Graibeard. Just wondering if you can lend any assistance to this debate: Talk:Rebate. I made it a disambiguation page pointing to Rabbet and Rebate (marketing) but someone has come along and claimed that rebate only has one meaning. I must have missed the move notice. He put it up last week but user:Grue took it down. They put it back and voted to move it without me noticing it somehow, even though I watch the page. SilentC 22:14, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for guidance

I'm having difficulty sorting some of the articles relating to metalworking and manufacturing. I spend more time contemplating if articles should be split and expanded before moving to a category or should they stay where they are and new pages created from some of the content on page. For example: the casting article seems to cover the generic use of casting but then goes on to cover the separate specific elements in detail with specific article titles redirected to the generic page. It would seem that the generic use would fall under the manufacturing category and the specific uses (like investment casting) should fall under a separate article for metal working called [[casting (metalworking)]] and possibly another article called [[investment casting]]. What has been your experience with handling the task of sorting articles and expanding?I already forgot 16:35, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gallery Request

A picture of Hand Files is needed for the Files articles, as these are the type of files people are most likely to encounter, the other types being much more specialized and less frequently encounterd in normal retail settings. And thanks for fixing my article edit cuttoffs; I will be more carefull in the future. --Knife Knut 13:26, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A picture of a trepanning bit or machine for [| Drill bit#Trepan] would be nice. derrick (talk) 01:53, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not delete pages you're not sure about

Please do not delete pages you're not sure about, thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.180.164.162 (talk • contribs)

Assuming you're refering to this edit, what the edit summary is talking about is the reversion tool used - follow the link.

Regarding the reason for the revert, I'm sure. ToolingU already has a link within the article to it's own wiki page, there is no need for another one disguised as an external link. The linked page is nothing but spam, it is not a History and Definition of CNC but instead is an ad for a free trail course about the History and Definition of CNC 100, the second part is a list of terms that are either already described in the wiki or with little effort could be. — Graibeard^(talk) 21:58, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shell vs Endmill.

I've started up the discussion nonsense on Talk:Milling cutter so anyone else can participate. By the way, thanks for the copyediting. I'm a bit tired today. =(

Files

You said you didn't mind, so I moved all your content from File (metalwork) to File (tool). You might want to check to make sure I didn't butcher it too badly during the merge. —Steve Summit (talk) 03:01, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Commons

Here a few new images for you. Perhaps you can translate them. (Image:Einsatzgebiete schneidstoffe.png, Image:Flaechen am Schneidkeil.svg, Image:Freiflaechenverschleiss.svg, Image:Kolkverschleiss.svg, Image:Temperaturverteilung hartmetalldrehmeissel.svg) Grüße aus Stuttgart --Ussschrotti 21:22, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the long delay in replying but I haven't been around much. I'll have a look at the images but I'm no bi-linguist ;-( If I get time in the near future I'll have a go at what I can interpret — Graibeard^(talk) 10:52, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem and thx --Ussschrotti 21:08, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:Metalworking - Metalworking finishing and fastening

Template:Metalworking - Metalworking finishing and fastening has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. --TheDJ (talk • contribs) 19:30, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

tool wear

Being a toolmaker and someone who has previously edited the stub for tool wear I was wondering if you could help me with the editing of the tool wear page. I don't want to get into too much depth with the page, but I also wanted to expand it to include more of the mechanics behind the tool wear. I'm still working at it, but I'd be interested in any feedback. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shipwear (talk • contribs) 21:51, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice, links and pictures. Shipwear 16:24, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Template:Metalworking - Metalworking finishing and fastening links

A tag has been placed on Template:Metalworking - Metalworking finishing and fastening links requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:11, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of Template:Metalworking - Measuring tools and gauges links

Template:Metalworking - Measuring tools and gauges links, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:Metalworking - Measuring tools and gauges links and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Template:Metalworking - Measuring tools and gauges links during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Wizard191 (talk) 15:25, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Template:Metalworking - Occupations links

A tag has been placed on Template:Metalworking - Occupations links requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. Wizard191 (talk) 00:04, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

CfD nomination of Category:CNC, CAD, and CAM

I have nominated Category:CNC, CAD, and CAM (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for renaming to Category:Computer-aided design, Computer-aided manufacturing, Computer-aided engineering, and Computer numerical control software (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:12, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

CfD nomination of Category:Metalworking fabrication

CfD nomination of Category:CNC, CAD, and CAM

Speedy deletion nomination of Flick grinder

A tag has been placed on Flick grinder requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

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 that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Wizard191 (talk) 14:41, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For context purposes only I'm copying what I wrote in reply to Wizard191 here. I take an accusation of copyright violation seriously and as the text above implies that I did that, when I haven't, then I want my side of the story here. A dodgy memory I might have, dodgy authorship methods I don't. — Graibeard^(talk) 11:07, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the deletion of Flick grinder

I'm a bit puzzled by the statement that it was a copyright violation. The only reference I'm aware of is (was) to the name, or at least that is how I recall it. I admit it's been a while since I looked at it! If I created the page it would have had an image [1] that I had taken of what we know in the trade as a "Flick Grinder". I've probably still got the original photo here. I wouldn't have quite described it as per the google book link but that description is probably a fair representation of one, but as I said, not as I would have described it. They are not a high precision tool but they certainly are several steps up from an angle or bench grinder.

One things for sure, I didn't put the text that you hint at on the article and a quick review of the articles history should have identified the culprit, so that removal of the copyrighted text would have squared it away. Speedy deletion seems like a bit of overkill.

As an aside, I believe they are called a Flick grinder because of the way the table is moved. The capstan handles in the referenced photo lend themselves to that action. The table often only moves a small amount and the quick reversals on the capstan handles are very much 'flick' like.

Unfortunately I have no way of knowing what was amiss as it's gone. One things for sure, none of my work was or is a copyright violation as that is not my style - credit where it's due and all that. I believe I created the article so it would have been an honest representation at the time, if anything it would have been on the 'stub' side of being an article and waiting on the input of others. I don't think google books was even around at the time. To say I'm surprised at the deletion, if only for that reason, is to state the obvious. — Graibeard^(talk) 10:06, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Replying to myself here. I notice that the linked google book [2] has a reference [WP] at the bottom of that extract. Looking at the "About this book" link [3] there is a short statement (click on more) that " The resulting entries are used under license or with permission, used under fair use conditions, used in agreement with the original authors, or are in the public domain." With that hint I looked further into the book and if you scroll to page 252 there is a statement that references Wikipedia. It seems they have borrowed material from Wikipedia and if the [WP] does indeed refer to Wikipedia as I suspect is the case, then they took it from us, as the text concerning headwords (in this case Flick Grinder) indicates. — Graibeard^(talk) 11:07, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just in case you didn't see, the article has been restored. Sorry for the confusion. Wizard191 (talk) 19:11, 27 June 2010 (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) 13:00, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright infringement

I just wanted to inform you that one of your pictures is used without license: http://www.hosendorfer.at/produkte/chemisch_technische_produkte/schmier_und_haftschmierstoffe/kuehlschmiermittelkonzentrat

Greetings — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:E3:FBC9:D899:30F3:ABBF:C6E1:B8E2 (talk) 12:21, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Precision adjustable level

Graibeard -- thanks for the valuable information you have managed here. I am familiar with many types of machinists precision levels, but I have not seen the exact one you posted a picture of before. (The adjustable one with wood side grips.) Is this a level you own? What is the make of it? Maybe a caption with a maker's name in the entry? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DivideT (talk • contribs) 12:35, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, It's obviously been a while since I've logged in, or seen my messages. Come to think of it, the email tickbox in preferences can't have been ticked either - it's now (re)enabled.

Anyway - as to your question, yes it is one I own and I'll endeavour to get a photo of the makers details, assuming it has some - maybe on the end? - when I'm next in the workshop --— Graibeard^(talk) 12:31, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Graibeard. 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]