User talk:OmegaAOL

Thank you for coming here. Before you raise a dispute about the content of an article, please make sure your request/addition complies with the policy of No Original Research and is backed up by Reliable Sources. Note: content here is never moved to an archive page, so this talk page might get decently long.

Can you add a picture of the CE Python?? Georgia guy (talk) 19:21, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done! OmegaAOL (talk) 21:54, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your good article nomination of the article TI-84 Plus series has failed. See the review page for more information. If or when the reviewer's feedback has been addressed, you may nominate the article again. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of TheTechnician27 -- TheTechnician27 (talk) 03:47, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:GoogleEarthProWin7.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:23, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Reddit API strike banner.webp. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:51, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On the infobox, I added a switcher to show both Web and Desktop. Do not over-write it again, as it's still shown on the infobox. The web version is ran on a desktop browser as well, so it's just fair that the web is present. I also used a Windows 10 screenshot instead with the proper, readable, resolution. The Windows 7 one is resized in such a manner, it can barely be read. Paowee (talk) 02:23, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Microsoft Office, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Outlook.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:54, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Babaoshan Revolutionary Cemetery, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 14:58, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I already uploaded a proper resolution for it, and that resolution meets WP:NFCC guidelines. It also runs on Windows 10. If you really want to keep it there, then upload a proper, minimal resolution, like what I did on the Windows 10 one.

Otherwise, keep the Windows 10 screenshot. Do not replace it with the Windows 7 one, as DatBot will just resize your resolution over and over. You could also unintentionally start an edit war if you keep this up.

Tip: Use half the resolution on your screenshot. Do not think the non-free no reduce template will let you get away with not resizing the screenshot with a proper resolution; other editors will pick up on it and may also request a speedy deletion. Just saying.

Also the screenshot cannot be the original resolution. At it's base resolution, resizing it to a good amount is mandatory. 1,291 × 825 is a base resolution. That has to be resized to a good extent. Paowee (talk) 03:22, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I apologise, I thought the Windows 10 screenshot was also compressed. This was a client-side error; I looked at it again and it seems to be at a readable size. OmegaAOL (talk) 13:55, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Nabi Tajima. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Marbe166 (talk) 08:47, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I thought that the 19th century ended in 1900. After further research, I seem to have been wrong. You can get where the misunderstanding comes from though right it's not like people were celebrating the dawn of the new century in 2001. Be assured my edits were not vandalism or in the spirit of vandalism but rather misguided. OmegaAOL (talk) 13:47, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Microsoft Office, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Android.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:56, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Legal history of wills

added links pointing to Genesis and European

Act of Accord

added a link pointing to Charles Ross

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:55, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to change the title of a page by cutting its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into X.com. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases for registered users, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. — Trailblazer¹⁰¹🔥 ^{(discuss · contribs)} 02:35, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Old reddit, 2025.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 03:30, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Re: [1]

That thread was due to be auto-archived tomorrow. You just extended that by seven days, and didn't add anything new. Perhaps you would consider removing it? ―Mandruss ☎ 2¢ IMO. 04:37, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. OmegaAOL (talk) 04:40, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Preciate cha. ―Mandruss ☎ 2¢ IMO. 04:44, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Just saw the GAN failed for the article. Currently working on the concerns you mentioned in the review. If they're not, looking for more specific examples. Ominae (talk) 13:54, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! It was an enjoyable article! OmegaAOL (talk) 13:56, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Otherwise, I'll see if I can nominate it again in the next few days. Ominae (talk) 16:39, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. The only issue was the copy-editing problem, really. Take care of that and it's a quick pass. OmegaAOL (talk) 16:40, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I just wanted to clarify what the issue was grammatically with the rewritten lead? I made alterations because I felt the tone was a bit informal given the subject matter, and still wish to alter the wording a bit for tone, but I wanted to double check with you what issues you felt there were grammatically before I did anything further given your revert on the page.

Also, while I do appreciate the copyedit on the article, I feel some of your edits aren't quite grammatically sound; in particular, you use a lot of em dashes in contexts where commas more than suffice and would be easier to read than em dashes. I've undone a few em dashes I felt were a bit off grammatically, but I've left the bulk in otherwise. If there are any I've removed you've got a particular gripe with let me know, as if I've made a mistake with any of them I am willing to listen to your rationale. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 18:33, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for the message! Always happy to improve.

I get that em dashes have become.. um.. infamous due to ChatGPT, et cetera. using them profusely, but at the same time you may notice when you look at Featured Articles, they seem to have a much higher amount of em dashes than normal (articles). Seems to indicate that em dashes are a pretty defining trait of high article quality at least on here.

I also use em dashes to break up long sentences that start to become unwieldy for the reader. People tend to focus mentally on one, two sentences at a time, and it confuses and irritates them when you have a lot of comma or semicolon continuations. Em dashes offset this and the human mind treats it as a seperate part, which is one of the reasons why they are used on featured articles, and why ChatGPT—which is so eager to please and convenience the human—makes significant use of them too.

There were no major grammatical issues, mostly prose-styling and the like; that is why I passed you for G.A since grammar seemed to be excellent. I was just OmegaAOL (talk page, and contribs) 21:22, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will clarify that I wasn't accusing you of ChatGPTing or something like that, it's just a lot more em dashes than I'm used to seeing. I will say that just because FAs use them a lot doesn't mean they need to be used a lot as a principle, but I get your point.

Your message seems to have gotten cut off; was there anything else you were going to add? Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 21:54, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

> FAs use them a lot doesn't mean they need to be used a lot as a principle

I know, it's just evidence I'm providing that em dashes are generally used at high levels of grammar.

> Your message seems to have gotten cut off; was there anything else you were going to add?

" - just cleaning up the prose. Thanks, - OmegaAOL" was all. OmegaAOL (talk page, and contribs) 21:56, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify, what issues did you have with the revised lead? Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 00:28, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

None. What do you mean? - OmegaAOL (talk page, and contribs) 00:28, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This reversion here. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 00:29, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, that. "in terms of parallels", "Others". Also I think the prose on mine flows (nicer). - OmegaAOL (talk page, and contribs) 00:31, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I feel the tone is a bit informal for something of this weight, in my opinion. I am not against grammatical changes but I do feel that the tone could be altered by some re-wording to be a bit more formal. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 01:12, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Edited to be more formal. - OmegaAOL (talk page, and contribs) 01:14, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An example sentence lifted from both the original version, my copyedit, and your further copyedit for eval:

original: The Ood were enslaved as a slave race by the company Ood Operations, with propaganda created by the company telling those who purchased Ood that the Ood enjoyed their work, and that their status as slaves was how their species functioned naturally.

• "enslaved as a slave race" is redundancy, using 2x and 2x "Ood" so close together is stylistically not ideal, and status and function are two different things.

my CE: The Ood race was enslaved by the company Ood Operations; the company manufactured propaganda—aimed at potential buyers—which claimed that the Ood enjoyed working as slaves, and that their species was naturally inclined towards slavery.

• remove redundancy, use Em dashes (instead of brackets) to provide further context, and distinguish "status" and "function/inclination".

your CE: The Ood race was enslaved by the company Ood Operations; the company manufactured propaganda, aimed at potential buyers, which claimed that the Ood enjoyed working as slaves, and that their species was naturally inclined towards slavery.

Same thing, except here the Em dashes were supposed to replace brackets—not commas—so the prose becomes clunkier. I am not going to revert it back to the Em-dashed version without your agreement, however I think that it was better for the above reasons. Please share your thoughts. OmegaAOL (talk page, and contribs) 21:31, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think I agree in terms of the example here now that you've clarified that with me. I'm unopposed to including the em dashes for this sentence, feel free to revert my edit on this one. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 21:55, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

story · music · places

... for an efficient GA review for a Bach cantata! - 300 years ago: another one, Gott der Herr ist Sonn und Schild, BWV 79, on the occasion for which it was written, Reformation Day - it's not only Halloween today. You are invited to the peer reviews for another candidate. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:03, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your kind words! I am going to look at it now, as I have some time before going out for Halloween. - OmegaAOL (talk page, and contribs) 22:15, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I hope you are doing well and having a lovely week. I wanted to just post a note that I believe that your quick fail of Allison Lanier was, in my opinion, very unfair. I felt that your comments could have been regular comments rather than a quick fail. First of all, I really do not see how the grammar is not good, but also, this could have easily been fixed. There is no article or even section to Anabelle so I am unsure of how it could be linked. Luxury was in quotes because that's how the actress described it and so it was done to ensure that it was depicted as being her opinion. Also, Summer Newman is a fictional character and characters are referred by first name, not last name. The reason that life and career have been merged is because there is a lot of overlap and it is (overall) a short section – this is also similar for Rory Gibson and Andrew Still (actor). And the reason that there are no photos is because there are no free ones available, which is often the case for BLPs. Having photos is not a requirement for GAs, it's just about ensuring that if there are photos they are in the article and that the photos there are relevant and free. Again, I am not trying to be rude at all, I just feel that these were not good rationales for quickfailing the article at all, and any issues could have seen the article easily stayed open and fixed within a few days. Regardless, I have done a copy edit to look out for any typos in case there were any, and will be renominating the article. Anyway, there's no hard feelings, I just wanted to explain. Have a lovely weekend 😊 DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 00:40, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! A quick fail does not mean an article is exceptionally bad; just that there is one criterion it is severly lacking in. In this case, it was the Photos section; the article Summer Newman has a photo of Lannier, and a requirement is that good articles must have photos if at all possible, which that article proves (that it is possible). That is the only reason why you were quick failed and the other reasons were just comments. - OmegaAOL (talk page, and contribs) 00:44, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thank you for letting me know. Just to clarify, the reason why Summer Newman has a picture of Lanier is because that is a screenshot from the show, which is allowed in character articles where it is the main subject, but not for actor articles of living people. This is why there are hundreds of soap opera articles with pictures of the characters but the actors not having them in their article as there is no free use rationale unfortunately DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 00:47, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There do seem to be CC videos on YouTube for the results "Summer Newman", so try using a still from one of those. - OmegaAOL (talk page, and contribs) 01:02, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, I thought the image in that article was CC/. - OmegaAOL (talk page, and contribs) 01:02, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good Evening! I just wanted to let you know that I think the quick fail for this GA was inappropriate. Based on your review, I don't believe the issues were significant and unlikely to be resolved during the seven-day time frame which is expected for GAs. I recommend reopening this GA and working with User:DaniloDaysOfOurLives to work this out, and please let me know if there is anything I can help you with! Bgsu98 (Talk) 03:16, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely; I had originally failed it due to incorporating no image - thus failing Criterion 6 - but then realized that the image in question that I had expected the author to have used, which was on another article, was fair use. I will be re-opening this review. - OmegaAOL (talk page, and contribs) 03:23, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited James Rorke, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pioneer.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:58, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

		The Computing Barnstar
		For your work in improving coverage of Texas Instruments calcultors, most notably so far TI-84 Plus series. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 13:16, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! - OmegaAOL (talk page, and contribs) 02:03, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

		The Multiple Good Article Reviewer's Barnstar
		This award is given to OmegaAOL for accumulating at least 30 points in the October 2025 GAN Backlog Drive. Your dedicated reviews contributed to the successful reduction of the backlog and helped improve the quality of articles. Here's our token of appreciation. Thank you for your time and efforts, and hopefully we'll see you soon again! Bgsu98 (Talk) 23:15, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, thank you for this! I was happy to contribute to the articles I reviewed and help make them GA-worthy. - OmegaAOL (talk page, and contribs) 02:03, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:TI 84 Plus CSE EZ-Spot.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:39, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:TI 84 Plus Monochrome.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:40, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Love your new signature it looks awesome! GothicGolem29 (Talk) 17:23, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh wow thanks! I spent 10 minutes on this lol and it JUST passed the character limit. OmegaAOLtalk? 17:25, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ooh it changed again this one is even better! I know the feeling took me ages to make a good signature. GothicGolem29 (Talk) 17:30, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, I would have included Special:Contributions on here too but for the damn character limit. OmegaAOLtalk? 17:33, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah that limit is annoying. GothicGolem29 (Talk) 17:41, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is a whole internal section on it. Apparently, you can bypass it with templates, which is interesting. Happy editing! OmegaAOLtalk? 17:44, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah that is an interesting tip to bypass it. You too! GothicGolem29 (Talk) 17:46, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Stub Barnstar Hires.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 18:30, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's ironic that you create the WP essay WP:NORGW arguing that "pro-RGW" editors are in favor of introducing less reliable sources to push a POV, yet you passed the Talk:Richard A. Peterson (aviator)/GA1. Why are YouTube videos and random websites reliable sources?? This seems to be something you just failed to check or don't fully understand.

{r{u|Bgsu98}} this is my problem with backlog drives that don't include a rigorous quality check. (t · c) buidhe 00:26, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Buidhe Three things:

• The YouTube videos are used to cite a quote by Peterson, and one of those videos is literally Peterson saying that quote, which is one of the only acceptable uses of a YouTube video in citation. This would still not be acceptable on its own, but there is a secondary source backing this statement up (c14).
• I did a spot-check of the first citation for each statement, and the YouTube videos made up the last 2 citations of a statement with 3 (the first was a book). This is how I missed the videos. I can (and will) remove the other, non-Peterson-including video, and that statement will still hold up.
• You missed the point of the essay. It was not about editors introducing invalid sources, but about editors giving undue or equivalent weight to a less reliable RS in favor of a preexisting more reliable RS.

failed to check or don't fully understand I think this statement is a bit, what was the word? Ironic? because the point of the essay completely flew over your head. OmegaAOLtalk? 02:34, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, the only site used that could be construed as "random" is To Fly and Fight, which does seem to be a legitimate, non-"blog" website. OmegaAOLtalk? 02:44, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Other than that, the sites used are just military history databases/directories that pull from multiple historical records, so why the plural for "random sites"? For dramatic effect or simply because you failed to check or don't fully understand the sources? OmegaAOLtalk? 02:49, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Being a blog is orthogonal to the question of reliability. It must have editorial oversight or recognized expertise, as well as a reputation for fact checking and accuracy. None of this has been, it appears, even evaluated. (t · c) buidhe 06:13, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The To Fly and Fight website is itself based on a famous book authored by the operator of the site, who has recognized expertise in the subject matter. OmegaAOLtalk? 11:52, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for pointing out the "history channel" YouTube video (which I have now removed from the three citations for that particular quote), but the rest of your points do not seem to be valid. See the rest of my response. OmegaAOLtalk? 02:50, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Peterson's statement in an interview is not a reliable source except as attributed for his version of events. Furthermore, the average YouTube channel is not even reliable enough to trust they are actually interviewing the person they claim they are. (t · c) buidhe 06:10, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. My apologies, I was unactive for some time. That video is sourcing a direct quote by Peterson, not a wikivoice statement. It is just sourcing his version of events. In addition, you are correct about the reliability but the statement is also backed up by a secondary source. OmegaAOLtalk? 11:49, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

inactive* OmegaAOLtalk? 11:52, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

story · music · places

Today I remember a singer who impressed me on stage. - Thank you for participating in the PR! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:16, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome! OmegaAOLtalk? 16:06, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have three biographies on the main page today, miss a fourth one, nominated a fifth, that means little time for other matters. My places now include La Scala, - see music, Verdi three times, and twice in my story! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:56, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia's norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Additionally, you must be logged in, have 500 edits, and have an account age of 30 days, and you are not allowed to make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any page within this topic.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template. — Newslinger talk 08:21, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please also be aware of the following contentious topics, which you have recently participated in:

• post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people (WP:CT/AP)
• articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles (WP:CT/BLP)

Thank you. — Newslinger talk 08:21, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your good article nomination of the article TI-84 Plus series is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of OpalYosutebito -- OpalYosutebito (talk) 19:06, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your good article nomination of the article TI-84 Plus series has been placed on hold, as the article needs some changes. See the review page for more information. If these are addressed within 7 days, the nomination will pass; otherwise, it may fail. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of OpalYosutebito -- OpalYosutebito (talk) 20:03, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you Change Windows vista screenshot to windows 7 screenshot in Microsoft Windows, cuz the screenshot feels out of place in the Microsoft Windows! ~2025-32800-49 (talk) 13:57, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@~2025-32800-49: I would, however the Vista screenshot is a CC0 "free image", and Wikipedia policy states to use those instead of copyrighted images. OmegaAOLtalk? 13:59, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Vistadesktop.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you.

This is an automated notification. Please refer to the page's history for further information. DatBot (talk) 00:32, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:TI 84 Plus CSE.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of non-free use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of non-free use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable non-free use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable non-free use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file's talk page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 10:03, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited TI-81, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Degrees.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:55, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2025 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:48, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]