user talk: Askarion
Feedback
[edit]Hello again. I would like to offer you some respectful feedback on our "Han shot first" conversation. I hope you will find the feedback constructive and useful, and not accusatory. I am offering it from a place of goodwill. Here is the beginning of your first comment in the conversation:
"Merge the pages "at some point"? It seems you've done that already."
Was this commentary necessary? The rest of your comment perfectly conveys your feeling that I should have gone about things differently. We both know I didn't merge the pages, and I very clearly used the phrase "officially merge". In your comment, you dropped the word "official", which results in a misrepresentation of what I said.
I am guessing your comment was borne out of irritation, annoyance or frustration with my bold action. Next time, it would be more helpful and constructive if you could simply state your feelings, such as "I find this type of bold action irritating," or "I'm feeling annoyed that you went about things this way." Otherwise, I am left sitting with your comment and wondering where it's coming from.
Thanks again for offering your valuable perspective on the merge. Your comment made me aware of the problems with it. Wafflewombat (talk) 21:39, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hello again — I was (and still am) unsure that boldly merging the contents of Han shot first to Han Solo without a merge discussion was a good idea. WP:MERGEPROP suggests that, without a merge discussion, content should only be moved from one article to another
if the need for a merge is obvious
, and also thatarticles that have been separate for a long time should usually be discussed first
. I think Han shot first is well sourced and independently notable, so I wouldn't consider this a case where the need for a merge is obvious, but other editors would need to weigh in first. I personally think the content should be removed from Han Solo in the meantime but I also don't think this is that big of a deal so I won't revert them myself. 〜 Askarion ✉ 02:17, 9 July 2024 (UTC)- I understand your views about my decision to merge the content without a discussion. You clearly explained this perspective on the talk page. My comment above was about how you communicated, not about your views. Can you see, from my view, how the beginning of your original comment might feel hurtful?
- I have reverted the edits. Wafflewombat (talk) 02:56, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- Nevermind, don't answer that question. I'm making a big deal out of nothing. Have a good day 🙂 Wafflewombat (talk) 16:15, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message
[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:46, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
ArbCom 2025 Elections voter message
[edit]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) 00:47, 18 November 2025 (UTC)
Your nomination of Utah monolith is under review
[edit]Your good article nomination of the article Utah monolith 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 Usernameunique -- Usernameunique (talk) 04:06, 6 April 2026 (UTC)
Your nomination of Utah monolith has passed
[edit]Your good article nomination of the article Utah monolith has 
passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Please also consider reviewing somebody else's nomination to help keep the backlog down. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Usernameunique -- Usernameunique (talk) 19:06, 30 April 2026 (UTC)
June 2026 GAN Backlog Drive
[edit]| Good article nominations | June 2026 Backlog Drive |  |
| June 2026 Backlog Drive:
Do you want to become more experienced in the GA process?
Interested in taking part? You can sign up here. | |
| Other ways to participate: | |
| You're receiving this message because you have participated in a good article review this year or participated in the previous backlog drive. | |