User talk:JohnThorne/Archive 2017

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome[edit]

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Dougweller (talk) 18:11, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Have been using Wikipedia for a long time. Ready to contribute wherever necessary.

Archives[edit]

Isaiah 45[edit]

Hi and thanks for your work! Note, the analysis of Verse 1 in this article came from a copyrighted web site, http://biblehub.com/commentaries/isaiah/45-1.htm so had to be removed. If I'm wrong, and that site actually took that content from somewhere else that was freely published, please let me know so it can be restored and proper attribution given. Thanks! CrowCaw 23:29, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Crow: The analysis of Verse 1 is taken from several individual sources. The online texts can be viewed at Studylight.org and Sacred-Texts.com. Regarding these resources, it is stated in the main webpage of the latter:

This page indexes fifteen Biblical commentaries, all believed to be in the public domain in the US due to publication prior to 1923. All of the Bible references in these files are linked into the King James Version of the Bible at this site.

Therefore I believe that the citations doesn't infringe any copyrights. JohnThorne (talk) 23:50, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for the reply. One thing we would need to confirm is the actual sources for the various commentaries. Using them as sources is perfectly fine, but if that content is added verbatim, each source needs to be attributed, even if Public Domain, so as to stay on the good side of our Plagiarism policy. I'll restore that content, but if you can identify the actual sources, that would be great. Thanks again! CrowCaw 23:56, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • (more) The detail for Ref 8 is exactly what would be needed for the others, if that level of detail can be gotten. CrowCaw 00:02, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Crow: Very appreciate your review and advice. I'm trying to carefully attribute each statement to the original sources, including citation within citation, such as works of Xenophon, Herodotus, etc. by more modern authors. Will add more details to the references. Thanks again for checking. JohnThorne (talk) 00:04, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks again for the diligence, and again for your contributions! CrowCaw 00:06, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Jewish Bible translations[edit]

Hi, John. Here is another website you might want to include in the external links section. One advantage of this site over the mechon-mamre site is the ability to view Rashi's commentary. Regards, -- -- -- 02:26, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@--: Thank you for the suggestion. JohnThorne (talk) 17:39, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bible chapter articles[edit]

Hi, I have been reviewing some articles you are writing on chapters from the Bible. Much of what you are putting in is very generic, applying to the whole Old Testament etc. It would be good to put some unique information about the content of the chapter in the lead section. This will make the articles more attractive to read, rather than telling people what they already know first up. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:22, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nuzi texts[edit]

I've rewritten this. As it was, it presented only the Creationist view and was a violation of WP:NPOV. I've tried to use a neutral source which mentions the view that there are biblical parallels and the more mainstream view that "The appearance of Late Bronze Age parallels to certain marriage, inheritance, and family religious customs ill Genesis cannot be used as evidence that such stories preserve ancient traditions of the second millennium, since most of these customs continued into the first millennium bce when the Genesis narratives were written down. So the Nuzi texts have a limited, largely illustrative function." Remember, we are a mainstream encyclopedia. On the other hand, if you want to edit from this perspective, Conservapedia is Creationist and probably won't represent any other views. Doug Weller talk 10:33, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and copyright[edit]

Control copyright icon Hello JohnThorne, and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to Nuzi texts have been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or plagiarism issues here.

  • You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
  • Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
  • Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
  • If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. However, there are steps that must be taken to verify that license before you do. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
  • In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
  • Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you can, but please follow the steps in Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Doug Weller talk 12:52, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 10[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Isaiah 23, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Tarsus and Phoenician. 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) 10:38, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 17[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ezekiel 1, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jubilee. 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) 10:13, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 25[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ezekiel 19, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Judah. 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) 10:21, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 7[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ezekiel 26, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Phoenician. 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) 10:41, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 29[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Oxyrhynchus Papyri, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Genesis 3 and Genesis 2. 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) 10:12, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 6[edit]

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.

Jeremiah 10
added a link pointing to Chaldean
Jeremiah 8
added a link pointing to Transjordan

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:57, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Jeremiah 31[edit]

A tag has been placed on Category:Jeremiah 31 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

'Category' only contains one article and some redirects to the same article

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Jeffro77 (talk) 07:50, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

JohnThorne, I have deleted this. Given the clear precedent established at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2016_November_17#Single-article_Book_of_Isaiah_chapters, please do not create or re-create any more categories along those lines. – Fayenatic London 10:38, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I now see that you have already created more of these within Category:Book of Jeremiah chapters and Category:Book of Isaiah chapters. Rather than take anyone else's time over this, please would you empty them yourself and tag the category pages with {{db-user}}? The ones containing other pages e.g. Category:Isaiah 8 can stay. (I have left a similar request for user:Spiderjerky who created some others in that set.) – Fayenatic London 10:47, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Specific categories were created in anticipation for accommodating related articles. However, it turns out that there is lack of coordination (and time) to perform such linking (or article creations), so many categories are left with very few real pages, and now just contain mostly redirects as "place-holders". I will take some times to help identifying the categories that won't be filled anytime soon, to tag them, so they can be deleted, if other users insist. Peace. JohnThorne (talk) 22:31, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Various issues[edit]

I can see that you have put a fair bit of effort into some quite well sourced articles about various Bible chapters, but there are number of issues with your additions:

  • See also sections are for providing links to relevant articles that are not already linked in the main article.
    • It is not the purpose of the section to link 'other related Bible parts', especially if there may be POV interpretations or only tenuous connections to particular verses or sections. Instead, such connections if relevant should be indicated in the article, with appropriate sources such as relevant commentaries.
    • If a term already appears in the article, link it where it already appears in the article instead of adding it to the See also section.
    • It is not necessary to link very general terms like Jesus in articles about the New Testament; in most cases, it would be better to simply link the term in the main article text. (And don't link to Jesus Christ anyway, because it is a redirect to Jesus.)
  • It is not suitable to create a category for Bible chapters that only contain the main article and a bunch of redirects to the same article. If there is a section about a particular verse in a given target article, just link to the section.
    • It is not necessary to create redirects for Bible verses the relevant section can be linked instead. For example, instead of linking to a redirect called "[[Jeremiah 31:22]]", you could provide a link to a section about a specific verse with "[[Jeremiah 31#Verse 22|Jeremiah 31:22]]".
  • It is not helpful to provide an article hatnote linking to a specific Bible chapter where the target is only a redirect to the article about the whole book.

This is not necessarily an exhaustive list of issues so far.--Jeffro77 (talk) 08:14, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I endorse all the above comments, except that it is acceptable to create redirects to sections if you envisage that they may be used more than once. Just do not categorise them unnecessarily. – Fayenatic London 11:13, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The comments and suggestions for improvements are highly appreciated. Just to clarify some points:
  • Selection of links in "See also" is primarily based on recommended links from the sources (commentaries, notes). Some links may appear both in the article body and "See also"; I will take some times to go back and remove the redundancy.
  • Both redirect methods have been used in many pages. A redirect is generally meant to link to a significant article, otherwise it is pending to the creation of that particular page (which unfortunately will take substantially longer time to get to). If the verse is only meant to be used once, generally it does not need redirecting.
  • Very apppreciate the remarks from Fayenatic London as well.
Feel free to give more positive advice and contributions to the pages. Peace. JohnThorne (talk) 22:44, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Warning about plagiarism[edit]

On your recent new article Jeremiah 34, you added the following text:

[begin quote]

"Against Lachish, and against Azekah": The two cities, Lachish and Azekah, are named in the book of Jeremiah for the first time in this verse. Lachish (45 km or 23 miles southwest of Jerusalem)[6] was one of the strongest towns of the Amorites in the time of Joshua (Joshua 10:3; Joshua 10:5), and was situated in the Shfela, or lowland district (Joshua 15:39). It was restored or fortified by Rehoboam, as a defence against the northern kingdom (2 Chronicles 11:9). Amaziah took refuge there on his flight from the conspiracy at Jerusalem (2 Chronicles 14:19; 2 Chronicles 25:27). It was taken by Sennacherib on his way from Assyria to Egypt, and made the monarch’s headquarters (2 Chronicles 32:9; 2 Kings 18:17). A slab at Kouyunjik[7] represents the siege of Lakhisha by the armies of Sennacherib, and gives something like a ground-plan of the city. Its site has not been identified with certainty, but ruins still known as Um-lakis are found between Gaza and Eleutheropolis. It is mentioned here as being, next to Jerusalem, one of the strongest fortresses of the kingdom of Judah, which as yet had resisted the attack of Nebuchadnezzar’s armies. The lesser known Azekah (18 km or 11 miles north-northwest of Lachish)[6] was also in the Shfela region, and is named with other cities in Joshua 10:10-11; Joshua 15:35 NKJV. The Philistines were encamped between it and Shochoh in the days of Saul (1 Samuel 17:1). It also was fortified by Rehoboam (2 Chronicles 11:9). Its site has not been ascertained, but Eusebius and Jerome speak of it as lying between Eleutheropolis and Jerusalem.[8]

[end quote]

This text was copied word-for-word from Ellicott's commentary. Passing this off as if it were the Wikipedia article itself constitutes plagiarism, and is forbidden at Wikipedia. Please familiarize yourself with WP:PLAG. You have been warned about this before. If you are unable to figure out what you're doing wrong here, it may be time for you to stop producing new articles, in order not to produce messes for other editors to clean up. If you have any questions about this policy, please let me know. Alephb (talk) 03:36, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The text is revised. JohnThorne (talk) 06:10, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Another plagiarism/misattribution warning[edit]

Hello, JohnThorne.

If you decide to lift wording directly from a source, especially a copyrighted source, you need to put quotation marks around the wording you directly copied. This is true of your recent edit to Isaiah 13. In this case you took the NKJV chapter heading "Proclamation Against Babylon" and turned it into a sentence This chapter record [sic] the [sic] proclamation against Babylon. If you want to do this, you need to put quotes around "proclamation against Babylon." Here's a diff of that edit: [1].

What is especially worrying here is that this latest misattribution occurred on July 12, only one day after your most recent warning about word-for-word copying on July 11th. And the most recent warning is by no means the most recent. To refresh your memory, here is a collection of times that people have warned you about improper copy-pasting of material into Wikipedia articles: [2][3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11].

As the button which you've placed on your User Page says, "This user is old enough to know better!"

It may seem like a small thing, but you've plagiarized from the NKJV headings a lot — in many cases without attribution — so you need to start getting especially careful about your habit of lifting things word for word. 21:10, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

The mentioned text is revised. There are signs of NKJV everywhere and each time it is quoted in the text, usually within the format code "|NKJV}}" which is not visible for reading, but it is visible for editing. JohnThorne (talk) 21:17, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Citations need to be visible to the reader, and words directly lifted need to be put in quotes. I've had to remove quite a bit of your plagiarism, and in some cases you haven't added any format codes at all. Your answer suggests that you still do not understand the problem. Alephb (talk) 22:49, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Clarification: the citations are marked with the visible references, but biblical verses have a template to point to specific Bible version such as NKJV. JohnThorne (talk) 23:55, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sometimes citations are marked with the visible references. Often they're just plagiarized without any attribution at all. Alephb (talk) 05:06, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Duly noted. JohnThorne (talk) 16:11, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please take part in this discussion at ANI concerning your editing[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. It's here Doug Weller talk 05:53, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notice. JohnThorne (talk) 15:31, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite topic ban from biblical topics[edit]

Based on the result of this community discussion about the patterns of your editing in these biblical topics, you have been indefinitely topic banned from all pages relating to the Bible. You may appeal this sanction, but it should be filed after no less than one year. There is consensus on that you are editing in good faith, and a block is not appropriate in this case. Violations of this topic ban however could lead to the option being considered.

This editing restriction has been logged here. Alex ShihTalk 19:08, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you are ready to ask the community to review this topic ban, you should start a new section on the page Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard, with a subject line such as "Review of JohnThorne topic ban". You should then link to the ban, ask for it to be reviewed, and explain what you have learned in the meantime, and how you would edit differently from before. Best wishes – Fayenatic London 09:10, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

biblical ban to hysterical indonesian project[edit]

Yup Indonesian articles are not regularly watched like the biblical ones, so the lattitude might or might not be in your favour

There are a multitude of sins in the project - and the likelihood if you look close enough there are major structural crimes in some areas as well - details of which can be provided if you dont understand what I am alluding to.

But please - if you have the capacity to get biblical eds concerned, please understand Indonesian project items require something of care, as there are watchers - and a considerable amount of discretion is required on very under-maintained and quite atrocious stubs - in their lack of WP:RS and lack of what WP:NOT might be thrown at JarrahTree 03:36, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Very appreciate the concern. I notice the issues and try to help as much as I can. Peace. JohnThorne (talk) 17:18, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A mystery series[edit]

One rather troubling set of articles are the mysterious 'rivers of indonesia' cited from an old hard copy atlas with no attempt to identify 'where' - that is a province or region or district is not identified

as the edits do not identify easily where they are or where they flow

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaingan_River

as part of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rivers_of_Indonesia

I may have encountered the difficult one, maybe most are solvable

a task to unravel the mysteries of some of the rivers would be very helpful JarrahTree 14:05, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No known river with that name in Java. Perhaps misspelled. I found one misspelled name in the list: "Maduin River" should be Madiun River. Will check other river names. JohnThorne (talk) 00:56, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
exactly - in my mind it puts up to question all river stubs utilising old atlas ref...

and well done on the madiun river !! JarrahTree 03:31, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A mystery is solved! "Kaengan River" is called Ci Kaengan by the local people, and more often written in Indonesian as "Cikaengan". I found "Kaingan" in old maps and it is indeed the "Ci Kaengan." JohnThorne (talk) 20:48, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly - each river needs to be checked imho - as the single ref of an old and obscure print atlas does not necessarily carry the term currently used or spelling for that matter JarrahTree 03:26, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
hahah dont know how that got through https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cod%C3%A9_River
kelud in east java, one has to be so careful... JarrahTree 00:34, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. Therefore, I added additional information to clarify this. The eruption of Kelud in 2014 was so big, that the ash fell to West Java. JohnThorne (talk) 00:46, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
even funnier you can tell i have been out of country for quite a time... my mistake then.. thanks for clarifying JarrahTree 01:08, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
very long time ago used to know some oz anthropologists working with the poor on the code edges JarrahTree 01:30, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
the good works continue to this day. JohnThorne (talk) 01:34, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Madiun River) has been reviewed![edit]

Thanks for creating Madiun River, JohnThorne!

Wikipedia editor Bfpage just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

nice article

To reply, leave a comment on Bfpage's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Bfpage (talk) 01:03, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Nehemiah has been nominated for discussion[edit]

Category:Nehemiah, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:23, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Book of Nehemiah has been nominated for discussion[edit]

Category:Book of Nehemiah, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:29, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Psalm 18 has been nominated for discussion[edit]

Category:Psalm 18, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:39, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ANI Experiences survey[edit]

Beginning on November 28, 2017, the Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) will be conducting a survey to en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.

The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:

If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.

Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 21:12, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Hello, JohnThorne. 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]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:JohnThorne/Archive_2017&oldid=1138988893"