Hello, Charles Inigo, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction and Getting started
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Jonathunder (talk) 13:06, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Jupitus Smart was:

This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Every article needs to be about a unique topic, while this article does not seem to have any context

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:Charles Inigo/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the or on the .
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Jupitus Smart 14:30, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Charles Inigo, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Jupitus Smart 14:30, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from International Time Bureau into Paris meridian. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was moved, attribution is not required. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:17, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Charles Inigo. 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]

Hello, Charles Inigo. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "sandbox".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 22:11, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Charles Inigo. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited French Geodesic Mission, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Acceleration due to gravity (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:59, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:21, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 02:53, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Charles, I reverted your addition of a See also section to the Benjamin Baillaud article because your edit summary gave no reason for the addition and I could find no connection that justified the inclusion. Gab4gab (talk) 15:16, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Gab4gab, Benjamin Baillaud is mentionned in the section Legacy of the article Carlos Ibáñez e Ibáñez de Ibero as follows : From a technical and scientific point of view, at this time, the development of wireless telegraphy hinted at the possibility of unifying Universal Time. From 1910, the astronomical clocks of the Paris Observatory sent the time to sea daily through the Eiffel Tower within a radius of 5 000 km. Following a report by Gustave Ferrié, the Bureau des Longitudes organized at the Paris Observatory a Conférence internationale de l'heure radiotélégraphique in 1912. The International Time Bureau was created and installed in the premises of the Paris Observatory. Due to World War I, the International Convention was never ratified. In 1919, the existence of the International Time Bureau was formalized under the authority of an International Time Commission, under the aegis of the International Astronomical Union, created by Benjamin Baillaud. The International Time Bureau was dissolved in 1987 and its tasks were divided between the International Bureau of Weights and Measures and the International Earth Rotation and Reference Systems Service (IERS). So the link between Carlos Ibáñez e Ibáñez de Ibero and Benjamin Baillaud is the International Time Bureau (1912-1987) the tasks of which where continued by the International Bureau of Weights and Measures and the International Earth Rotation and Reference Systems Service. Charles Inigo (talk) 18:57, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Charles Inigo. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Jean Brunner, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 08:02, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your message,

As I mentionned in the talk page of the draft, the article Jean Brunner has already been edited and the draft can be destroyed.

Charles Inigo (talk) 17:17, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions. It seems that you may have added public domain content to one or more Wikipedia articles, such as Ferdinand Rudolph Hassler. You are welcome to import appropriate public domain content to articles, but in order to meet the Wikipedia guideline on plagiarism, such content must be fully attributed. This requires not only acknowledging the source, but acknowledging that the source is copied. There are several methods to do this described at Wikipedia:Plagiarism#Public-domain sources, including the usage of an attribution template. Please make sure that any public domain content you have already imported is fully attributed. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 14:41, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your remark. I have difficulties to follow your instructions. Could you help me with an example.Charles Inigo (talk) 15:51, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just add the template {{PD-notice}} after your citation. Here is a simple example. — Diannaa (talk) 17:58, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Bri. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Metrication, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:21, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 01:30, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited International Association of Geodesy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Masala.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You did not identify the source of the material in your edit. It appears to be Metrication. Copying within Wikipedia is acceptable but it must be attributed.

This type of edit does get picked up by Copy Patrol and a good edit summary helps to make sure we don't accidentally revert it. However, for future use, would you note the best practices wording as outlined at Wikipedia:Copying_within_Wikipedia? In particular, linking to the source article and adding the phrase "see that page's history for attribution" helps ensure that proper attribution is preserved.

While best practices are that attribution should be added to the edit summary at the time the edit is made, the linked article on best practices describes the appropriate steps to add attribution after the fact. I hope you will do so.

I've noticed that this guideline is not very well known, even among editors with tens of thousands of edits, so it isn't surprising that I point this out to some veteran editors, but there are some t's that need to be crossed.~~~~ S Philbrick(Talk) 12:26, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In fact material has been copied from the article Carlos Ibáñez e Ibáñez de Ibero. I didn't mention that material was copied because I contributed myself to the text of this article as I also did in the article metrication. Charles Inigo (talk) 14:36, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You did identify the source of the material in your edit. It appears to be Seconds pendulum. Copying within Wikipedia is acceptable but it must be properly attributed.

This type of edit does get picked up by Copy Patrol and a good edit summary helps to make sure we don't accidentally revert it. However, for future use, would you note the best practices wording as outlined at Wikipedia:Copying_within_Wikipedia? In particular, linking to the source article and adding the phrase "see that page's history for attribution" helps ensure that proper attribution is preserved.

While best practices are that attribution should be added to the edit summary at the time the edit is made, the linked article on best practices describes the appropriate steps to add attribution after the fact. I hope you will do so.

I've noticed that this guideline is not very well known, even among editors with tens of thousands of edits, so it isn't surprising that I point this out to some veteran editors, but there are some t's that need to be crossed.~~~~ S Philbrick(Talk) 15:46, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:50, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:36, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I thought you had finished editing Prime meridian (Greenwich) but I see that my last edit and yours collided. I think my edit incorporated the correction you were making but please review. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 12:30, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to History of the metre, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. On the Talk page for History of the metre there was a discussion of your additions related to Einstein. The consensus was clear: no. Re-adding those claims in a long series of edits to other parts of the article is not acceptable behavior. The only way forward for that content is to develop a consensus to add it. Johnjbarton (talk) 17:04, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at International Bureau of Weights and Measures. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Please stop adding content that is not directly on-topic for that specific article, evidently WP:DUE and not in breach of WP:SYNTH, as you did here at great and tendentious length and despite having been told repeatedly by different editors in a variety of ways that it is contrary to the very purpose, design and function of the encyclopedia. NebY (talk) 17:20, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved content from History of the metre into Foundation of the International Bureau of Weights and Measures. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content (here or elsewhere), Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 11:53, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Foundation of the International Bureau of Weights and Measures is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Foundation of the International Bureau of Weights and Measures until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

NebY (talk) 13:26, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to History of the metre. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Please pay attention to and follow Wikipedia policy as expressed in Wikipedia:No original research#Primary, secondary and tertiary sources and WP:No original research#Synthesis of published material. Rather than researching history yourself, seek out and summarise appropriate reliable sources which directly discuss the subject - see WP:SCHOLARSHIP. NebY (talk) 15:32, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The source I recently mentionned in History of the metre was a secondary source, Jean-Baptiste Delambre cited by Guillaume Bigourdan, in an article which is a reliable source. Charles Inigo (talk) 16:54, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Where did Bigourdan say "It was originally planned to dematerialize the meridional definition of the metre by counting the number of swings of a one-metre-long pendulum during a day (86,400 seconds), in a vacuum, at sea level and at the temperature of melting ice"? NebY (talk) 17:00, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

P. 334 Charles Inigo (talk) 17:12, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bigourdan retailing a primary source with "On proposa"? NebY (talk) 17:54, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The primary source is Base du système métrique décimal. Bigourdan introduced a quote with "On proposa..." The quote is "En un mot si la mémoire de ces travaux venait à s'effacer, si les résultats seuls étoient conservés, ils n'offroient rien qui pùt servir à faire connoìtre quelle nation en a conçut l'idée, en a suivi l'exécution". In the precedent page (p. 333) he says: "La première est le pendule"...

I added a note sourced by pp. 333-334 in Arc measurement of Delambre and Méchain:

French scientists did not want to introduce another dimension (time) into the definition of the unit of length, which was at the time the unit on which the metric system (metre and kilogram) was based. However, it was originally also planned to dematerialize the definition of the metre by counting the number of swings of a one-metre-long pendulum during a day (86,400 seconds), in a vacuum, at sea level, at the temperature of melting ice and at a latitude of 45°.^[1] The second was only added to the system following a proposal by Carl Friedrich Gauss in 1832 to base a system of absolute units on the three fundamental units of length, mass and time (see Centimetre–gram–second system of units).

Maybe we could use it in the introductory summary of History of the metre? Charles Inigo (talk) 21:24, 9 July 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) 00:41, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]