Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Dan arndt were:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Elikonas hill and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Dan arndt (talk) 13:37, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, LaparohMesa! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation 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! Dan arndt (talk) 13:37, 29 December 2024 (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 KylieTastic was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Elikonas hill and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

KylieTastic (talk) 14:06, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some Greek transliterations do not reflect the names we use under WP:COMMONNAME: for example, we use Acharnes instead of Aharnai. I am also concerned about the removal of templates that we use to link to stations within the article and template spaces, such as {{metro}}, {{rws}} and {{stn}}, and also those we use to convert units and for references, such as {{convert}} and {{reflist}} (which is widely used on this wiki). Finally, I am concerned, based on this edit, your claim that the Souflias plan proposed to extend Line 2 to Acharnes, which is untrue as the extension to said station was proposed long after he left office. His proposal only went as far as Zefyri. --Minoa (talk) 04:55, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The spellings of the stations are the same as the ones shown in the 2022 October plan so stop spreading misnfo. I will undo your edit. Although I will keep what you did in Grigorios Lambrakis station LaparohMesa (talk) 12:38, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Accusing me of misinformation over how we transliterate Greek names is probably the most silliest thing I have heard, and is bordering on being uncivil: Elliniko Metro is not always right with their transliterations of station names, especially when there is a widely-used English name (for example, we use Athens instead of Athina, and Corinth instead of Korinthos). --Minoa (talk) 19:17, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Minoa Yes, thar might be true for Athens and Cornith, but Aharnai is Αχαρναί so that's not the case for the station name LaparohMesa (talk) 19:21, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that Αχαρναί comes from the Katharevousa form, which is not in general use nowadays. I can attribute the alternative spelling to Elliniko Metro with an inline source in the table, but the default should remain "Acharnes" per the article about the town, and also we transliterate "χ" to "ch" and not "h", according to ISO 843. --Minoa (talk) 21:38, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@LaparohMesa, can we keep things civil, these edits have been built up over a number of years and the editors have found consensus in the translation of these pages. Mistakes can/are made, but going against other editors, removing templates and threating language is not helpful. ✠ Emperor of Byzantium ✠ (talk) 23:38, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@The Emperor of Byzantium sorry LaparohMesa (talk) 13:46, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I had to undo the merging of municipalities in the station tables, because some stations are on the boundaries of two municipalities, such as Cholargos. In addition, long merged rows can cause readability problems. Your understanding is appreciated. --Minoa (talk) 04:55, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that your recent edit to Line A3 (Athens Suburban Railway) did not have an edit summary. You can use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit, or to provide a description of what the edit changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances that your edit will be misunderstood. For some edits, an adequate summary may be quite brief.

The edit summary field looks like this:

Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. With a Wikipedia account, you can give yourself a reminder by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary (or the default undo summary), and then click the "Save" button. Thanks! Tenshi! (Talk page) 15:00, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you translated text from el:Λόφος Ελικώνας to Elikonas Hill. While you are welcome to translate Wikipedia content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing requires that you provide attribution to the contributor(s) of the original article. When translating from a foreign-language Wikipedia article, this is supplied at a minimum in an edit summary on the page where you add translated content, identifying it as a translation and linking it to the source page. Sample wording for this is given here. If you forgot, or were not aware of this requirement, attribution must be given retroactively, for example:

NOTE: Content in the edit of 01:25, January 25, 2023 was translated from the existing French Wikipedia article at [[:fr:Exact name of French article]]; see its history for attribution.

Retroactive attribution may be added using a dummy edit; see Repairing insufficient attribution. It is good practice, especially if translation is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{translated page}} template on the talk page of the destination article. If you have added translated content previously which was not attributed at the time it was added, you must add attribution retrospectively, even if it was a long time ago. You can read more about author attribution and the reasons for it at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. JTtheOG (talk) 06:25, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, LaparohMesa,

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username TheLongTone, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I have tagged AsharshylykAAs for deletion, because it doesn't appear to contain any encyclopedic content. You may find our guide for writing quality articles to be extremely informative. Also, you may want to consider working on future articles in draft space first, where they cannot be deleted for lacking content.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top. If the page is already deleted by the time you come across this message and you wish to retrieve the deleted material, please contact the deleting administrator.

For any further query, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|TheLongTone}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

TheLongTone (talk) 15:27, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Dengismmm has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 17 § Dengismmm until a consensus is reached. Rusalkii (talk) 01:56, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article MAGA Communism 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/MAGA Communism 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.

Remsense ‥ 论 20:52, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @LaparohMesa - would you mind reverting your non-admin close of this discussion please? This discussion did not fit the criteria for speedy keep - despite the nominator's withdrawal, there were delete and redirect !votes, which makes it ineligible for a speedy keep. Only when there are keep !votes coupled with nomintor withdrawal is a speedy keep possible under criteria #1(iii). Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 22:56, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, I've looked at this more closely, I do not see any evidence of a withdrawal from the nominator. Can you please indicate why you closed the discussion and what gave you an indication the nomination was withdrawn? Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 23:03, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted this closure. There was no withdrawal by the nominator and it was not eligible for a Speedy Keep so that was deceitful on your part. If you try another stunt like this, LaparohMesa, I will give you a block. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:28, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently edited a page related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, 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.

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 here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 12:15, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Koukoumitsa of Aetolia-Acarnania, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

NeoGaze (talk) 11:13, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop making substantial changes to widely used templates like {{POW}} and {{Executed}} without gaining consensus or even explaining the reasoning for them. It's totally unacceptable to foist those changes across the Wiki without a word of justification. Remsense ‥ 论 12:46, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, LaparohMesa. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Elikonas hill, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 15:08, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, LaparohMesa. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Bathroom fight, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 19:06, 24 October 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) 00:53, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]