Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2015/MassMessage

Note to self

Consensus is here

Copy editing suggestions

Following up on this request for feedback: I suggest the following copy edits (with "voting page" linked to the appropriate page):

Hi {{BASEPAGENAME}},

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee,

I would like to change "maintain our editing environment" as well: I would prefer to refer to maintaining a collaborative/productive community. I suspect though that this may draw some opposition. isaacl (talk) 17:42, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mdann52, do you have any comments regarding my suggested changes? isaacl (talk) 06:22, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Isaacl: Looks ok to me, I'll merge it later on. Mdann52 (talk) 13:18, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Points

@Mdann52: "Candidates statements" is ungrammatical. It needs an apostrophe: "candidates' statements". I'm also curious as to why you indented the message..? — This, that and the other (talk) 06:38, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also pinging Mike V since the page is now protected. — This, that and the other (talk) 06:39, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the {{admin help}} template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page.

Can someone please enact the above on the message please, removing the accidental indent? Thanks, Mdann52 (talk) 07:09, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done @Mdann52: -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 07:41, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

BASEPAGENAME

Is it normal to use the BASEPAGENAME in a non-subst'd mass message? It looks like the message itself was sent with {{tl}} which just confuses things, but I think removing the basepagename bit all together is sensible, unless the message is going to be subst'd. In fact, I think I'll do that now. Worm^TT(talk) 09:13, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to remove the RL, I'm not subs ting to make it easier tore move if desired - do what you want!!! Mdann52 (talk) 09:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I vaguely remember a bot that comess round an subst's any instances of BASEPAGENAME, so I thought it better to remove all together :) Worm^TT(talk) 09:58, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Worm That Turned: As this is a transclusion, this shouldn't matter at all (it won't be subst: in Wikipedia space AFAIK), but as you said, better to be safe :) Mdann52 (talk) 12:59, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How many

How many copies of this message were delivered? All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 01:19, 3 April 2016 (UTC).[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 8 March 2019

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please prepend <noinclude>{{pp-template|small=yes}}</noinclude> to the start of the page. It is currently template-protected (see the protection log) but the page is not currently tagged as such. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 06:10, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done — xaosflux ^Talk 13:41, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]