User talk:Robert Kerber

Archive

Hi Robert Kerber, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the autopatrolled user right to your account. This means that pages you create will automatically be marked as 'reviewed', and no longer appear in the new pages feed. Autopatrolled is assigned to prolific creators of articles, where those articles do not require further review, and may have been requested on your behalf by someone else. It doesn't affect how you edit; it is used only to manage the workload of new page patrollers.

Since the articles you create will no longer be systematically reviewed by other editors, it is important that you maintain the high standard you have achieved so far in all your future creations. Please also try to remember to add relevant WikiProject templates, stub tags, categories, and incoming links to them, if you aren't already in the habit; user scripts such as Rater and StubSorter can help with this. As you have already shown that you have a strong grasp of Wikipedia's core content policies, you might also consider volunteering to become a new page patroller yourself, helping to uphold the project's standards and encourage other good faith article writers.

Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:44, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

HJ_Mitchell: Many thanks! Robert Kerber (talk) 20:39, 1 June 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

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

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:00, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

For the record, the "nonsense" word referred strictly to the template, not to the copyediting and the addition of sources. And it was you yourself who added the tag that you agree at that point was already "obsolete" (I would point it would had been inappropriate even before your edits, as there was zero OR and each and every sentence was already based on cited sources). Sorry if you felt offended, keep it up the good work. Cavarrone 19:12, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cavarrone I do not agree with everything you've stated above, but let's leave it like this. Robert Kerber (talk) 10:33, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]