User talk:Kmsiever

Archives

2008 / 2007 / 2006 / 2005

WikiProject Canada rating

I've reverted your change to the Lethbridge rating - see my reasoning. Mind matrix 22:12, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Lethbridge College

I added the "not to be confused with University of Lethbridge" hatnote to the top of Lethbridge College because both institutions are in the same town, Lethbridge, Alberta, and share a similar name. Someone unfamiliar with the schools or the area (like me) might be looking for a college or university named "Lethbridge" that is in Lethbridge unaware that there are two (in the United States there is no established difference between terms "college" and "university"). If you disagree, please let me know why. -Mabeenot (talk) 22:10, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The only thing similar about their names is the word “Lethbridge”. In Canada, where these two institutions are located, there is an established difference. Lethbridge College doesn’t even offer degrees. I feel that such a practice could lead down a slippery slope, especially given the American usage. After all, it wouldn’t make sense to create college redirects for every US university article, and university redirects for every US college. --Kmsiever (talk) 03:46, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. You're more familiar with Canadian higher education. In response to your slippery slope comment, we already have redirects and disambiguation pages that mix universities and colleges in the United States (for examples, see the hatnotes for Boston University and Trinity University (Texas)). -Mabeenot (talk) 05:44, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Kmsiever! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 2 of the articles that you created are Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to these articles, it would greatly help us with the current 331 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

Jim Unger - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Stacy Roest - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 07:22, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Brocket, Alberta

An article that you have been involved in editing, Brocket, Alberta, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brocket, Alberta. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. 117Avenue (talk) 01:08, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA reassessment of Lethbridge Collegiate Institute

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. You are being notified as you have made a number of contributions to the article. I have found some concerns which you can see at Talk:Lethbridge Collegiate Institute/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 04:53, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Online business directories and Crime Stoppers

Hi Kmsiever, FYI, please see User talk:Maleficant#Lethbridge and Medicine Hat external links. Your assistance in explaining why these links shouldn't be included would be appreciated and may put the current edit/revert cycle to bed sooner rather than later. Cheers, --Hwy43 (talk) 06:20, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Project: Canadian Sport

I noticed you recently updated an article dealing with Sport in Canada. You might be interested to know that there is a project aimed at improving articles on this subject. Feel free to stop by and help out, we'd love to have you! HalifaxRage (talk) 11:24, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Karanacs (talk) 03:41, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. Thanks! --Kmsiever (talk) 15:50, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Lethbridge Journal

The article Lethbridge Journal has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable local paper

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:23, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Send you an email

Regarding Lethbridge. --Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:46, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article for deletion

Hello. Given your history of contributions to Brocket 99 you may have insight to provide to the discussion about deletion of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tim Hitchner Canuckle (talk) 15:39, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

- Oh, thank goodness. —Kmsiever (talk) 22:51, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Lethbridge Centre

The article Lethbridge Centre has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

NN 330,000 sq ft mall.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Epeefleche (talk) 20:36, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
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, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:16, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Dave Siever (February 22)

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

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

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 Draft:Dave Siever and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

SwisterTwister talk 04:54, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the update and for the time you spent reviewing it. I will see if I can find anything else more in-depth. —Kmsiever (talk) 21:58, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Dave Siever

Hello, Kmsiever. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Dave Siever".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation 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 edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} 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) 20:29, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Kmsiever. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page.

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Kmsiever. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lethbridge map.gif

Hello. File:Lethbridge map.gif is an image you uploaded as the owner and had released it into public domain. It is marked as ready to be moved to Commons, where it can be used by other Wikimedia projects. Can you please/can I move the image to Commons, assuming there is no problem with the license? Thanks. We can use CommonsHelper. --Deniz^T_C 23:09, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for asking! By all means, feel free to move it. :) —Kmsiever (talk) 17:33, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Kmsiever. 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]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Kmsiever. 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]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

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) 00:03, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

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) 01:15, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ARCHES

Hello, why did you remove contents related to their hiring of relatives in Special:Diff/996891573 even though it is properly sourced? "A senior executive’s family member was hired, earning $9,900. The auditors could not locate a resume or personnel file to verify any qualifications." "Proper personal conflict of interest declarations were not recorded when related individuals or vendors were hired or utilized." Graywalls (talk) 09:06, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Because it had nothing to do with the $13,000 in interest income earned on SCS funding, which is what the sentence was implying. —Kmsiever (talk) 16:43, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Kmsiever. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page Draft:Kim Siever, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Dan arndt (talk) 03:23, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Dan, for reaching out. I was afraid this might end up being the case, even though I tried to be strict about following notability and citation guidelines while creating the sandbox article. While reading through the COI guidelines you linked to (thank you, by the way), I noticed that editors with COI can use the AfC process for such articles. Do you think the article I submitted for review could be a candidate for AfC? Kmsiever (talk) 03:33, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Lethbridge Bulls

The article Lethbridge Bulls has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:NBASE; could not find reliable secondary sources on Google or DDG

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Dudhhr (talk) 04:27, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kim Siever has been accepted

Kim Siever, 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.

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 leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

―Qwerfjkl talk 06:25, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Qwerfjkl! —Kmsiever (talk) 20:22, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Kim Siever for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kim Siever 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/Kim Siever 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.

Madg2011 (talk) 13:54, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

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) 00:03, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

James Poapst

Do you know James Poapst? he is a wiki admin from Lethbridge Mynameisfakeisthatok (talk) 23:17, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don’t believe that I do. The name doesn’t sound familiar. But there are over 100,000 people in this city. :) —Kmsiever (talk) 19:20, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]