`  == Male Wikipedians ==  Hi! I noticed you made yourself a male userbox. I've just made a ``standard`` one at  (which slots you into Category:Male Wikipedians). Feel free to use it and/or edit it! —  |     ==Wikimedia Canada== Hi there! I'd like to invite you to explore Wikimedia Canada, and create a list of people interested in forming a local chapter for our nation. A local chapter will help promote and improve the organization, within our great nation. We'd also like to encourage everyone to suggest projects for our national chapter to participate in. Hope to see you there!   ==Strelchick==   I got your message about Strelchick.  When I made an article about him, it was about 2 weeks before the election.  It was only 2 sentences long.  Then some NDP-er added like 100 paragraphs too it.  (Don't worry, Im a staunch liberal)  I think it should be shortnened, and then, if nothing at all happens for about six months, deleted.  But not yet.  Thanks.  ==Strelchick 2==  I got a reply from someone about you, and the Strelchick article.  I didn't really understand it, but this guy hates you.  Take a look at it, and tell me what you want to do about the article.  Thanks,    PS.  You went to TSS.  cool  == Help with Vandalism ==  Hey, you seem like a fairly experienced user, so I thought I'd ask you for help.  keeps blanking Talk:Simon Strelchick. I've reverted it like three times already, and he keeps blanking it - what should I do? Thanks,     :I've left him a warning message on his talk page. You could list the incident on WP:AN/I or, if he reverts more than three times in 24 hours, on WP:AN3.    ==Strelchick redux==  While it's clear that the new editors' behaviour is inappropriate, I'd be remiss if I didn't also suggest to you that you might want to be a bit more careful in the future not to get involved in discussions where you might be perceived as having a personal bias. Whether you do or don't isn't even really the point — sometimes all that's necessary to spark this kind of ruckus is the perception that you have a vested interest. They obviously believe that your nomination was politically motivated rather than based on a neutral assessment of Wikipedia policy.  In future, it might be best to just avoid putting yourself in a situation where your motivations might be questioned in this way. You can always ask other editors, or the Canadian notice board, to review a situation if you think your motivations for proposing a course of action might be questioned.    : Wikipedia:Canadian wikipedians' notice board    == WikiProject Vancouver ==  Hello. I am Arnold (aka Buchanan-Hermit) and I am writing to invite you to join the newly-formed WikiProject Vancouver. It was created really recently and it's in need of new members and those who are willing to spread the word.  I'd love to see you there. ) Thanks for your time. .....   == test page ==  Please do not use the main article namespace for testing. There is the Wikipedia:Sandbox for doing that, or . Just edit the page at the red link. —•• EMAIL•   :I've speedily Userfied your test page, it can now be found here: User:Pm shef/Pm Shef's Test Center, feel free to test away in your own userspace.  /CVU   :Test pages are not approriate for the main Article space, however you can have all the test pages you want that start with User:(yourname)/PageName.  I moved the test page Pm Shef's Test Center out of main article space to a subpage of your userpage, User:Pm shef/Pm Shef's Test Center.  You can test/edit/develop it all you want there.  If you intend to make it in to an article, you can either MOVE it to the article name, or just copy/apste the contents (if you are the only contributor).  Hope this answeres your question.  /CVU   == Shefman AfD ==  No, I wasn't aware of it, but here's a counterexample: if you look at Boston, MA, there are perhaps two people on the entire City Council that have articles here on WP (they're all listed, but only one or two have blue links).  Boston is about 4 times the population of Vaughan, and I would also point out that its politicians get in the papers very often as well for voting if nothing else.  It's certainly much more historically notable as a city than Vaughan is (as I see it), and yet there is clearly no consensus on who deserves an article and who doesn't.  I would also note that if there is a group that concerns itself with Vaughan on WP, they've got kind of a vested interest in claiming that everyone in their city deserves an article, and thus you've got a slanted vote.  I see very little in the way of content that makes Shefman any more notable than the average town selectman, and if you would like, I would support an RFC on notability for all of the Council as long as there wasn't a skewed vote (as occurred on the first or second Shefman AfD).  From that vote, it seems that a lot of the Vaughan people are politically active, which also makes motive regarding political notability questionable.  The reasoning you have wrt Vaughan would also have it stand to reason that every SGA president of a sizable college campus would be deserving of an article, and that certainly is not the case by any stretch of the imagination.  Also, if newspaper appearance was notable, every weekly columnist for every paper in any municipality would also be notable.  That's not the case.  Every athlete would be notable from high school on up, and that's not the case. To take it a little further, I would bet that every single UN delegate does not have an article on WP, and they're much more notable than a councilman, in my view.  I see a rigged consensus and some self-promotion involved.  What would in fact best serve this whole process would be a WP policy on political notability, because it gets it out of a single issue (which this is) while achieving the same result, as well as solving the problem in future for everybody.   :WP:RFC I believe is the policy page, but I think we would need to do something bigger than that for purposes of reaching the whole community.  An RFC is a ``Request for Comment``, so you basically ask for other peoples' opinions on something, but invariably, unless someone is interested in the topic, they don't comment.  If you are interested in trying to do something community-based rather than on one article, I'll have to look in to how to do that.   ::If there were to be a City Council level page, you would probably get into a WP:BIO problem if you dealt with each individual separately, on that page, and I still don't think it addresses the Non-Notability issue in your favor - the Hamilton Council page has 15 names, only two of which have articles (one being the mayor, who would be notable, and the other being Ward 6 Councilor Tom Jackson, whose article was up for a deletion vote in the past).  So, there's clearly still a notability issue.  I could see a council page with the mayor as notable and no one else without remarkable proof, and if that was acceptable to everybody, I would agree to that kind of page, but I don't think others will, precisely because they feel that there is notability for everyone involved, and I don't think there is.  Other people have apparently thought so too. Even if the council page is a list, there can still be articles linked, and I or anybody else could still AfD the articles inidividually, which doesn't solve the issue. NEW