User talk:Acroterion

Happy New Year!

Acroterion,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Volten001 ^☎ 07:02, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Volten001 ^☎ 07:02, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Can I put the edit in if I remove the quote or no? Megawinner2 (talk) 02:41, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

No. See your talkpage, let's keep this in one place. Acroterion (talk) 02:42, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

You helped me with the 'Murtz Jaffer' page a long time ago and locked it from vandalism. It appears it has been targeted again as someone filed a GNG dispute against it. I have cleaned it up and marked it as a page to watch. Hoping you might be able to lock it for awhile again. Trip316 (talk) 22:44, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

It's not being vandalized, and a deletion nomination isn't a reason to protect it. Acroterion (talk) 23:13, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Sorry, yes, I wasn't aware that it was an editor that made that request. Is there any advice you can provide on what I can do? Trip316 (talk) 23:40, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Add sources to show that it passes the general notability guideline. Acroterion (talk) 23:56, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

thank you Acroterion.

Do I just place these in the sources? Trip316 (talk) 23:58, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Yes, and you can add anything showing notability that those sources support. Acroterion (talk) 00:06, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Okay thank you. I have also asked the editor who nominated the article for deletion for any further feedback on what I can improve as well as messaged ADMINHELP on my talk page to sort through the issue. My issue is that the deletion nomination notice is public so I am hoping a resolution can be reached soon even if the editor's request to have it removed is what is decided on. Trip316 (talk) 00:09, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

There's nothing an administrator can or will do to alter the deletion discussion, but you're welcome to expand the article and reference it. Take a look at WP:BIO and WP:GNG for the sorts of things that establish notability. Acroterion (talk) 00:20, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Is there a way to move the article somewhere until a decision is reached so that it it being 'nominated for deletion' isn't available for public search? Trip316 (talk) 00:49, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

No, the article has to stay where it is. We're not concerned with whether it's tagged. Acroterion (talk) 01:16, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

That's what is concerning to me as the request for deletion could be concerning for anyone who googles and sees it, but I guess no option. Can you advise how long before a decision is reached? Trip316 (talk) 01:20, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Be careful about WP:OWN, it's not your article. If readers see a deletion notice, maybe they'll be inspired to improve it. Please read the directions at WP:AFD. It could run for seven days. Acroterion (talk) 01:38, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for your help as always Acroterion. I really appreciate your guidance. Trip316 (talk) 02:19, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

hi I want to delete my account Tony British 99 Please I want to delete it or you can block me Tony British 99 (talk) 16:34, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

We can't delete accounts. Just stop editing. Acroterion (talk) 23:16, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Category:Skipjacks indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:33, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2025).

Administrator changes

• Epicgenius
• Left guide
• LEvalyn
• MPGuy2824
• The4lines
• Yue

Fathoms Below

• BaronLarf
• Firefly
• kelapstick
• Opabinia regalis
• Pbsouthwood
• Sethant
• UtherSRG
• Whouk

CheckUser changes

• Giraffer
• HouseBlaster
• SilverLocust

• Liz
• Worm That Turned
• Z1720

Oversight changes

• Asilvering
• Giraffer
• Girth Summit
• Guerillero
• HouseBlaster
• Izno
• SilverLocust

• Liz
• Worm That Turned
• Z1720

Guideline and policy news

• All general sanctions imposed by the community may now be enforced at the Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard (WP:AE) as a result of a recent RfC.
• Due to the result of a recent RFC, the administrator recall process is amended to extend the deadline for a re-request for adminship to 30 days or the next administrator election, whichever is later.
• Changes to the Access to Temporary Account IP Addresses Policy's disclosure rules include broadening the consecutive-blocks exception to cover all admin actions and removing the requirement to revision-delete permissible disclosures once they become unnecessary (instead requiring only their removal). See WP:TAIVDISCLOSE for more information.

Arbitration

• Following the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been elected to the Arbitration Committee: Aoidh, Asilvering, Girth Summit, Guerillero, HJ Mitchell, HouseBlaster, Izno, Sdrqaz, SilverLocust.
• The arbitration case Pbsouthwood has been suspended.

You recently RD2'd a comment by ~2026-20195-1 at Talk:Freya Fox, but they're still disparaging the subject as seen in this reply to a final warning. Their contribution history shows that they're only here to grind an axe, not collaborate. fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four (talk) 22:40, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Blocked and their latest talkpage comment revdel'd. Acroterion (talk) 22:46, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi , I added sources for Bill Ackman giving money to the gofundme for the ICE guy Who shot a woman in the face and it seems the page was set up by dome kind of Nazi . But I messed up the section title and can’t make it look right . Perhsps you could tidy it up and re title it anyway as the Daily Mail and rumours and threats to sanction etc is not the point . Grazie🙏🏼 ~2025-43306-02 (talk) 23:26, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

The New York Post and Newsweek are only marginally superior to the Daily Mail. Where is this covered inreliable sources? Acroterion (talk) 23:29, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

The link I added was to an article by the excellent Jacqueline Sweet in theintercept.com.

And to Ackmans acknowledgement of his action on his X account.

Ill add more sources as they arrive - this seems very important to me as an indication of Ackmans world view . ~2025-43306-02 (talk) 00:10, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

I believe Ackman was also donating to Good's family. So that should be mentioned. Acroterion (talk) 00:16, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

He did not do so. ~2025-43306-02 (talk) 00:26, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Look around, he appears to have stated that intention. Acroterion (talk) 00:32, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Yeah he said he was too late . That’s too bad . But he was in time to donate 10K to the guy Who shot a woman three times in the face . ‘look around’ ? ? At what. I know what he said. And I know what he did. ~2025-43306-02 (talk) 01:49, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Please be careful when writing about someone you plainly don't like. Acroterion (talk) 01:56, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Be careful? Are you threatening me now ? You tell me to ‘look around’ and ‘be careful’ ? Of what? You asked for sources. I’ve added a couple. You said he ‘was also donating to Goods family’. No , he wasn’t , because he said he was too late. Please dont keep threatening , it seems knee jerk with you - threatening with sanction , warn to be careful , look around, wtf - I never heard of this guy until he donate d this money to the ICE shooter so it’s absurd to say I have a particular animus against him. I think this donation says something important about him that’s all . Is that a thought crime? ~2025-43306-02 (talk) 02:12, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Don't be paranoid. No, I'm simply cautioning you to be extra careful to check your assumptions and biases (we all have them) when writing about someone you plainly don't like. Wikipedia isn't a forum for your views on whether someone is good or bad. Acroterion (talk) 02:19, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

I know what Wikipedia is . I don’t need to check my bias because I’m dealing with looking for sources for an action of his - did it happen? You challenged this and warned that there were many Bill Ackmans , or something like that - well , yes it did happen - so then it’s just , is it worth mentioning in an article about this man . I would say yes because to donate to this fundraiser , to my mind, reveals a lot about a guys mentality and world view - maybe you would say no - but that may be because of your bias, - the thing is - anyway , it happened , it’s reliably sourced - ( I can’t add it to the article anyway because it’s locked, so until the article is opened up its moot - spparently Jacqueline Sweet , the respected journalist whole article I linked to asked for a comment but Ackman didn’t respond. Perhaps he will at some point explain more about his action . ) ~2025-43306-02 (talk) 04:47, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

I just realized that ~2026-26011-9 (talk) threatened my life on ANI, in response to my comment the Jon968 v Shoshin000 situation.

They said this: You are going to be in grave danger if you keep going at this rate, I am taking you very seriously, I have your estimated location jotted down, and I will inform my higher ups to tell them what you are doing ~2026-26011-9 (talk) 9:35 pm, Yesterday (UTC−5) shane (talk to me if you want!) 19:48, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

It's a troll who has done this before, they have no idea who you are and don't care, they just like to make threats at randomly chosen editors and threads. They were doing this to five or six people yesterday. They're not even on the same continent, and "jotting down" New York City is far from specific. Somehow I doubt they'd even be allowed on a plane. However, because they have the potential to scare people, I reported them to the WMF when I saw it. Acroterion (talk) 00:06, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

I actually screenshotted their threats on their talk page and sent them to the emergency email shane (talk to me if you want!) 13:15, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

"If this is the 'stupidest behaviour you've ever seen,' either on Wikipedia or anywhere else, you've been remarkably fortunate." I went to the Talk page to say, "If this were the stupidest behaviour I'd ever seen, I would not hasten to broadcast the meagerness of my experience," but you'd already done a better job of it. PRRfan (talk) 16:46, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Your version's pretty good too. Acroterion (talk) 17:52, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Saw you blocked MR JOSÉ IVON RODRIGUES DA CRUZ MINISTER OF THE COURT USA, glad to see this sock finally get blocked as I have been debating whether or not to bring this to ANI for weeks.

Is there a plan to block (or glock) the rest of these accounts? – LuniZunie_(talk) 21:31, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

No plan for me, I just have noticed a series of these grandiosely-titled all-caps accounts now and then, that seem to have the same origin. A CU would probably be in order. Acroterion (talk) 21:39, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

So should I file an SPI? – LuniZunie_(talk) 21:40, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

Probably best. Given your toolforge link I will go through and block everything on the list (toolforge was taking its sweet time to respond while I was writing out that reply). Acroterion (talk) 21:41, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

Given the cross-wiki component a steward might need to get involved. Acroterion (talk) 21:43, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

@Acroterion Going to file an SPI, I think it's a bot (I'm thinking SB1 or something), SPI should be able to go directly to steward requests when closed. – LuniZunie_(talk) 21:44, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/MR JOSÉ IVON RODRIGUES DA CRUZ MINISTER OF THE COURT USA if you want to comment. – LuniZunie_(talk) 21:47, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

no hard feelings love u TRVE PATRIOT (talk) 04:31, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

There should already be an article for the subject before you add it. Don't add red linked topics to that kind of list. Acroterion (talk) 04:35, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

i see thanks man TRVE PATRIOT (talk) 04:36, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi there, user Saitzken popped up at de-wiki and left some "unfriendly" message on you talk page and at de-wiki:Vandalism Report. He was blocked immediately and contribs removed. Please contact sysops at https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administratoren/Anfragen if you should want to read his postings. More or less the same as here I fear. Maybe a global lock needs to be done. --Pentachlorphenol (talk) 14:33, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, I'm sorry they're having that kind of trouble. There's no point in reading abuse, so I'll just ignore it. If they keep it upa global sysop may have to act. Acroterion (talk) 14:36, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

Replacement theory is not debunked as it is not scientific and is realm of political science instead. It’s a theory behind motives. It was quite literally confirmed by a Spanish politician yesterday. ~2026-71190-5 (talk) 16:13, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

Take it up on the talkpage, an edit summary that simply says "bias" while removing references is completely insufficient. Acroterion (talk) 16:15, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

You might want to remove TPA from this TA which you blocked earlier. Aydoh8^{[what have I done now?]} 16:19, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Oh and while you're at it, can you nab this account too? It's an LTA I've already sent to SRG. Aydoh8^{[what have I done now?]} 16:24, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Nevermind, Jamie got that one. Aydoh8^{[what have I done now?]} 16:28, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi Acroterion! It looks like we had an edit collision at AN3. I tried to fix it, but I wanted to check in with you that it's correct. EvergreenFir (talk) 19:40, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Yup, thanks. I blame a rogue mouse. Acroterion (talk) 19:41, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Back in 2014 you indef-semi-protected WGUL. Any chance you think it's ready to be unprotected? meamemg (talk) 15:28, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

Wow, yes. Unprotected. Acroterion (talk) 15:33, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

Hey, I don't understand why you were so eager to reverse and even delete a simple comment on the discussion page that questioned why Bill Gates should be considered a philanthropist, considering what has come to light. This time, I'll snapshot this for my own safety. ~2026-77001-9 (talk) 16:14, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

WP:BLP applies everywhere. Defamatory speculation and WP:FORUM soapboxing are not acceptable uses of talkpages. your "safety" is not at issue, but your abuse of talkpages to speculate about living individuals is. Acroterion (talk) 18:21, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

That was disappointing to see, the revert war returning. Thank you for re-instating the full protection as your response. Acalamari 06:54, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello, Acroterion. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

QwertyForest (talk) 23:17, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi Acroterion, I archived a section on the talk page about a false allegation/misinterpretation, because the matter was already settled (the person who made the section apologized and retracted the comment), an admin commented that there was no issue with talk page participation, and because WP:TPG says Comment on content, not on the contributor or It's the edits that matter, not the editor: Keep the discussions focused on the topic of the talk page, rather than on the editors participating meaning the section is a violation of talk page guidelines.

Skitash then re-opened the section without a clear reason and reinserted an aspersion against me. Skitash made 5 reverts on the article and I believe this qualifies as harassment or a continuation of that disruptive behavior. Axiom Theory (talk) 19:39, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

I saw all that when I commented on it. You were blocked for determined edit-warring, but that is to some extent moot, since nobody can edit the article now, because I protected it. Please stop focusing on other editors and focus on content. This was decidedly inappropriate - it's not a personal attack, and I'm the one who blocked you - are you claiming I made a personal attack by doing so? And please stop spamming PA notices. You really shouldn't have archived, please stop fiddling with the talkpage and focus on what is happening now. Acroterion (talk)

Simply noting that you're currently blocked from North African articles does not constitute a personal attack and does not justify you altering their comments in violation of WP:TPO. This was also unwarranted, and spamming editors like myself, M.Bitton, and ElijahUHC with unjustified warnings after you've been told about WP:DTTR is clearly disruptive and signals WP:NOTHERE behavior, not to mention your blatant WP:HOUNDING on other articles. Skitash (talk) 19:48, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Why did you unarchive the section? An admin already clarified that a temp page block has nothing to do with the talk page so you are being disruptive.

By implying that the temp page block has anything to do with the talk page or the validity of the RfC, it is an casting aspersions and violating talk page guidelines. You are well-aware of these policies and yet you unarchived the section without a reason, and then separately reinserted an aspersion against me. Axiom Theory (talk) 20:03, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Please drop it - Roxy was confused, and it's not a personal attack to note that you were blocked from the article for edit-warring. You're not being harassed, you're stirring the pot and then complaining that you're getting reactions. Acroterion (talk) 20:06, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Indeed I was confused, and made a basic error, it is very embarrassing, but it was far far too early to archive. Walter Ego 20:10, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

No worries, and thank you for clarifying earlier. Axiom Theory (talk) 20:48, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Acroterion, thank you for the clarification and I have a few questions if you don't mind.

Particularly, if WP:TPG policy says Comment on content, not on the contributor or It's the edits that matter, not the editor: Keep the discussions focused on the topic of the talk page, rather than on the editors participating then why is it appropriate for Skitash to unarchive this section which is about an editor and not the content of the article? And separately, how is also, the proposing editor is currently blocked from editing North Africa–related pages in response to a RfC, which implies that the RfC is invalid which is incorrect, not also a violation of It's the edits that matter, not the editor: Keep the discussions focused on the topic of the talk page, rather than on the editors participating? Similar comments were already struck. Axiom Theory (talk) 20:48, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

You appear to be far more concerned with how you are perceived by other editors than with addressing the content of the article. There was no reason to archive, and you're getting wrapped up in technicalities about talkpage management that have little to do with the actual discussion. Please move on. Did you read what I said several indents up? Acroterion (talk) 21:32, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi Acroterion, thanks and yes I see it now (I think there was an edit conflict earlier). No I wasn't implying the block itself is the personal attack, I was saying that insinuating that someone isn't allowed to discuss content, or that content discussions they start are invalid, is casting aspersions on account of not being true.

When you get a moment could you look at this new comment in the RfC here? Is this allowed? I'm confused. It's not how I'm perceived it's that editors are violating "Content, not contributors" to prejudice a position on a talk page in a way that seems against policy. This is confusing to me because I thought the purpose was to encourage everyone to discuss on the talk page, but editors are using it to discourage discussion (the RfC). If I understand correctly Largoplazo also said the discussion was valid.

Am I missing something? I would hope that these portions can be struck, but of course it's up to you. Thanks. Axiom Theory (talk) 10:46, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

As I and Roxy said, Roxy was confused about whether the block extended to the talkpage. It has been made amply clear that it doesn't. {Keep in mind that Roxy's signature these days is Walter Ego).

I'm not very keen on that talkpage comment you mention, and I'm going to add a note - there is no reason for any prejudice against your participation, which in fact is encouraged. Acroterion (talk) 13:21, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

Even though animals are statistically common targets for the fetish, they are not the inherent basis of the fetish which is why I removed the categories. Is there any help page on categories that argues against my logic for removing the categories? And yes it goes double for the foot fetish category since not all crush fetishes derive gratification from the feet. MezmerizingWiseguy (talk) 13:33, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

You are doing a lot of hair-splitting to reason cruelty away. Crush fetish is explicitly associated with animal cruelty, it is inappropriate to remove that on the basis that other things are sometimes crushed. That it's done as part of a foot-focused paraphilia doesn't wave it away. What you were doing looks a lot like whitewashing the topic. However, I did add paraphilia back in as a category, since that's also appropriate. Acroterion (talk) 13:40, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

So creating a separate page for crush fetish content focusing solely on the animal cruelty aspect of the fetish while trimming the main crush fetish page would be pointless? This is the last argument I'll make in favor of distinguishing between animal and non-animal crush fetishes before a conclusion is drawn. MezmerizingWiseguy (talk) 14:29, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

Unless you can show via sources that animal abuse is <more than a> minor or fringe component of that specific fetish, a POV content fork of that kind would be inappropriate. As for categories, they are not mutually exclusionary, as you appear to assert. Acroterion (talk) 14:38, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

So the foot fetishism category will be staying as well since there's at least one source showing they overlap? MezmerizingWiseguy (talk) 14:47, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

Yes, that would be appropriate. Acroterion (talk) 15:15, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello, is it justified to write roles and descriptions next to the names of actors in movies and series when most of them were not covered in the sources? What is your opinion on this? Saman9395 (talk) 02:33, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

That sort of thing is probably covered in the manual of style Acroterion (talk) 02:48, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2026).

Administrator changes

Vacant0

• Crisco 1492

• Deepfriedokra
• Hbdragon88
• Karl Dickman
• Worm That Turned

CheckUser changes

Daniel Quinlan

Vanamonde93

Mkdw

Oversight changes

Daniel Quinlan

Arbitration

• Due to the result of a recent motion, a rough consensus of administrators at the arbitration enforcement noticeboard may impose an expanded topic ban on Israel, Israelis, Jews, Judaism, Palestine, Palestinians, Islam, and/or Arabs, if an editor's Arab-Israeli conflict topic ban is determined to be insufficient to prevent disruption. At least one diff per area expanded into should be cited.

Miscellaneous

• Voting in the 2026 Steward elections started on 06 February 2026 at 14:00 (UTC) and will end on 27 February 2026 at 14:00 (UTC). The confirmation process for current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.

To one of your posts at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adam Lanza. Just wanted to give you an FYI. - Shearonink (talk) 23:47, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

You reverted edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=September_11_attacks_advance-knowledge_conspiracy_theories&diff=prev&oldid=1335487647

with the message "Rv unexplained removal". Why? I only added new information, without removing anything, and I cited it well. I did it in good faith, it was a normal edit and I really believe there was no reason to revert it. ~2026-63202-0 (talk) 11:12, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

Ah, I saw where you'd removed the paragraph on Silverstein, I didn't see the addition. That said, the way you cited your addition didn't directly reference or address the conspiraracy theories, they only reference the actual events, which make them inappropriate syntheses in Wikivoice. Just saying that there was a lot of asbestos in the building that had to be removed and referencing it doesn't make something a conspiracy theory - please read WP:SYNTHESIS. Acroterion (talk) 13:20, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

See . We've had this repeatedly, do we need to do more?

P.S. got your email - was vaguely contemplating doing the same, but will wait to see yours. AndyTheGrump (talk) 02:43, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

Jesus wept. ECP, and a get-your-attention block. They don't get to merrily edit BLPs and do that. What is this, vigilante justice-pedia? Acroterion (talk) 04:38, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

Would you mind comparing User:HellaPics988/sandbox to Loc-Poet, Loc-Poet (rapper), and Draft:Loc-Poet? I suspect they're a sockpuppet trying to promote the rapper. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 18:30, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

It's tolerably obvious. I didn't go farther because I'm working on Real Life work and needed to concentrate on that for a while. I'll take a further look when I get a chance if somebody hasn't done it first. Acroterion (talk) 18:40, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

Of course, take your time. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 18:44, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. 21:06, 18 February 2026 (UTC) Poundthiswriter (talk) 21:06, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2026).

Administrator changes

• Brendanconway
• Calmer Waters
• Hut 8.5
• Joe Roe
• VersedFenrir

CheckUser changes

Ks0stm

Oversight changes

Ks0stm

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, the web archival service archive.today has been deprecated; links to the site should be removed.
• A request for comment is open to discuss retiring CSD criterion R3 in favour of handling such redirects through RfD.

Arbitration

• Following a motion, remedy 9.1 of the Conduct in deletion-related editing case has been amended to limit TenPoundHammer to one XfD nomination or PROD per 24-hour period.
• Following a motion, the Iskandar323 further POV pushing motion has been rescinded.
• The Arbitration Committee has passed a housekeeping motion rescinding a number of outdated remedies and enforcement provisions across multiple legacy cases. In most instances, existing sanctions remain in force and continue to be appealable through the usual processes, while some case-specific remedies were amended or clarified.

Miscellaneous

• Following the 2026 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: A09, AmandaNP, Barras, Count Count, M7, SHB2000, Teles and VIGNERON.
• An Unreferenced articles backlog drive is taking place in March 2026 to reduce the backlog of articles tagged with {{Unreferenced}}. You can help reduce the backlog by adding citations to these articles. Sign up to participate!

I wanna know why you keep changing and blocking my accounts to where I have to create new ones and every time you block me I can’t communicate with you so please cut it out ~2026-13751-25 (talk) 16:38, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

You've answered your own question, hm? —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 17:22, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

No, I haven’t ~2026-13751-25 (talk) 17:40, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Blocked for about the sixth time now. Block evasion is an automatic block on any new accounts. Acroterion (talk) 17:50, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

In September, MyGosh789 created the article The First Gentleman (novel). When I read it, I suspected that it was generated with artificial intelligence. Some further review found false claims and misleading citations. I reported this on the talk page and began to clean up the article. MyGosh789 reverted all of my changes, and they has been so obstinate and rude on the talk page that I have begun to wonder about whether they are trolling. Given that you have interacted with this user before, could you help sort this situation out? Pipoin (talk) 00:13, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

I've left a warning and a note, and I'll keep an eye on developments. Acroterion (talk) 00:29, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you. Pipoin (talk) 01:13, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Please revoke their TPA. This is WP:LTA/SB1. --Prothe1st (leave me a message)-- 23:33, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

@Acroterion I need your support for closing an RfC North Africa as an administrator.

On the talk page, there have been a series of RfC to review proposed content modifications and proposed set of images.

I have opened my RfC for 4 weeks now since it was opened on 5th February. There seems to be strong support for the proposed content amendment with scope for adjustments in light of a vocal minority.

Nonetheless, the last vote made was two weeks ago on 12 February and I think the RfC has reached a natural close. However, I cannot close the RfC as the proponent and need an administrator to close the RfC and formalise the consensus position.

Could you do this on our behalf ? I'm looking to de-active my account permanently after these final round of RfC so it will be appreciated if we could resolve this decisively.

Please find the RfC here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:North_Africa#Proposed_content_addition WikiUser4020 (talk) 17:05, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for deleting the draft. Maybe we should salt these pages?

• Draft:Daniel Larson
• Daniel Larson (Internet personality)
• Draft:Daniel Larson (Internet personality)
• Daniel Larson (celebrity)

One of them gets recreated once a year or so. Or maybe we should create an edit filter? Or just hope that it doesn't get worse... :-) — Chrisahn (talk) 20:53, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Probably not worth a filter, though there might be one that can be modified. This isn't anything like some of the more prolific spam articles on "internet personalities." Salting probably isn't worth the effort either, and it provides a useful context when we look at all those deletions. Acroterion (talk) 21:58, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Would it be possible if you could remove talkpage access from blocked user "I wanna be yours"? They were blocked for repeatedly spamming pages with a youtube link, and is continuing to do so on their talkpage. Thank you for your time. Mr Fink (talk) 06:25, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Looks like the global block took care of that. Acroterion (talk) 13:40, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Hey! It's been some time since we've talked. I just want to say I am sorry about how I interacted with you a couple years ago, I was just really immature and didn't think to see your side of things. I hope we can put that behind us and move onward. I would also like to say thank you for approving of my block appeal, especially because you were the one who had to take the brunt of my BS. It truly means a lot and I will swear to you that what happened two years ago will NOT happen again. Aj631314 — Preceding undated comment added 22:30, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

No worries, go have fun. Thank you for your apology and your well-done unblock request. Acroterion (talk) 22:35, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Do you think a TPA removal is appropriate? The user is putting nonsense on their talk page. I found it because it was tagged on the category of Wikipedians needing help but the page history is so hard to interpret that I couldn't figure out what the question was. TheTechie^[she/they] | talk? 00:58, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Yes, talkpage acess removed. Acroterion (talk) 01:01, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

The article List of HABS documentation of Wendover Air Force Base has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not seeing any real benefit to this listing of photos etc. held externally. WP:INDISCRIMINATE would appear to apply.

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, articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion based on established criteria.

If the proposed deletion has already been carried out, you may request undeletion of the article at any time. Dumelow (talk) 07:07, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

The article List of HAER documentation of Defense Depot Ogden has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not seeing any real benefit to this listing of photos etc. held externally. WP:INDISCRIMINATE would appear to apply.

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, articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion based on established criteria.

If the proposed deletion has already been carried out, you may request undeletion of the article at any time. Dumelow (talk) 07:08, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

The article List of HAER documentation of Hill Air Force Base has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not seeing any real benefit to this listing of photos etc. held externally. WP:INDISCRIMINATE would appear to apply.

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, articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion based on established criteria.

If the proposed deletion has already been carried out, you may request undeletion of the article at any time. Dumelow (talk) 07:08, 14 March 2026 (UTC)