User talk:Anyrmson

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that your recent edit to List of Kenyan counties by Human Development Index did not have an edit summary. Collaboration among editors is fundamental to Wikipedia, and every edit should be explained by a clear edit summary, or by discussion on the Talk page. Please use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit, or to describe what it changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances that your edit will be misunderstood. For some edits, an adequate summary may be quite brief.

The edit summary field looks like this:

Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. When logged in to your Wikipedia account, you can give yourself a reminder by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary (or the default undo summary), and then click the "Save" button. Thanks! Cydopan (Talk • Edits) 20:03, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Sorry for delayed reply!.

Okay, I will be giving an edit summary for all my edits Anyrmson (talk) 14:15, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I'm DB1729. I noticed that you recently removed content from Kenya without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. DB1729^talk 10:11, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Embu County, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages English and Swahili. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 19:54, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of counties of Kenya by GDP, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Baringo, Busia and Embu.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:52, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Nairobi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Capital.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:55, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Christianity in Kenya, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kikuyu.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:54, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

Hey @Anyrmson

I’m reaching out because I’ve noticed and appreciated your significant historical contributions to this article. Since you’ve been a key part of maintaining this page, I wanted to coordinate with you on a necessary distinction regarding Laikipia County.

While Laikipia is a central part of the Mount Kenya geopolitical and economic bloc, it is technically situated within the Rift Valley geographically and administratively. To maintain the high standard of accuracy for this page, I believe we should update the geographic data (specifically land area rankings) to reflect this some population estimates, I put it for est 8.86 million people at lead paragraph, moved it on "Geopolitical Classification and Disputes"

I thought it was worth mentioning to you first, as keeping geographic totals aligned with KNBS and IEBC data will prevent conflicts with the Rift Valley's own administrative pages. My plan is to move the Laikipia details into a dedicated Geopolitics section to highlight its role as a "bridge" between the two regions, while keeping the primary geographic stats focused on the 8 core counties.

Looking forward to your thoughts on keeping the article’s data consistent. MTLNORG (talk) 23:39, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

Did some adjustments on the infobox settlement, from a strict administrative and statistical reporting standpoint, I omitted the Laikipia,s GDP from the aggregated total and amended the difference. MTLNORG (talk) 00:20, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I believe we have discussed this issue many times, and it is disappointing that it keeps being repeated. Mount Kenya is not an administrative region, and there is no official classification of these counties.

A province is different from a region; not all eight Mount Kenya counties were part of the former Central Province. Yes, Laikipia was in the Rift Valley Province, but we are not discussing provinces here — we are discussing a region.

This region refers mainly to a geopolitical and economic bloc, and Laikipia is indeed considered part of it.

Please rectify this, as I do not wish to continue arguing about the same matter. Anyrmson (talk) 04:30, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

@MTLNORG

You have made extensive changes that go against our previous agreement. May I ask why? I am quite disappointed.

You could have discussed these edits with me before making such significant alterations.

The definition clearly describes it as a geopolitical, cultural, and economic area. Given that, I do not understand the basis for these revisions.

Please focus on improving the article through collaborative engagement rather than making unilateral changes. Constructive discussion will help us reach consensus and maintain the quality of the page. Anyrmson (talk) 04:38, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

Hey @Anyrmson we have never discussed anything about Laikipia. I am simply ensuring accuracy, there`s a section for geopolitics & disputes. Under the current devolved system and historical provincial boundaries, Laikipia is categorized as one of the 14 counties of the Rift Valley region. Its administrative headquarters is Rumuruti, though some operations remain in Nanyuki. Therefore it would be inaccurate to claim it as part of the central highlands. MTLNORG (talk) 04:40, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

Note @Anyrmson while I value our collaboration, it is important to clarify that editorial consensus cannot supersede factual accuracy or official administrative records. My edits ensure the article correctly distinguishes between cultural/economic associations and formal governance; under both the 2010 Constitution and historical provincial boundaries, Laikipia is legally part of the Rift Valley, not the Central region. Maintaining this distinction isn't a matter of personal preference or prior agreement, but of ensuring the encyclopedia remains a reliable and verifiable resource. MTLNORG (talk) 04:45, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

Are you serious right now?

Do you understand the difference between a province and a region? The Constitution states that Laikipia was part of the Rift Valley Province; it does not state that it belongs to a “Rift Valley Region.” Even if it did, how would that change the current discussion?

Are all the counties within the Mount Kenya region from the same former province? Clearly not.

This is not a formal administrative unit; it is a geopolitical region. I have stated this repeatedly.

Your claims lack a solid basis in this context and, unless properly supported, will be reverted. Anyrmson (talk) 04:57, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

While the 2010 Constitution replaced provinces with counties, the term 'region' remains the standard official designation used by the Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (KNBS) and the IEBC to group counties for administrative, judicial, and statistical purposes. Under these frameworks, Laikipia is consistently classified within the Rift Valley, not the Central region. Distinguishing between a cultural/geopolitical area and a formal administrative boundary is essential for encyclopedic accuracy; an agreement to conflate the two would result in a factual error regarding the county's official status.

Let me know if you have any other questions. MTLNORG (talk) 05:02, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

You can also refer to the "Geopolitical Classification and Disputes" section which clearly explains geopolitical context :) MTLNORG (talk) 05:05, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

Nice try.

The term “region” is not formally used by KNBS or IEBC, and the Mount Kenya region does not appear as an official statistical unit in their classifications. This article is not about the former Central Province; it is about the Mount Kenya region as a broader geopolitical and socio-economic concept.

Even if Laikipia is classified under the former Rift Valley Province and Embu under the former Eastern Province, both are still commonly regarded as part of the Mount Kenya region. Administrative classification and geopolitical identity are not the same thing.

You have claimed that Laikipia is not officially part of the Mount Kenya region. Please provide specific references from KNBS or IEBC that define the “Mount Kenya region” and list its counties as you assert.

As I have stated, your claims currently lack verifiable evidence. If no reliable sources are provided to support them, the edits will be reverted in line with Wikipedia’s sourcing and consensus guidelines. Anyrmson (talk) 05:26, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

That's the beauty of that section "Geopolitical Classification and Disputes" specifically the "Laikipia – The Rift Valley "Bridge"" have you read it?

Laikipia is administered as Rift Valley and nowhere says its central region here or even the dedicated Wikipedia page for Laikipia county nother there mentions Mount Kenya but clearly referenced as part of Rift Valley. MTLNORG (talk) 05:41, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

When you read this portion in quotes "Historically, Laikipia County was an integral part of the former Rift Valley Province, and it remains geographically and administratively situated within the Rift Valley region. It serves as a strategic bridge to the Mount Kenya region. Due to its location on the plateau stretching from the mountain's western slopes, the county is deeply integrated into the 'Murima' bloc through shared ecological resources, cultural ties, and economic interests. As an active member of the Central Kenya Economic Bloc (CEKEB), a framework that facilitates coordinated development and trade between the county and the central highlands, linking the northern pastoralist corridors of the Rift Valley with the agricultural hubs of the Mount Kenya counties."

Take some time to read this article: Great Rift Valley, Kenya - Wikipedia MTLNORG (talk) 05:46, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

Did you know Rumuruti is the administrative headquarters of Laikipia County? Located in the Rift Valley not so far from Nakuru the same way those other 5 core counties are close to the actual mount Kenya.

Key note: Rumuruti sits on the Laikipia Plateau, which is part of the Rift Valley system. It is physically separated from the "Central" highlands by the Aberdare Range and the deep descent into the plateau.

Direct Distance to Murima: Rumuruti is approximately 97.8 km from the Mount Kenya summit.

It’s a bit like how people think of Limuru as being "near" Nairobi, when it actually has a completely different climate and geography. Rumuruti is firmly in the savanna belt, not the mountain forest belt. MTLNORG (talk) 06:22, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

Because Nanyuki was briefly (the former HQ) it sits right at the foot of Mount Kenya, many people assumed the whole of Laikipia was "Mountain country." Moving the headquarters to Rumuruti actually reclaims the county's true identity as a Rift Valley/Northern frontier territory :) MTLNORG (talk) 06:25, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

For your further research, refer to this InfoTrack research for Rift Valley Region. MTLNORG (talk) 06:31, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

@MTLNORGI believe I now understand where the confusion is arising. In Kenya, there is no clear or officially standardized naming and delimitation of regions. We have various references to “regions,” but there are no formally defined boundaries that legally demarcate them.

Therefore, whether Laikipia is described as being in the former Rift Valley Province, referred to as a “region,” or categorized under another grouping does not necessarily preclude it from also being considered part of the Mount Kenya region in a different context.

We often encounter terms such as Central Rift, Northern Rift, and others. In some cases, as reflected in sources like Infotrak, these “regions” correspond largely to the former provinces but are simply referred to using different terminology. However, there is no official constitutional or statutory declaration that clearly defines regional boundaries in the way counties are defined.

Given this lack of formal delimitation, the inclusion of a county within a particular region depends largely on the context and reliable sourcing rather than on a single fixed administrative framework.

Is there any specific issue with acknowledging this contextual understanding?@ Anyrmson (talk) 08:55, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

Apologies for the delay.

First, let me clarify an important point, as I stated in our previous discussion at ANI: this article is not about counties that are geographically closest to Mount Kenya. You argued that proximity to the mountain is the determining factor, but that is not accurate. For example, Nyandarua is actually farther from Mount Kenya than Laikipia, yet it is still considered part of the Mount Kenya region. That alone undermines the proximity argument.

Secondly, this article is not strictly about physical geography. The Mount Kenya region is understood in a broader socio-political and economic context, not merely in terms of distance from the mountain itself.

Regarding the Infotrak research you cited, it primarily reflects the composition of the former provinces for example for Eastern region they include all counties of Eastern Province rather than the geographic region itself. That does not automatically determine inclusion or exclusion from the Mount Kenya region. Moreover, several other sources place Laikipia within the Mount Kenya region in various contexts.

Unless there is new, verifiable evidence supporting a different position, I will proceed with restoring the article in line with the broader consensus and available references. Anyrmson (talk) 08:35, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

@MTLNORGI believe I now understand where the confusion is arising. In Kenya, there is no clear or officially standardized naming and delimitation of regions. We have various references to “regions,” but there are no formally defined boundaries that legally demarcate them.

Therefore, whether Laikipia is described as being in the former Rift Valley Province, referred to as a “region,” or categorized under another grouping does not necessarily preclude it from also being considered part of the Mount Kenya region in a different context.

We often encounter terms such as Central Rift, Northern Rift, and others. In some cases, as reflected in sources like Infotrak, these “regions” correspond largely to the former provinces but are simply referred to using different terminology. However, there is no official constitutional or statutory declaration that clearly defines regional boundaries in the way counties are defined.

Given this lack of formal delimitation, the inclusion of a county within a particular region depends largely on the context and reliable sourcing rather than on a single fixed administrative framework.

Is there any specific issue with acknowledging this contextual understanding? Anyrmson (talk) 08:56, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

This article is about the geographical and geopolitical region when it comes to geography, an official administrative classification must be respected @Anyrmson Refer to the section that is under the first paragraph clearly labeled "Geopolitical Classification and Disputes" It actually goes into detail and clearly still highlights Laikipia as "The Rift Valley "Bridge""

That is why that portion Reverting to a version that presents an informal 'socio-political' grouping as a formal administrative fact violates WP:NPOV by ignoring official government data. MTLNORG (talk) 09:04, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

Laikipia's inclusion in the 'Central' category would be misleading readers, the lead must distinguish between formal governance and socio-political identity. Per the KNBS and the IEBC, Laikipia is officially grouped within the Rift Valley; therefore, stating it is 'in Central Kenya' without qualification is factually incorrect. Moving this claim to a 'geopolitics' section allows us to acknowledge its cultural ties without misrepresenting its legal and administrative status. MTLNORG (talk) 09:09, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

Central?

If you wish to create an article about Central Kenya, you are free to do so. However, this article is about the Mount Kenya region.

As I have repeatedly explained, the IEBC and KNBS do not formally demarcate regional boundaries; they only list the former provinces and counties. There is no official administrative framework that defines “regions” in the way you are suggesting.

For the record, this article is not about an administrative, provincial, or strictly geographic entity. It concerns a broader geopolitical region.

You have not provided reliable sources to substantiate your claim. In the absence of verifiable evidence, I will proceed to restore the article in line with policy. Anyrmson (talk) 10:09, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

The assertion that Laikipia was ever part of the Central region lacks historical evidence; it has been a constituent of the Rift Valley region since well before the 2010 Constitution. Geographically, Laikipia cannot be accurately described as part of the Mount Kenya region. The current edits reflect these factual realities and will be maintained. The 'Geopolitical Classification and Disputes' section was specifically created to address these nuances. If there is a disagreement regarding the evolution of this article from a purely geographic focus to a geopolitical one, I welcome a third-party opinion, but the distinction between the two must remain clear. Therefore, I disagree with you here looking at the context on how this article was approved in the first place as a geographic region. MTLNORG (talk) 10:45, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

I never stated that Laikipia was part of the Central Region — that is your assertion, not mine. My position has consistently been that Laikipia is part of the Mount Kenya region.

There is a clear distinction between the Central Region and the Mount Kenya region. The Central Region generally refers to the counties of the former Central Province, whereas the Mount Kenya region is understood in a broader geopolitical and socio-economic context.

You made extensive changes to the article without adequately supporting your claims with reliable sources or prior discussion. Anyrmson (talk) 13:50, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

Thank you, User:Anyrmson. I acknowledge your point on the geopolitical scope. However, my revisions actually increase the article's reliability and new proposal on the Talk:Mount Kenya region provives better structure with the verifiable sources (KNBS, Constitution of Kenya, and County Government records) that distinguish the core highlands from the Rift Valley administration.

To bridge our positions, you will need to respond to that Mount Kenya region talk page. It recognizes the 8 core highland counties for geographic/data precision while explicitly defining Laikipia as a "geopolitical bridge" to the Mount Kenya bloc. This maintains the broader scope you advocate for without sacrificing the administrative and economic accuracy of the core data. Please review the proposal so we can reach a consensus. MTLNORG (talk) 01:24, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

I respect and understand your motive of improving this article quality. I am not authoritatively asking you to always inform me when making changes to the article, No. But making massive changes that alter the whole scope of the article need proper discussion please.

Laikipia has its status in former rift valley province context but that doesn't rule out its position in the region.

This article solely talks about the region and has no relations with Provincial or administrative relationship.

Mount Kenya has 9 Counties , That's a fact that can't be ruled out. Anyrmson (talk) 05:49, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

I have opened a formal discussion on the Talk:Mount Kenya region page regarding the classification of Laikipia County and the recent edits to the lead section. Since we have both contributed significantly to this article, please join the conversation there so we can reach a community consensus. MTLNORG (talk) 12:33, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

If you wish to initiate a discussion regarding Laikipia’s inclusion in the Mount Kenya region (not the Central Region), the article should first be restored to its previous version in accordance with the outcome of the last discussion at ANI.

Had this process been followed before making the contested edits, the situation would have been much easier to manage.

Once again, to be clear: this article concerns the Mount Kenya region — not a former province, not a strictly geographic classification, not the mountain itself, and not a formal administrative unit. Anyrmson (talk) 13:56, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

I have posted a formal compromise proposal on the Talk:Mount Kenya region page regarding the Lead paragraph and Infobox structure.

The proposal suggests a "dual-reporting" structure that maintains the 8.86 million population/GDP figures for the core highland counties while explicitly acknowledging Laikipia's role as a "geopolitical bridge" and its administrative status in the Rift Valley. This approach aims to satisfy both the geographic accuracy of the core and the geopolitical scope of the broader region.

Please review the draft on the article talk page so we can reach a consensus. ~~~~ MTLNORG (talk) 01:21, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

I have addressed your concerns in my previous replies:

• I clarified the definition, scope, and status of the Mount Kenya region.
• I explained the distinction between regions and former provinces.
• I clarified Laikipia’s position within the Mount Kenya region.
• I proposed the addition of a “Controversies” section to ensure neutrality and balance.

If there are any new issues supported by reliable sources, please raise them for discussion. Otherwise, I will proceed to restore the article to the version agreed upon in the last consensus. Anyrmson (talk) 06:00, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

I have listed our disagreement regarding the classification of Laikipia in the lead and infobox at Wikipedia:Third opinion to seek a neutral outside perspective. I have also created a dedicated section for this discussion at Talk:Mount Kenya region#Third Opinion discussion<nowiki>. I hope this helps us reach a community consensus on the 8 vs. 9 county count. MTLNORG (talk) 06:45, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Yes, that sounds reasonable. Seeking a Third Opinion would be a good step forward. However, the article should first be restored to the previously agreed version while we await that input.

Thank you. Anyrmson (talk) 06:51, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Thank you, User:Anyrmson. I am glad we agree on seeking a Third Opinion. Regarding the "restore," Wikipedia policy on WP:NPOV and WP:V suggests that we should maintain the current version with the tag while the 3O is pending.

Reverting the changes now would be counterproductive, as the current version specifically addresses our disagreement by introducing a "dual-reporting" structure and the **"bridge" model**. These structural compromises were created to balance your geopolitical scope with the administrative and data accuracy (KNBS/Constitution) I have cited. Reverting would essentially remove the very compromise we are asking the Third Opinion volunteer to evaluate.

I have officially listed the dispute here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Third_opinion#Active_disagreements. Let's leave the article as is, with the dispute tag visible, and let the 3O volunteer provide the neutral path forward. MTLNORG (talk) 07:03, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

No, you departed from our previous consensus by making extensive changes without prior discussion.

The article in its current form is misleading, particularly since the claims introduced have not been adequately supported with reliable sources.

It should be restored to the previously agreed neutral version so that the content remains balanced and does not reflect a one-sided interpretation. Anyrmson (talk) 07:08, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#Mount Kenya region. Thank you. MTLNORG (talk) 11:19, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

I have no issue with that. I did not engage in edit warring; I clearly stated that the article should be restored to the version we both agreed upon, rather than retaining a one-sided revision made without prior discussion.

You introduced extensive changes that altered the fundamental structure of the article, which departs from what we had previously agreed upon at ANI. Anyrmson (talk) 11:43, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Mount Kenya region shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing a page's content back to how you believe it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree with your changes. Please stop editing the page and use the talk page to work toward creating a version of the page that represents consensus among the editors involved. Wikipedia provides a page explaining how this is accomplished. If discussions reach an impasse, you can request help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution such as a third opinion. In some cases, you may wish to request page protection while a discussion to resolve the dispute is ongoing.

If you continue edit warring, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, or whether it involves the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also, please keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule— if things indicate that you intend to continue reverting content on the page. MTLNORG (talk) 11:48, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello Anyrmson. You've been warned for edit warring per a complaint at WP:AN3. If you edit the article again without getting a prior talk page consensus for your change you are risking a block. EdJohnston (talk) 20:15, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The discussion is about the topic Mount Kenya region.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

MTLNORG (talk) 09:58, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

@MWFwiki I understand that I am currently restricted from editing the Mount Kenya region article, and you were previously involved in Article 30 and DRN discussions. I am respectfully requesting your assistance in helping conclude the discussion at Mount Kenya region. Otherwise, @MTLNORG may proceed with the proposed split and introduce interpretations that, in my view, are not supported by the sources.

In his AI-generated statement at Talk:Mount Kenya region, he raised the following points. I will respond briefly to clarify the context:

"Geography is an inherent physical fact defined by the UNESCO geographical Mapping which identifies the summit and its immediate neighbors via hydrology and peaks." Yes, that is true but the source refers to Mount Kenya National Park and Forest. As multiple sources indicate, this article is not about the immediate geographic neighbors of the mountain itself, but about a geopolitical and economic bloc.

"Any objection must refute the KNBS 2019 Census (Volume I)." The article already relies on the 2019 KNBS Census data. If the aggregated 10-county data is being challenged, then the same source is also used for any 5-county summit calculation. Both rely on identical census material.

"Any objection must refute the (IGRTC) 2024 Report (Page 2) which notes that regional economic blocs are established under Article 189(2) of the Constitution." This point is not directly relevant to the dispute. No one has argued that regional economic blocs are unconstitutional. The issue concerns how the Mount Kenya region itself is defined in reliable sources.

"Aboriginal Inhabitants." I have no objection in principle, but reliable sources would be required before including such content in the article.

"Gross County Product restored to Kenyan Shillings per Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (KNBS)." I have no objection to presenting figures in local currency. That update is acceptable.

"This reflects the output of the geographic mountain summit counties only, not the political trade bloc." This is fundamentally a classification issue regarding the definition of the Mount Kenya region and has already been discussed at length.

"Unilateral reclassification to a 'Geo-political region' to bypass geographic audited data." At the time, I was the sole active editor, and the available sources supported describing the region in geopolitical and economic terms. The classification was not intended to bypass data but to align the article with how sources characterize the region.

Regarding the proposal to split Mount Kenya region into an economic bloc and a geographic core: No, it should not be split. There are no clear sources supporting such a division, and the economic bloc is widely described as a feature of the broader region.

From my understanding, the intention appears to be redefining the article as a 5-county geographic region. However, no reliable source has been provided that explicitly states which counties constitute Mount Kenya region in that restricted sense.

I respectfully request that no further substantial edits be made without clear consensus and sourcing. Anyrmson 07:03, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi there, please understand that other editors are prohibited from making edits on your behalf while you are blocked, per the policy against proxying. MWFwiki will need to make editing decisions based on their own judgment. As talk pages of blocked editors are intended solely for the eventual appeal of a block, if you would like to edit the English Wikipedia in the future, I recommend distancing yourself from the English Wikipedia for at least six months (per the standard offer) and making constructive contributions to other Wikimedia projects that would establish a positive track record for you, which would strengthen a future appeal at User talk:Aguahrz. — Newslinger talk 13:19, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

@Newslinger I did not ask him to make edits on my behalf. I only requested that he help conclude the Article 30/DRN process properly. He may not be fully familiar with the Kenyan context of this topic, so I was simply providing clarification. Of course, he is free to respond and decide based on his own judgment.

At this point, I am prepared to step away from the English Wikipedia and focus on the Swahili Wikipedia instead. However, the concern is that no one else appears to be actively monitoring the article, and this editor may proceed to introduce what I consider to be personal interpretations without adequate sourcing. It feels as though there is little I can do beyond raising these concerns. Anyrmson 16:15, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

@Anyrmson; I assure you, I am keeping my eye on it, though I doubt that this will be an issue, given the sanctions now-imposed on MTLNORG. I do wish to thank @Newslinger for taking the initiative on that. I was going to be taking them to ANI today for their incessant LLM-use (including on their proffered drafts), their sealion-ing, as well as a blatant misapplication of WP:SILENCE, so I do appreciate the assistance. In case they do appeal, Newslinger, I do wish to note that I also casually warned them (last paragraph - sorry, I tend to type more than I should) about LLM use.

Regardless, as Newslinger says, I obviously cannot make edits on your behalf, though I recognize that is not what you were requesting. I am unclear as to why you were socking, but I will say that I feel that you have something to offer Wikipedia and that I enjoyed working with you. I hope you learn from this and take the standard offer. If I have time, the only change I may make to the article is the nine/ten county issue, as I demonstrated via the sources. That said, this article clearly means a lot to you, so I will keep it on my watchlist.  — MWFwiki (talk) 20:30, 28 February 2026 (UTC)