User talk:Chess enjoyer

@Chess enjoyer: Would you please consider whether the articles Harappan language and Indus script should be semipritected per WP:CT/SA? (I give a short motivation for my question at Talk:Harappan language#This subject is controversial and should be edited and sourced with great care. However, on the other hand, happy to say, I'm not aware of any particular case of abusal POW-editing of either article now; it's more a general worry.) Regards, JoergenB (talk) 22:23, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi @JoergenB. I'm not sure why you're asking me this, as I'm not an administrator, but I'm inclined to say that protection of these pages is probably unnecessary if there hasn't been any disruption. Certainly they fall under the South Asia contentious topic, but pages are not usually protected as a preemptive measure. There are exceptions to this, however. The ones that are relevant here are if they fall under the subtopics of Indian military history or social groups, which are under the extended confirmed restriction. I don't think these articles fall under those subtopics, but maybe I'm wrong. If you're worried about disruptive editing, you can make a request for page protection, or just keep them on your watchlist. Chess enjoyer (talk) 01:42, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Emayeah has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Emayeah (talk) 12:19, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

You're welcome! Chess enjoyer (talk) 21:37, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

I never thought people in the US were so self-righteous and IDIOT that they refuse to acknowledge objective facts. Run no where (talk) 00:09, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I hope this is the appropriate way to contact you. I received your message regarding a recent edit on Helen Leach's Wikipedia entry. Her death will be published in the local paper on Tuesday 27th January and I was expecting to be asked to provide details when making the amendment but did not see anything. Perhaps you could suggest me as to why that might be and presumably I will have to wait till the death notice has been published before trying again. Regards Janey Thomas (daughter). JETNZ (talk) 02:09, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello. Yes, this the appropriate way to contact me. If no reliable sources have reported on her death yer, then unfortunately we can't say so on our article. If you're right about it being published in a newspaper, that should be an appropriate source to cite for this. I'm sorry that we can't update the article immediately. When that paper gets published (or if another source reports it sooner), feel free to update the article. You may also leave another message on my talk page or on the Biographies of living persons noticeboard if you need any help. Chess enjoyer (talk) 02:34, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi again, the death notice has been printed in the local paper but not yet picked up online. Would a jpg of the notice suffice or should we wait till it's online. Thank you. JETNZ (talk) 21:24, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

@JETNZ, can you provide details on the newspaper, such as its name, title, and date? Sources do not have to be online in order for them to be cited. Once it's published online, then a url can be added to the reference. A photo of the picture could be useful until then, but it can't be uploaded here, as we only allow free content with limited exceptions. If you could upload an image somewhere else, that would be helpful, but you don't have to. Chess enjoyer (talk) 21:35, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

Other editors have handled it now. Again, I'm sorry that couldn't have happened sooner. Chess enjoyer (talk) 22:55, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you I see the entry has been updated, the family will be glad that's done. Thanks to the editors for updating so promptly. JETNZ (talk) 05:27, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for reverting that page-move vandalism, I did not know how to revert it back. So I just reported the account to ARV. thank you for your help. 𝚃𝚑𝚎 𝙶𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚝 𝙴𝚙𝚒𝚙𝚑𝚊𝚗𝚢👁👄👁 (talk) 04:00, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

You're welcome! To perform a page move, I clicked on the "move" button under tools. From there, I typed in the original title and selected the appropriate reason from a dropdown menu. Chess enjoyer (talk) Chess enjoyer (talk) 04:05, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

I tried doing that but it said that the title was already used. 𝚃𝚑𝚎 𝙶𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚝 𝙴𝚙𝚒𝚙𝚑𝚊𝚗𝚢👁👄👁 (talk) 16:34, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

That's strange. According to this section of Wikipedia:Moving a page, you should have been able to move it back. Maybe we were both acting at the same time and I was a little faster? Chess enjoyer (talk) 22:33, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

Im going to need an explanation regarding your homophobic reverts on Gleam Hotrodfaulkner (talk) 23:05, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

Ignoring your labelling of my revert as homophobic, do you really not see what's wrong with calling a programming language homosexual and transgender? Chess enjoyer (talk) 23:09, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

If any outside outside observers are reading this, the above account was indefinitely blocked at around the same time I was typing my reply. That's why they didn't respond. Chess enjoyer (talk) 23:23, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Renamed user b59eda9dc7917d86d89bd84f425fad79. TarnishedPath^talk 08:53, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Insult by Acoolusername2025 @ Talk:Elliot Rodger. TarnishedPath^talk 23:39, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the heart attack, @TarnishedPath! Chess enjoyer (talk) 23:42, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

I hope you've recovered? TarnishedPath^talk 23:43, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

I was joking. I usually see only see those being given out to the subject of the report, so I hope you understand why that surprised me. I'll leave a comment on the thread. Chess enjoyer (talk) 23:45, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for redacting the comment. TarnishedPath^talk 23:47, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

You're welcome, but per my comment on the thread I don't think it was directed at you. Chess enjoyer (talk) 23:52, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

On the mha page for izuku midoriya, people keep listing him as having a significant other. As of 2026, he does not have a significant other of any gender. This is not a shipping wiki. Please see to it the page is CORRECTLY maintained or others will keep doing it for you. ~2026-73876-9 (talk) 03:49, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi. I made that revert because it was not accurate to the cited source. However, it doesn't look like the source is considered reliable. Given that, I don't have any problems with the Midoriya not having a partner listed in the infobox. If other editors try to add one, you or anyone else can revert the edit or discuss it on the talk page of the article. Keep in mind that we go by what reliable sources say, not our personal opinions. If a reliable source said that so-and-so is Midoriya's partner, we would have probably have to include it in the article. I was just passing by, and Midoriya's romantic status isn't something I have a strong opinion on, so I'm not particularly interested in maintaining the article. Chess enjoyer (talk) 04:10, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

Alright. Thank you for clarifying. The page seems to have become a sort of "mini war" which is embarrassing as there are other fandom wikis specifically FOR shipping. I have no idea why people do this kind of thing on wikipedia of all places. Me and others will handle it i suppose. ~2026-73876-9 (talk) 04:16, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

just letting you know that the page for izuku midoriya keeps being vandalized by someone who insists on using an inaccurate and untrustworthy source to claim he has a significant other. If you able to, consider locking the page ~2026-83421-8 (talk) 20:35, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Only administrators can protect pages, and I'm not one. You should go to requests for page protection if you want the article to be protected. Chess enjoyer (talk) 21:26, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Thank you, will do. ~2026-91409-0 (talk) 20:40, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello Chess enjoyer, Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. This refer to the article Onek Dame Kena, which you moved to draftspace as Draft:Onek Dame Kena. Draftification was not appropriate per WP:DRAFTIFY, since this article was last edited less than 60 minutes before you moved it to draft (). Please consider using the MoveToDraft script, which guide editors through the draftification process and provides a warning when moving an article to draft space is inappropriate. Regards. QEnigma 论 08:16, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

You're right. It was close, but it hadn't been long enough to draftify the article (I'm not counting the edits by myself and the one that requested speedy deletion, since those aren't improvements to the article), and I'll check the edit history more carefully next time. However, given that it was close to an hour and that page definitely isn't ready for mainspace, I don't think it should be moved back just because of this (of course, any editor can move it back if do think it's ready). MoveToDraft is what I used to draftify the article, and a look a this diff should confirm that. I moved it despite the warning it gave me because I assumed that it was only giving it because of the CSD tagging. Chess enjoyer (talk) 08:41, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

@QEnigma: pinging you per the banner on your talk page. Chess enjoyer (talk) 08:43, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply Chess enjoyer. There is no necessity undo the move but please exercise caution the next time you move an article to draftspace. In addition, you can use {{Ping|user name}} or {{u|user name}} to notify another editor. Regards. QEnigma 论 08:53, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

You closed Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 February 23#Wikipedia and china as "Retarget to Chinese Wikipedia", however that was the original target. Everybody in the discussion recommended regargetting to Wikipedia in China. Thryduulf (talk) 13:35, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Whoops! Thanks for pointing that out, I'm not sure how I messed that up. I've reclosed the RFD with what the actual consensus was. Chess enjoyer (talk) 14:39, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi there. I may have mislabeled the redirect discussion for Safechuck v. MJJ Productions - saw your handle on the March 8 page to discuss redirect reverts so figured I would let you know. Bhdshoes2 (talk) 01:30, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi. I'm not sure why you thought you had to talk to me specifically about this, but your nomination does look malformed. I'll see if I can fix it. Chess enjoyer (talk) 01:37, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Oh thanks. Appreciate it. saw your name on the redirect page for March 8 that was why i came here. Folks now keep blanking the very page we are trying to decide should be redirected! Anyway, thanks again Bhdshoes2 (talk) 19:34, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

You're welcome. I'm just a regular editor, though. I guess you saw my username when I relisted a discussion? Chess enjoyer (talk) 19:53, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

There is plenty of time remaining to meet the goal of 26 new articles representing each letter of the alphabet, to be made in the year 2026. Let me know if you're looking for ideas. Cheers! BD2412 T 00:34, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder. I haven't forgotten or given up, I'm just lazy :)

I'll start sooner or later. Chess enjoyer (talk) 00:43, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Regarding your requested redactions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tree of Life, you may have to go deeper. The user has put that link and their name into numerous articles. CMD (talk) 05:21, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

Could you give a diff as an example? I'm not seeing anything. Chess enjoyer (talk) 05:27, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

No, that's a bad idea. I'm still don't see what you're talking about, though. Chess enjoyer (talk) 06:09, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

I've looked into this further and was looking at an old account, the individual has two (non-overlapping). Relating to the second account, check the sample diffs at the start of the discussion. CMD (talk) 09:07, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi. Just an FYI; the link I posted was taken directly from a Wikipedia article created by that user, I assumed that since they posted it to WP, it was fair game to repost it. The original link posted by the editor is visible several times in the edit history (for example here), and in others; I don't know if you can remove it from there as well. Dyanega (talk) 14:50, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

They added it themselves and they don't say that that's their website, so there's no need to suppress it as far as I know. Since they haven't said on-wiki that this is their website, I don't think it was appropriate for you to add it like you did. I didn't know that when I requested oversight, though. Chess enjoyer (talk) 15:07, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

Thx. I actually got a hunch to check their pronouns, but forgot. — Knightoftheswords 03:14, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

You're welcome. Even when you don't know what an editor's preferred pronouns are, it's better to just use they/them to be on the safe side. Chess enjoyer (talk) 03:20, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

This is probably the most trivial edit I've seen in 10+ years on Wikipedia. I'm not trying to get this page promoted to a featured article, I'm trying to get it deleted, and I'm pretty sure the admin who will do this would have figured it out. Magnolia677 (talk) 19:10, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Um, hi. Yeah, it probably would have gotten deleted either way, but the page isn't patent nonsense. The long string of text is (I think) an attempt to add an image, and the rest is just the start of an article. You're right, it was trivial, but is there any harm in making sure a page is tagged with the right CSD? Chess enjoyer (talk) 19:20, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

You have been trouted back for editing a user's main user page instead of their talk page. This was fun to watch unfold, hahaha. Thanks for the trout, it was my first! FaviFake (talk) 17:39, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

Well-earned, for the both of us! Chess enjoyer (talk) 17:41, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

P.S. This happens to be my first trout as well! Chess enjoyer (talk) 17:46, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

Wow that's perfect! FaviFake (talk) 17:47, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi Chess enjoyer! Long time no chat! I was pinged by your edit summary a few moments ago about this image and exporting it over to the Wikimedia Commons (here). If you believe that moving it to be hosted there would be more beneficial than keeping it hosted here locally, then hell yeah - go for it! ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:42, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi! I also just exported File:Meningioma Removal 2.png while I was at it. This'll let other language wikis (or anyone at all) use the photos, so I thought exporting them could only be a good thing. I was just surprised that it took this long for someone to think if it; File:Brain Tumor MRI.jpg was exported almost a year ago! (Also, most of that happened either before I was active or while I was still a newbie, but I'm glad everything turned out okay. You happen to be one of the nicest editors I know, and this place is definitely better with you than without :)) Chess enjoyer (talk) 23:06, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

I am SO SORRY for everything that happened on Earth. I want to be better than this. Please forgive me. 😔 Epicazowski (talk) 12:00, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Relax, Epicazowski. The other editor was arguably being more disruptive, given that consensus on the talk page is against keeping the blue marble as the lead image, so I don't blame you as much as the other editor. That said, you need to start using the talk page when you're reverted instead of just reverting back, and you should explain any revert that isn't obvious vandalism with an edit summary. That said, they didn't use edit summaries either, so everything I said applies to them, too. Chess enjoyer (talk) 16:57, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Ok. Epicazowski (talk) 17:25, 9 April 2026 (UTC)