User talk:ERcheck

Hi ERcheck, quick note on Special:Block/DennisRodmanOfficial: I updated the block reason to match the talk page notice since a promotional note in the reason could send someone in the wrong direction in the future. I'll also plug Twinkle for blocking since it keeps the reason in sync automatically and has reasonable defaults (like soft blocks for blocks like this one). Cheers. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 20:48, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

@Daniel Quinlan - Thanks. It was a few weeks ago, so, I'm not sure how I added the incorrect reason in the block, but the correct reason on in the notice to the user. Thanks for catching that. — ERcheck (talk) 23:58, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi I am Verdict! and recently I have found an article which is completely messed with unreliable sources. I have been arguing with an editor who kept those things since whole day!. You may see our conversations on our talk page and understand the whole situation. Could you please help me what can I do further to make it unbiased. I don't know what to do! Narrow-gauge railways in Denmark, this is the page I am talking about. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VerdictByLogic (talk • contribs) 19:28, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

You have just place this on that Wikipedia website and you have just been removed all of informations that was already there so why place this thing here yeah that doesn't make any sense at all. ~2026-17339-05 (talk) 21:34, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-17339-05 - Please do not carry your dispute to my talk page. — ERcheck (talk) 21:39, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

I'm just trying to talk to this person so this person can have some more respect against other peoples. And nothing else at all. ~2026-17339-05 (talk) 21:41, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

I hope you understand what I'm saying and I think you should go to my talk page so you can see the whole thing for yourself. ~2026-17339-05 (talk) 21:42, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a free place, and I don't think you should be that aggressive you should just be calm and not aggressive at all. Just remember that tone okay that's all for me and I hope you understand what I'm saying by the way. Thanks for your understanding. ~2026-17339-05 (talk) 21:45, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

You are only warning yourself dude, and all of the admins they can just see what you have sent to me on my talk page. That is not okay and you have not that privilege at all, that privilege is only by admins. ~2026-17339-05 (talk) 21:40, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-17339-05 - I am blocking you from commenting on my talk page. As I said, I am not a part of this dispute. — ERcheck (talk) 22:50, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

That didn't work. Perhaps it's better if it didn't work; I'm not a fan of an administrator using the tools to deal with a dispute they're involved in, such as partially blocking someone from their own talk page for having annoyed them. I'd recommend asking them to stop messaging you, as everyone can, and if the messages continue, revert, revert, report at ANI. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 02:03, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

@ToBeFree - Thanks. I see your point, though I didn't view myself as an "involved" party. One of the disputing parties came to my page, I surmise randomly looking for an admin; then, the other party followed to my page. I requested that the discussion not be on my talk page, but it continued both on my page and Verdict!'s page. I did recommend make recommendations on addressing their dispute. Given your perspective, I will be more circumspect in a similar situation. — ERcheck (talk) 06:14, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

All good, I was a bit in a hurry this morning. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 16:03, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

		The Barnstar for the Oops
		thank you for telling me that African agoty don't have tails

Bencefo (talk) 17:29, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

Sir thank you for handling that user whom i reported at the AIV, the person vandalizing the article about the Baker Act law in Florida. Really, I don’t know why he was doing that. I live in Florida, I’ve lived here my entire life, apart from when I lived in India during my infancy, that was where I was born. Yes, I am an Indian-American boy, born and raised Catholic, and I have been U.S. citizen since Summer of 2015 before my 4th grade.

Ever since I immigrated to USA as a toddler in late 2006, I have been living in Florida. I know VERY WELL what the Baker Act is and I was actually in the Baker Act myself from September 21, 2019, at 12 AM, to when I was discharged the next day during the afternoon. Don’t worry, I’m better now, and yes, the Baker Act is NOT a baking school, where you “learn how to bake cookies, french chocolate pastries, cupcakes, and so much more,” quite contrary to what this vandal was doing.

It’s called “Baker Act” but the official name of that Act is the Florida Mental Health Act of 1971. Baker Act is just a nickname. It comes from Maxine Baker. She was in the Florida House of Representatives, she represented Miami-Dade County FL, and she was the one who pushed for this Act. That’s why it’s called Baker Act, and it really has nothing to do with baking.

Don’t worry, I am not like that user. I am here to help Wikipedia improve and be better. That’s why I reported that troublesome user at the AIV. Thanks for handling him. It’s annoying when braindead kids like him come and cause trouble like this. Come on, if someone is bored, he/she has far better things to do than to be vandalizing Wikipedia or Fandom and giving admins and others trouble. Don’t you think? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AmericanDude28 (talk • contribs) 02:10, 25 April 2026 (UTC)

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

Administrator changes

• Deepfriedokra

• EvanProdromou
• Wouterstomp

Interface administrator changes

L235

Chaotic Enby

CheckUser changes

• TheresNoTime
• Versageek

Oversight changes

Moneytrees

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

• Changes to user permissions made from Meta are now included in the local user permissions log (T6055).
• The autoconfirmed user group will soon be modified such that the four-day account age requirement begins when an account makes its first edit (T418484).

Arbitration

• The arbitration case SchroCat has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case closed on 15 April.
• Per a recent motion, appeals of blocks from the conflict-of-interest VRT queue are, by default, appealed on-wiki through the normal unblock process. However, they may be heard by the Committee if COIVRTers disagree on the interpretation of the evidence or believe ArbCom would be better suited to hear the appeal. Administrators are also advised that loosening or lifting such blocks without the consent of someone with access to the queue or ArbCom can be grounds for desysopping.
• Per a recent motion, restrictions issued directly by the Committee may now be enforced with blocks which work exactly like contentious topic blocks.
• The arbitration case Maghreb has been closed.

Miscellaneous

• The May 2026 administrator elections are scheduled to run from April 29 to May 19. The call for candidates ends May 5.
• The 2026 Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) election is scheduled to run from April 25 to June 1. Candidacy submissions close on May 10.
• A new noticeboard for non-urgent, batch page protection requests has been created, primarily for the enforcement of contentious topic restrictions.

I got called out for not handling WP:UAA appropriately, are you available to help me for a moment? --みんな空の下 (トーク) 18:28, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

What is your question? (I have just a few minutes now.) — ERcheck (talk) 19:39, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply, but I was wondering if you have any input on my possible UAA mistakes (third warning section). I'm trying to correct the mistakes from the input Cabayi gave me earlier today. --みんな空の下 (トーク) 20:06, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

@みんな空の下 - Likely it was a bit of a surprise to be admonished for what you felt was diligent reporting. I recommend to take a few moments (and a few deep breaths), shed off the feelings associated with being called out, and now let's look at how do handle things differently in the future. I recommend reading Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention/Instructions.

FYI, here are some things that I do when I look at usernames:

• First thing, check to see if the account is blocked.

• When I look at newly created accounts/usernames that seem promotional:

1. I do a google search on the name to see if it is truly a company with the exact same name/website with the exact term.
2. I check the user contributions to see if they have been editing promotionally.
3. I check the user talk page to see if they have already received a warning.

• If no warning has been issued, I then use the {{uw-coi-username}} warning, with the usual subject line "Username issue - please choose new username".
• If you issue a warning, give the user time to respond. Don't report to UAA immediately thereafter.

• On occasion, I will need to use Google translate to figure out what is actually happening.
• Looking at usernames that are offensive is sometimes a difficult call.
• Key takeaways for when to report to WP:UAA:

1. Blatantly aggregious violations, such as threats of violence, blatantly inappropriate names, I'd bring to UAA.
2. For all others, that are serious/obviously promotional, follow the "Only report accounts with edits and do not report those with no edits in the preceding 2 weeks" and also, provide a clear explanation of what is against policy.

Hope this helps. Feel free to ask specific questions here. I am busy IRL, so I might not respond quickly. — ERcheck (talk) 20:06, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

@Minna Sora no Shita - I wrote the above while you were answering, so, I may not have addressed what you needed. Please to feel free to ask for more details if needed. — ERcheck (talk) 20:11, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

@みんな空の下 - Follow-up to warning on obvious corporate usernames: As such names are allowed on other wiki accounts, I do check to see if the account was created on en.wikipedia.org, with no other global accounts/contributions. I find that the use of the template {{uw-coi-username}} is gentle way of letting a new editor know that their username does not comply with English Wikipedia's policy. There was an admin discussion thread last year (July 2025), that leaned toward WP:CORPNAME with no edits = warn/discuss. 18:36, 7 May 2026 (UTC) — ERcheck (talk) 18:36, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

I'm not sure if you should follow-up with Cabayi with this, since they're the admin that has warned me for biting new editors (I was handed a final warning earlier this morning). I've been using {{uw-coi-username}}, but thanks for the tip with the point on no other global accounts/contributions (use Special:CentralAuth to see if such). I usually use Google/Duckduckgo to see if the username resembles an existing company in real life, but maybe I should also use CentralAuth tool as well. Though I'm not sure if I'm going back to full speed patrolling newly created users... (Maybe newly created pages might be better, especially when I find blatantly promotional pages that are unacceptable for wikipedia). --みんな空の下 (トーク) 19:02, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

I saw you deleted an article that I created. This article is legitimate. ~2026-29968-87 (talk) 01:26, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page 1952 Mount Gannett C-124 crash, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A dates error. References show this error when one of the date-containing parameters is incorrectly formatted. Please edit the article to correct the date and ensure it is formatted to follow the Wikipedia Manual of Style's guidance on dates. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 02:35, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

Typo fixed. — ERcheck (talk) 03:03, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

I see you blocked user:AQUAFUTURE and user:TNBDA BUSINESS for 24 hours aren't username blocks supposed to be indefinite especially when combined with promotional edits? Lavalizard101 (talk) 14:16, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

@Lavalizard101 - Thanks for letting me know. I was using Twinkle for blocking for the first time and made a mistake. Fixed them both to indefs. — ERcheck (talk) 15:44, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

No worries twinkle misclicks are easily done. Lavalizard101 (talk) 17:16, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

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

Administrator changes

• Asukite
• Bobby Cohn
• Bonadea
• Ca
• Drm310
• Reconrabbit
• Sammi Brie

• Tamzin
• TonyBallioni

• Ezhiki
• Queen of Hearts

Bureaucrat changes

• WereSpielChequers

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, the "persistent usage of large language models" has been included as a common reason for a block.

Technical news

• Mandatory 2FA for bureaucrats: Bureaucrats without two-factor authentication (2FA) enabled have already lost access to their advanced rights on 26 May. Those who do not enable 2FA may be automatically removed from the groups in mid-June 2026, and from that point onward, new members must have 2FA enabled before they can be added. (T423119, T423120)

Arbitration

• The arbitration case SchroCat has been closed.
• The arbitration case Michael Jackson has opened. Evidence submissions in this case closes on 1 June.

Miscellaneous

• Voting for the 2026 Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) election closes on 1 June.

Hi ERcheck. I'm just curious what the procedure is to handle bot-reported names at UAA. For ones that are not a violation, does it have to be manually de-listed? Or just require an explanatory comment with the {{uaa}} template, and then DeltaQuadBot will remove it? --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 16:35, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

@Drm310 - Excellent question! I am not sure. I did some sleuthing and see that DeltaQuadBot seems to list them; while, HBC AIV helperbot14 removes the blocked ones from both the Bot-reported and User-reported lists. I don't think the bots can discern comments, so I think admins have to manually de-list. I must admit that I haven't really paid close attention to how the not-a-violation commented ones go away. I have seen that comment, then subsequent follow-ups that decide an entry is an issue. If you learn anything more, I'd love to hear back about it. — ERcheck (talk) 18:51, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

This is the same person as 椿 10 (and a number of other accounts) so perhaps TPA should be revoked. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 04:42, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

@45dogs - Have you filed a report at WP:SPI? I've got to run IRL right now, so, I won't have time to address this. — ERcheck (talk) 04:44, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

IMO this is so obvious an SPI isn't needed, as evidenced by this. I will ask another admin though if you are busy. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 04:47, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Hello ERcheck, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Draft:Mahdere Paulos, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not only plausibly LLM-generated. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Ca ^{talk to me!} 07:20, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

Hi ERcheck, I am just writing regarding a deleted New Zealand court case article called the Seizure of Shaun Allen's farm, which was deleted back in late April 2026. It was created by a now-banned user Kiwimanic, who had done so while being banned as a sockpuppet of a notorious long-term ban evader, Offender9000. Given the article's notability in New Zealand current affairs and policing, would it be possible to recreate it as a draft? Me and other interested users could then rewrite it to remove any trace of Kiwimanic's work and to ensure it complies with Wikipedia policy? Thanks for your time. Andykatib (talk) 03:07, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

@Andykatib - I reviewed the deletion log and the sockpuppet investigation. Given the reason for the original block of the sockpuppet, and that many of the revisions of the draft have been redacted, I decline restoring it to be worked on. However, you are welcome to create a new draft.

@Justlettersandnumbers: Courtesy ping as you have been asked by Andykatib about restoring drafts of the sockpuppet. — ERcheck (talk) — ERcheck (talk) 14:08, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

Hi, ERcheck, how are you? – thanks for the ping. Yes, I share your concerns and I too declined to restore the two sockpuppet pages Andykatib asked for; I did however email him the content thereof, with a request that he make whatever use he wishes of the structural elements of the pages, but write new text (this partly because of who wrote the stuff, and partly to avert any concerns over attribution). Was I wrong to do so, do you think? Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 14:24, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

@Justlettersandnumbers - I don't judge it as wrong. Personally, I like to keep everything within the wiki-universe. Given that the sockpuppetry investigation centered on serious POV issues, I think a clean start is what I would suggest. Even the structure/section headings could hold a bias. Thanks for the discussion. Happy to talk if you have other questions/concerns. — ERcheck (talk) 14:47, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

Thanks, ERcheck, I think that's sound advice. Andykatib, could I ask you to do as ERcheck has suggested and make a clean start on those pages rather than re-using any part of the deleted articles? – despite what I said earlier, I think that would be best. I'd be most grateful. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 15:11, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

Good morning @Justlettersandnumbers: and ERcheck, thanks for your advice. I agree it would be best to make a fresh start for those three articles. Would it be alright to use the sources cited in the articles if they come from reputable sources like media organisations or government reports? I would of course rewrite the structure and body of the articles from scratch. Andykatib (talk) 21:00, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

@Andykatib - As you are a PhD, and maybe a bit of a Trekkie (no offense meant to a Star Wars fan), I recommend that you "boldly go where no man has gone before," and start completely fresh. I have not reviewed the citations used in the deleted drafts, so I can not speak to their possible bias. — ERcheck (talk) 23:52, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

Thanks ERcheck for your advice. Those citations should also be easily available through a Google search. My method is to use Google searches plus media sources like Radio New Zealand and The New Zealand Herald. Will draw upon my university training. On a fun fact, I also like some Star Trek stories such as Star Trek Prodigy and Star Trek: Strange New Worlds. Cheers. Andykatib (talk) 00:18, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

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

Administrator changes

• Chipmunkdavis
• TechnoSquirrel69

• Mlaffs
• SpuriousQ
• Lectonar
• Dennis Brown
• Hog Farm

CheckUser changes

• Giraffer
• TonyBallioni

• Dbeef
• EdJohnston

Oversight changes

• Giraffer
• TonyBallioni

L235

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment asks whether the criteria for autoconfirmed and extended confirmed should be modified.
• A request for comment proposes an addendum for the Real name section of the Username policy.

Technical news

• The special page Special:RangeCalculator has been created for any users to use to find an IP range. (phab:T268429)
• The "indefinitely" button in Special:Block for temporary accounts can be replaced with a preferred block duration stated on MediaWiki:ipb-indefinite-expiry-temporary-account. (phab:T427125)

Arbitration

• Following a series of motions, changes to the contentious topics procedure to restructure awareness have been implemented.
• The arbitration case Michael Jackson has been closed.

Miscellaneous

• The 2026 Developing Countries WikiContest will run from 1 July to 30 September. Sign up now!
• 10 candidates have been appointed to the U4C.

Doing a google search on the title seems to tell me that it all circles back here on Wikipedia as a made-up entry as nothing else turns up e.g. IMDb listings and the like, hence why I deleted them from Don Rickles's filmography article. Blake Gripling (talk) 02:05, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

@Blakegripling ph - Mea culpa - looking more closely, you are right. I've restored your version and made a note on the article's talk page. — ERcheck (talk) 02:44, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

No problem, mate, thanks! Blake Gripling (talk) 02:45, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Michelle Kwan, a link pointing to the disambiguation page Labrum was added.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:13, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

Hello, thank you for the notice.

I understand the conflict of interest guidelines. I am the subject of the article and I will avoid promotional wording. I am providing only factual information supported by independent reliable sources and I welcome independent review and corrections by other editors.

Thank you. Arsimgashiviolinist (talk) 04:44, 17 July 2026 (UTC)

@Arsimgashiviolinist - Please review WP:COI and WP:Autobiography to make sure you fully understand Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. You will need to make sure you declare your COI if you edit on topics related to yourself. — ERcheck (talk) 04:47, 17 July 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification.

I understand the COI and autobiography guidelines. I have disclosed my connection to the subject and I will avoid promotional edits. I will focus on providing reliable independent sources and factual information, and I welcome independent editors to review and improve the draft.

Thank you.

Arsimgashiviolinist (talk) 04:49, 17 July 2026 (UTC)

Just wanted to flag Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2026 July 24 for you since it doesn't look like you were notified. You deleted Draft:Montgolfier Balloon as a G12, but the hotairballoonist.com website was just copying from our article Montgolfier brothers, as had already been sorted out at DRV once before. Another admin has already undeleted, but it's a good reminder to make sure you're considering the possibility of reverse copyvio as well as checking the history and the logs before pushing the delete button. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 05:15, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

Why dis you caution TITANSofCNC (talk · contribs) about their username? They haven't edited this wiki. There's nothing in the filter log. Why would this user be subject to enwiki's username policy rather than that of some other WMF project? Cabayi (talk) 11:12, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

Same for Figmarketing (talk · contribs) Cabayi (talk) 11:24, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

@Cabayi - TITANSofCNC (now MFGconnector), according to Global account information, registered with enwiki, not some other WMF project. When I post a coi-username warning for a new account, I check to see which wiki they registered with. Both TITANofCNC and Figmarketing (now Nelliamlnk) registered on enwiki. — ERcheck (talk) 18:15, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

Many users register on enwiki and then become prolific users & contributors on other wikis without ever typing one word on enwiki. You're berating these users who have done nothing wrong on any wiki. Cabayi (talk) 07:42, 28 July 2026 (UTC)

@Cabayi - I don't view the request to change a username as "berating" a user, but rather providing the user with information that they weren't aware of. — ERcheck (talk) 13:57, 28 July 2026 (UTC)

But you have no reason to request that they change their username if they aren't active on enwiki. That's why we have {{UAA|w}} at UAA. Cabayi (talk) 16:26, 28 July 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Ticketbud, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters contains an invalid URL. Please edit the article to fix the URL. (Fix | Ask for help). Below are the references causing this error:

• • Team Guideflow (June 25, 2026). "15 best event ticketing software options for 2026". guideflow.com. Retrieved July 28, 2026. {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 22:29, 28 July 2026 (UTC)

Thanks bot! Done. — ERcheck (talk) 14:50, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Augmented Seventh. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Nabo Gass, but you didn't provide a reliable source. On Wikipedia, it's important that article content be verifiable. If you'd like to resubmit your change with a citation, your edit is archived in the page history. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Howdy,

I think you might unknowingly be changing a direct quote.

While your prose is fine, i think it might be misdirected.

cordially, Augmented Seventh (talk) 03:28, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

@Augmented Seventh - It looks like we were both trying to revert edits and your reversion took first and mine reverted yours. I agree that the edit by User:HatRabbit was appropriate to revert (note I left a note on their talk page about the revert). — ERcheck (talk) 03:31, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

noted, and thank you. Augmented Seventh (talk) 19:09, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

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

Administrator changes

• MCE89
• Staraction

• Danaman5

CheckUser changes

• dbeef

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, the 30-day requirement for extended-confirmed status now begins after an account's first edit instead of its registration (T431060).

Technical news

• Inactive editors can now be removed as mentors at Special:CommunityConfiguration/Mentorship automatically.
• The Suggested Edits' Revise Tone feature is now enabled. It encourages editors to identify and revise non-neutral language in articles.

Miscellaneous

• The Unreferenced articles August 2026 backlog drive is underway. Help to add references to 47,000 articles.
• The Articles for creation August 2026 backlog drive is under way. Help to review 4,500+ drafts.

Hello, I am an AfC reviewer, you recently blocked User:Team Lewis Communications. A new account then resubmitted this draft as their only edit. I thought you may want to follow up with them. Czarking0 (talk) 14:52, 15 August 2026 (UTC)

@Czarking0 - Thanks for keeping an eye on this COI issue. Per the block notice to Team Lewis Communications, they had the option of creating a "new account with a different username", which is what they appear to have done. The new account name does not appear to be a group account/have a promotional username. They have received a notice on their talk page that they need to declare their paid COI. If they do not, they may blocked for undisclosed paid editing. Thanks. — ERcheck (talk) 21:45, 15 August 2026 (UTC)