User talk:Flyingphoenixchips

Women in Red | March 2026, Vol 12, Issue 3, Nos 358, 359, 364, 365, 366 Online events: March 1-31: Artists & Activists | Artworks by women | Alphabet run: countries starting with C Continuing (year-long initiatives): #1day1woman | Sports Announcements from other communities: Celebrate Women Unreferenced articles backlog drive Wiki Loves Ramadan Tip of the month: Those experiencing difficulties with new articles can follow the guidance in our essays, perhaps starting with our Ten Simple Rules. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest

--Rosiestep (talk) 09:28, 25 February 2026 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Hi there, Flyingphoenixchips. I see you have removed the WiR template from your user page and have deleted the invitation for April here. As a result, I have removed your name from our mailing list so that you will no longer be bothered with future notifications. Thanks anyway for your earlier interest in the project and all the best for editing in other spheres.--Ipigott (talk) 08:59, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

Hey @Ipigott I actually was organizing my wikipedia userpage so had made those recent edits. I will still be very much in the Women in red community at wikipedia. I strongly continue to feel this is an extremely important project that needs more editors. Best, Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 21:14, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

Would you like to continue receiving our monthlu newsletters? If so, I can re-insert your name on our mailing list.--Ipigott (talk) 07:53, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

yes would still love to :) thanks Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 11:54, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

Hey Flyingphoenixchips, excellent work on Wikipedia! @Kelob2678 pointed out that you may use AI in your work. To which you replied, "I used a script to organize bare references, yes. [I] did not use [it] for writing." It seems that text from your article was likely AI-generated, and others appear to have AI generation with human review. Since you are a native speaker of English from your WP:Babel user template. I wanted to let you know that I left you some AI-generated tags. If you think this is wrong, let me know. CostalCal (talk) 02:29, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi @CostalCal, thanks for pointing this out. So what I had been doing is creating self written articles on local drive with annotations with specific references, and use a python script to organise it all and push edits onto my wikipedia account. The script does use two agents to format the paper and organise the references. Was not quite sure, if this would fall under No LLM guidelines of wikipedia. will have a look at the tags you made, and improve it accordingly. Thanks again, much appreciated Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 03:51, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying. However, under WP:AI, "When exploring AI techniques and systems, the community consensus is to prefer human decisions over machine-generated outcomes until the implications are better understood." Using LLM for anything on Wikipedia is a mistake I once made: Wikipedia:WikiProject AI Cleanup/Noticeboard/Archive 2#Mass AI use by CostalCal. Using a Python script for editing isn't allowed if you haven't gotten approval from the WP:Bot Approvals Group. CostalCal (talk) 04:32, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Got it, thanks. It was just a bit annoying to keep formatting the references and things in wikitext over and over, so I was tempted to automate it. I'll try doing things myself from now on and will try to get it approved. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 13:01, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

That fails to explain the bucketloads of AISIGNS in your edits. Either your agents are doing something far beyond what you have told them to do or there is some information we are not privy to here. Fermiboson (talk) 13:16, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

The script instructs the agents to convert a markdown I had written to wikitext and pushed edits in bulk. The thing is I structured the markdown with references marked as "$", and the agents handled formatting and pushing those. I did test and verify that the references were correct after each run, but I am not sure why AI signs are showing up. I hadn't looked at the specific contents until @CostalCal pointed out. Yes, it does seem to me that the conversion was altering sentence structure beyond what I caught. I apologize for that. I will clean up the affected articles manually and stop using this method going forward. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 13:24, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for your transparency. Fermiboson (talk) 13:25, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

thanks again for the heads up, I am working on fixing all of the other articles Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 13:41, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manipur Institute of Technology. Your edits do not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use your sandbox. Such more could ban you. SatnaamIN (talk) 12:29, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

? Please again explain how my comments were factually incorrect, please do not resort to an edit war Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 12:32, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi Flyingphoenixchips. Thank you for your work on Park Dong-hyuk (soldier). Another editor, Mariamnei, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thank you for your work on this article. Please add a source for "For years, the men of PKC-357 were barely acknowledged." Thanks and have a good day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Mariamnei}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Mariamnei (talk) 08:12, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the review and suggestion. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 12:42, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Flyingphoenixchips. I've closed the Yaithing Konu AfD. This was open for a number of weeks with varying opinions from different editors. I genuinely don't know why a canvassing banner was applied, as I didn't see any canvassing from any participants, including yourself. This was a pretty clear notability versus editorial disagreement. I don't think either a keep or merge/redirect could have been performed here without serious disagreement taken from the opposing side, so no consensus made the most sense. I definitely recommend opening a merge proposal.

If you feel this was a WP:BADNAC, I will vacate the close. No WP:DRV required. I felt able to perform the close as, despite the disagreement in the discussion, the close was straightforward. It was also requested by one of the participants. I don't usually leave talk page messages for AfD closes I do, but I felt I should explain this one due to the multiple factors involved.

Courtesy pinging @Star Mississippi so they are aware. 11WB (talk) 22:38, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping.

I think this is a perfectly fine NAC, @11WB. There wasn't a consensus, nor was there interest in participating further. You identified that in the same way I would have and I suspect the same is true for most admins. Language access is clearly a factor. Since merge now lives at AfD, I don't know if opening one right now makes sense: editor hat, not admin hat. This is just my opinion. Maybe see if a Talk page discussion helps first @Flyingphoenixchips? Star Mississippi 01:28, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

That's true. Following PAM would result in an AfD right after an AfD. Technically allowed, but it could look WP:POINTy (attempting to push through a consensus for something). Fully concur with the talk page discussion suggestion. That would definitely be the best way forward! 11WB (talk) 01:33, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

I've updated the close statement per the above. 11WB (talk) 01:36, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

I think that's a good outcome, both for now and for someone who revisits the article down the road. Star Mississippi 02:16, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

Hey thanks for letting me know. I am kind of worked up this week, so might not get time to look into that article further. But I shall see and bring it up on the talk page, as I see fit. Thanks again Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 14:43, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

Dear Mr. @Flyingphoenixchips:, I've read your statement on your profile regarding extending a hand and further contact for those that are interested in working in articles about Northeast India, Mizo culture and other less known articles of the region. I can help regarding culture, languages, mythology and whatever topic crosses one or all three. Regards, KHR FolkMyth (talk) 20:53, 25 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello @KHR FolkMyth, great to make your acquaintance as well. Thanks for reaching out. We could definitely work together on these topics. I can also help with translations of Mizo-language articles if that would be useful for the work. Looking forward to collaborating. Best, Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 22:11, 25 April 2026 (UTC)

Achal Agrawal (academic), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been accepted!

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

• See the quality assessment scheme to find out how to improve the article.

Future articles

• Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without submitting a draft for review. However, you may continue submitting drafts to Articles for creation if you prefer.

• Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

Next steps

• Find other Wikipedia articles related to your topic and add links pointing to the new article. This helps readers find it.
• Group the article with similar subjects by adding relevant categories.
• You may consider nominating a fact from the article within the next 7 days to appear on the Main Page's Did you know section.
• Wikipedia is a work in progress. You can continue to expand and improve the new article.
• The new article will become eligible to be indexed on search engines once patrolled or after 90 days; search engines may take time to reflect this.
• For friendly peer support regarding editing, sourcing, or policies, visit the Teahouse, a question and answer hub for new editors.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

SafariScribe^{Edits! Talk!} 07:19, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for this ː) ǃ Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:48, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Flyingphoenixchips 😀 Just saw some cool graphic boxes on your user page. Any idea how to add them... I wanted to add some like This user is from NE, Christian. Where can I get those?

Thanks and regards,

Sam SamBordoloi (talk) 10:15, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

Hey Sam,

Thanks ː) You can check the following out at Wikipedia:Userboxes. For Christianity there are a lot of userboxes variant at Wikipedia:Userboxes/Religion/Christianity. There are also the India related userbox at Wikipedia:Userboxes/Location/India

Happy editingǃ @SamBordoloi Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 11:58, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you @Flyingphoenixchips can anybody add it? Or does adding need permission? SamBordoloi (talk) 08:36, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Yes anyone canǃ Feel free to browse the page and add the userboxes you wantǃ Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 14:44, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

oh cool! 😀 SamBordoloi (talk) 08:03, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		Can't help but appreciate your detailed and heavily policy coded nomination rationales at the AFD, especially the recent ones. BhikhariInformer (talk) 01:32, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks a lot ː) ǃǃ Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:58, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Thank you for helping out! Regards, Sam SamBordoloi (talk) 08:05, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

thanks ː) Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 15:41, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Hi Flyingphoenixchips, you will find this commentary familiar, I expect. Good job! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:57, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for sharing Appreciate it ː) Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 21:45, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Hello, Flyingphoenixchips. Per your request, your account has been granted temporary-account-viewer rights. You are now able to reveal the IP addresses of individuals using temporary accounts that are not visible to the general public. This is very sensitive information that is only to be used to aid in anti-abuse workflows. Please take a moment to review Wikipedia:Temporary account IP viewer for more information on this user right. It is important to remember:

• You must not share IP address data with someone who does not have the same access permissions unless disclosure is permissible as per guidelines listed at Foundation:Policy:Wikimedia Access to Temporary Account IP Addresses Policy.
• Access must not be used for political control, to apply pressure on editors, or as a threat against another editor in a content dispute. There must be a valid reason to investigate a temporary user. Note that using multiple temporary accounts is not forbidden, so long as they are not used in violation of policies (for example, block or ban evasion).

It is also important to note that the following actions are logged for others to see:

• When a user accepts the preference that enables or disables IP reveal for their account.
• Revealing an IP address of a temporary account.
• Listing the temporary accounts that are associated with one or more IP addresses (using the CIDR notation format).

Remember, even if a user is violating policy, avoid revealing personal information if possible. Use temporary account usernames rather than disclosing IP addresses directly, or give information such as same network/not same network or similar. If you do not want the user right anymore then please ask me or another administrator and it will be removed for you. You may also voluntarily give up access at any time by visiting Special:Preferences. Happy editing! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:30, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Hi Flyingphoenixchips. Thank you for reviewing my draft. Dipanjan Roy meets criteria 3 of WP:PROF. He is a fellow of National Academy of Sciences, India. I have used the primary sources only for biographical facts, just his career appointments and educational background, consistent with WP:PRIMARY. If you feel that the article relies a lot on primary sources I can take some information out. Can you please take a look again when you have time? HRShami (talk) 05:14, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Yes I understood that, but the issue I had was with primary sources. What you did in the article was basically original synthesis of his research work. He is notable no doubt of it, but either you should find better sources for bulk of the content or remove them @HRShami. See Wikipedia:No original research Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 05:18, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

The faculty pages are fine, I am just a bit hesitant with using his peer reviewed publications directly. There should be faculty websites/webpages of his lab that list his research work I suppose, or even press releases from the university? @HRShami Feel free to submit it again, after making these changes Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 05:24, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Understood. The first line of the research felt like WP:OR. I have changed the reference to his website where the same information can be confirmed without any synthesis. Is it okay to resubmit it now? HRShami (talk) 10:30, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

Hey @HRShami it looks good now. You can resubmit it, and I should be able to approve it. Also just fyi, it would be better to not cite his individual research papers under career. Maybe use a faculty page to talk about his field of work? Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 16:48, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

The papers I have cited are not written by him. They are papers that have cited his work. I have resubmitted the article. Thanks for your help with this. HRShami (talk) 05:42, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

I have accepted the same @HRShami. Happy editing Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 18:46, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

Hi Flyingphoenixchips, hope you're keeping well?

We've had two users come to the AfC help desk today, in both cases the drafts were most recently declined by you. What caught my attention was that you had declined them saying no improvement had been made since the previous decline, although in both cases that wasn't true; I've also since then found a third draft with a similar decline. Could you help me understand why you declined these drafts the way you did?

• Draft:P. V. Unnikrishnan – significantly edited (c. 100 edits) since previous decline, quite comprehensively rewritten, size increased from 21k to 31k bytes. Declined with "no improvement".
• Draft:Miguel Marcelino – doubled in size since previous decline from 5.5k to 11.5k, several new sources added. Declined with "no improvements since the last AfC review".
• Draft:Françoise Quintin-Ryszowska – substantially expanded and edited since previous decline, doubling size from 12k to 25k, and several new sources added. Declined with "no improvement since".

As far as you can recollect, have you made more such declines, or is this the extent of it?

Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:28, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Hey @DoubleGrazing that was the extent of it. I remember giving a more thorough response, than just this. Thanks for the heads up I am having a look Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 14:29, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. If you discover a glitch in the review tool, please post on the project talk page so it can be fixed. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:41, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Gotcha. I have responded back with the specifics to all 3. Thanks again for the head's up Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 14:46, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Hi Flyingphoenixchips and thanks for your AfC reviewing! I just wanted to suggest that you be a little more careful in picking your decline messages to avoid the risk of confusing submitters at AfC. I was reviewing a draft you'd previously declined, and noticed a few other pages you've reviewed recently where it was quite hard to understand your exact reason for declining the draft. For instance:

• Draft:Phool Dei was declined for "reading like a resume or curriculum vitae" despite being about a cultural festival and not a person, with a comment saying "fix the references"
• Draft:Dipanjan Roy was declined for failing to demonstrate notability, but you then told the submitter that there was no doubt that the subject was notable and that the issue was something unrelated to notability
• Draft:Tapan Das (Politician) was declined with only the comment "conform to wikipedia manual of style"
• Several drafts were declined for having no sources when they did have at least some sources (e.g. Draft:James Koppert)

The aim of an AfC decline should ideally be to give actionable feedback to the submitter on exactly what they need to fix in order to have their draft accepted. Some of these decline messages don't seem to match up with your comments, or are likely too vague for a new user to really understand what to do with. I'd also suggest having a read of WP:AFCPURPOSE and WP:AFCSTANDARDS — the primary purpose of AfC is to assess notability, and drafts don't need to be perfect to be accepted. It's okay to accept a draft even if it contains some citations to primary sources, has imperfectly formatted references, or doesn't perfectly conform to the manual of style. Things like lacking an infobox (Draft:Mario Pinto) or having too many citations (Draft:Tapinanthus quequensis) are definitely not reasons to decline a draft.

Thanks! MCE89 (talk) 15:57, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Got it, thanks for the heads up. Will keep this in mind moving on. Also could you have a look at Sinjarist/Battle of Mount Handrin. I am unable to just move the article without the creators username to mainspace Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 18:09, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

@MCE89I have responded in detail for most of the cases to the individual users. My keyboard is a bt broken so I have been using a wisperflow agent to convey suggestions on improving the specific article. It seems like its messing things up however. Apologies for that Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 23:51, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for that, appreciate it! With regards to Draft:Sinjarist/Battle of Mount Handrin, it looks like the title Battle of Mount Handrin is salted due to being repeatedly recreated. If you think the draft is ready for mainspace, the best first step would be to reach out to the protecting administrator Ponyo and ask if they would consider reducing the protection level. You could also request that the title be unsalted at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Decrease. MCE89 (talk) 09:36, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

Gotcha, thanks Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 18:38, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

Please undo any declines that you acknowledge are incorrect. If you consider that any of these drafts are eligible for article space, please move them there. ~2026-28227-78 (talk) 10:44, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	For your work on Myanmar and northeast India! Junosangleave a message 10:36, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

Thanks appreciate itǃ Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 18:39, 9 May 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 A Case Study in Biting Newcomers: The Catch-22 of Draft:AuDHD. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 08:57, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for this ping Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 00:12, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Hi Flyingphoenixchips,

Thank you for your review of my submission on author Gary McAvoy. Per your response, I’ve removed the citations for the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal. I've kept the citation for the Guardian since that article specifically cites Mr. McAvoy as the author of the book. I’ve also added an additional reference for a prominent Publishers Weekly review of his work.

I hope these changes are sufficient for acceptance.

Thanks! Rsamborn (talk) 04:09, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Hello Flyingphoenixchips,

Backlog update

At the time of this message, there are 15,282 articles and 32,951 redirects awaiting review.

After the January–February drive the article backlog was reduced to 15,179 articles and the redirect backlog to 19,053 respectively. Great job! However, both queues are growing rapidly and any additional reviews are highly appreciated.

2024 and 2025 NPP Awards

JTtheOG was selected as the NPP reviewer of the year for both 2024 and 2025, for reviewing the most articles amongst all reviewers.

Hey man im josh and MPGuy2824 won the Redirect Ninja Master Award for 2024 and 2025 respectively, for reviewing the most redirects.

Overall in 2024, one Platinum, two Gold, eight Silver, 12 Bronze and 45 Iron Barnstars were awarded. Additionally, 66 reviewers got the NPP barnstar for doing more than 100 reviews through the year. In 2025, one Platinum, ten Silver, 13 Bronze and 38 Iron Barnstars were awarded. Additionally, 38 reviewers got the NPP barnstar for doing more than 100 reviews through the year.

BoyTheKingCanDance, Rosiestep, SunDawn, and Vanderwaalforces were inducted into the NPP Hall of Fame for having two separate years of 2,000+ article reviews.

January–February backlog drive

The experimental two-month long backlog drive concluded with 183 reviewers patrolling over 27,761 articles and 35,309 redirects, earning over 36,836 points. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 6,484.6 points in this drive.

May backlog drive

An article-only backlog drive is currently underway. We are hoping to make a big dent in the backlog. You can read more about it or join at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Backlog drives/May 2026.

PageTriage

An attempt was made to get the New Pages Feed to sort by date marked as reviewed instead of date created. However we had to revert it due to bugs. We may try again in the future. You can subscribe to the Phabricator ticket if you're interested in following along.

Reminders:

• You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
• Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:37, 14 May 2026 (UTC)