User talk:MSK

Welcome to Phase 2 of the January–February 2026 NPP drive. During Phase 1, we reviewed 16,658 articles and 4,416 redirects, and there is currently a backlog of 16,475 articles and 23,782 redirects in the queue. Fantastic job! Completing 22,502 patrols in the first phase made a significant dent in the backlog. Let's keep our foot on the gas for Phase 2, and I hope we can achieve even more reviews than Phase 1. Best of luck!

You are receiving this message because you added your name to the participants list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:21, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

what if you just looked up the source yourself ~2026-12294-47 (talk) 16:03, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

I wrote the article myself, by looking up sources myself, and copying the exact statistics. Flamin123 (talk) 10:53, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

If that is the case, I apologize for the mistake. The sources still do not show notability, which is required for a draft to be accepted. All of the sources are primary (the government) monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 17:13, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

On 12 February 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Black-rumped magpie, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the black-rumped magpie was made a full species in 2018? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Black-rumped magpie. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Black-rumped magpie), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

HurricaneZeta^C 00:03, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

On 16 February 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Rock wren, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that rock wrens build pavements made of flat stones to keep their nests dry? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Rock wren. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Rock wren), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

—TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 00:02, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

Hey there MSK! I have been a casual editor for Wikipedia before, but it's been awhile and I am starting fresh today. I would like to create a page for the Little Rock Fire Dept. Can you assist? --HipsterBombero (talk) 18:35, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

Hey! Before you create an article, I strongly suggest you read up on the general notability guidelines, which are very important while creating a new article, mostly since they are the rules for whether a subject should have a Wikipedia article or not. Cheers! monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 19:14, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

hello how can i add an article --Eyuel assaye (talk) 07:17, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

@Eyuel assaye see WP:My first article. Cheers! monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 15:30, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

sir, i would like to how to put citation to the article --REV. SUNIL DEBBARMA (talk) 03:02, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

@REV. SUNIL DEBBARMA Hello! See WP:Citing sources. monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 19:13, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

I'm contacting the members of WikiProject AI Tools because there is a related discussion about creating help pages on using such tools on Wikipedia. You are invited. It's at Wikipedia talk:Help Project#Planning help for AI workflows. See you there!    — The Transhumanist   14:11, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi MSK - I've just seen a couple of errors generated by your template in synonym lists; at Black-rumped magpie it has put the synonym authority in brackets "(Delessert, 1840)", which it shouldn't be (no change in the genus attribution), and ditto at Curlew sandpiper it has put the protonym authority in brackets "Tringa ferrugineus (Pontoppidan, 1763)", again of course as the original genus attribution, it shouldn't be in brackets. Can you iron these (and any other similar errors) out, please? I guess it might need adding a line 'Brackets: yes/no'. Thanks! - MPF (talk) 19:27, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

@MPF iirc there's a param "para", if it is set as anything that's not blank it will hide the brackets. I can't do anything rn since im on my phone though, thanks you noticing that though monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 19:34, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks! - MPF (talk) 20:47, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Sorry, still can't work this one out! I tried adding "|brackets=no", but that didn't do anything - MPF (talk) 16:48, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

@MPF {{Subspecies bullet list item|scientific name=P. l. lophotes|describer last name=Reichenbach|year described=1853|description=[[Nominate subspecies]].|describer name=Ludwig Reichenbach|para=amogus}} (note the "para=amogus", as long as the para parameter is set as something not blank no brackets will be rendered.)

that will resolve to:

• P. l. lophotes Reichenbach, 1853 —Nominate subspecies. monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 18:13, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello mentor.

I'm really grateful for your time and help as a new editor. I've disclosed my conflict of interest (I'm Purandar Mishra's social media manager) on my user page and am only suggesting changes via the talk page using the Edit Request template. I have posted a proposal there about fixing inconsistencies, like the birth date (some sources/news say 3 January 1959, but the 2023 affidavit on MyNeta shows age 63, implying ~1960) and adding well-sourced details about his role as founder/president of Shri Jagannath Mandir Seva Samiti, Raipur. And some other essential details.

I'm stuck on: How to best handle conflicting sources (e.g., news biographies vs. official affidavit)? Should I propose noting the discrepancy? What makes a secondary source "reliable enough" for BLP details? For example, NPG News (2023) and some other Hindi profiles repeat 1959 and family details from his biodata. Any tips to improve my talk-page request so it's more likely to be reviewed/acted on? (It's in the backlog.)

I'd love any general advice on COI editing for politician bios or how to find better independent sources for Chhattisgarh MLAs. I'm happy to wait and learn. Thanks again for your support!

Best regards, ShaambhaviiC (talk) --ShaambhaviiC (talk) 22:32, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

In general, COI editing is strongly discouraged by the Wikipedia community, and it's common for COI edits to be put under more intense scrutiny and more severe consequences for mistakes. If you want to make changes to Purandar Mishra's page, I suggest you make edit requests on that article's talk page.

Regarding your question about what makes a reliable source, there is a list of reliable/unreliable sources available, and WP:Reliable is a good essay going over what good reliable sources are like.

Cheers! monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 23:50, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:19, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

(This message was sent to User talk:Monkeysmashingkeyboards and is being posted here due to a redirect.)

On 20 February 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Brown cacholote, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that brown cacholotes sing only in duets, mate for life, and share parental duties equally? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Brown cacholote. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Brown cacholote), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

HurricaneZeta^C 12:02, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

How do I code in HTML in the edit section --Rowenhunter (talk) 14:21, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello! See Help:HTML. monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 18:45, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

Thank you --Yingqi365 (talk) 22:20, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

so would you please tell me how to add photos to my homepage😅 --Yingqi365 (talk) 22:22, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

See Help:Introduction to images with VisualEditor. monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 23:01, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi, this is an automated reminder as part of Global reminder bot to let you know that your permission "patroller" (New page reviewers) will expire on 00:00, 28 February 2026 (UTC). For most rights, you will need to renew at WP:PERM, unless you have been told otherwise when your right was approved. To opt out of user right expiry notifications, add yourself to m:Global reminder bot/Exclusion. Leaderbot (talk) 19:41, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi @MSK, Thank you for reviewing my new page Eric Schwarz so quickly, I was wondering if you would be able to help me more on determining if any of the sources I have used as evidence are independent/tertiary? I was under the impression that the Newsroom NH one would likely be independent, as Schwarz was given an award by them but had not been involved in the writing of the article itself, which was a description of the award and why it was given. I want to ensure I am following Wiki's guidelines but just need some more clarifiction! Thanks Izzy.C1287 (talk) 19:42, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

@Izzy.C1287 let's look at the references, one by one.

Schwarz 2014 (sources 1 and 3): A work by Schwarz, does not establish notability since it is a primary source.

Cravath (2): Ex-employer (Frederick A. O. Schwarz, Jr. retired from the Firm in December 2001, and was named Senior Counsel in 2002.) and is not independent.

Echoing Green (4): Looking at the application process, the personal bio is submitted by the applicator, and thus is not independent and does not establish notability. (An important distinction is the proactive nature of the application, e.g. Echoing Green does not find a candidate, they are found by the applicator)

Citizen Schools (5): Founded by Schwarz.

International Education News (6): This source is a precursor biography for their interview here, and would not be independent. IEN is also a self-declared blog, which are considered unreliable by Wikipedia.

Coledge for Social Innovation (7): Co-founded by Schwarz, and therefore is not independent.

Solutions Insight Lab (8): Interviews are not indepdendent.

University of Vermont Foundation (9): Incredibly brief mention, not in-depth enough to establish notability.

Congressional Record (10): Same as above.

Skoll (11): Not independent of Schwarz, as he is a Awardee and this would be a WP:COISOURCE. (Also applicable to Echoing Green)

Newsroom University of New Hampshire (12): Student papers are unreliable, additionally, Schwarz is conducting a workshop at UNH (Quote, In addition to his keynote address, Schwarz will also lead a workshop, "The Opportunity Equation: Innovative Models for Business and Citizen Engagement in K-12 Education," with New Hampshire panelists Fred Bramante (National Center for Competency-Based Learning), Tanna Clews (N.H. Charitable Foundation STEM Pathways Initiative), Representative Mary Stuart Gile (N.H. House Education Committee), and Mark Greenlaw (FIRST). For more information visit www.unh.edu/svic.) therefore it is both unreliable and not independent.

Social Capitalist Inc (13): Same as sources 9 and 10, not in-depth enough.

Hopefully this should be enough to convince somebody (perhaps your employer) that an article on Schwarz may not be possible for now. I also want to warn against a scam on Wikipedia, where somebody claiming to be an "experienced editor" or "administrator" will promise you that they will accept/create your page, as long as you pay them a "processing fee." (See WP:Scam warning.) monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 20:18, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

Discussion topic Epsteins Death So i had AI search the epstein files relating to his death and the notecthat epstein left behind. It analyzes it on an investigator perspective and used the released documents to do so. I would like to post the findings and explanation of findings and what took place along with the discrepencies of the pictures and what took place for him to still be alive and how it all lined up with the evidence found in the released documents how do i share this? --Investigatorsidehustle (talk) 12:38, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a place for original research like this, you should instead try social media or a blog. Sarsenet•he/they•(talk) 15:26, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello MSK, I saw that my edit in Orolia was undone. Could you please tell me why? Thank you! Neepn3rf (talk) 16:25, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

Your edit made the promotional tone worse, as it used a non-independent source for ephemeral information. {Safran explained that this acquisition was part of its long-term strategy to grow in Positioning, navigation and timing. This includes areas such as Inertial navigation, time systems, and GNSS receivers and simulators. - using Safran as a source for this statement is not at all appropriate.) monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 18:01, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi msk, not disagreeing but reverts of anything other than test edits and vandalism should have an edit summary. lp0 on fire () 22:34, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi MSK, the source I used was an article from Aviation Today, which is an independent publication and not a Safran source. However, I understand your concern about the promotional tone. Also, it would be helpful if you wrote an edit summary when reverting an edit so other editors can understand the reason. Neepn3rf (talk) 12:38, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

The claim that Orolia’s knowledge could help improve system reliability, especially in situations where satellite navigation signals may be interrupted, by combining GNSS with independent timing or inertial solutions is sourced to a quote from Safran, which should raise some red flags. monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 17:30, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

how can i report a vandalism when it happens? --Johnsonreal (talk) 22:01, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi @MSK You made a review of my article on Constis Drygianakis. I did not use AI or any kind of automated editing. I am just a non-native speaker of English and an academic in humanities, who is trying to write their first article on Wikipedia :) Therefore there are discrepancies in edits and in the style of writing. I am looking into other articles to see how to make this one work and, apparently, that is also a mistake. I am quite overwhelmed with the instructions for newbies, which I read of course, too. Do you have advice on how to fix this? Skontapsou (talk) 09:57, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article Curlew sandpiper has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Please also consider reviewing somebody else's nomination to help keep the backlog down. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Michael Aurel -- Michael Aurel (talk) 12:31, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi, I am entering factual evidence with supporting references to update a boxers achievement but each time someone else cancels my edit and also blocked my account. Is this fair? --Advisory Entity (talk) 20:50, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

You are not blocked right now. It may have been an edit filter, in that case, you can make an edit request on the talk page of the article you want to change. Cheers! monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 20:52, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

Thank you Advisory Entity (talk) 23:03, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi, I've rephrased the article and re-submitted for review. I am happy to rewrite it further on a more neautral point and add new independent sources as I find them. Thanks and havea. great weekend. ~2026-12793-66 (talk) 02:02, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

HOW DO WE PUBLISH ARTICLE --CoolarCole (talk) 00:17, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello --Jairajsingh123 (talk) 09:20, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi MSK, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the new page reviewer user right to your account. This means you now have access to the page curation tools and can start patrolling pages from the new pages feed. If you asked for this at requests for permissions, please check back there to see if your access is time-limited or if there are other comments.

This is a good time to re-acquaint yourself with the guidance at Wikipedia:New pages patrol. Before you get started, please take the time to:

• Add Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers to your watchlist to follow NPP-related discussions
• If you use Twinkle, configure it to log your CSDs and PRODs
• If you can read any languages other than English, add yourself to the list of reviewers with language proficiencies

You can find a list of other useful links and tools for patrollers at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Resources. If you are ever unsure what to do, ask your fellow patrollers or just leave the page for someone else to review – you're not alone! Sohom (talk) 03:56, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Note: Pravin lakhe's mentor Ampimd is away.

hello Can we know which section of our article DOES NOT MEET WIKIPEDIA'S CONTENT POLICY so that we can work on /remove it and recover our page truly yours pravin lakhe --Pravin lakhe (talk) 04:06, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, MSK. 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! Sohom (talk) 06:49, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi MSK, thanks for commenting on the PrePass page I updated. The additions were not from LLM or any other technology. I assembled the text from an earlier page, from online research (aided by search engines, of course), from a number of people I've teamed with, and from sources they supplied. If there are specific aspects of the page that you feel are inappropriate, please let me know on my talk page. PlanktonVise (talk) 20:22, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Sorry for the confusion. Some aspects of the the changes that are inappropriate, regardless of LLM use, are:

1. Unusual citation style. Instead of using ref tags, you use wikilinks with citations in them, e.g something like [["Our_Story." PrePass. Retrieved October 2018.|1]].
2. Bad sourcing. A large portion of the additions have the tone like that of a product listing. (e.g, PrePass Plus consolidates weigh station bypass and toll payment functions into a unified platform isn't exactly neutral tone, especially when it's unsourced)
3. Large portions of added text are unsourced. (self-explanatory).

Cheers! monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 20:39, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Okay, good to know. I'll look into the citation style and also see if I can get more and better sourcing. Might take me a bit of time. Thanks for your perspective. PlanktonVise (talk) 21:54, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

On 7 March 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Curlew sandpiper, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the small curlew sandpiper (pictured) respects neighbour territories when chasing intruders away? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Curlew sandpiper. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Curlew sandpiper), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

HurricaneZeta^C 12:02, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited ClimateWorks Foundation, a link pointing to the disambiguation page Foundation was added. 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) 10:02, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Draft:Battle of Phủ Tông Hoá, Tonkin, 25 July 1948 - Wikipedia Mprictor (talk) 02:09, 14 March 2026 (UTC)