User talk:Newslinger

Dear Admin, I have reviewed Boro Muolkoi, Thingsat, Saron, Mahur, Lamherh, Saiphai, Saipum, Lungsum, Khawlian, Phuaibuang, Phainuam, Zawngin, Saihapui V, N. Chawnpui, Vaitin, Daido, Mizoram, Khawlian, New Vervek, Tinghmun, Damdiai, Mauchar, Zokhawthiang, Sunhluchhip, Palsang, Khawpuar, Zohmun, Suangpuilawn, Ratu, Mizoram, Sailutar, Hmarkhawlien, Huonveng (Hjo) with sources and believed they comply with Wikipedia guidelines and policies. I think it does not need any changes at present. Please feel free to correct me if i am wrong and suggest me if needed to improve. Also, wanted to know to whether i can remove the tag directly from the stubs? Afraid to be blocked again. Please help🙏 Vankal (talk) 06:33, 11 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi Vankal, the following sources cited in these articles are self-published sources and should be avoided:

• Geolysis Local (geolysis.com  ): See 2023 discussion
• ViewVillage (viewvillage.in  )
• indiapincodes.net  
• Hmar Dictionary (hmardictionary.com  )
• Schools.org.in  
• Educonnectin (educonnectin.com  )
• Villagegram (villagegram.in  )
• Vill (vill.co.in  )
• villagecodes.in  
• PINcode.net.in  
• Village in India (villageinindia.com  )
• Dwello (dwello.in  )
• censusofindia.net  
• VillageDatabase (villagedatabase.com  )
• Getatoz (getatoz.co  )
• Maps of India (mapsofindia.com  )
• Themapscompany (themapscompany.com  )
• iCBSE (icbse.com  )
• Mindat.org (mindat.org  ): See 2023 discussion

census2011.co.in is also a self-published source and is not ideal, per previous discussions ( ), but I see that it has been given an exception because of problems associated with the official website of the 2011 census of India (censusindia.gov.in).

In many of the articles, you also cited official government websites, which are acceptable sources for this type of geographic information. Could you please replace the self-published sources with reliable sources, and edit the articles to ensure that they are verifiable to the reliable sourcing? — Newslinger talk 07:46, 11 August 2026 (UTC)

Sure, I will review by tonight itself if no works. Thanks for responding and May God bless you for showing kindness to newbies. Vankal (talk) 08:44, 11 August 2026 (UTC)

Sir... After revision, i started removing the tag. Will there be a problem? Kindly reply if you have time. Vankal (talk) 20:02, 11 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi Vankal, your new edits to the Boro Muolkoi and Thingsat articles are fine. If you improve the other articles listed in your first comment in the same way, then you can remove the WP:LLMPROD tags afterward.

I noticed that you also removed the WP:LLMPROD tag from the Thiek language, but this article cites a Scribd (RSP entry) upload, which is self-published because there is no listed author or publisher, and it is unclear where this document came from. Could you please replace this source with a reliable source and make the necessary edits to the article to ensure it is verifiable to the cited sources? — Newslinger talk 22:04, 11 August 2026 (UTC)

I tried my best but I couldn’t finish it. We have a new baby at home, so i don’t have much time to review all within a short period. I wish i could get an extension.

Thanks for your guidance. It means a lot me. Vankal (talk) 18:00, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

Normally userfication is how that would be handled, but I'm not sure how that works with your unblock conditions? The LLMPROD guideline also permits WP:REFUND requests, that are then handled by admins, so it is probably best to see what Newslinger thinks. ‑‑gurkubondinn 21:26, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

Vankal, congratulations on your baby, who should take priority over meeting a deletion deadline on Wikipedia. I have userfied the pages that still had the WP:LLMPROD tags on them, and they are now listed at Special:PrefixIndex/User:Vankal/. Feel free to take as long as you want to revise them, and when you are ready, send me a message on my user talk page (this page) so I can move the pages back to article space. — Newslinger talk 00:05, 14 August 2026 (UTC); revised link 05:22, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for your understanding, guidance and for giving me time to revise the pages. I really really appreciate your help. Gurkubondinn, apologies for all my edits and for making you spend time checking/reverting them. This experience has taught me many things related to Wikipedia.

Thank you both for your patience and guidance 🙏 Vankal (talk) 08:08, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi,

If you're referring to my edit on July 13, I certainly was not "taking responsibility" for some other editor's edit. All I was doing was removing the word "claims" (which, per WP:SAID, implies strong doubt) from a paragraph that was devoted to examples of Wikipedia having dealt with cases of antisemitism. My edit was a minor word-usage correction, nothing more. NightHeron (talk) 23:47, 12 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi NightHeron, I apologize for making that assumption without confirming with you, and I have reverted the content restoration as the original edit was an WP:ECR violation submitted by another editor. I have clarified that you are not responsible for the edit in the edit summary of Special:Diff/1369128708 and in my accompanying talk page comment. Any extended confirmed editor is welcome to restore the content with a cited reliable source, if they are willing to take responsibility for it. — Newslinger talk 02:30, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

Hello, there is another sock on one of the articles - Ramzan Ghanchi, that you mass reverted months ago. Their user is ~2026-44726-09 (talk · contribs). Just wanted to let you know if you could block them to avoid more block evasion. Beyoncé and Rihanna's navy 🐝🪖 19:07, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi Beyhive Navy, another administrator blocked the temporary account before I saw your message, and I have just now tagged their user page. Thank you for the update. — Newslinger talk 12:26, 15 August 2026 (UTC)

How can I report a suspected LLM-use by a very experienced editor on Wikipedia in the most pragmatic and neutral way without making it a personal attack? I suspect most of their arguments on a specific article talk page are LLM-generated. I worry reporting this carries a lot of risk because they seem to carry a lot of Wikipedia street cred. — Longewal (talk) 19:54, 17 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi Longewal, the AI noticeboard (WP:AIN) would be the most appropriate venue for this report. Since you are concerned about the outcome of your report, please make sure you have evidence that shows, with high confidence, that the editor in question has been misusing LLMs. WP:AISIGNS and WP:AITALKSIGNS cover the most common forms of evidence, but some of the signs listed on these pages are stronger than others. For example, if the evidence includes markup indicators, those tend to be stronger signs of LLM misuse and I would highly recommend filing the report. On the other hand, if you are solely relying on AI detection tools or a few lower-confidence indicators of writing style, there is a higher chance that the report would be evaluated as inconclusive or otherwise result in no action. Either way, the noticeboard participants will look into the reported editor's history and search for more evidence while reviewing the report. When filing, simply list the evidence you found and ask whether it is enough to qualify as LLM misuse; this would not be considered a personal attack. — Newslinger talk 01:07, 18 August 2026 (UTC)

Thanks. I have gone ahead and created a report: Wikipedia:AI noticeboard#User:Fowler&fowler. — Longewal (talk) 03:43, 3 September 2026 (UTC)

You're invited to join the Organized Labour community editing event, a cross-wiki event taking place throughout September 2026!

The campaign brings together Wikimedians interested in improving coverage of organised labour, workers, trade unions, and labour history. We have confirmed collaborations with Wikipedia language editions in English, Dutch, Persian, Serbo-Croatian and French. If you want to add other language editions or other wiki projects you are strongly encouraged to do so! This event spans geography and languages!

This is a one-time invitation. You're receiving it because you previously signed a petition related to Wiki Workers United (WWU). We hope you'll join us!

Regards ~ Shushugah (talk) 14:19, 19 August 2026 (UTC)

There is an ongoing sockpuppet investigation at WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Vladraresfilip that may involve you as the blocking admin of User:Vladraresfilip at WP:AIN. Thank you. Shield ^{\\ |T| - |C| - Solidarity \\} 22:01, 20 August 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, .sh1eldo7. — Newslinger talk 06:05, 21 August 2026 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Go (programming language), a link pointing to the disambiguation page Concurrency was added.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:54, 21 August 2026 (UTC)

Fixed. — Newslinger talk 06:29, 22 August 2026 (UTC)

The Admin's Barnstar

Newslinger, you have consistently modelled exemplary conduct handling and analysis at AE for as long as I have looked at this board. For handling this noticeboard for so long and incredible work elsewhere, I can't help but say thank you for tackling the thankless in the way that you do. You've taught me a lot without even knowing it, and have definitely taught admins that got the mop after me too. :) Sennecaster (Chat) 14:41, 25 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi Sennecaster, thank you very much for this extremely kind note and barnstar! To be honest, I check AE only occasionally (usually when an incident I'm watching on another noticeboard makes its way there), but I'll stay for a while to help process cases if AE is backlogged. Lately, it seems like there has been more of an admin shortage there than usual, and I want you to know that I appreciate all of the effort you spend reviewing AE cases just as well! — Newslinger talk 16:50, 25 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi there, we've got some people at WP:ACC getting stuck in this block, do you remember who it was targetting? In solidarity, asilvering (talk) 20:13, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi asilvering, I've responded by email. — Newslinger talk 20:47, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

Good morning Admin,

Pls I humbly request that I am unblocked site wide and I promise to always obey Wikipedia guidelines moving forward,I started using Wikipedia about 6 month ago and I must say it has been a pleasure contributing to this space and I will love to do more,it is on this that I implore you to unblock me from editing and creation site wide, a block which has almost lasted a week ..... moving forward,if any article created is found or suspected to contain the use of LLM for creation.....i Pablowhite44 shall bear the consequences and take responsibility.

Thanks for your swift response and support, it's been a great one I must say. Pablowhite44 (talk) 09:42, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi Pablowhite44, I have responded on your user talk page. — Newslinger talk 13:48, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi Newslinger, it looks like Urabura is back under a new account. Since you know the case, I'd appreciate it if you could have a look at the SPI. JeanClaudeN1 (talk) 05:37, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi JeanClaudeN1, after checking a few other data points, I have processed the case. Thank you for reporting this. — Newslinger talk 05:59, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Thank you very much. JeanClaudeN1 (talk) 09:54, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi, I'm reaching out regarding the mainspace block on my account. I read the full AI noticeboard discussion on me and completely understand the concern. I relied too heavily on raw LLM translations without proper attribution. I accept and apologize for my mistake. I will work in the Draft: namespace first, manually review and edit all text, always include proper attribution tags and submit the article for review. Could you please give me a chance? ArchivioItalia ✉ 01:34, 4 September 2026 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @ArchivioItalia: you can do this already as you aren't blocked from draftspace. The idea is to do that before requesting an unblock, to prove you understand the relevant policies and guidelines. lp0 on fire () 05:45, 4 September 2026 (UTC)

@Lp0 on fire: Thank you for clarifying. I’ll start working in the Draft, still I have few doubts. ArchivioItalia ✉ 03:21, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

@Newslinger: If my contributions in Draft show that I’ve understood the concerns and am following the policies properly, then could you please consider shortening the six month period before I can appeal the restriction? I would also be grateful if I could be allowed to revert vandalism edit in the mainspace as I don't think that would conflict with the purpose of the restriction. ArchivioItalia ✉ 03:22, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

Hi ArchivioItalia, I don't recall mentioning a six-month waiting period (i.e. the standard offer) for your block, and you are welcome to appeal it at any time. Some of your article creations were moved to draft space, so I recommend thoroughly checking them, reworking and revising them to eliminate the type of issues raised in the AI noticeboard discussion, then submitting them through the Articles for Creation (AfC) process. You are also able to create new drafts for AfC. Once you get a decent number of articles accepted and published through AfC, you will have a positive track record that can be used to support an unblock request.

There is no technical way to grant an exception to the block for antivandalism, so if you would like to continue patrolling pages in article space for vandalism, this will unfortunately have to wait until you have your block lifted. — Newslinger talk 13:50, 6 September 2026 (UTC)

Apology won't cut it. You apologised before too and went back to generating 50 more articles. Others are left with manually verifying and cleaning up. This is NOT how a healthy Wikipedia community strives to function. Unless you show up to first clean-up every single one of those pages - reading the source & fact checking if the source says so, correcting bias in those articles, and submitting the edits for the people who are cleaning up for you.

@Friniate @Purring maggot

Until that happens, I don't think there is point trusting your word a 3rd time. We don't want 10 generated new articles in 1 week that tireless people would clean up after you over next 3 months. ~2026-48137-15 (talk) 21:13, 4 September 2026 (UTC)

I hope that you can give me some answers about

I am confused now. Quinn withdrew their complaint and you as an uninvolved admin made a ruling after this. What are the rules for when an editor wants to withdraw a complaint? Is that ignored or followed?

Also, today I suddenly realized why people reacted to my comments the way they did and in my view I can now provide crucial context that might sway the outcome. What is the situation now? Is this procedure over and do I need to file an appeal to have it looked at by someone else? Can I then bring in additional context or would the appeal only cover the statements made so far?

Also, when I click on the link to start an appeal, it says "Make sure that the relevant remedy allows for such appeals", but there is absolutely no instruction on how I can make sure that an appeal is allowed. Can you explain?

I would very much appreciate some clarification as this is the first time I am involved in such a procedure. Aapjes (talk) 11:10, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

@Newslinger: I would kindly ask you to reply to the above as well, if you have the time/willingness to do so. Note that I don't really have a problem with your ruling in itself, and have no intent to make further comments in that section and probably for the entire talk page, but am not happy about how a bunch of editors seem to foster a gatekeeping culture that seems to be in direct conflict with the main goal of Wikipedia: to provide a culture where people are encouraged to 'be bold' and try to make improvements, rather than be fearful and where they get personally attacked if they make a mistake in the eye of others. Aapjes (talk) 11:32, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

@Newslinger: Am I allowed to respond in the results section? The instructional text suggest I may not, but it may only be intended for first level comments. In any case, very shortly after adding another statement I noticed that the statements were combined and that it said that I exceeded the limit, so I undid my change with an edit summary explaining why. Aapjes (talk) 11:16, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

Hi Aapjes, my response to your first comment here (which, as you mentioned, you had previously posted to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard before removing it to comply with the word limit) has already been posted in the discussion. If you would like to request a word limit extension for your participation in the enforcement request WP:AE § Aapjes, you may do so at WT:AE and another reviewing administrator will evaluate it.

Word limits on the WP:AE noticeboard apply to the combined number of words an editor posts in each discussion section, excluding certain content such as required template text. The word counter bot only properly counts the words in one "Statement by..." section per editor, which is why I had to combine your two statement sections for the bot to properly count your words in the discussion. — Newslinger talk 11:24, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

Oh, you combined them manually. I thought that it did it automatically. Can you explain where I would request an extension? Should I add that to my statement? I assume that it won't be regarded as a rule violation if that request makes my statement go over 500 words? Do you expect me to state roughly how many words I would need? Aapjes (talk) 11:26, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

You can request a word limit extension for any WP:AE discussion by starting a new discussion on the corresponding talk page, WT:AE. Yes, please state the number of additional words you would like to request and give a very brief summary of what you intend to use those words for. There is no need to announce in the WP:AE discussion that you are requesting an extension, as this would only increase your word count. — Newslinger talk 11:35, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

I found the link to request a word extension and have made one: Aapjes (talk) 12:20, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

Editor is blocked for LLM and as a sockpuppet (thank you) but there are so many articles that cleanup seems infeasible. Are there any tools that could be brought to bear here?

I can't make a cleanup tracker due to exceeding template limits, even if I limit to edits +/- 500 bytes or more.

There are very few article creations; it's mostly edits. 1200 pages have edits +/- 500, which is easily big enough to have introduced a lot of bad text. M kuhner (talk) 15:52, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

Hi M kuhner, thanks for helping with this cleanup task. I've split the latter half of Wikipedia:AI noticeboard/2026-09-07 Axios512 to Wikipedia:AI noticeboard/2026-09-07 Axios512/2, which keeps the size of each half under the WP:PEIS template limit.

Unfortunately, I'm not aware of any other tool that can do what AINB-helper does here. When I mass-reverted sockpuppet edits per WP:BE, I used a combination of the massRollback script (which might not be appropriate for WP:LLMPROD when sockpuppetry is not involved) and manual reversion. — Newslinger talk 16:16, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for your help! Is there any chance you could apply massRollback here, as the editor is a sock? AINB occasionally can complete a 1200+ case when they are article creations, but when they are edits instead it does not happen. We just don't have the manpower. M kuhner (talk) 16:24, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

 Done. This covers the 760 edits that were the latest revisions at the time of the mass rollback, excluding article creations. Any editor who is willing to take responsibility for any reverted edit may restore it. I am going to review the edits and see if there are any that are worth immediately restoring.

By the way, if you are willing to patrol recent changes for a while, you would be eligible to apply for the rollback permission at WP:RFP/R. — Newslinger talk 17:31, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

But that doesn't let you do the mass-rollback, isn't that an admin-only thing? Twinkle can do rollbacks without needing rollback permission, which just gave me an extra button on page histories (and ability to use AWB, Huggle, etc). Always felt like I was missing something about the rollback permission. ‑‑gurkubondinn 21:06, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

Nevermind, I should have read the whole (short thread) before banging on the keyboard. The massRollback script uses (and requires) the rollback permission. ‑‑gurkubondinn 21:07, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

Hehehe, now we know you are rollbacker, you get to do this stuff. M kuhner (talk) 21:41, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

Good morning, @Newslinger! 😊

Here's a barnstar!

		The AI Cleanup Barnstar
		I, Zahrazamedahmedi, give you this barnstar for your tireless work on blocking accounts used for misuse of LLMs! Congratulations, Newslinger! Cheers, (⁠◕⁠ᴗ⁠◕⁠✿⁠) Zahrazamedahmedi (🗨️My Talk Page🗨️) (🫗My Mistakes🫗) 00:46, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Happy editing! Cheers, (⁠◕⁠ᴗ⁠◕⁠✿⁠) Zahrazamedahmedi (🗨️My Talk Page🗨️) (🫗My Mistakes🫗) 00:46, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Hi Zahrazamedahmedi, and thank you for this barnstar, which I wasn't aware of until now! There are other editors who deserve this barnstar (quite a bit more than I do) for coordinating cleanup tasks on the AI noticeboard every day. This barnstar is the perfect way to show appreciation for these hard-working editors, and I'll be sending some of them out shortly. — Newslinger talk 15:43, 10 September 2026 (UTC)