User talk:ONUnicorn

Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2026 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor, we hope the WikiCup will give you a chance to improve your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here, and a bot will set up your submissions page within one day, ready for you to take part. Any questions on the scoring, rules or anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page.

For the 2026 WikiCup, the highest-ranking contestants will receive tournament points at the end of each round, and final rankings are decided by the number of tournament points each contestant has. This is the same scoring system that we had last year. If you're busy and can't sign up in January, don't worry: Signups are open throughout the year. To make things fairer for latecomers, the lowest-scoring contestants are no longer eliminated at the end of each round.

The first round will end on 26 February. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email), Epicgenius (talk · contribs · email), Frostly (talk · contribs · email), Guerillero (talk · contribs · email) and Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:38, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2025).

Administrator changes

• Epicgenius
• Left guide
• LEvalyn
• MPGuy2824
• The4lines
• Yue

Fathoms Below

• BaronLarf
• Firefly
• kelapstick
• Opabinia regalis
• Pbsouthwood
• Sethant
• UtherSRG
• Whouk

CheckUser changes

• Giraffer
• HouseBlaster
• SilverLocust

• Liz
• Worm That Turned
• Z1720

Oversight changes

• Asilvering
• Giraffer
• Girth Summit
• Guerillero
• HouseBlaster
• Izno
• SilverLocust

• Liz
• Worm That Turned
• Z1720

Guideline and policy news

• All general sanctions imposed by the community may now be enforced at the Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard (WP:AE) as a result of a recent RfC.
• Due to the result of a recent RFC, the administrator recall process is amended to extend the deadline for a re-request for adminship to 30 days or the next administrator election, whichever is later.
• Changes to the Access to Temporary Account IP Addresses Policy's disclosure rules include broadening the consecutive-blocks exception to cover all admin actions and removing the requirement to revision-delete permissible disclosures once they become unnecessary (instead requiring only their removal). See WP:TAIVDISCLOSE for more information.

Arbitration

• Following the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been elected to the Arbitration Committee: Aoidh, Asilvering, Girth Summit, Guerillero, HJ Mitchell, HouseBlaster, Izno, Sdrqaz, SilverLocust.
• The arbitration case Pbsouthwood has been suspended.

Hi there,

I'm leaving this message because you contributed to the recent RfC regarding the inclusion of airport destination lists. As promised, now that that RfC has closed, I've initiated a further discussion about the sourcing standards to be applied to these lists.

If you wish to contribute to the discussion, please do so at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Airport destination lists - sourcing requirements.

Cheers! Danners430 _{tweaks made} 15:35, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

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

Administrator changes

Vacant0

• Crisco 1492

• Deepfriedokra
• Hbdragon88
• Karl Dickman
• Worm That Turned

CheckUser changes

Daniel Quinlan

Vanamonde93

Mkdw

Oversight changes

Daniel Quinlan

Arbitration

• Due to the result of a recent motion, a rough consensus of administrators at the arbitration enforcement noticeboard may impose an expanded topic ban on Israel, Israelis, Jews, Judaism, Palestine, Palestinians, Islam, and/or Arabs, if an editor's Arab-Israeli conflict topic ban is determined to be insufficient to prevent disruption. At least one diff per area expanded into should be cited.

Miscellaneous

• Voting in the 2026 Steward elections started on 06 February 2026 at 14:00 (UTC) and will end on 27 February 2026 at 14:00 (UTC). The confirmation process for current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.

WikiProject Unreferenced articles | March 2026 Backlog Drive
There is a substantial backlog of unsourced articles on Wikipedia, and we need your help! The purpose of this drive is to add sources to these unsourced articles and make a meaningful impact. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles cited. Remember to tag your edit summary with [[WP:MAR26]], both to advertise the event and tally the points later using Edit Summary Search. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you have subscribed to the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:13, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Pir Syed Arif Ali Shah Tirmizi Al-Hussaini, 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) 20:45, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

The first round of the 2026 WikiCup ended on 26 February. As some of you may have noticed, good article nomination reviews now receive 10 points, an increase from 5 points in the previous year, as per a consensus at WT:CUP. This point increase has been retroactively applied to all good article reviews for which competitors have claimed points in this round. Peer reviews, which continue to be worth 5 points, are now listed in the same section as featured article candidate reviews, rather than with good article reviews. Everyone who competed in round 1 will advance to round 2 unless they have withdrawn or been banned. No other changes to the round-point system have been made for this year.

Round 1 was competitive. Three contestants scored more than 1,000 round points, and the top 16 contestants all scored more than 300 round points. The following competitors scored more than 800 round points:

• Bgsu98 (submissions) with 1,467 round points, largely gained from 1 featured article, 5 featured lists, 15 good articles, and 42 FAC and GAN reviews;
• Olliefant (submissions) with 1,246 round points, largely from 4 featured lists, 9 good articles, 2 featured topic articles, 4 did you know articles, and 75 FAC and GAN reviews;
• Generalissima (submissions) with 1,095 round points, largely from 3 featured articles, 6 good articles, and 5 did you know articles;
• MCE89 (submissions) with 848 round points, largely from 1 featured article, 8 good articles, 1 did you know article, and 32 FAC and GAN reviews; and
• Rollinginhisgrave (submissions) with 838 round points, largely from 1 featured article, 8 good articles, 1 did you know article, and 14 FAC, GAN, and peer reviews.

The full scores for round 1 can be seen here. During this round, contestants have claimed 7 featured articles, 16 featured lists, 2 featured-topic articles, 168 good articles, 13 good-topic articles and more than 50 Did You Know articles. In addition, competitors have worked on 14 In the News articles, and they have conducted nearly 700 reviews. The tournament points table will be updated within the next few days.

Remember that any content promoted after 26 February but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, feel free to review one of the nominations listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:57, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

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

Administrator changes

• Brendanconway
• Calmer Waters
• Hut 8.5
• Joe Roe
• VersedFenrir

CheckUser changes

Ks0stm

Oversight changes

Ks0stm

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, the web archival service archive.today has been deprecated; links to the site should be removed.
• A request for comment is open to discuss retiring CSD criterion R3 in favour of handling such redirects through RfD.

Arbitration

• Following a motion, remedy 9.1 of the Conduct in deletion-related editing case has been amended to limit TenPoundHammer to one XfD nomination or PROD per 24-hour period.
• Following a motion, the Iskandar323 further POV pushing motion has been rescinded.
• The Arbitration Committee has passed a housekeeping motion rescinding a number of outdated remedies and enforcement provisions across multiple legacy cases. In most instances, existing sanctions remain in force and continue to be appealable through the usual processes, while some case-specific remedies were amended or clarified.

Miscellaneous

• Following the 2026 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: A09, AmandaNP, Barras, Count Count, M7, SHB2000, Teles and VIGNERON.
• An Unreferenced articles backlog drive is taking place in March 2026 to reduce the backlog of articles tagged with {{Unreferenced}}. You can help reduce the backlog by adding citations to these articles. Sign up to participate!

Hi, how are you? Thought I'd mention that I'd just left a copyright warning at User talk:Pstdeleilesanmi, so yours might perhaps appear to be a little like Pelion upon Ossa. Regards, thanks for all your good work! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 14:48, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Looks like yours was just a couple seconds before mine. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 14:54, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Yep, that's how it looks to me – two minds with but a single thought ... Just wondered if you might want to remove yours so that we don't look too bitey; if not I'll happily rm mine. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:34, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi ONUnicorn. Just wondering whether you were aware of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ProGet and WT:AFD#AfD Request: ProGet when you speedily deleted ProGet. The article was kept by consensus but seems to have been targeted by various unregistered accounts since then. Perhaps a second AfD would be preferrable to speedy deletion. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:52, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Looking at the IP and location info for the temp accounts, it does appear that a single unregistered editor has been forum-shopping for deletion since the AfD close. If they want to start a second AfD or ask for a deletion review, I have no objection to either, but speedy is for uncontroversial deletions and there is no way to call this uncontroversial. --RL0919 (talk) 02:16, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for pointing that out. I'm not sure how I missed it. I have undeleted both the article and talk page. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 03:30, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for taking another look at this. FWIW, I only noticed this because I posted a query related to something else on WT:AFD about a week ago. Multiple unregistered accounts (no idea whether its the same person) had re-posted requests for a second AfD be started despite the intial request being declined. I combined the threads and added the article to my watchlist. I saw the tagging by an unregistered account but figured it would just get decline and left it as is. For reference, the same account also tagged Subic Broadcasting Corporation for speedy deletion per A7 on March 11, but that tag was removed. I can't say whether this other tagging is just a random coincidence or somehow related to ProGet. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:15, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

There is plenty of time remaining to meet the goal of 26 new articles representing each letter of the alphabet, to be made in the year 2026. Let me know if you're looking for ideas. Cheers! BD2412 T 00:35, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Redirects you have created have been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 March 17 § Devanagari + anything else until a consensus is reached. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 08:45, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Is there anyway to contact you privately? Totallynotetage (talk) 22:04, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

About what? The "E-mail this user" link for me is active although I don't check the e-mail associated with it all that often but if I know to expect an e-mail I can check it. But where possible it's best to keep communication on Wikipedia. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 15:56, 24 March 2026 (UTC)

Alrighty, I couldn't see the thing on da Phone. Except an e-mail coming your way :D Totallynotetage (talk) 16:59, 24 March 2026 (UTC)

@Totallynotetage I got your e-mail. Not sure why that couldn't have been handled on Wikipeida. I have gone ahead and restored the history of your sandbox. That way you can copy it and save it somewhere off-line. You can access it by clicking on view history on desktop, or the icon that looks like a clock with an arrow on mobile. Keep in mind that, while your user sandbox is meant to be a place to test editing functions, experiment with wikicode and formatting, and figure out how things work here, it is not meant to be a place to host fake articles or creative writing. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 18:36, 24 March 2026 (UTC)

is there anywhere I can keep it where only I can see it on wikipedia, or does it have to stay offline? Totallynotetage (talk) 19:08, 24 March 2026 (UTC)

It can stay in the history of your sandbox like it is now. But everything on Wikipedia is publicly visible. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 19:22, 24 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi. Could you help me on High priest? The page came up on suggested edits. Am I allowed to use the website https://www.pastorjasonelder.com/bible-facts-all/high-priests-of-israel-list-and-timeline as citation missing for: The High Priest of Israel served in the Tabernacle, then in Solomon's Temple and the Second Temple in Jerusalem. The Samaritan High Priest is the high priest of the Samaritans. NicoR8 (talk) 12:04, 24 March 2026 (UTC)

I would not use that website for that purpose. It looks like the personal website of Pastor Jason Elder. If you read the about page he says that, "I first got the idea of starting a website from a conversation with my wife, . . . I realized that I was doing a lot of meaningful stuff - writing liturgies, writing notes for bible study, and writing engaging sermons - yet all of it was being used once and then living on my laptop for years, not helping anyone. I decided to freshen up the documents and share them . . ." He indicates that he does have a MDiv and has pastored churches, but he does not seem to be a scholar or theologian. His website is not peer-reviewed or fact checked. There is no indication that he is "an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications."

Pastor Elder's website falls under the self-published source section of the reliable source guideline and the self-published source section of the verifiability policy. Those two pages are important to read and understand when evaluating what sources you should and should not use for specific purposes. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 17:18, 24 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you so much. I will for sure read all links. NicoR8 (talk) 17:29, 27 March 2026 (UTC)

Could you also help me with Mouni Sadhu Travel section second paragraph starting with: Between 1946 and 1948. All references are self-published by this same person. I can reword or remove? NicoR8 (talk) 18:38, 27 March 2026 (UTC)

The Core Contest—Wikipedia's most exciting contest—returns again this year from April 15 to May 31. The goal: to improve vital or other core articles, with a focus on those in the worst state of disrepair. Editing can be done individually, but in the past groups have also successfully competed. There is £300 of prize money divided among editors who provide the "best additive encyclopedic value". Signups are open now. Cheers from the judges, Femke, Casliber, Aza24.

If you wish to start or stop receiving news about The Core Contest, please add or remove yourself from the delivery list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:20, 24 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi ONUnicorn, I believe you recently declined the speedy deletion nomination to Nope Your Too Late I Already Died because the current version cites more and newer sources. The person who initially tagged the article for speedy deletion recently opened up an AfD discussion. I was wondering if you could provide your opinion on it? Thanks! NP2026 (talk) 02:23, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

@NP2026 I have no opinion on if it should be kept or deleted. I declined the speedy because it did not meet the strict criteria for deletion under which it was nominated. The AFD is the correct next step. I do not intend to participate in the AFD. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 15:52, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for letting me know. Just wanted to let you know in case you wanted to NP2026 (talk) 23:43, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

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

Administrator changes

• ARandomName123

• Biblioworm
• Causa sui
• Djsasso
• Espresso Addict
• Fenix down
• Firefangledfeathers
• GeneralNotability
• NawlinWiki
• Northamerica1000
• Smalljim

Checkuser changes

Giraffer

Oversight changes

Kj cheetham

Giraffer

Guideline and policy news

• The content of Wikipedia:Writing articles with large language models has been updated following a request for comment. It now prohibits using LLMs to generate content, with exceptions for translation and copy-editing.

Arbitration

• Following a motion, the GSCASTE extended-confirmed restriction in the Indian military history case has been narrowed. It now applies to caste-related topics in South Asia, and the preemptive protection remedy has been amended accordingly.
• The arbitration case Pbsouthwood has been closed.
• The arbitration case Maghreb has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case will close on 7 April.

BHPetrol was a clear A7. Citing a source is not a credible indication of significance. I am disappointed. MediaKyle (talk) 23:59, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

@MediaKyle I'm sorry you are disappointed. WP:AFD is your next step.

Regarding A7 - A7 "does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance".

What is a credible claim of significance or importance?

A credible claim of significance can be assessed in an article with two different methods:

1. a statement in the article that attributes noteworthiness, or
2. information written about the subject in reliable sources.

So, where is the credible claim of significance in BHPetrol? It is in the existence of SIDHU, JAGDEV SINGH (2005-02-05). "Boustead to buy 70% of BP Malaysia for RM456mil". The Star. Retrieved 2026-04-12. It does not qualify for A7. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 00:04, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Be aware that your interpretation of A7 differs greatly from several other administrators. I invite you to take a look at the other articles deleted under A7 today on my CSD log. Thank you, MediaKyle (talk) 00:05, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

I am aware that "Administrators should take care not to speedily delete pages or media except in the most obvious cases." I am aware that speedy deletion is intended for "pages or media with no practical chance of surviving discussion." I am aware that we should "consider whether [the page] could be improved, reduced to a stub, merged or redirected elsewhere, reverted to a better previous revision, or handled in some other way." I am aware that "Significance is a lower standard than notability." I am aware that a single source does not notability make, but also that where there is one there may be more. Hence why "information written about the subject in reliable sources" counts as a credible claim of significance.

I am aware that not every admin interprets the speedy criteria as strictly as I do, but I don't see that as a problem. We are all humans here, and we are acting on good faith. We also all occasionally make mistakes and delete things we shouldn't. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 00:15, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

You're right, thank you for taking the time to explain. I understand why you declined it... I guess I just get a bit tied up in my crusade against spam sometimes. I apologize. I'll remember this before I whine and complain next time. All the best, MediaKyle (talk) 00:29, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

@MediaKyle I would also invite you to this discussion regarding A7. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 00:20, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

You are invited to participate in the Destubathon of the Americas, a contest/editathon which will run from May 1 to May 31. The goal is to destub as many of our 475,000+ stubs for the Americas (from Alaska down to Chile) as possible. A good chance to have fun in expanding many of our old stale stubs and win up to £2000 ($2680) in Amazon vouchers for expanding stub articles. Sign up in the Contestants/participants section on the contest page if interested. Even if not interested in prizes you are still warmly welcome to participate in it as an editathon! Hopefully we can achieve something significant in the month of May together! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:23, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

May 2026 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
On 1 May 2026, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:24, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

The second round of the 2026 WikiCup ended on 28 April. As a reminder for contestants who just joined or are unaware of recent changes to our round-points system, good article nomination reviews now receive 10 points, an increase from 5 points in the previous year, as per a consensus at WT:CUP. Peer reviews, which continue to be worth 5 points, are now listed in the same section as featured article candidate reviews, rather than with good article reviews. Everyone who competed in round 2 will advance to round 3 unless they have withdrawn or been banned. No other changes to the round-point system have been made for this year.

Round 2 was competitive. Three contestants scored more than 1,000 round points; nine scored over 500; and fourteen scored over 300. The top seven contestants had at least one featured article (two of them with two apiece). The following competitors scored more than 800 round points:

• MCE89 (submissions) with 1,333 points, mainly from good and featured articles about Australian people and geography
• Generalissima (submissions) with 1,169 points, mainly from good and featured articles related to shipping ethics controversy in fanfiction, waterways, and Gu Yanwu
• Bgsu98 (submissions) with 1,149 points, mainly from good articles, featured articles, and featured lists about figure skating, along with many article reviews and two good topics
• Olliefant (submissions) with 830 points, mainly from good and featured articles about television shows, episodes and media, along with nearly four dozen good and featured article reviews
• Gommeh (submissions) with 827 points, mainly from good and featured articles related to Genshin Impact and Honkai: Star Rail

The full scores for round 2 can be seen here. During this round, contestants have claimed 12 featured articles, 13 featured lists, 2 featured-topic articles, 106 good articles, 22 good-topic articles and more than 40 Did You Know articles. In addition, competitors have worked on 3 In the News articles, and they have conducted over 200 reviews. The tournament points table has been updated.

Remember that any content promoted after 28 April but before the start of Round 3 can be claimed in Round 3. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, feel free to review one of the nominations listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:49, 29 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.

Thank you for your comments at ANI. Wikipedia has become a very toxic place where far too much of discussion is combative instead of consultative. It feels like my concerns about the misuse of redlinks are not really listened to. I have seen cases such as Olympic competitors where multiple system wide discussions agreed that no every competitor in the Olympics was notable for doing that. As a result I removed redlinks from articles on Olympic competitors only to be tole that such links were allowed. I have no idea why when we have multiple times agreed that Olympic competitors are not notable. Wikipedia has multiple subjects that we used to have much broader inclusion criteria on. The speed and ease at which editors can create new articles leads not just to lots of articles on non-notable people. It leads to lots of articles on notable people being too narrow in scope. Wikipedia is essentially olympepedia and politician pedia because it has thousands of articles on politicians and Olympic competitors who were actually more notable or at least as notable for other actions in their lives but they only have coverage for their roles in politics or the Olympics. Local mayors is one of the weakest political coverage issues. Redlinks serve to suggest to people what articles are worth creating. Having massive redlinks to not notable people are organizations is unwise. I probably went overboard. However it is really feistrating the way editors respond to my edits. The response of "ban the editor" is just not helpful.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:28, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

You're welcome. I think people tend not to want to listen and try to understand where people are coming from - and I see that everywhere, not just on Wikipedia. The art of asking clarifying questions and paying attention to responses is not one a lot of people practice, and AN/I tends to be a dogpile rather than an exercise in fruitful discussion.

I understand where you're coming from - not every human who is mentioned in an article is a valid topic for their own article, and sometimes having a red link can be a magnet for spammers. However, I also see where everyone else is coming from - red links aren't inherently bad and can and do point to gaps in our coverage of potentially notable topics. Perhaps everyone needs to calm down a bit and take red links on a case-by-case basis rather than digging into positions of "redlinks good" and "redlinks bad". ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 23:54, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

It does not help that the editor who brought this nomination has been consistently rude and harsh to me. A few months ago he made edits in which he disparaged me. Other editors said that he should tone it down or be taken to ANI. He just taunted them about it pointing out that at ANI punishing the victims is considered fair. This is also difficult for me because back in 2022 an editor was very rudely taunting me. Another editor brought a complaint about it. I should have just ignored it but instead I joined in calling for a punishment. The eventually outcome was taking me to the are Com. They came within 1 vote of banning me from all participation on Wikipedia. There was another restriction on me. 3 months later I asked that that restriction be lifted. The response there was that it came very close to banning me from editing Wikipedia at all from the offense of asking that restriction be lifted. Both of those restrictions are still in place all these years later. One of the comments on this ANI may in fact being attacking me because back in 2013 a commentator wrote a peace in the New York Times attacking Wikipedia for some edits that I had done. That was based on a misunderstanding of the very complex rules that govern the non-diffusion of categories for Ethnicity, Gender, Religion and sexuality. It is very frustrating how rude some editors are.John Pack Lambert (talk) 11:10, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

Hello ONUnicorn,

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) 23:38, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Quick facts Nine years! ...

Precious

Nine years!

Close

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:42, 30 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.

Hello,

I saw you declined my CSD request on Draft:SMOKE BOY CALIVRE. The reason I deemed the page to be vandalism was because there are zero google hits for "Smoke Boy Calivre." EaglesFan37 (talk) 22:46, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

Odd. My google search turned up:

• This YouTube Channel
• This page on something called audiomack
• This spotify playlist

and a bunch of similar stuff. None of which constitute RS or could be used to write an article - but that wasn't the question posed by the CSD tag. The question posed by the CSD tag is, "is this page pure vandalism"?

Even if a google search turned up zero hits, evaluating the page as it was could not rule out it being a test edit or someone attempting to promote themselves as a musician, which, while G2 and G11 are their own criteria, is not vandalism. I also don't think at this point there is enough there to delete it as G2 or G11 - although I suspect that if the editor returns and continues their efforts it will eventually reach G11 territory. That said, unless they start trying to force it into mainspace or otherwise causing disruption with it, I'm of the opinion that we should leave useless drafts alone. Not that I won't delete blatant advertising in draft space (I do quite frequently), but my calibration of just how blatant is higher in draft space than mainspace. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 23:09, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

@ONUnicorn I don't know why mine didn't. If it's an actual musician, then it doesn't meet CSD EaglesFan37 (talk) 23:52, 3 June 2026 (UTC)