User talk:Qwerfjkl

Hello there! I was wondering, what is the best way to contribute to Wikipedia aside from editing articles? I'm not against editing articles, I would just like to know other ways to contribute. Thanks, Aidan Ewany --Aidan Ewany (talk) 13:29, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Aidan Ewany, I'm not sure what you mean by "best" (just do whatever you enjoy), but see Wikipedia:Maintenance for a non-exhaustive list. — Qwerfjkltalk 18:44, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks @Qwerfjkl! Aidan Ewany (talk) 18:02, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

Page: Costco

Diff: Special:Diff/1350681480

I think it should be correct. No outstanding errors. Thanks :

Chen Hei Yin (talk) 10:31, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

@Chen Hei Yin, the dates are formatted incorrectly. It was fixed by another editor in this edit. Qwerfjkltalk 10:37, 25 April 2026 (UTC)

Can you add FfD to massXFD please? JHD0919 (talk) 11:02, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

@JHD0919, yes, I've already written the code for it after User talk:Qwerfjkl/Archive 74#Another Mass XfD. I'm just trying to get some other fixes done at the same time, and that takes a bit of time. Qwerfjkltalk 10:42, 25 April 2026 (UTC)

Page: Stewart_Brand

Diff: Special:Diff/1350933135

Comment/question: 1) The link is to an image. it is not titled. 2) Another editor improve the title, since I made my edit. — Lentower (talk) 00:28, 25 April 2026 (UTC)

@Lentower, you appear to have removed the title in your edit, which another editor later reinstated. Why did you remove the title? Qwerfjkltalk 10:39, 25 April 2026 (UTC)

missed that in my review of the ReFill2 tool output — Lentower (talk) 15:37, 25 April 2026 (UTC)

Copied from Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous) § Request for comment (global AI policy) because this page is listed on Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)/Subscribe.

A request for comment is currently being held to decide on a global AI policy. Thank you! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:57, 26 April 2026 (UTC)

Note: Jdavidson012's mentor Vacant0 is away.

Hi! I have created some standalone pages regarding Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan’s notable qawwalis (Dil Pe Zakham Khate Hain, Jani Door Gaye, Man Atkeya Beparwah De Naal, and Yeh Jo Halka Halka Suroor Hai). Unfortunately, they have been flagged that it may not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for music. However, I believe they merit standalone coverage when considered in their proper cultural and musical context. These works are not simply routine album tracks but foundational works within the qawwali tradition, with enduring influence and cultural significance, particularly in South Asia. I appreciate that identifying extensive, song-specific secondary sources can be more challenging in this context, as coverage of qawwali often focuses on performers, traditions, or performances rather than isolating individual songs in the way Western music journalism sometimes does. However, this does not necessarily reflect a lack of notability so much as a difference in how the music is historically documented and discussed. Given this, is there anything I can do to prevent the pages from being removed? --Jdavidson012 (talk) 05:44, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

Jdavidson012, I can see you also asked this question at User talk:Dr vulpes#Regarding notability of Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan Qawwalis. Please don't ask the same question at multiple places. I will leave it to Dr vulpes to answer your question, because they are more knowledgeable than me, and they added the tag.
Are you using AI to write your comments? — Qwerfjkltalk 10:13, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

My apologies. Thanks for responding to my question (not written using AI). Jdavidson012 (talk) 10:48, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

MediaWiki message delivery 18:04, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

The administrator elections process has officially started! Interested editors are encouraged to self-nominate or arrange to be nominated by reviewing the instructions at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/May 2026/Candidates.

Here is the schedule:

• April 29 – May 5: Call for candidates
• May 8–12: Discussion phase
• May 13–19: SecurePoll voting phase

Please note the following:

• The requirements to run are identical to RFA—a prospective candidate must be extended confirmed.
• Prospective candidates are advised to become familiar with the community's expectations of administrators, which are much higher than the minimum requirement of having extended confirmed status. This includes reviewing successful and unsuccessful RFAs, reading the essay Wikipedia:Advice for admin elections candidates, and possibly requesting an optional poll on their chances of passing.
• The process will have a seven day call for candidates phase, a two day pause, a five day discussion phase, and a seven day private vote using SecurePoll. Discussion and questions are only allowed on the candidate pages during the discussion phase.
• The outcome of this process is identical to making a request for adminship. There is no official difference between an administrator appointed through RFA versus administrator elections.
• Administrator elections are also a valid means of regaining adminship for de-sysopped editors.

Ask any questions about the process at the talk page. Later, a user talk message will be sent to official candidates with additional information about the process.

If you are interested in the process, please make sure to watchlist the appropriate pages. A watchlist notice will be added when the discussion phase opens, and again when the voting phase opens.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:31, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Copied from Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous) § May 2026 Administrator Election – Call for Candidates because this page is listed on Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)/Subscribe.

The administrator elections process has officially started! Interested editors are encouraged to self-nominate or arrange to be nominated by reviewing the instructions at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/May 2026/Candidates.

Here is the schedule:

• April 29 – May 5: Call for candidates
• May 8–12: Discussion phase
• May 13–19: SecurePoll voting phase

Please note the following:

• The requirements to run are identical to RFA—a prospective candidate must be extended confirmed.
• Prospective candidates are advised to become familiar with the community's expectations of administrators, which are much higher than the minimum requirement of having extended confirmed status. This includes reviewing successful and unsuccessful RFAs, reading the essay Wikipedia:Advice for admin elections candidates, and possibly requesting an optional poll on their chances of passing.
• The process will have a seven day call for candidates phase, a two day pause, a five day discussion phase, and a seven day private vote using SecurePoll. Discussion and questions are only allowed on the candidate pages during the discussion phase.
• The outcome of this process is identical to making a request for adminship. There is no official difference between an administrator appointed through RFA versus administrator elections.
• Administrator elections are also a valid means of regaining adminship for de-sysopped editors.

Ask any questions about the process at the talk page. Later, a user talk message will be sent to official candidates with additional information about the process.

If you are interested in the process, please make sure to watchlist the appropriate pages. A watchlist notice will be added when the discussion phase opens, and again when the voting phase opens.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:31, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Page: Kiritimatiellota

Diff: Special:Diff/1351595395

Comment/question: Hi, Qwerfjkl notified me of a potential date error, I don't see one so I just wanted to let you know of a potential false positive. But then again I'm kinda new at this and may just not see it. Best! GillsBrightblood (talk) 02:26, 29 April 2026 (UTC)Gills

GillsBrightblood (talk) 02:26, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

GillsBrightblood, you missed out the day in the date for both of the references you added. — Qwerfjkltalk 11:20, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Thx! GillsBrightblood (talk) 19:54, 30 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)

My views on edits in total were at 3 million, and now they're at 900000. Why is this? --Aditi.Anand.Is.A.Bear (talk) 18:26, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Aditi.Anand.Is.A.Bear, I believe they only track the last 30 days (or some similar time frame). — Qwerfjkltalk 11:18, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Page: Sir_James_Wylie,_1st_Baronet

Diff: Special:Diff/1337531761

Comment/question: I very reluctantly undid the Bot's changes. The sequence of events involved in undoing the bot's wok and my attempts to follow the relevant instructions were as follows: (a) I had little idea what those were saying (b) But I persevered to attempt to insert the relevant cite template (c) But I could find no way of placing it appropriaely (in visual editing it's impossible to place it within any of the Notes and in source editing appears not to show the Notes (d) I placed it as close as possible to the Notes area (e) Within visual editing I then filled out the template (f) this caused every note to displace unuseable remarks in every note (g) there appeared to be no relevant instructions for what to do (h) I reluctantly undid the bot's changes.

It remains totally obscure to me why a standard template can be completed in visual editing, but in some cases it can never be completed to the bot's satisfaction even where all relevant information is included therein, remains so despite an editor's numerous fine-tuning, this causing hugh stress to the editor and loss of many hours of his/her edits. I have now been pushed to the point of publishing my edits after every small handful of them, just to forestall losing 3 hours of work, as happened yesterday. I have reached the pointJDWylie (talk) 05:26, 30 April 2026 (UTC) of abandoning further work on Wikipedia articles.

JDWylie (talk) 05:26, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

JDWylie, the only issue my bot had was that you didn't add a title to the reference. The bot didn't make any edits to the article, only to your talk page. You may be confused with WikiCleanerBot, which did edit the article. You can add the template {{In use}} if you don't want to be interrupted whilst making large changes to an article. — Qwerfjkltalk 11:26, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Page: Steven_Davidoff_Solomon

Diff: Special:Diff/1351737863

Comment/question: The bot removed a sentence about the subject's work history that was accurate.

Krhinestone (talk) 16:56, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Krhinestone, the bot didn't remove anything; it didn't edit the article. — Qwerfjkltalk 11:15, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Hello. How do I create a Wikipedia page for a writer who I figured does not have one yet --Cvaynerchuck (talk) 19:59, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Cvaynerchuck, Welcome! Creating a new article from scratch is extremely challenging, and new editors are strongly recommended to spend a few months learning how Wikipedia works, by making improvements to some of our existing seven million articles before trying it. When you do decide to have a go at a new article, you are highly encouraged to read Help:Your first article. If you haven't already also check out the tutorial; it's a lot of fun! Happy editing! — Qwerfjkltalk 11:15, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Page: Kate_Levant

Diff: Special:Diff/1351794606

Comment/question: fixed and got a second notification

Hegemoniconline (talk) 05:22, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Hegemoniconline, the bot only ever left one notification on your talk page. — Qwerfjkltalk 11:16, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

How can I continue working on Wikipedia when my dad keeps reminding me how it's not going to make any money (I obviously know that it's true but this bugging just makes me feel that my editing is being more and more worthless, I suppose)? nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead) 03:15, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

.nhals8, instead of looking for extrinsic validation you should do what you enjoy. If you want to help volunteer and edit Wikipedia, then by all means, go for it, and I will be happy to help if you need it. But if you don't want to volunteer, that's also okay. — Qwerfjkltalk 19:07, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Page: Battle_of_Tsushima

Diff: Special:Diff/1352144018

Comment/question: I see no error. But more importantly, the bot caused me trouble because I tried to fix what I thought the bot might have flagged as an error while I already had iabot running, causing iabot to overwrite my edit. Please build in a delay that takes into consideration the rather lengthy time iabot takes to analyze pages and add its archives before notifying editors. I suggest 40 minutes. Abductive (reasoning) 10:26, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Abductive (reasoning) 10:26, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

@Abductive, the bot already has a delay (15 minutes). The issue is the reference:

{{cite journal |last=Kowner |first=Rotem |author-link=Rotem Kowner |date=15 June, 2022a |title=Time To Remember, Time To Forget: … In Japanese Collective Memory Since 1905 |journal=Asia Pacific Journal |volume=20 |issue=12-3 |url=https://apjjf.org/2022/12/kowner |issn=1557-4660}}

specifically the |date= value (the comma should be removed). — Qwerfjkltalk 19:16, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Page: Permethrin

Diff: Special:Diff/1352160260

Comment:The date is formatted per the Visual Editor and Wikipedia Cite tool, of which the link for the page was inserted and the Cite tool created the citation.

Dmadden51 (talk) 15:21, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Dmadden51, for the third reference you added ("Permethrin exposure affects neurobehavior and cellular characterization in rats' brain"), you missed out the day when you added the date. The automatic tools for adding references are not perfect. — Qwerfjkltalk 19:19, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Hi, one of my articles, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portsmouth_terrorist_cell has been cited as needing improvement. Do you think you could provide some specific examples of what they want so I can improve this? Thanks so much. I just started editing Wikipedia last fall and feel very new and inexperienced. --Muffinbutt1985 (talk) 19:24, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Muffinbutt1985, you could ask User:Thilio, who added the tag. This paragraph:
Choudhury, the oldest of the men, was married with two children[2] and had worked as a racial harassment caseworker and part-time as a development worker in the Muslim community. A member of the Portsmouth City Council later said Choudhury "embellished" both roles.[12] He had trouble in his personal life; he would later be described as a "serial liar". He had once pretended to have stomach cancer, then took the £35,000 his family gave him for medical treatment in Singapore and spent it on prostitutes.[2] He said his failings and his lies had made him "utterly ashamed and embarrassed". He texted his wife in 2013 and suggested they move to Syria, and she replied, "I hate you. You want to die in battlefield, go die. I really mean it, just go." She later said she didn't literally mean that he should go to die in the Syrian civil war, and that she didn't consider his statements about Syria to be serious because she saw him as a fantasist and incapable of fighting.[3]
is almost entirely excessive detail, and should be one or two sentences at most. — Qwerfjkltalk 20:43, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Ok I went and removed the stuff about his job and what his wife said to him, cut it down and merged it into the paragraph above. Thank you. Muffinbutt1985 (talk) 20:50, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

That's good, but a lot of the article suffers from the same problem. — Qwerfjkltalk 20:53, 2 May 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.

Hi, I'm thinking of trying to translate some pages as I am fluent in both English and Swedish. I'm asking what to do with English sources, do I keep them when translating to Swedish or should I find sources in Swedish? And does it matter that most Swedish speakers do have at least a basic understanding of English?

Any other recommendations and things to keep while translating (or editing tips in general) would be appreciated. --Minst4tecken (talk) 18:14, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

Minst4tecken, if you're translating to Swedish I can't really help you; the Swedish Wikipedia has its own set of policies from the English Wikipedia.
In general, the language of the source shouldn't be an obstacle, so the sources would be kept assuming they are decent sources.
And does it matter that most Swedish speakers do have at least a basic understanding of English? - Matter in what way? I don't think so, but again, that depends on the policies of the Swedish Wikipedia.
I can see there's a page linking to advice on the Sweidsh Wikipedia at w:sv:Wikipedia:Översättning, w:sv:Wikipedia:Översättningsrekommendationer in particular looks relevant. — Qwerfjkltalk 18:55, 4 May 2026 (UTC)