User talk:Rangasyd

Hi, I don't understand why Draft:List of OSCAR satellites was rejected and at the same time entry List of OSCAR satellites was created, which is basically the page I wrote. --Sinucep (talk) 21:20, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

Please see my reply on the talk page of the list article. Please do not reply here. Thanks. Rangasyd (talk) 00:40, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

@Rangasyd, the problem is you deleted the code I wrote and used it to create another page without going through the draft. So, I, the creator of the content and the one who created the draft, was rejected, and now the page I translated manually from German during my vacation appears to be yours. Sinucep (talk) 11:41, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Please see my reply on the talk page of the list article. Please do not reply here. Thanks. Rangasyd (talk) 00:18, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

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)

Hello Rangasyd, I noticed an article you created in 2018 for a historic property in Sydney copies almost entirely from the NSW HMS property page for the Garibaldi. I understand this was a long time ago and you're probably now well-familiar with Wikipedia's copyright policies, but I will still direct you to Wikipedia:Copyrights, Wikipedia:Copyright violations, and Wikipedia:Plagiarism. I am far too busy myself at the moment to do a cleanup of the page (just stumbled upon it doing some light category maintenance); I have placed a maintenance tag on it and thought I would let you know in case you would like to do the rewrite yourself. Cheers, – TCMemoire 17:12, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

@TCMemoire: I hear you and understand your copyvio concerns. In fact, that article was part of project to add to Wikipedia every property listed on the New South Wales State Heritage Register that was completed during 2018 and 2019. There is discussion on the matter here and here, with detailed discussion on copyvio and attribution occurring in November 2019, in the second link above. There was no real consensus on the way forward, other than that the use of material from the NSW Heritage Database was considered free and unlicensed (at the time of use). I chose not to comment in that second discussion, given that I was the so called "cause" of the problem, when in fact, I was just one member of the team that assisted with the project - working on central Sydney articles, mostly. And articles by other editors who contributed to the project adopted that same rationale and were not identified. Anyway, I've moved on. Happy to review the article, when and if I have a moment. Cheers, and thanks for the heads up. Rangasyd (talk) 11:54, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi Rangasyd. I noticed you did a great deal of the writing on the Lennox Bridge, Glenbrook article so I thought you might be interested in having a look over Mitchell's Causeway. I've made a start but there's definitely a lot more to be written and refined. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 22:41, 25 March 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)

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Laanecoorie Weir, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A ISBN error. References show this error when the ISBN value or formatting is invalid. Please edit the article to ensure the value is correct, that only one ISBN is used, that the proper optional separators are used, and that no other text is included. (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) 12:23, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

Hello Rangasyd,

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)

Hello, I'm Zackmann08. Thank you for your recent contributions to Dights Falls. When you were adding content to the page, you added duplicate arguments to a template which can cause issues with how the template is rendered. In the future, please use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find these errors as they will display in yellow at the top of the page. You can also install the userscript found here to help find and eliminate these errors. Thanks. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 18:00, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Zackmann08. Thank you for your recent contributions to Camberwell tram depot. When you were adding content to the page, you added duplicate arguments to a template which can cause issues with how the template is rendered. In the future, please use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find these errors as they will display in yellow at the top of the page. You can also install the userscript found here to help find and eliminate these errors. Thanks. Once again.... Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 04:51, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

Before adding a category to an eponymous category, as you did at Category:National Trust of Australia (Victoria), please make sure that the category is appropriate under Wikipedia's categorization guidelines and is consistent with WP:EPONYMOUS.

An eponymous category is a category named after a subject that contains pages associated with that subject. For example, an eponymous category about a person, place, organization, or work may contain articles about related people, events, works, history, or other topics connected with that subject, not just the main article itself.

Because of that, adding a category to an eponymous category means that the added category should make sense for the contents of the eponymous category as a whole, not just for the subject it is named after. In general, the added category should apply to all or nearly all of the pages in the eponymous category.

For example, a category such as establishments in YEAR may apply to the subject itself, but usually will not apply to every page in the eponymous category, so it is usually not appropriate to add it there. Please also make sure that any category you add already exists. Categories that do not meet these requirements may be removed. Thank you. ^SMason_Garrison 03:09, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page West Gate Bridge, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A generic title error. References show this error when they have a generic placeholder title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title to the reference. (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) 18:22, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Pyrmont and Glebe railway tunnels is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article is being discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pyrmont and Glebe railway tunnels until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may still edit the article, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the AfD notice from the article until the discussion is closed.

Qwerty123M (talk) 07:55, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

Hello. I noticed that you've created a number of "church buildings with domes" categories for multiple countries. In Ukraine in particular, many (I believe the vast majority of) churches have at least one dome. Therefore, with its current scope, this category has the potential to turn superfluous and rather large (hundreds of pages) if all churches with domes are included. I've thought about it and I believe it would be more useful to divide the pages into smaller subcategories that classify the churches by number of domes (which is a much more defining characteristic than the mere presence of the domes). I could not find any similar categories to compare this situation to, however, and it may be difficult in some instances to distinguish domes from cupolas. Would you support implementing this? Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 10:54, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

@Shwabb1: Thanks. There were more than 500 articles categorised as "churches with domes", which made the category way too big to be useful. Given that there are categories for mosques with domes and mosques with minarets and that these were sub-categorised by countries, it made sense to do the same with churches. Whilst I acknowledge that most churches in some Eastern European / West Asian countries are all likely to have domes, that is certainly not the case globally, where they are the exception, rather than the norm. I'm not a fan of enumerating the number of domes as a category. I could not see any precedence for this. As to distinguishing domes from cupolas, perhaps that's another step at another time. But, certainly not in my remit at present. And then, do we do the same with church steeples, church bells, etc.? I'm more interested in getting {{Infobox church}} used consistently, instead of {{Infobox religious building}}, when completing articles on Christian churches. BTW, I've been working on articles for mosques, synagogues, churches, convents, monasteries, temples, and other religious buildings for years, now.... Rangasyd (talk) 14:40, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

OK, I only suggested this as it is the only way to reasonably subdivide this category that I can think of. Certainly it would not make sense for countries where churches with domes are not common, so I only suggested this for the Ukrainian category at least. Regardless, I can help populating this category with the relevant pages in the nearest time. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 15:36, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

Thanks. Rangasyd (talk) 15:37, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Glebe and Wentworth Park railway viaducts, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pyrmont and Glebe railway tunnels until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Category:1840s in Lithuania indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:30, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

@Rangasyd: You edited and added good content to some articles about mosques in Albania. The articles Neshat Pashaj Mosque (sq:Xhamia Neshat Pashaj), Pasha's Mosque (Elbasan) (sq:Xhamia e Pashës (Elbasan)) and Mecite Mosque (sq:Xhamia Mexhide) are missing, and the articles Saranda Mosque and Ballie Mosque are quite short. Do you want to create them? Do you have some good sources? ~2026-40323-64 (talk) 13:23, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Category:Recipients of the 1914–15 Star requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, such as at Articles for deletion. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. ✗plicit 14:14, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Category:Recipients of the British War Medal requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, such as at Articles for deletion. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. ✗plicit 14:14, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Category:Recipients of the Victory Medal (United Kingdom) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, such as at Articles for deletion. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. ✗plicit 14:14, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

HM Prison Pentridge

added links pointing to Her Majesty and His Majesty

William Bannon

added a link pointing to Irish

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:06, 21 July 2026 (UTC)