User talk:Sdrqaz

Hi, I’d like to request semi-protection for the "Pagpag" article. Lately, it’s been hit with a lot of vandalism. It’s getting hard for people to keep fixing it as quickly as it happens. I think semi-protection would help stop the disruptions while still allowing good edits from regular users.

Thanks! ~~~~ MysticWizard (talk) 22:53, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply, MysticWizard. While I've heard of pagpag, I'm not an expert so need a bit more information before taking action – looking through the history, it's not clear to me whether it's vandalism or a content dispute. Apart from edits like Special:Diff/1300971397/1303450966, can you identify the other vandalism and explain why? Edits like Special:Diff/1304093916/1304259726 are hard to fully review because the sources require registration. Thanks, Sdrqaz (talk) 04:14, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

The second link you shared comes from a user who often deletes sourced material from the history section without any explanation and usually replaces it with unsupported claims or their own narrative. MysticWizard (talk) 22:50, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

The article was protected for a month by Isabelle Belato (thanks!), so hopefully that resolves things. Sdrqaz (talk) 23:07, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind assistance! Slr MysticWizard (talk) 07:45, 29 August 2025 (UTC)

@ChildrenWillListen The word 'hapilan' from the Bisaya (Cebuano) language is documented and verifiable by different references. There is a documentary that claims most people who live in Hapilan are of Visayan descent, which is why it was called Hapilan.

The editor who consistently deletes the verifiable content is making false or unverifiable content based on their own narratives. MysticWizard (talk) 01:15, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

Responding to ping: I reverted this edit because it contained LLM communication intended for the user (Here are the top provinces of origin for squatters in Manila.) The rest of my reverts were because they removed huge amounts of sourced content without providing a reasonable explanation. I haven't looked at the content dispute. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 01:26, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

The content in the History section is very particular to the Hapilan community, which undeniably comes from the Bisaya (Visayan) language, as verified by different references.  I am not an expert on this topic, but it seems that this is the community that popularized pagpag because most of documentation or reference online is very particular to Hapilan, Tondo. Similar practices of pagpag consumption outside Tondo (particularly Hapilan) is less documented. The other added content, such as saying that pagpag evolved into "Monok" (a specific local meat dish)" is unverifiable. The maker of the Monok recipe said it was not pagpag, and that she inherited it from her mother. It was properly sourced or purchased directly from a restaurant, not from the garbage dump. MysticWizard (talk) 02:30, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

Continuing from the earlier protection request and the previous ANI report.

I still want to request semi-protection for the Pagpag article. The same disruptive editing (of Classicthings / Meowingg ) is continuing — repeated removal of properly sourced/referenced content and replacement with unsourced or clearly AI-generated material. It's making it hard to keep the article stable.

We already reported this issue before with User:Meowingg:

• Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1207

Even after warnings and a temporary block, it keeps happening. The edits look like LLM/AI output, which violates Wikipedia's rules on AI-generated content.

@Sdrqaz: or any available admin — can we please get temporary semi-protection (or extended confirmed if better) so the vandalism stops while good edits can still come in from regular users? The article really needs stabilizing with reliable sources.

Thanks. Ddssalot (talk) 05:27, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi, I saw that this page was deleted by you. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log?type=delete&user=&page=Draft%3AMahavatar+Narsimha&wpdate=&tagfilter=&wpFormIdentifier=logeventslist can you please give the deleted material, because this page was made by the producer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Kleemproduction.media and it is needed for current page Mahavatar Narsimha there has been a long discussion on the talk page. Optim594 (talk) 09:45, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply. This is an unusual request, Optim594, but I've restored the draft. See the page history. Sdrqaz (talk) 02:43, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks Optim594 (talk) 02:46, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi Sdrqaz, you recently protected Talk:Nim on account of repeated nonsense. Unfortunately, since the protection ended, the nonsense has continued and also maybe migrated to the article itself . Would you be willing to protect for a longer period (or, do you have any other suggestions)? Thanks, --JBL (talk) 17:10, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

The talk page has been protected by Isabelle Belato and I've expanded the partial range block to the article as well. Sdrqaz (talk) 04:20, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

September 2025 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
On 1 September 2025, 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) 15:32, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Can you please Unblock or Unbanned me on my Jdhfox account. I will keep up with consistency & I will not ask for any of the articles that I create to be deleted, and I will also recreate my deleted articles the right way so that they won't face deletion or be deleted, and I am not joking about it this time.

I have also been unblocked on 71.65.161.185 since then because also during that time I was a block invasion. During that time period I was blocked on 71.65.161.185 because I was a beginner in editing and I didn't know how to edit that well so I created Jdhfox & during that time period I didn't know how to create citations when I created articles on Jdhfox but now I do and I am better than ever.

I am also am once more blocked on 71.65.161.185 plus 2600:1004:B200:0:0:0:0:0/40 due to connections to Jdhfox.

If unblocked I will recreate articles Adrenaline Rush (professional wrestling), TaDarius Thomas (wrestler), Future of Honor & MLW Women's Featherweight Division with honor and prestige so that they won't face deletion this time. Or any other future article.

I also have a lot of things I want to edit as well if unblocked.

I also want to be unblocked on Wiki Commons as well. And once unblocked on that I will never upload again without a license.

Since then over time I've also blocked on IP address 75.189.238.0 as well due to connection with jdhfox.

So can you also unblock IP addresses 71.65.161.223, 75.189.238.0 & 2600:1004:B200:0:0:0:0:0/40 and any other IP’s that are blocked due to my Jdhfox account as well. To even further clear my name.

I also will never commit Sock Puppetry again & I will no longer ask for my account to be deleted again or want to quit Wikipedia again.

Also if you get the time could contest for deletion or delete my confirmed & suspected sock puppet accounts, Except for the Flinction because I didn't create Flinction. / To instantly close the whole sock puppet / block invasion investigation that will officially clear my name. (Or I could myself when unblocked either is fine by me.)

Because over time I might have gotten into more trouble by creating more accounts due to my blocks when I realized that I wasn't done editing in Wikipedia. And I might need your help to delete them. To further clear my name & close the Sock puppet case.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_Jdhfox

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Suspected_Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_Jdhfox

And I will also keep out of trouble when it comes to Wikipedia from that point on.

I also understand your reasoning for the blocking. 45.37.160.149 (talk) 16:22, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

I don't understand what you mean when you say that you will contest for deletion or delete my confirmed & suspected sock puppet accounts. Your main account is banned due to repeated block evasion and continuing to do so on my talk page and elsewhere is a bad idea. A route back to editing may be to take the standard offer (which means no block evasion for six months), use one of your accounts (preferably Jdhfox) and make an appeal via your talk page or WP:UTRS, asking for a ban appeal to be copied to the administrators' noticeboard. Sdrqaz (talk) 23:59, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

I’d like to report the username "Pachup4po" for being inappropriate. In Filipino/Tagalog, the word “pachupa” in that name is slang for a sexual act and adding “po” doesn’t remove the offensive meaning. So, for anyone who speaks the language, this username is actually offensive and not suitable for use on Wikipedia.

Thank you! MysticWizard (talk) 07:16, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

Here is the link of the account:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%3APachup4po&redlink=1 MysticWizard (talk) 07:17, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

Here is a the dictionary definition for the word tsupa/chupa: https://diksiyonaryo.ph/search/tsupa MysticWizard (talk) 07:24, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/chupa#Tagalog MysticWizard (talk) 07:25, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/tsupa#Tagalog MysticWizard (talk) 07:35, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply. As nobody seems to have talked to them about this issue and given their seemingly constructive edits, I will assume good faith and leave a warning. Sdrqaz (talk) 23:59, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

Despite being a long time Wikipedia editor, I do not understand the upper admin regulations and rules; I see that this issue is open, but the evidence is closed. I am an uninvolved party and have key insight into this issue that I feel will help the administrators understand the points of view of both sides of this situation, so I'm posting it here on your talk page - please do not take offense.

Talking about trans issues is difficult, because the mainstream model is the medical model (there is a trans syndrome, direct cause unknown, and transition medical care helps people with this medical issue). Thus, transition medicine is seen as medical care under the medical model. Those who are trans deserve the best evidence based medical care that can be provided. This is the model that allows medical groups to bill insurance for transition related care in the United States.

That point of view isn't the one causing problems. It's a second point of view.

There is an ideology defined and explained by Martine Rothblatt in the book "Sex is Apartheid". It begins with a belief in mind-body dualism; that the mind is the true human, a body merely a shell. Human bodies can have individual features that are more masculine or more feminine, therefore, sex isn't a binary, but a spectrum, merely a "series of biological and psychological factors a body can have". One should spend time contemplating their gender, and that their gender should therefore determine their sex. Body modification should be posed as a human right. These ideas should be codified in psychology, medicine, and law. Letting go of the binary point of view of sex is the next step toward freeing humanity from the "Apartheid of Sex".

Once you see this explanation, you understand the origin of arguments like "Gender is assigned at birth" over "Gender/Sex is observed at birth" - because in this model, one's gender is determined in one's mind, "all genders are valid", and there are no external factors that can be observed to see one's Gender. Modifying one's body to follow the mind is framed as a human right, along with legally and socially being recognized in the gender one declares themselves to have. Thus, Self ID law (where one is able to legally declare their gender, and this is treated as their sex thus forth) is justified.

There are many arguments that do not make sense if you do not understand this framework. "I am a biological female, I take estrogen!" doesn't make sense unless you have the ideology behind it: estrogen provides a "female biological factor", because all human bodies have a series of traits that can lean female or male, and sex is a spectrum of traits a body can have. The general public, of course, is at a total loss because they don't understand the underlying "rules".

It's important to note that Rothblatt helped write a sample Self ID Law draft that has been presented as a suggestion to governments around the world, and that the book was written to justify the law and encourage it's adoption. It's available freely online and is considered a "key" transgender reading, but most people learn the principles in online communities, not by reading the book.'

The challenge to people with this point of view is that pushing it too hard would lead to loosing insurance or health care support for body modifications, since transition is no longer medical care. That's what interjects so much confusion into the debate; the inability to let go of "medical care" to achieve body modification access for those who are not wealthy. This was not a problem then Rothblatt faced personally, so it was not considered in the book.

There have been multiple attempts to name this point of view, and it's prominent here on Wikipedia across many articles, despite never being named. "Gender Ideology" was an neutral attempt. The second closest neutral name I can find is the lengthy "one who doesn't believe you need gender dysphoria to be trans" among those who reject the medical model. To see the fighting in action... you have to look at the words "tucute" and "truscum", both seen as pejorative today. Alas, many followers have not read the book and can't articulate the arguments well. But if you read Rothblatt's book - agree or disagree - the logic behind it can be articulated, and that point of view is being pushed here on Wikipedia.

People who are true believers do not believe they have a point of view to disclose, rather, they believe they are the source of TRUTH. Any disagreement with the TRUTH must be silenced, so even though their own point of view is Fringe, they label "believing human bodies are born with a sex, male or female" as a hateful fringe idea, despite it being the point of view of the majority of people in the USA and UK, and most likely, the whole world.

Therefore, editors who simply try to push a neutral point of view, following the sources, get burned by activists who shut them down by any means necessary. If you spend time in these articles you see the same editors over and over "voting" to protect this point of view at any cost.

It's also hard because most people writing on this issue do have a bias, so any critisism is shut down as "biased" - while biased "pro" sources are openly allowed, leading to biased articles.

This leaves Wikipedia in a bind, because we have a very clearly biased group of editors accusing anyone who disagrees with them, even on a minor point, of being "argumentative" and "unreasonable" and "biased", because they alone hold the TRUTH that others must be forced to see.

I am leaving this comment as an uninvolved party to help the Admins understand the arguments being made, because it will make the points of view being argued about more clear. I've generally just tried to steer clear of these articles, because people are simply allowed to push their POV by pretending they don't have one. I generally stick to trying to clean them up, leaving contentious material, and just making sure it represents what the sources say, but I've been burned for even trying to make an article reflect the source material.

Denaar (talk) 15:39, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

Greetings fellow Wikipedian, I am Giovanni Potage! I would like to request the restoration of PMDrive1061's indefinite semi-protection for Arthur (TV series). Back in June this year, you removed the article's long-standing protection following a WP:RfPP request, based on the principle of WP:UNPROTPOL. Since then, the article has been struck by a slow, but steady stream of disruptive editing (mainly the addition of unsourced nonsense) from IP editors, which get quickly reverted. This issue has completely taken over the article's edit history — effectively staling its growth, with only a single-digit number of productive edits being made. To deal with the this issue, I requested page protection, but the administrator who answered by request (Dr vulpes), unfortunately decided that the best course of option was a week-long protection. I believe this is an ineffective counter to a several months-long persistent stream of unhelpful edits that will only work temporarily. Since the article's subject is one of the most popular cartoons in US television, and the fact that vandalism resumed after a 16-year long protection regime, I believe the former indefinite protection should be restored. This page will likely continue to be a vandalism manget unless any action is taken. Giovanni Potage (talk) 20:14, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

@Giovanni Potage, this is probably not the proper place for such a request. Head on over to Wikipedia:Administrative action review and they can handle the discussion of the page protection there. Make sure to follow the instructions and post the proper template on my talk page to formally notify me of your request. Dr vulpes (Talk) 21:36, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

I'm trying to find a MediaWiki plugin that can be used to detect and block VPNs and other open proxies. Are there any plugins that Wikipedia uses that are available under an open license? TheEternalOutsider (talk) 00:40, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

A Wishlist proposal had some associated changes, including mw:Extension:IPReputation, which is probably the closest thing we have to what you're asking. Sdrqaz (talk) 04:18, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Sdrqaz. This message is being sent to remind you of significant upcoming changes regarding logged-out editing.

Starting 4 November, logged-out editors will no longer have their IP address publicly displayed. Instead, they will have a temporary account (TA) associated with their edits. Users with some extended rights like administrators and CheckUsers, as well as users with the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will still be able to reveal temporary users' IP addresses and all contributions made by temporary accounts from a specific IP address or range.

How do temporary accounts work?

• When a logged-out user completes an edit or a logged action for the first time, a cookie will be set in this user's browser and a temporary account tied with this cookie will be automatically created for them. This account's name will follow the pattern: ~2025-12345-67 (a tilde, year of creation, a number split into units of 5).
• All subsequent actions by the temporary account user will be attributed to this username. The cookie will expire 90 days after its creation. As long as it exists, all edits made from this device will be attributed to this temporary account. It will be the same account even if the IP address changes, unless the user clears their cookies or uses a different device or web browser.
• A record of the IP address used at the time of each edit will be stored for 90 days after the edit. Users with the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will be able to see the underlying IP addresses.
• As a measure against vandalism, there are two limitations on the creation of temporary accounts:
  • There has to be a minimum of 10 minutes between subsequent temporary account creations from the same IP (or /64 range in case of IPv6).
  • There can be a maximum of 6 temporary accounts created from an IP (or /64 range) within a period of 24 hours.

Temporary account IP viewer user right

• Administrators may grant the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right to non-administrators who meet the criteria for granting. Importantly, an editor must make an explicit request for the permission (e.g. at WP:PERM/TAIV)—administrators are not permitted to assign the right without a request.
• Administrators will automatically be able to see temporary account IP information once they have accepted the Access to Temporary Account IP Addresses Policy via Special:Preferences or via the onboarding dialog which comes up after temporary accounts are deployed.

Impact for administrators

• It will be possible to block many abusers by just blocking their temporary accounts. A blocked person won't be able to create new temporary accounts quickly if the admin selects the autoblock option.
• It will still be possible to block an IP address or IP range.
• Temporary accounts will not be retroactively applied to contributions made before the deployment. On Special:Contributions, you will be able to see existing IP user contributions, but not new contributions made by temporary accounts on that IP address. Instead, you should use Special:IPContributions for this (see a video about IPContributions in a gallery below).

Rules about IP information disclosure

• Publicizing an IP address gained through TAIV access is generally not allowed (e.g. ~2025-12345-67 previously edited as 192.0.2.1 or ~2025-12345-67's IP address is 192.0.2.1).
• Publicly linking a TA to another TA is allowed if "reasonably believed to be necessary". (e.g. ~2025-12345-67 and ~2025-12345-68 are likely the same person, so I am counting their reverts together toward 3RR, but not Hey ~2025-12345-68, you did some good editing as ~2025-12345-67)
• See Wikipedia:Temporary account IP viewer § What can and can't be said for more detailed guidelines.

Useful tools for patrollers

• It is possible to view if a user has opted-in to view temporary account IPs via the User Info card, available in Preferences → Appearance → Advanced options → Enable the user info card
  • This feature also makes it possible for anyone to see the approximate count of temporary accounts active on the same IP address range.
• Special:IPContributions allows viewing all edits and temporary accounts connected to a specific IP address or IP range.
• Similarly, Special:GlobalContributions supports global search for a given temporary account's activity.
• The auto-reveal feature (see video below) allows users with the right permissions to automatically reveal all IP addresses for a limited time window.

Videos

• How to use Special:IPContributions
• How automatic IP reveal works
• How to use IP Info
• How to use User Info

Further information and discussion

• For more information and discussion regarding this change, please see the announcement from the Wikimedia Foundation at Wikipedia:Village pump (WMF) § Temporary accounts rollout.

Most of this message was written by Mz7 (source). Thanks, 🎃 SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 02:48, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi, may I ask why you modified the appearance of my statement, by removing the blank lines with which I had formatted it? I did so intentionally, to clearly set off the revised text from the struck text. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 02:22, 11 November 2025 (UTC)

Hello, my edit was because of the Manual of Style. If the intention was to make the distinction between the unstruck and struck text clearer, I think that the <s>...</s> tags make it very clear already. Sdrqaz (talk) 03:05, 11 November 2025 (UTC)

I could quibble that that's applicable to article space and not elsewhere...but it's a fair point. Thanks. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 03:10, 11 November 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Sdrqaz. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:The Gatekeeper (book), a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 19:07, 20 November 2025 (UTC)

Hi,

@Sdrqaz I would like to create the article Victory Day (India) to cover Wikiproject India task. I see that you deleted the article before? What is your opinion of the recreation ? AlphaCore talk 14:55, 21 November 2025 (UTC)

Hi, AlphaCore. When I deleted the page, it was a redirect to Kargil Vijay Diwas (see log entry). I deleted it because the author blanked it, so it's fine if you recreate it. Looking at the page you've created, have you thought about merging that information to Victory Day (Bangladesh), since they seem to refer to the same topic (16 December)? Sdrqaz (talk) 03:03, 22 November 2025 (UTC)

Yeah I thought about that when I research the topic. But I think the event has a separate relevancy in India from Bangladesh's liberal war perspective. I created it as even I see the task, however, I will be discussing the same thought with my regional project members. AlphaCore talk 19:27, 22 November 2025 (UTC)

I've already left a message on Lofty's talk page, but could TPA please be revoked here? May need edit history (from the temporary account) removed as well. Thanks. Magitroopa (talk) 07:23, 26 November 2025 (UTC)

Done by Extraordinary Writ (thanks ). Sdrqaz (talk) 17:58, 26 November 2025 (UTC)

— how did my allegory on sockpuppets and deletion come to your attention in the first place? DS (talk) 15:43, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

After some digging (it came to my attention a few years ago), I am now quite sure that I saw it from following the links at Special:Diff/978946173 from Jackmcbarn's second RfA, leading me to User talk:Iridescent/Archive 28 § Origins of CSD G5, which mentioned your essay. Second most likely scenario is that I looked at your user page and found the allegory link ... Sdrqaz (talk) 17:59, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

Once more could you unblocked me on Jdhfox. I will keep up with consistency recreate my deleted articles Adrenaline Rush (professional wrestling), TaDarius Thomas (wrestler), Future of Honor, MLW Women's Featherweight Division, Seleziya Sparx and Jenny Rose (wrestler) with citations & the right way this time around so that they won't face deletion & I will (Or you can. You have my permission) delete all of my secondary sock puppet accounts via db-u1, Db-multiple, Db-g3, Db-g5 and Db-g12 (Now these five things go inside these {{ }} type of parentheses the only reason I didn't put them directly beside them is because I didn't want to accidentally contest delete your talk page.). Except for my main account Jdhfox itself because that's the account that I plan on keeping & for some reason except for Flinction because I didn't create Flinction. I started out as a block evasion on IP 71.65.161.223 due to disruptive editing because I was just a beginner & new at editing when it came to Wikipedia plus during that time I didn't know how to 100% with perfection edit Wikipedia. Afterwards in response I created account Jdhfox which I also got blocked on due to me repeatedly asking for a talk page that I accidentally created to be deleted, not keeping up with consistency & being the original editor on IP 71.65.161.223 which turned things into a bigger problem especially when when it comes to my Wikipedia reputation. Also over time I was blocked on other IP’s such as 2600:1004:B000:0:0:0:0:0/40 and 75.189.232.174 because I still wanted to edit because I still love doing it which turned into an even bigger problem. So I am here asking you may I be unblocked on my user page Jdhfox & all three IP’s 71.65.161.223, 2600:1004:B000:0:0:0:0:0/40 and 75.189.232.174.

Also I want undeletions for Drafts Draft:Nehemiah DeRoche, Draft:DESTIN CONRAD and Draft:Jay Cinco. And I also want undeletions for articles Adrenaline Rush (professional wrestling), TaDarius Thomas (wrestler), Future of Honor, MLW Women's Featherweight Division, Seleziya Sparx and Jenny Rose (wrestler) before or after I'm unblocked so that I can remake over them the right way so that they don't have to face deletion or be deleted.

And every time I ask for an unblock somewhere else like on the wiki unblocked request ticket system they never do it & always decline or say that I've run out of argument time. Probably because they have personal vendettas in their own lives against me, and if you feel the same than you probably you do as well.

_Links to my secondary sock puppet accounts below_

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_Jdhfox

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Suspected_Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_Jdhfox ~2025-42262-81 (talk) 21:24, 21 December 2025 (UTC)

@~2025-42262-81: Thank you for listing your accounts but you are still evading your ban as I'm quite sure that this edit (13 minutes before your message) was you. I gave you a possible route to an unblock in September: as you are banned, I cannot unblock you by myself. You will need the Community to want you to be unbanned, and the best way to get there is no block evasion for at least six months. Please stop, as it is harming the project and your chances. Sdrqaz (talk) 06:36, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Happy holidays and a prosperous 2026!

Sdrqaz, we have come a long way since our pending changes reviewer and rollback days. We both know you are a frequent solo dissenter at ArbCom, which is something you share with Newyorkbrad. I am sure we will disagree a bunch while we are serving together, but I can promise you I will always respect your opinion, and I really look forward to spending some time with you! The best to you and yours this holiday season, and happy new year :)

HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:05, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

IU! Those were simpler times. It's sometimes exhausting being a solo dissenter, so hopefully this term you will join me and form a majority. Thank you for your kind words; have a peaceful December and happy new year! I look forward to working together too . Sdrqaz (talk) 06:36, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Fingers crossed; I have no idea what voting patterns I will fall into. Again, I really look forward to the next two years

I don't actually think I've told the granters about this happenstance. Mz7 and Chetsford: five years ago, to the day, OfficerCow, Sdrqaz, and I happened to make three PCR requests in a row. Mz7, you granted it to OfficerCow and Sdrqaz; Chetsford, you gave it to me. OfficeCow got a rename, and is now doing business as... theleekycauldron. And soon all three of us will be on ArbCom! HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 07:26, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Wow, that is an amazing coincidence. :D I love how on Wikipedia, you can look back through the histories to find serendipities like this. One of my greatest personal motivations for contributing here is the idea that our descendants far into the future might be taking a peek into our page histories and discussion page archives to see what it was like to write about history as it happened. To those future people, I say hello—I hope you’re doing well! To all of you here in the present, I say best of luck in 2026. Congratulations Sdrqaz and HouseBlaster on your success in the election, and wishing you and theleekycauldron and Chetsford and everyone else a happy new year. Mz7 (talk) 14:06, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Finally I have someone in a position I can call favors in on! Chetsford (talk) 22:08, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2026!

Hello Sdrqaz, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2026. Happy editing, Abishe (talk) 11:21, 25 December 2025 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Abishe (talk) 11:21, 25 December 2025 (UTC)

January–February 2026 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
New Pages Patrol is hosting a one-time, two-month experimental backlog drive aimed at reducing the backlog. This will be a combo drive: both articles and redirects will earn points. The drive will run from 1 January to 28 February 2026. The drive is divided into two phases. Participants may take part in either phase or across both phases, depending on availability. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled during the drive. Two-month drive-exclusive barnstars will be awarded to eligible participants. Each article review earns 1 point, while each redirect review earns 0.2 points. Streak awards will be granted based on consistently meeting weekly point thresholds. Barnstars will also be awarded for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Interested in participating? Sign up here.
You are receiving this message because you are a New Pages Patrol reviewer. To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself from here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:23, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

Hey @Sdrqaz. Your wiki edit anniversary is today, marking 10 years of dedicated contributions to English Wikipedia. Your passion for sharing knowledge and your remarkable contributions have not only enriched the project, but also inspired countless others to contribute. Thank you for your amazing contributions. Wishing you many more wonderful years ahead in the Wiki journey and a blessed New Year. :) -❙❚❚❙❙ GnOeee ❚❙❚❙❙ ✉ 17:32, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you! It's hard to believe that it has been a decade. Hope you have a great year as well! Best wishes, Sdrqaz (talk) 23:55, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

how is it a hoax if I GO THERE AND LEARN THERE ~2025-43341-01 (talk) 12:50, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

sorry if I seem rude. ~2025-43341-01 (talk) 12:51, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

@~2025-43341-01: I deleted International School of Choueifat because at the time the page's content (amongst other things I won't repeat) was about a "monkey house" with "boiled snake" as cafeteria food. Hopefully that isn't true about the actual school. Sdrqaz (talk) 13:23, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

you have a point because the school ain't like that. They are some kids whom are just trolling. May you revive the page? I will monitor it and stop trolls. ~2025-43341-01 (talk) 15:16, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. Sdrqaz (talk) 05:28, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

thanks for saving Xenobe Purvis. while author biographies are source light, she had an alumni interview, which is above average. Loopydoor (talk) 18:11, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

The article Japan at the 2009 Asian Youth Games has been protected by you for the past three years. Is there any way to unprotect it and allow me to republish it under the article's eligibility requirements? (I believe the reason for the previous protection was repeated recreation of the article under discussion for deletion due to not meeting the eligibility requirements.) Sorry if I'm being impudent. Hosohiro (talk) 16:24, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello Hosohiro, you are not being impudent at all . Please see the discussion that led to its first deletion; the sources used in the deleted versions include a, b, and c. If you can find some independent and reliable sources (maybe something from a newspaper?), please write a draft and contact me afterwards or submit it to Articles for Creation. Best wishes, Sdrqaz (talk) 11:58, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

Quick facts Four years! ...

Precious

Four years!

Close

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:55, 2 April 2026 (UTC)