User talk:ShoBDin

Hello, since you are good at editing articles about Myanmar, such as Myanmar protests (2021–present), I would like to invite you to help me edit an article about State Administration Council Chairman Min Aung Hlaing. Thank you. Wonnie97 (talk) 12:23, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

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

• A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter 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) 11:27, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Hello ShoBDin! Your additions to Illegal drug trade in Lebanon have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably free and compatible copyright license—to request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, it's important to understand and adhere to guidelines about using information from sources to prevent copyright and plagiarism issues. Here are the key points:

• Limited quotation: You may only copy or translate a small portion of a source. Any direct quotations must be enclosed in double quotation marks (") and properly cited using an inline citation. More information is available on the non-free content page. To learn how to cite a source, see Help:Referencing for beginners.
• Paraphrasing: Beyond limited quotations, you are required to put all information in your own words. Following the source's wording too closely can lead to copyright issues and is not permitted; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when paraphrasing, you must still cite your sources as appropriate.
• Image use guidelines: In most scenarios, only freely licensed or public domain images may be used and these should be uploaded to our sister project, Wikimedia Commons. In some scenarios, non-freely copyrighted content can be used if they meet all ten of our non-free content criteria; Wikipedia:Plain and simple non-free content guide may help with determining a file's eligibility.
• Copyrighted material donation: If you hold the copyright to the content you want to copy, or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license the text for publication here. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• Copying and translation within Wikipedia: Wikipedia articles can be copied or translated, however they must have proper attribution in accordance with Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. For translation, see Help:Translation § Licensing.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices. Persistent failure to comply may result in being blocked from editing. If you have any questions or need further clarification, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 13:15, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Please don't add Category:Film festivals to articles that are already in a subcategory of that, such as Category:2025 film festivals or Category:Cannes Film Festival. We don't want or need articles to be duplicate categorized like that — there are so many articles about film festivals around the world, in fact, that if every individual film festival were directly filed in the parent category, it would have thousands of articles in it and would be nearly impossible to actually use due to its sheer size.

So articles are filed in appropriate subcategories, for specific years and specific locations and specific individual film festivals, and are not filed directly in the base Category:Film festivals category at the same time as being in the subcategories. Thanks. Bearcat (talk) 15:54, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your interest in the Arab–Israeli conflict. Due to past disruption, a special set of rules apply to anyone editing in this topic area. Specifically, only extended confirmed editors are allowed to make direct edits and page creations to this topic area. Since you currently do not meet the requirements to contribute to this topic area, the page you created has been nominated for speedy deletion under G5.

If you think this page does not fall under the general sanctions described, 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. Additionally you may wish to read about the topic restrictions here. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:18, 7 July 2025 (UTC)

You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Additionally, you must be logged in, have 500 edits, and have an account age of 30 days, and you are not allowed to make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any page within this topic.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

* Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:18, 7 July 2025 (UTC)

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date. You have shown interest in the Russo-Ukrainian War. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has authorised uninvolved administrators to impose contentious topics restrictions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, expected standards of behaviour, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic. For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Please note that editors who are not extended-confirmed may not make edits related to the Russo-Ukrainian war, broadly construed. Thanks. Mellk (talk) 06:50, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

@ShoBDin: this edit is clearly about the war. Mellk (talk) 08:34, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Is that a problem? ShoBDin (talk) 08:38, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

As I have just said, per WP:RUSUKR, you are unable to make any edits about the war, broadly construed. Mellk (talk) 08:39, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Oh sorry! got it thanks! ShoBDin (talk) 08:41, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

No worries. Mellk (talk) 08:42, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

I should also note that it is still possible to make edit requests. Mellk (talk) 08:45, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Great ill read about that and how its done:) appreciate your help! ShoBDin (talk) 08:59, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi ShoBDin. Thank you for your work on Illegal kidney sales in Myanmar. Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thank you for taking the time and energy to create the article! Have a blessed day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ Contact me! 05:46, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

@SunDawn Thank you very much for reviewing the article and thanking me for it. I wish you all the best ShoBDin (talk) 07:31, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2025 Hamas executions is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2025 Hamas executions until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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 until the discussion has finished.

Smallangryplanet (talk) 20:30, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for making the al-fashir tragedy article Pencilceaser123 (talk) 23:09, 3 November 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for this, really appreciate it. ShoBDin (talk) 07:25, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hamas external European operations is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hamas external European operations until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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 until the discussion has finished.

Smallangryplanet (talk) 11:13, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sexual and gender-based violence against Israeli hostages during the Gaza war is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sexual and gender-based violence against Israeli hostages during the Gaza war until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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 until the discussion has finished.

Smallangryplanet (talk) 11:47, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions to Displacement of Israelis after the October 7 attacks. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because This article is not written with WP:NPOV in mind, and also WP:UNDUE should be considered. Please clean up the emotional language used throughout the article.. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Equine-man (talk) 19:04, 26 November 2025 (UTC)

@Equine-man, I stumbled upon this article earlier and saw that you converted it to a draft.

Can you clarify the reasons? What should be added/removed to achieve NPOV? What aspects are given undue weight? What language do you consider emotional? I'm asking because it's based on reliable sources and seems alright at first glance. Alaexis_¿question? 20:11, 26 November 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Alaexis, please see what I've just written here on the talk page.

@ShoBDin It is poor form to move an article that has valid concerns back into mainspace without attempting to see if anything can be changed. Equine-man (talk) 16:09, 27 November 2025 (UTC)

Hi, Based on the reasons you wrote, i don't think you were right in moving it to draft. The article is well sourced, all facts have sources. IF you think it is POV, it is your personal view of the matter, not a solid Wikipedia fact. You can try and find facts and sources contradicting the article, but the facts remain the a large scale of the population was displaced.

I find it very rude that someone just feels he can do whatever he wants, and hide behind Wikipedia rules, that are not truly represented in the right way. You should've opened it for discussion rather than simply moving someone's work. ShoBDin (talk) 16:19, 27 November 2025 (UTC)

I don't think you have actually read what WP:NPOV is? Did you actually read what I wrote in the article Talk page about how to improve the article? Putting it on the talk page is a way to discuss it, not accuse someone that it's their personal view of the matter. Nobody is hiding behind rules. The majority of editors here follow the rules that were set in place to make this website what it is. Your non-NPOV writing could result in a ban, so take the emotion out of your writing and keep it factual please. Equine-man (talk) 16:49, 27 November 2025 (UTC)

@Equine-man, thanks for the response. I agree with some of your points and would be happy to help fix them.

I don't think the draftification helps. The topic is notable and the content is more likely to be improved if it has greater exposure. Alaexis_¿question? 06:28, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

Hello! Your submission of Mass graves associated with the Sri Lankan Civil War at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Kowal2701 (talk) 22:49, 8 December 2025 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hezbollah's drone smuggling network is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hezbollah's drone smuggling network until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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 until the discussion has finished.

Smallangryplanet (talk) 11:12, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a report involving you at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement regarding a possible violation of an Arbitration Committee decision. The thread is here. Thank you. Lf8u2 (talk) 02:25, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello, ShoBDin. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/Sarajevo Safari.
Message added 08:18, 30 December 2025 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:18, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Barry J. Brock sexual misconduct allegations is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barry J. Brock sexual misconduct allegations until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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 until the discussion has finished.

– bradv 16:59, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

A page you created has been nominated for deletion as an attack page, according to section G10 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

Do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject or any other entity. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia, and users who create or add such material may be blocked from editing. Oaktree b (talk) 00:07, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello, ShoBDin. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Lo Manh Hung, 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) 10:09, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

The following topic ban now applies to you:

You are topic banned from adding any "See also" link that leads to a page related to the biographies of living persons and/or Arab–Israeli conflict contentious topics.

You have been sanctioned for adding inappropriate "See also" links from articles such as Patients' rights (Special:Diff/1330100771) and Sexual harassment (Special:Diff/1330100743) to your now-deleted attack page Barry J. Brock sexual misconduct allegations while an arbitration enforcement request about a related incident you were involved in was still open.

This topic ban is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decisions at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Editing of Biographies of Living Persons#Final decision and Wikipedia:Arbitration/Index/Palestine-Israel articles#Final decision, and, if applicable, the contentious topics procedure. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. Please read WP:TBAN to understand what a topic ban is. If you do not comply with this topic ban, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.

You may appeal this topic ban using the appeal process and the arbitration enforcement appeals template. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this topic ban, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything above is unclear to you. — Newslinger talk 21:20, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi ShoBDin, I have reduced the scope of the topic ban to solely the Arab–Israeli conflict (WP:CT/A-I) contentious topic, as you had not yet met the awareness criteria for the biographies of living persons (WP:CT/BLP) contentious topic at the time the edits were made. Instead, you are warned that adding inappropriate "See also" links that lead to pages related to the WP:CT/BLP contentious topic will lead to sanctions such as this one; the warning has been recorded in the arbitration enforcement log. Thank you for your understanding. — Newslinger talk 04:05, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for message and reduction to only the Arab-Israeli conflict. If in the future i create an article NOT related to the Arab-Israeli conflict, Can i add 2-3 related articles in a See also section, so the article won't get an - Orphan tag?

P.s. Just to be clear the - Barry J. Brock sexual misconduct allegations, was NOT an attack page even though someone tried to frame it that way, it was an article i did, thinking this was a notable case, making headlines at the time i wrote it. The one trying to frame it as an attack, was someone jumping on the general assault on me. @Newslinger ShoBDin (talk) 13:15, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

You are still able to add links in "See also" sections to an article that you created, provided that the article you created is unrelated to WP:CT/A-I and that the link addition is appropriate. MOS:ALSO states that "Links in this section should be relevant and limited to a reasonable number". If you create an article about a single example or narrow subset of a broad topic, it is usually not appropriate to add a link to the article about the single example or narrow subset in the "See also" section of the article about the broad topic. For example, if you created an article about a song, it would not be appropriate to link to it from Song § See also, because there is no good reason to prefer a link to that song in the section over any other song, and there are so many songs that linking to all of them would exceed "a reasonable number" of links. However, you would be able to add your article about the song to the appropriate subcategories of Category:Individual songs, as categories do not have limit restrictions.

After reading the deleted revisions of the Barry J. Brock sexual misconduct allegations article, I agree with the consensus in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barry J. Brock sexual misconduct allegations that the article is an attack page and qualified for speedy deletion per criterion G10. The problem is that the article consisted of "biographical material that is entirely negative in tone and unsourced or poorly sourced". In particular, the entire "Allegations" section was sourced to two web pages operated by law firms that are seeking clients who wish to file a lawsuit against Brock; these sources do not meet the reliability requirements of the WP:BLPRS and WP:BLPPRIMARY policies. Additionally, this is exacerbated by the fact that Brock was not notable enough to have a standalone Wikipedia article about him prior to these allegations, which makes him notable for only one event as a relatively unknown figure. — Newslinger talk 14:54, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for your time and effort explaining to me my mistakes. I find it a much nicer and respectful way of doing things. I will learn and imply this lesson in my future contribution to Wikipedia. ShoBDin (talk) 15:37, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

No problem. In the future, if you have any policy-related questions, you are welcome to ask me. You can also ask these questions at the Teahouse, on a relevant noticeboard (if available for that policy or guideline), or on the talk page of the policy or guideline. — Newslinger talk 16:48, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ShoBDin. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 19:45, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

ShoBDin (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)

---

Request reason:

This is totally outrageous, not only was i continuously harassed by users with clear POV point of view on the Arab-Israeli conflict. They delete and contradicted my edit using petty excuses, things they would never stand for if i did on their articles. I then get WP:HOUND by a user by the name of Smallangryplannet, who goes to extreme efforts in deleting every article i created about the conflict. Surprisingly enough, with the articles i created or edits i did regarding the El Fasher massacre and other horrific events in the world, he lives in peace. Then there is the complaint about my edits, which i can understand, but even there all the "Kind souls" who harassed me, ganged up and added wood to the fire. This was another attempt to shut me up. Once that was finally resolved, surprise once again, they could not shut me up, so now i am accused as a Sockpuppet and blocked. This is clear persecution users on a system that obviously wants and favors only one voice and one side of the story, The truth is irrelevant. This is so clear, if all these users cared so much for this system, how come the only time they found a fault with my contributions, is when it concerned the conflict, but with all my other edits, they had no problem what so ever? If i could give the time of day for it, i bet i can find several other users with overlapping hours of activity, similar edit summarize and so on and on. Had this been a trail in court, any judge would immediately dismiss dismiss without a second thought. After all written here i can only say i was marked by a group of users how now have managed to shut me up. Thanks for nothing ShoBDin (talk) 08:57, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

• the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
• the block is no longer necessary because you:
  1. understand what you have been blocked for,
  2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
  3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Cabayi (talk) 13:08, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

ShoBDin (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)

---

Request reason:

I HAVE NOT CAUSED DAMAGE NOR DID I DISRUPT WIKIPEDIA. I understand what i am accused of BUT all the accuser has, are circumstantial evidence, that can easily be said about many other users on Wikipedia. I did not, do not and will not have another account on Wikipedia. Raising such an allegation, is ridicules. Maybe Smallangryplanet and i are socks we never edited at the same time, but we simply do not use the same edit summaries. This how easy it is to say - look, he is a Sockpuppet. I never meant to cause any damage here. The one EA case was well explained, i completely understood it, and it ended on a friendly note with the user NEWSLINGER. The fact my accuser used the POV claim, for edits i did, that were ALL sourced, is a POV in itself, proving this whole case is a witch-hunt as i stated before. I can not speak about edits done by the other user, as he is not me. All i have done here, was done in good faith, writing true, sourced facts. The only POV here, is by those after me! ShoBDin (talk) 13:39, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

Decline reason:

See WP:NOTTHEM. I would suggest that you agree to a topic ban from the Arab-Israeli conflict. 331dot (talk) 10:50, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Hey 331dot (talk) thanks for your reply, I read WP:NOTTHEM i understand it and your point. I said what i said about others and hope someone made a note of it. Once again I'll, say the accusation of Sockpuppetry is outrageous, the evidence is so circumstantial, no court in the world would convict me on this accusation. Once more I'll say, I KNOW what i have done wrong and apologized for it and once again now. I will not edit in the future about the conflict. As everyone can see, i did important edits on Wikipedia on other subject in the world.

On 16 January 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Use of camite during the 2024–2025 Georgian protests, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a World War I chemical agent was apparently used against protestors in Tbilisi during the 2024–2026 Georgian protests? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Use of Camite during the 2024–2025 Georgian protests. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Use of camite during the 2024–2025 Georgian protests), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:03, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you Chris Woodrich for this message. ShoBDin (talk) 12:51, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello 331dot (talk) Did you get a chance to read the message i left you here or see that once again an article i wrote appeared in DYK?

I accepted your advice to agree for a topic ban, yet there is no response for anyone who is connected to this whole blocking issue. ShoBDin (talk) 12:56, 19 January 2026 (UTC)