User talk:TheInevitables

The page Mankirt aulakh has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section R2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it was a redirect from the article namespace to a different namespace except the Category, Template, Wikipedia, Help, or Portal namespaces.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, you may contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you may open a discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion review. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:11, 23 November 2025 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Wahhabi raids on Zubair requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from the article namespace to a different namespace except the Category, Template, Wikipedia, Help, or Portal namespaces.

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. --pro-anti-air ––>(talk)<–– 01:01, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

U suck YurabHastard (talk) 04:46, 27 November 2025 (UTC)

Sorry to hear that you feel that way. TheInevitables (talk) 04:48, 27 November 2025 (UTC)

Hello. I made a discussion on Benito Mussolini's talk page regarding to my reverted edit. Thank you. RatMan7108 (talk) 06:04, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Hi TheInevitables,

It looks like you have the old User:Kephir/gadgets/rater script in your User:TheInevitables/common.js, which has not been updated in several years and doesn't support the project-independent quality assessments that has been rolled out over the last 2 years. You can switch to User:Evad37/rater's version that is actively maintained by putting

{{subst:lusc|User:Evad37/rater.js}}

into your common.js file. Cheers Harryboyles 03:52, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know! I'll make the switch TheInevitables (talk) 04:01, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

The blocking redirect has been deleted. I assume that you requested that it be deleted. So go ahead and accept it, and be sure to edit the parent page to provide a link to the article. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:36, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

since it's declined, the article have to merged to West Caribbean Airways. But why? I just did have three WP:SIGCOV on it. Shaqil (talk) 01:52, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

Your draft does not have evidence that your subject should have a standalone article, as such it is most suitable to be merged into the article I suggested. TheInevitables (talk) 01:54, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

It kinda make me disappointed, but i guess it's fine. Shaqil (talk) 01:56, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

Don't be discouraged! There are still a lot of WIkipedia articles to write and improve. TheInevitables (talk) 01:58, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

I would like to added section on WCA article and also added one of my draft which doesn't have enough to be in mainspace Draft:West Caribbean Aruba. May i also put infobox? Shaqil (talk) 13:22, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

Hi TheInevitables, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the new page reviewer user right to your account. This means you now have access to the page curation tools and can start patrolling pages from the new pages feed. If you asked for this at requests for permissions, please check back there to see if your access is time-limited or if there are other comments.

This is a good time to re-acquaint yourself with the guidance at Wikipedia:New pages patrol. Before you get started, please take the time to:

• Add Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers to your watchlist to follow NPP-related discussions
• If you use Twinkle, configure it to log your CSDs and PRODs
• If you can read any languages other than English, add yourself to the list of reviewers with language proficiencies

You can find a list of other useful links and tools for patrollers at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Resources. If you are ever unsure what to do, ask your fellow patrollers or just leave the page for someone else to review – you're not alone! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:04, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! TheInevitables (talk) 21:26, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

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

Administrator changes

• Chaotic Enby
• Rjjiii

Valereee

• Fathoms Below
• Tamzin

CheckUser changes

Spicy

Technical news

• Starting on November 4, the IP addresses of logged-out editors are no longer being publicly displayed. Instead, they will have a temporary account associated with their edits.
• Administrators will now find that Special:MergeHistory is now significantly more flexible about what it can merge. It can now merge sections taken from the middle of the history of the source (rather than only the start) and insert revisions anywhere in the history of the destination page (rather than only the start). T382958

Miscellaneous

• The December 2025 administrator elections are scheduled from Nov 25 – Dec 15.
• An Articles for Creation backlog drive is happening in December 2025, with over 1,000 drafts awaiting review from the past two months. In addition to AfC participants, all administrators and new page patrollers can help review using the Yet Another AFC Helper Script, which can be enabled in the Gadgets settings. Sign up here to participate!

Hi - I wanted to query your closing here.

This was a very odd discussion. The article had 16 RS supporting its existence which would normally result in a speedy keep. However, there was a prima facie case that canvassing may have occurred in the middle of the AfD (which was getting frustratingly no attention from editors who watch AfD, and for the second time of asking). The proposer pinged a short list of named accounts rather than reposting to a neutral venue with no statement of why those people had been pinged. (The proposer had, incidentally, failed to ping most of the main contributors to the article - not a rule break, but a courtesy undone). None of the subsequent identical !votes from those canvassed to redirect cited any policy. One of them later commented making a claim they could only find one source and thus it failed WP:N - which showed they had not read the article or the foregoing discussion before !voting. So procedurally, I think it should have taken an admin to handle this.

Also - and I appreciate this veers into discussing the issues at AfD rather than the procedures, but it seems worth raising: the citation in the AfD proposal of WP:ROUTINE was, as far as I can see, blatantly an incorrect reading of the policy, which refers to one line announcements in sources rather than whole articles dedicated to the topic. Alas, that issue was not discussed at all by any of the other !voters, who, as I say, were canvassed, didn't cite policy, and possibly didn't look at the article before !voting.

The whole thing was just weird and I'd like an admin to have a look. OsFish (talk) 06:24, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for giving me a heads up! From the way the situation was described, it seems a lot more complex and messy than I understood it to be - I was purely trying to get a read of the AfD discussion when closing, and there seemed to be a clear consensus to redirect. An admin should probably take a look in that case. TheInevitables (talk) 03:52, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello! Thank you for taking the time to review the earlier draft of "Natalia Libet" article. I appreciate the feedback you provided. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Natalia_Libet

I have now substantially reworked the article to address the concerns raised:

• Tone and structure — promotional or CV-like language was removed, and the biography was rewritten in a neutral, encyclopedic style in line with MOS:BIO. • Sources and verification — all statements are now supported with independent and reliable sources (Variety, Deadline, Cineuropa, Suspilne, Ukrinform, Interfax-Ukraine, etc.). Passing mentions were removed, and only significant coverage was retained. • Notability — the draft now focuses on aspects with clear, well-sourced significance (Berlinale selections, Tribeca recognition, Venice premiere, documented international press coverage). • Article organization — sections were restructured for clarity (lead, recognition, career, memberships), following the standard layout for film producers’ biographies. • External links, filmography, and inline citations are trimmed to policy-compliant essentials.

If you have a moment, I would be grateful if you could take a look at the revised version now submitted for review. Any further guidance or suggestions would be very helpful.

Thank you again for your time and volunteer work — it’s much appreciated. Ольга Ковтун (talk) 15:23, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

Just a hopefully helpful ping to this AFD to which you have previously contributed: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kristiyan Stoyanov (3rd nomination)

Another editor has merged the draft text into mainspace, plus I was OK with the draft version. If you are able to have another look at the AFD discussion then that's great. I'm not sure I would have handled it this way, but maybe that doesn't matter so much. ChrysGalley (talk) 11:41, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello TheInevitables, I apologize for not adding any references it is because i have very little information of the Monastery. I will cite some references, Again i apologize for the inconvenience.

-T95Tank T95Tank (talk) 21:04, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello TheInevitables, I already added the References which is the only one i could find due to the scare information of the Monastery.

-T95Tank T95Tank (talk) 21:18, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

If you cannot find significant coverage, then your topic may not be notable enough for inclusion on Wikipedia. TheInevitables (talk) 21:20, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

Greetings,

You recently reviewed my article on Tamara Jackson-Snowden, an important cultural leader in New Orleans. I updated the article to hopefully read more professionally and neutral. I would love to get your feedback on how I can improve to better meet wikipedia's standards.

Thank you for your time and consideration! Poshisl (talk) 22:46, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, 2025 Brown University Shooting. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – [[:{{{article}}}]]. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at [[:{{{article}}}]]. If you have new information to add, you might want to discuss it at [[Talk:{{{article}}}|the article's talk page]].

If you think the article you created should remain separate, 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. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Red0ctober22 (talk) 22:25, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

The article is NOT a duplicate of any other article in mainspace. It was created around four minutes before you created your own draft article on the issue, which perplexes me. You seem to have created your own draft article, notice there was already page on it, and tried to get it deleted. What was your rationale? TheInevitables (talk) 22:34, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Lyon in the Renaissance isn't my article, although I did a bit of clean-up on it after you declined the draft. I wanted to let you know that the draft's history and its talk page says that the draft is a translation of fr:Lyon à la Renaissance from the French Wikipedia. The French article was created in 2021 and ha been through the hands of several different authors, making the claim that it was generated by a large language model unlikely. See the French article's history. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 05:43, 21 December 2025 (UTC)

Hi, I've deleted that page and its talk page. You should be able to move Draft:Hello, Kitty Girls! to mainspace now, if you wish. Epicgenius (talk) 02:49, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Many thanks! TheInevitables (talk) 02:51, 26 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)

• Czarking0 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Roger Rondon (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This meets NPOL you can't decline for notability.

Czarking0 (talk) 04:36, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

@Qcne I started a similar comment here which did not get a response. Czarking0 (talk) 21:29, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi, I appreciate the swift closing of the AfD, but can you please reopen this one for two reasons. The first is that a lot of editors have reduced participation around the holidays associated with 25th December and the second is that none of the previous participants in the first AfD were notified. HighKing⁺⁺ 17:16, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

If you would like to ask for the discussion to be re-opened, the appropriate venue would be at this page. TheInevitables (talk) 22:20, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

• Actually no. I don't disagree with the reasoning underpinning your close and I'm not looking to override it - the processes were followed and the consensus formed at that page was an inevitable Keep. But given the time of year and the fact that previous AfD participants (like me) were not notified, I'm asking that you exercise your discretion as the closer to re-open the AfD for the reasons I provided. If you don't wish to do so, that's OK, I can always re-file an AfD and I will ensure that all previous !voters are notified. Have a great new year! HighKing⁺⁺ 19:01, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

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

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

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

Hello. Regarding your comments for the article Greek Steamer Avgi, I have reworked it, adding inline citations fully documenting every sentence. Also, regarding notability, this concerns a historic vessel of the Hellenic Navy for which there were articles in old Greek Encyclopedias (as well as an article in Greek Wikipedia). After corrections, I have put it up for review. Thanks! Skartsis (talk) 06:42, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

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

Administrator changes

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

Fathoms Below

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

CheckUser changes

• Giraffer
• HouseBlaster
• SilverLocust

• Liz
• Worm That Turned
• Z1720

Oversight changes

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

• Liz
• Worm That Turned
• Z1720

Guideline and policy news

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

Arbitration

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

Dear TheInevitables, Many thanks for reviewing Draft:Joaquim Roca. As you requested, the referencing format has been corrected to comply with Wikipedia’s standards for inline citations. The draft has also been revised to soften the tone and streamline the Research section in accordance with WP:BLP and WP:PROF. Notability is established primarily under WP:PROF criterion #3 (significant scholarly impact). Prof. Roca’s work is discussed in multiple independent secondary sources, including Annual Reviews and is presented in standard graduate-level textbooks. Primary research articles are cited only to verify factual statements about research topics and methods, consistent with WP:BLP and WP:SECONDARY. Institutional and self-curated sources (CSIC, IBMB) are used to confirm affiliations and positions held. Thank you again for your time and guidance. OscarCW88 (talk) 07:36, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi, this is an automated reminder as part of Global reminder bot to let you know that your permission "patroller" (New page reviewers) will expire on 00:00, 31 January 2026 (UTC). For most rights, you will need to renew at WP:PERM, unless you have been told otherwise when your right was approved. To opt out of user right expiry notifications, add yourself to m:Global reminder bot/Exclusion. Leaderbot (talk) 19:41, 24 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)

Pep Guardiola has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 04:24, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

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

Administrator changes

Vacant0

• Crisco 1492

• Deepfriedokra
• Hbdragon88
• Karl Dickman
• Worm That Turned

CheckUser changes

Daniel Quinlan

Vanamonde93

Mkdw

Oversight changes

Daniel Quinlan

Arbitration

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

Miscellaneous

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Administrator changes

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

CheckUser changes

Ks0stm

Oversight changes

Ks0stm

Guideline and policy news

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

Arbitration

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

Miscellaneous

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

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

Administrator changes

• ARandomName123

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

Checkuser changes

Giraffer

Oversight changes

Kj cheetham

Giraffer

Guideline and policy news

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

Arbitration

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Remember that any content promoted after 28 April but before the start of Round 3 can be claimed in Round 3. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, feel free to review one of the nominations listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:49, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

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

Administrator changes

• Deepfriedokra

• EvanProdromou
• Wouterstomp

Interface administrator changes

L235

Chaotic Enby

CheckUser changes

• TheresNoTime
• Versageek

Oversight changes

Moneytrees

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

• Changes to user permissions made from Meta are now included in the local user permissions log (T6055).
• The autoconfirmed user group will soon be modified such that the four-day account age requirement begins when an account makes its first edit (T418484).

Arbitration

• The arbitration case SchroCat has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case closed on 15 April.
• Per a recent motion, appeals of blocks from the conflict-of-interest VRT queue are, by default, appealed on-wiki through the normal unblock process. However, they may be heard by the Committee if COIVRTers disagree on the interpretation of the evidence or believe ArbCom would be better suited to hear the appeal. Administrators are also advised that loosening or lifting such blocks without the consent of someone with access to the queue or ArbCom can be grounds for desysopping.
• Per a recent motion, restrictions issued directly by the Committee may now be enforced with blocks which work exactly like contentious topic blocks.
• The arbitration case Maghreb has been closed.

Miscellaneous

• The May 2026 administrator elections are scheduled to run from April 29 to May 19. The call for candidates ends May 5.
• The 2026 Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) election is scheduled to run from April 25 to June 1. Candidacy submissions close on May 10.
• A new noticeboard for non-urgent, batch page protection requests has been created, primarily for the enforcement of contentious topic restrictions.