User talk:TonySt

Hello TonySt, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! 

Now, about WP:AIV. Feel free to put test4 on someone's page, but test5 should be for admins. Also, make sure you do the template right, and get the article name right. So it's {{vandal|IPaddress}} and the article was Christopher murt not Christopher Mutt (or at least the one I found). Wikibofh 22:12, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Ok, thanks, and sorry :-p--TonySt 22:13, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

• No worries.  :) Wikibofh 22:15, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Hello Tony, I'm confused. I just spent hours learning how to use Wikipedia's edit function and to correctly editing my page. This is not promotion, its accuracy. There was information that was obsolete, outdated, incorrect, private, and unnecessary. It was profoundly out of date. I spent all day updating and correcting it. I do not understand how all of that work can just be deleted. I'm very new to this. I'm learning. Was that work I spent all day on today saved or is it all just gone? All of the information I added was linked to external sources, primarily academic and news media sites such as Rolling Stone, Harper's Magazine, CNN, etc. In only a few instances did I link to my site, but only because I saw that older posts that had been on Wikipedia for years were linked to my website, so I assumed that must be acceptable. I do not understand why links to prestigious and well-known media outlets, as well as links to academic sites where journalism Fellowships, Adjunct Faculty positions, etc. which I linked to should be unacceptable. I improved the wikipedia page for accuracy, timeliness, improved the links, and reflected how I am known in the popular culture. Existing entries which I deleted did not do the same. Can you please restore the work I spent all day on today? Thank you very much. MNYUHG (talk) 19:26, 2 December 2025 (UTC)

Hi MNYUHG! I see you left a similar message on your talk page, so I'll respond there to consolidate the discussion. tony 20:16, 2 December 2025 (UTC)

Is there a reply? I do not see it. MNYUHG (talk) 13:51, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Now I see it on my Talk page. MNYUHG (talk) 13:54, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

I want to say thanks on the edit you did on Ron McNeil (musician)'s page. I never knew that McNeil formed a Beatles tribute before The Fab Four. There isn't any proof or sources that McNeil had Imagine: A Tribute to the Beatles before the Fab Four. And that McNeil has never mentioned that band in any of his interviews regarding the Fab Four and his other tribute band the Monkee Men, even news articles. And I don't think there are any YouTube videos regarding it. So again, thank you. Dream7392 (talk) 05:56, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! tony 00:23, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

Nevermind, a user just updated McNeil's page to include a link about his first band ;) Dream7392 (talk) 00:15, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Hi Tony! I was going through some of the WP:GS authorizations to see if there are any that we don't need anymore. I noticed that you are a frequent alert-giver—of the ~13 alerts since 2021, you gave out 5 of them. I still lean towards removal: it seems like most of the disruption comes from new SPAs who probably should just be indef'd. The last user enforcement action was in 2022; the rest is just protection which could occur regardless of whether or not there was a GS. But given you are handing out a bunch of alerts, I wanted to check and see your thoughts on the matter :) Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:22, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

Hey HouseBlaster! Thanks for reaching out. I'd support a repeal of that GS. As you mentioned the disruption in that topic tends to be the type that can be taken care of via normal protection or blocks. My use of the alerts is mostly to give a heads up to any user who might wiggle themselves into the tiny space of PW-topic disruption that could only be addressed via GS, but in practice that hasn't really happened (and in retrospect I'm not sure what I was doing with the TA and IP alert!). tony 00:38, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

=]

🐟sea cat🫧 (talk) 18:01, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! :) tony 18:10, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

MediaWiki message delivery 19:01, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

Hi Tony, my edit was snarky - but information was drawn from a quality source, cited (The Spinoff). I've removed the snark, and the perhaps excessive reproduction of verbatim falsehoods. Not trying to vandalize. Thanks. IdiotSavant42 (talk) 04:54, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Hey @IdiotSavant42! It wasn't reverted for vandalism -- the "snark" was the reason for the NPOV revert, and I appreciate you re-adding your contribution without it. Sorry for the template, and thank you for reaching out :) --tony 05:05, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Cheers Tony. Lesson learnt. :) IdiotSavant42 (talk) 05:13, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Hi again! This reversion didn't come with a warning D:

This warning was marked as minor.

As a request, it would be nice if rollbacks for things like "unsourced" or "NPOV" weren't marked as minor since minor edits are usually just for reverting vandalism and tests. There is technically an exemption for any tool that uses rollback but it would be nice not to need that.

Again, thanks for making this, and happy editing :) lp0 on fire () 14:11, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

That non-warning reversion is weird and concerning, I haven't run into that yet. Do you have any recollection of it showing you a notification (at the bottom, like the "editconflict" or "alreadyrolled" you sometimes see)? I'll do some troubleshooting to figure out what's going on, and I'll also make sure it throws a notification on any issues when writing to talk page.

Good catch with the "minor" thing. I'll adjust it to only mark "vandalism" reversions as minor, which seems more in line with the spirit of WP:MINOR, as you suggested.

I'm about to push a version that has some single-issue warnings in the revert menu -- it's still a work in progress as far as how those warnings are presented but hopefully they're useful. I'm planning on having that version out today, and then after that another small fix today for the minor edits and more verbose notifications. Thank you for letting me know about these, and definitely please keep letting me know if you see anything amiss or if there are any additional features you'd like to see. tony 14:37, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Thanks so much! This is really an amazing tool, and I'd guess it's probably just about the only thing I do on mobile now.

As far as I remember there was no notification for that edit. I was using rather patchy Wi-Fi though, so it's plausible that it reverted, couldn't warn because the connection died, and then forgot to do it when the Wi-Fi came back on.

I suppose I'll find out soon, but I wonder whether it would be possible to issue single-issue notices (e.g. edit summaries) without reverting the edit in question. lp0 on fire () 15:52, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

You should now see those single-issue templates. I'm not super happy with how it's laid out just yet, but it's there now. I've also added in some additional notifications for errors, though I suspect your inkling is right in that it was probably a network error. Network errors will still prevent warnings at this point, but now it should at least give you a heads-up when that happens. I'm still investigating the "minor" edits thing -- the fix was easy for warnings but the rollbacks being marked as minor is proving to be more difficult. tony 16:21, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Here things seem to be working as intended. It threw http, so I redid it. The second time it threw alreadyrolled, but it seems that one of the two times did result in a warning. lp0 on fire () 18:42, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Never mind; here it threw http and said it had failed to write, but warned them nonetheless. lp0 on fire () 18:52, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Is it OK if I send you an email? tony 18:56, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Yes, that's fine. I probably won't reply until tomorrow because email on mobile is a pain. lp0 on fire () 19:45, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Hey @Lp0 on fire, following up on this: turns out rollback actions via API are automatically marked as "minor" by the MediaWiki software, and there's unfortunately nothing I can change to alter that :( --tony 03:22, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

That's a shame. I think LunieZunie found a way of doing it for WikiShield (don't quote me on that) so perhaps you (or I) could ask how they did it? lp0 on fire () 10:12, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Here's a list of recent Wikishield rollbacks -- they're marked minor. tony 16:18, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Oh well. Sorry to bother you (: lp0 on fire () 16:23, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Not at all -- the original issue you were talking about was the warnings being issued as "minor", which is now fixed thanks to you mentioning it :) tony 16:26, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

puto americano demierda la reconchadetumadre ~2025-41295-99 (talk) 16:58, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

vale :) tony 17:06, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

reaal ~2026-11511-36 (talk) 05:50, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

MediaWiki message delivery 21:43, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

If you had thought I'd totally forgotten about trying to use CVPI, shame on you! I always keep my word : ) The moment to test out the tool has come. It looks awesome! I think I nailed in the first two edits with it. The rest of the time till now, I've just been skipping through a pile of edits to catch the rhythm (you know what I'm saying?). Sadly, a glitch happens to me whereby the feed completely stops updating and displays the message "Waiting for next change...", even after 20 minutes of waiting, which looks really awkward. I solved this by restarting the browser and re entering CVPI, but this solution doesn't seem right, because it keeps on happening again. I also disabled all browser extensions. You enter CVPI and enjoy the feed for about 5 minutes, then it stops updating. I suppose the tool was created to favor mobile smartphones? I'm using the latest version of Chrome, 143.0.7499.148, on Windows 11. Oh yeah and another teaser! I noticed the message you added to the loading page of CVPI, it ends with "...st computer, or are the world's fastest reader." LOL! To tell you the truth, it displayed for like 3 seconds on my screen. I only read from the middle to the last parts of the message as normally as I do before it disappeared, and I was like "What the heck man?? He actually planned this!!!!", Hah! Cool! Happy holiday! ‎ ‎ B⠄Jayden ^(talk) 00:06, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Hey @B.Jayden! Thank you for reaching out about this. That "Waiting..." thing is super weird behavior. I use the tool in Chrome with a Windows 11 machine and a MacOS machine, and I regularly use it for pretty long periods (usually more than 15 minutes and sometimes upwards of an hour). Can I ask what ORES setting you're using? I'd expect it to hang indefinitely if it's a very high setting (like 1.00), but if it's a lower setting (like the default 0.15) then it shouldn't hang unless there's significant network issues. Also, it sounds like you ARE a pretty fast reader :) --tony 02:50, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Oh heck yeah, my high school teacher also said the same thing about my reading skills. That was looong ago. Yeah! ORES! I haven't tripped that up yet, but still at the default 0.15 you've set, I still don't receive any feed updates after 5 to 10 minutes, so had to use twinkle to run today. I'll try to shift the ORES volume to 0.00 and see if I can live for at least more than 30 minutes, but will not revert. My network's always above 5 bars, so I doubt it could be the issue. Yeah, I'll check back with ya later. It's kinda sad things didn't work out the first time as expected. If it fails again, I'll try restarting Windows or just use a different browser and see.‎ ‎ B⠄Jayden ^(talk) 03:34, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

CVPI is awesome! I was going to make a new section, but since there's already one with this title, I'll ask here: what does CVPI stand for? lp0 on fire () 21:43, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

CVPI stands for "Counter-Vandalism Patrol Interceptor"‎ ‎ B⠄Jayden ^(talk) 22:46, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Thanks! I thought it might be something like that (: lp0 on fire () 22:55, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

B.Jayden is right, but it's also a backronym intended to match the initialism for this CVPI :) tony 23:22, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Ooh, fun! lp0 on fire () 23:35, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Hi Tony. Update, I think I'll have to stop using CVPI for the moment, still no luck. The maximum alive time until the recent feed stopped updating was about 15 minutes (an improvement to when I first ran it at least) but then froze on the waiting notice again. Same thing happened with different browsers like Edge, Firefox, etc. Maybe I'll try again in a few months when you've patched some updates to it? And Chrome will be far more better than it is now. Thanks for all your work. ‎ ‎ B⠄Jayden ^(talk) 22:09, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Hey @B.Jayden, I just pushed an update a few minutes ago, if you could let me know if that fixes your issue I'd appreciate it. I just pushed a version that fixes a bug related to how the ORES scores are fetched, and I'm thinking it might help you. You may (or may not!) need to clear your cache for the script to update on your machine. Take care --tony 23:14, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Ahh! Hol' up then. I'm gonna check...‎ ‎ B⠄Jayden ^(talk) 23:23, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Ah, unlucky! Sad news, there is a new faulty behavior with CVPI. This time when I click on "Next" to view the next edit. The new edit appears about 10-15 seconds after the waiting notice in the center. This also happens when there are current edits left available to see (by the visible number showing on "Next"). Also tested with other browsers and juggled the ORES volume back and forth. Even at 0.00 which is wicked fast!! Going to the next edit takes time to load up. I Even tried switching between 7 different MiFi connections to confirm this, and my PC speed is totally exceptional. It's a gaming setup. Don't stress yourself too much on this man, you did just fine. I obviously won't forget to try this out again soon. Thanks.‎ ‎ B⠄Jayden ^(talk) 02:59, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

It's not unusual to wait that long between edits being shown, but it's very strange that it still says there's edits waiting for you (with the number next to "next") even when it's waiting. If you see any notifications pop up or additional feedback from the tool that you find relevant, please let me know :) --tony 03:18, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

		The Recent Changes Barnstar
		Thank you for keeping a watchful eye on recent changes MossOnALogTalk 23:00, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! :) --tony 23:24, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		You have been making Wikipedia way better by reverting vandalism. I really appreciate that you revert it and never stop. Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

Dylan Hackworth1 (talk) 02:56, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Hell yeah! I second this! What a loyal soldier.‎ ‎ B⠄Jayden ^(talk) 03:02, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Thank you both! :) tony 03:19, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello Tonyst, I suppose you are in control of what changes are allowed on the article you may have written. And in response to your response of the changes I made to the header Hebrew Bible in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_Babylon I now respond to your message here:

Hello, I'm TonySt. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Fall of Babylon, but you didn't provide a reliable source. On Wikipedia, it's important that article content be verifiable. If you'd like to resubmit your change with a citation, your edit is archived in the page history. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. tony 05:25, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

I have supplied the Scriptures as reliable source, just as the header of the article presupposes the reader interprets it as. Which the original author or multiple authors of the article under the header have done as well, but I have corrected the errors. What do you mean with not having supplied a reliable source? Kind regards, Ruben ~2025-43059-40 (talk) 05:32, 26 December 2025 (UTC) ~2025-43059-40 (talk) 05:43, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello, and thank you for lending your time to help improve Wikipedia! If you are interested in continuing to edit, I suggest you make an account to gain a bunch of privileges. Happy editing! – LuniZunie_(talk) 05:17, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

Hey @LuniZunie, I might have found a bug in WS ;) --tony 05:29, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

Well, I think you did.... doing some testing on a dev version currently that probably caused it =) – LuniZunie_(talk) 05:58, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

Found it... was a single variable being used in the wrong place. Thanks for the heads up =D – LuniZunie_(talk) 06:00, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

The battle is called Battle off Ulsan. There have been several battles on land at Ulsan. In particular, it was a notable time during the Imjin War, in the development of Korea. The Russ-Japanese War happened centuries later. Korean martial arts and Gakgung both refer to the Imjin War's Battle of Ulsan, not the Russo-Japanese War -- ~2025-41582-72 (talk) 04:23, 28 December 2025 (UTC)

Hey @~2025-41582-72, thank you for reaching out and for the information. Just a heads-up -- it's probably a good idea to use an edit summary with that information, since otherwise other editors might think it's an introduction of a typo instead of the correction you're describing. Thank you for your contributions :) --tony 04:27, 28 December 2025 (UTC)

"Failed to write to User talk:Lukehass: http. Please report this"

Maybe it tried to verify that it had written, but couldn't tell because someone else had already sent another warning? lp0 on fire () 12:40, 28 December 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for reporting this! "http" error means it received an error code from the server (like a 404 or 503). I was seeing a bunch of these last night and yesterday, and when it happened I clicked a few diff links and one of them opened to a server error instead of the diff link. It looks like the Wikimedia servers have been having issues over the last day or so. I'll adjust that message so it isn't lying about the warning not being left. I also need to change how those errors are reported in general because when the servers start having issues it can sometimes spit out a TON of errors when it really only needs one. Again, thanks for letting me know, it's only possible to fix these issues because you report them :) tony 16:47, 28 December 2025 (UTC)

No problem! happy to help :) lp0 on fire () 17:01, 28 December 2025 (UTC)

Responded, I can't thank you enough! Plasticwonder (Cat got your tongue?) 17:23, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the sammich, and any time! :) tony 17:31, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

I understand the standard for verifiability. However, nothing in the article on SSN 750 is properly sourced. The article is: 60% information on the collision in 2007 which has numerous references, 5% information from the naval vessel registrar, And 35% completely unsourced. Including the 'Thunder from below' as the unofficial motto is in keeping with the standards in the article. For example, there is no reference for the ships official motto 'magni nominis umbra'. one can assume that it is the motto because that is what is written on the ships crest. However there is nothing sourcing the ships crest on the article, as far as I can tell it is just sources the image to the US Navy. Regardless assuming the crest is accurate,(which it is), it is reasonable to use that to source the official motto.

My main argument as to why the unofficial motto should be included is the unofficial motto is not a direct quotation, it is not a fact that is being challenged, likely to be challenged, or contentious. Based on Wikipedias policy on verifiability it does not require an inline citation. And it can be verified by the banner the ship hangs across the brow. The most recent images of the ship released from the 2025 port call in Iceland include a brow banner that that reads 'thunder from below' it is the US sub fleets standard to put a ships motto on the brow banner from the Quarterdeck. For example, if you look at past pictures of the ship released in port the brow banner reads 'magni nominis umbra'. It's reasonable to say that 'thunder from below' is used as a motto at least unofficially.

2025 brow - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:USS_Newport_News_(SSN-750)#/media/File%3AUSS_Newport_News_(SSN_750)_Pulls_in_to_Iceland_(9170941).jpg BoBByMac747474 (talk) 05:01, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Hey @BoBByMac747474! Thank you for your message. After reading your thoughtful words, I agree with you. All too often, people edit a Wikipedia article to add their own made-up nicknames, mottos, creeds, etc., so it's sometimes difficult when a real (but unverified) motto is introduced. I won't remove the motto again, and instead I'll start looking for supporting sources and add them if I can find them. Again, thanks for reaching out. Happy New Year, and happy editing :) --tony 22:05, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Whenever you are active, it seems like half the time I go to revert someone you have already beat me to it. Just wanted to let you know your work is appreciated. Happy New Year! LordCollaboration (talk) 04:53, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Happy new year! Likewise, I've noticed your reverts and your work here is very much appreciated :) tony 05:12, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Regarding need for citation, I am a former student and have witnessed the event, however I am not sure how to put that as a source. ~2025-35256-32 (talk) 22:10, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello! Unfortunately, we can only accept published, secondary sources. You can read more about the types of sources we can accept here at this link. Take care --tony 04:31, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

TonySt,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Marincyclist (talk) 06:42, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

I edited my cousin, John Woodrow Wilson’s page. I have family tree info and oral history from my father. Not sure how to document that, but I know some of the family info on Johnny’s page isn’t accurate or is incomplete. How can I correct it? Jcaesarbrown (talk) 21:13, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello! Per our verifiability policy, we can only use certain published sources for biographies. If the information can't be found in published sources, it might be a better fit elsewhere, like a family genealogy website. tony 01:23, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

Half the time you beat me to reverting ot reporting, eep up the godo work!

JoBoGamer has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

JoBo Gamer 13:20, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you, JoBo! :) --tony 13:30, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Tony! Seems like a miracle happened as I suspected. CVPI's performance improves with every new update of Chrome. Currently at 143.0.7499.194, No betas! Waiting time epically reduced to around 3–5 seconds, an appropriate time to wait until the feed is refreshed and switching between diffs appears twice as quick than before (depends on your monitor Hz). Also, the fastest revert speed of a vandal's live edit to when it gets reverted with CVPI, is only 6 seconds! CPU and graphic cards should also be updated to ensure these results. So I'm proud – to confirm – and verify – that version 0.8.4.2 is a stable release!! Awesome work in recent changes this week.‎ ‎ B⠄Jayden ^(talk) 15:48, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

While I'm still looking at this glory! I wanted to know if it was possible to also write custom edit summaries when reverting edits? If not, that's okay. Don't let my report stop you from rejoicing! Heh heh.‎ ‎ B⠄Jayden ^(talk) 15:49, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

That's great to hear! You can revert using custom summaries by selecting "Other (prompt)" or "Other AGF (prompt)" at the bottom of the revert menu. It'll then let you type in an edit summary, and it'll open their talk page so you can add a warning using Twinkle if you wish. It doesn't add any warning to their talk page automatically when you use those buttons. tony 15:53, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi Tony, I'm so sorry about the accidental AIV report earlier. I'll leave the wiki-shield team a note about adding some protection against reporting designated people. Thanks for all your work fighting vandals! All the Best -- Chuck ^Talk 05:44, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Hey @Alachuckthebuck! No worries at all, and thanks for patrolling recent changes :) tony 22:34, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Do you want to know why you keep getting Anti-Vandalism Barnstars? Well, it's because you keep reverting vandalism and you don't stop. You revert vandalism way quicker than a lot of users reverting vandalism, including me. I'm so amazed you revert it so quickly and you're making Wikipedia a way better place and more reliable!

Dylan Hackworth1 (talk) 03:22, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you, Dylan! tony 06:45, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Tag me in the talk page, since you keep lying... ~2026-24635-2 (talk) 14:02, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

MediaWiki message delivery 19:31, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at User talk:CabinetCavers on a "Wikipedia technical issues and templates" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (botop|talk) 23:30, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I'm new here and was trying to revert an edit that appeared to be vandalism. Im very sorry if I had messed up with something. In the future, what should I do differently? Abscondrespite (talk) 17:00, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Abscondrespite! Welcome to Wikipedia and vandalism reverting :). I haven't noticed any issues -- it doesn't look like anything has been messed up, but I might be missing something. If you saw something that said "edit conflict" or similar with my name, that just means that I reverted a piece of vandalism that you were also trying to revert. That happens very often when multiple people are reverting the same vandalism, and it doesn't mess anything up (I like to think of "edit conflict" as meaning "someone else already took care of it" when reverting). Is that what you were seeing, or was there something else? tony 17:25, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I noticed that you reverted my edit to the page for the band 12 Stones. I didn't remove anything. I added a genre with a source and consolidated all of the citations related to the group's sound and lyrics into a musical style section to clean up the infobox. The only real change I made was rewording the sentences slightly and fixed the contrasting information present. ~2026-76380 (talk) 03:37, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Hey @~2026-76380! I've self-reverted. Thanks for the explanation -- I hope you consider registering :) --tony 04:08, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Me zanima, kaj ima to zveze z splošnimi informacijami o Vrhniki. Nisi pa omenil Grobnice na Drči,

če smo ravno pri tem. A se res moramo razdvajati? Pa hvala za informacijo. LP! JanezCeli (talk) 10:41, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello! I can't read or write in that language, so I'm not sure what you are saying. tony 17:54, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Haha, so why do you publish anything about Slovenia or my city on Wikipedia if you are a stranger? I think that those info you put on about the mass grave in my city is not good. First, the information is on general info on the city of Vrhnika, so why then such a notice of mas grave? It is not important for this. Otherwise, publishing such info also make polarity of the people in my coutry. I will again erase the info, and you, if you wish, start publishing mass grave info all over Slovenia in a separate item. Thank you! JanezCeli (talk) 09:18, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

{{uw-engvar}} would be a helpful one to have in Interceptor, and could probably replace one of the less used ons like {{uw-hijack}}. Again, thanks for writing this great tool! lp0 on fire () 14:57, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Great idea! I'll add this shortly. tony 05:19, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

Just got it; looks great! There's a tempting gap to fill with {{uw-blp}}, and another spot opposite the AIV button that looks just right for "report to UAA". :) lp0 on fire () 19:50, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

Actually, it looks like something isn't working right; see Special:Diff/1334150799 which was meant to be an engvar revert but had an effectively blank edsum and didn't issue a warning. lp0 on fire () 21:31, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

@TonySt Seems like you forgot to add to the switch statement on line 3011 :p No clue what the lack of warning issue is caused by though. – LuniZunie_(talk) 21:43, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

Might just be my unrelatedly awful internet.

Speaking of which,

Hello, TonySt. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. lp0 on fire () 21:47, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

You might be correct that the issue is related to your internet connection. Engvar and other single-issue templates currently always leave less-verbose edit summaries when reverting; though it might seem sparse compared to the descriptive summaries used when reverting with multi-issue templates it's less of a bug and more of a not-quite-feature. Speaking of your email -- I'll adjust those errors so they autohide after a few seconds if they don't already (thank you for the screenshots, that's invaluable!). If HTTP errors are overwhelming your screen frequently then the problem may be outside of the scope of what I can do without a bucket truck and some fiber splicing equipment ;). I'm wondering if it's possible that an HTTP error came up when you made the reversion you linked? I should be able to have it give you a more verbose warning if it fails to warn due to an internet connectivity drop. Did it give you any indication which made you look at the user's talk page to see that it failed? --tony 22:26, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

It probably gave me a nice clear message saying the warning failed, but I didn't notice it among the 9 generic HTTP errors. I've started phasing these out; I only looked to see what the new templates looked like. lp0 on fire () 07:36, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

Gotcha -- I just pushed a version with most of those error messages removed or set to autohide. I'm also testing a version which moves most of those messages to the top of the screen (where it says "Rollback complete" normally). tony 14:07, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

Hey! I noticed your recent patch on CVPI, now at 0.8.5, and I gotta say, that it actually makes a lot more sense. Now seeing that the "Table diff" at the top right corner was removed, this actually boosted up the flow in performance a bit. I went for a test drive a few hours ago and the tool's shining solid! Let's also hope that the Chrome devs can keep this performance up in their future updates too. Amazing. Yeah! I'm also echoing in here and hope that the tool's experience works out great for @lp0 on fire.‎ ‎ B⠄Jayden ^(talk) 23:02, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

Looks good to me :)

The warnings are a lot more subtle, which is nice. lp0 on fire () 07:36, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you both for the feedback :) tony 16:10, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

TonySt I notice you intervened in a researchers wikipedia page at 20:56 on Nov 21 stating that the researcher "had a point" in removing an inappropriate post from her wikipedia article. The wikipedia article on me has exactly the same inappropriate sentences (which contain factual errors and also is not relevant to the subject's career), presumably from the same source. Someone (not me) recently edited and removed the text, but it was put back within minutes. It was then removed and put back multiple times. Is an AI bot perhaps at work here? Can I get your assistance in getting this inappropriate post removed once and for all, as you did for this other person? I can provide more details if needed. I am new to wikipedia so not sure how this works. ~2026-39909-0 (talk) 01:17, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello! Which article are you referring to? tony 05:18, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_W._LaBelle

situation appears very similar to this page where you appear to have intervened saying that the editor "had a point"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claudia_V._Jakubzick

Thanks for any help you can provide with this! ~2026-46166-7 (talk) 23:04, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

I encourage you to register for a user account, disclose your COI, and then open a discussion on the article talk page. tony 00:08, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

Dear TonySt, per your advice I have registered for an account. As a professor, I have some expertise in certain specialized areas and look forward to maybe contributing sometime. I am happy to declare COI, I am the subject of the wikipedia page

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_W._LaBelle

which has suffered from disruptive editing (my opinion), although I have not done any of the edits or removals. I'm not sure I see how to "talk" with what appears to be multiple bots attacking the site.

I am a neophyte and finding it pretty opaque how wikipedia works. Can I ask you a question? When I look at the site

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claudia_V._Jakubzick

it appears as though a member attempts occur to remove what I would call an inappropriate contribution, each time being reversed. Then it appears as though an editor, possibly yourself, steps in and effectively puts an end to the multiple edits and re-edits, stating "she has a point" and labeling the contribution as potentially disruptive. Am I interpreting this sequence of events correctly? (The reason I ask is, it's exactly parallel to what's happening at the other website.)

Thanks for enlightening me on this, and for any help you can provide with regard to disruptive edits on wikipedia sites!

JL Jlabellevt (talk) 17:50, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

Hey tony, im assuming this is where i can talk to you without starting a series of us undoing each others edits. im new to this so if im wrong please correct me. i was reading one of the sources on the 'dhu al manar abraha' article and it had his name as abraha dhu al manar in arabic. additionally the 2 other sources dont say his name as dhu al manar abraha but either just by his title or just by his name (with abraha being his name and his title being dhu al manar) unfortunarlty i cant seem to figure out how to change the name of the article directly. Saleh Ali AlDharhani (talk) 06:05, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

Hey @Saleh Ali AlDharhani! I'm not an expert in this subject, but it looks like the Tomlins source lists the subject as Dhu'l Manar Abrahah, and the other source doesn't call him "Abraha Dhu'l al Manar", so I'm not sure there's enough sourcing to move the page (which is what we call changing its name). One thing I like to do when evaluating the name of an article is check other, similar articles. I found Yaksum ibn Abraha, as well as Masruq ibn Abraha, which have the Abraha at the end of the subject name. tony 14:52, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

I looked further into the issue and would like to clarify and correct part of my earlier claim. You are correct that Yaksum ibn Abraha and Masrūq ibn Abraha are sons of a different Abraha,(with 'Ibn" meaning "son of" in arabic) since Abraha is a given name rather than a unique identifier. Dhū al-Manār, by contrast, is clearly a laqab (title) meaning “possessor/owner of the beacon (or lighthouse).” After reviewing Tomlins’ source more carefully, I found that he does in fact refer to the figure as “Dhū al-Manār Abraha” in multiple places, and I therefore stand corrected on the claim that another source gives him a different name. Notably, al-Ṭabarī’s History appears to be unusual in that it refers to Dhū al-Manār and Abraha separately and never combines them into a single construction, which seems more likely to reflect a stylistic or historiographical difference than evidence of two separate individuals. The Arabic source I was referring to is ملوك حمير وأقيال اليمن وشرحها المسمى خلاصة السيرة الجامعة لعجائب الملوك التبابعة (The Kings of Himyar and the Yemeni Princes, with a Commentary Entitled The Concise Compendium of the Marvelous Histories of the Tubbaʿ Kings). This work consistently refers to the figure using titles such as Dhū al-Manār, Dhū al-Adhʿār, and Dhū al-Nār, and—most importantly—explicitly names his son as Ifriqīs Son of (ibn) Abraha Dhū al-Manār in Arabic. This reflects standard Arabic naming structure, in which the given name precedes the laqab (title) . Given this, I believe the identification of Abraha Dhū al-Manār as a single individual is supported by multiple traditional sources, and the edit can be adjusted to attribute the naming clearly to the cited Arabic historiography while noting differences between sources such as al-Ṭabarī. Thanks for your looking into this and have a great day. Saleh Ali AlDharhani (talk) 21:27, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

Hey @Saleh Ali AlDharhani. After reading this, I'm not opposed to your edit and your idea of moving the article. I would normally suggest you go ahead and move it but because you don't have enough edits it will not allow you to. I will go ahead and implement your change and move Dhu'l Manar Abrahah to Abrahah Dhu'l Manar on your behalf next time I'm on a computer (I'm on my phone right now) :) --tony 02:08, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks @TonySt Appreciate your help Saleh Ali AlDharhani (talk) 05:08, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

@Saleh Ali AlDharhani, all set! Welcome to Wikipedia, by the way -- I hope to keep seeing you around! Take care :) --tony 14:46, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

IM SAD ~2026-39813-3 (talk) 07:10, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

MediaWiki message delivery 20:28, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi tony, you removed my edits to a page that was poorly written and put together so now it has been returned to its devastated state. please explain Capra Ibex75685 (talk) 05:24, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Capra Ibex75685! Thank you for reaching out. I reverted your changes because their tone and content appeared promotional. Looking closer, the reason they appear promotional may be because they appear to be, at least in part, copyright violations of the organization's website. Do you represent (or work with/for) the American Swiss Foundation? --tony 16:21, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi @TonySt! I do not represent or work with/ for the American Swiss Foundation. I've wanted to become a Wikipedia editor for some time and recently transitioning from banking so have more time. Sadly not a Swiss bank.

I first read an article from NZZ on the organization and wanted to learn more about it, especially with the current state of foreign relations of the U.S. with other countries. I saw their wiki was not the best and wanted to update it. Maybe my nosiness is driving me, I find these organizations peculiar and want to make the info on them more easily accessible and compiled in one place (Sadly NZZ has a pay wall). There are many organizations like this in NYC and most Americans are oblivious to them (Most similar being the French-American Foundation).

I think I will just focus on the Swiss for now but will later look more into the others. Saw most of the info on the page was either not true based on information from the Embassy or News or missing what they have been doing recently (from seeing their Press and combing through their accounts). Capra Ibex75685 (talk) 03:02, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

Gotcha -- welcome to Wikipedia! Just a heads-up: we can't copy+paste directly from sources (especially copyrighted sources), and we have to be careful to stay neutral to avoid the perception of promoting the things we're writing about. This section of the policy is a great resource, and I find myself referring to the words to watch page often. tony 15:28, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi Tony. This was my first edit so apologies if I made any mistakes. You said the Daily Mirror was not a good enough source but it’s actually been reported by the BBC it’s just they referenced the Daily Mirror as their original source. Is this fine? Thanks Tropicalted (talk) 04:03, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Tropicalted, and welcome! As we typically do not accept the Daily Mirror as a reference, the BBC source would absolutely be preferred :) --tony 04:05, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi, thanks! Are the new additions good enough? Tropicalted (talk) 04:28, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

That looks great! Please let me know if you have any questions about Wikipedia or if there's anything I can help with :) tony 16:09, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

I made that edit to his page, I played with him in High School as a team mate. Thought it should be made know his success as a high school hockey Champion before his college career. Supernev72 (talk) 16:27, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello Tony, I was reading up on Max Müller and saw something kind of humorous. Someone claimed that "he raised interest in Aryan culture, deeply disliking the resulting racist Aryanism" when he died in 1900 before Nazi Aryanism existed. No sources support this, and his death date refutes it; considering "Racist Aryanism" was a subject that WAS built upon by the Nazis in the 1920s, but it was built on Chamberlain's book. I believe this could be an anachronism. Can you help source or clarify? Thanks. ~2026-56009-9 (talk) 05:08, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

I also believe there could be a lot of misleading information on that page in attempts to poison AI to spew garbage like this. Not an avid Wikipedia editor so I don't know if this is an actual problem on this website, or nonexistent, so yeah. ~2026-56009-9 (talk) 05:12, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello! It looks like a few other editors were able to help you with your question regarding sourcing. Thank you for your edits, and good call on the apology in your latest edit summary there. Sometimes these discussions can get frustrating but it's important to remember we're all humans :) tony 16:38, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

MediaWiki message delivery 21:16, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you! Recorded in 1987 Alexplayer1 (talk) 07:43, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

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

• A dates error. References show this error when one of the date-containing parameters is incorrectly formatted. Please edit the article to correct the date and ensure it is formatted to follow the Wikipedia Manual of Style's guidance on dates. (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) 16:29, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

I have tried to publish important information about the Hungarian revolution in 1956. However, I have got refusals of my main sources. My main sources, the 1956 Institut (1956-os intézet) and The Hungarian National Digital Archive (Magyar Nemzeti Digitális Archívum) are on blacklist. .. These sources are Hungarian state institutions. .. The article about the revolution starts with an obviously false statement about the revolution, stating, that the revolution on 23 October 1956 started against Mátyás Rákosi.

Mátyás Rákosi resigned as party leader in July 1956, and he left Hungary, and never returned to Hungary. .. The article later in the text recognises that the prime minister was András Hegedűs and the party leader was Ernő Gerő on 23 October 1956. .. So, based on the article clear that the statement mentioning Rákosi is false. On 23 October 1956 Rákosi played no role. ., Why is this false statement impossible to delete or change? ~2026-58819-9 (talk) 08:08, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello! Just a heads-up -- if you're User:Filozofus87 you may want to log in, since at first I wasn't sure who you were. I can see that I reverted these edits since there weren't sources included, and I can also see that the edit filter automatically stopped you from adding some links to that article.

I think there's two things going on that might make you think those sources are "blacklisted":

The first is that you might have been pasting a URL into the article without using reference tags. If that sounds like it might be the case, click here for great information on how to add a reference. The software will sometimes automatically stop you if you just paste the URL in without references. If this is not the case then you can ignore this suggestion.

The second thing is that sometimes when you share a link from an Android phone or from Google Chrome it copies a "share.google" short URL to your clipboard, instead of the actual URL, even though you didn't ask it to. URLs generated by URL shorteners are disallowed by Wikipedia. This is something that happens accidentally to many editors, and I can see that it happened here as well. The solution is to go to the URL and then copy what is in the address bar itself, instead of going to the "Share" button or similar. The source is not blacklisted -- the URL shortener is, though. tony 15:17, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi TonyST,

I’m concerned about the recent messages regarding my edits. The way they’ve been worded has made me feel uneasy about the possibility of account deletion, even though I’m trying to edit in good faith and follow Wikipedia’s policies.

If there are specific problems with any of my edits, I’d appreciate it if you could point them out clearly so I can correct or improve them. I want to resolve this constructively and continue contributing without unnecessary concern.

Thanks for your time, and I’m open to further discussion. TheOfficialMajstorski (talk) 00:16, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

Whoops. I was actually joking around and was being stupid with my edits. My bad... TheOfficialMajstorski (talk) 00:17, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

MediaWiki message delivery 17:42, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Regarding your edit summary here and your RFPP request, be advised that this article is not under ARBECR. ECR imposed under WP:CT/SA only applies to social groups (this article is about a politician) and to Indian military history (he is not from India). - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 03:20, 5 February 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for the heads-up -- I was construing it a bit too broadly there. tony 16:02, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello!

I’m attempting to update the Career, education and training section of this article with more current information, as the existing content appears outdated and largely unsourced. I rewrote the material in a neutral, encyclopedic tone, but the additions were removed, likely due to sourcing concerns.

Before reattempting the edit, I wanted to ask for guidance from experienced editors:

• What types of sources are preferred for verifying academic degrees, fellowship training, and institutional appointments (e.g., university faculty profiles, hospital announcements, press releases)?

• Is it acceptable to add the updated text incrementally with citation templates (e.g., {{citation needed}}), or should all new material be fully cited at the time of addition?

• Given that some existing content is uncited but outdated, would it be preferable to update those sentences directly rather than adding new ones?

I want to ensure that any future edits comply fully with Wikipedia’s sourcing and content policies.

Thank you for your guidance. Mxhdigh (talk) 13:08, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Mxhdigh! Thank you for reaching out. Just a heads-up in case it's relevant here: we don't use AI tools to write (or help us write) text on Wikipedia -- especially user talk pages. If those tools are being used I'd strongly recommend you avoid them since they're likely to cause your edits to be removed and/or your words to be disregarded solely on the basis of AI usage.

We generally prefer secondary sources, and you can find more information about what kinds of secondary sources we can use here at this link. We can use primary sources (press releases, hospital announcements, university faculty profiles) typically only for uncontroversial things related to that primary source. For instance, it's probably sufficient to cite a press release to say the subject worked at a university in a given role, but it's probably not sufficient to cite that press release to say they did anything that requires analysis (as an example: an athlete's association with a university can probably be sourced with a press release, but we can't cite that press release to call them the best of all time, even if the press release says they are).

It's usually easiest to write the information paragraph-by-paragraph and add references at the time of writing. That way your work is being saved as you go. If you introduce unsourced content and qualify it with a {{citation needed}} tag immediately, it will probably be reverted by someone because it's unsourced.

If there's information that's unsourced and incorrect, I'd suggest removing it altogether (using a descriptive edit summary) prior to making any additions.

Take care :) --tony 13:24, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello, TonySt! The edit I made to the Buckskin article was actually my first edit on Wikipedia, so I didn't realize that citing a source was required, I'm sorry. I just made that edit because my Equine Science teacher said that Buckskin is a horse breed and a color simultaneously. Anyway, um, I gotta finish my homework so Imma just leave you with this link, though I am open to the idea that Buckskin is only a color and not a breed: [Is Buckskin a Color or a Breed of Horse? - THE THINKING EQUESTRIAN]

Edit: Oh, and "Contrary to the belief of many, the Buckskin or Dun horses are not a mere "color" in the equine world. Those who studied genetics some time ago believed that the Dun horse was the result of a dilution gene, and that breeding Duns and Buckskins to each other often resulted in the birth of an Albino foal. More recent studies have proven this to be in error. The true Buckskin horse may trace his lineage through a direct line of Dun or Buckskin colored ancestors, as far back as recorded history of the animal are available." by Buckskin Horses | Oklahoma State University

Okay, thx, have a good weekend, I know I won;t because I have so much work :,)

ChloetheTiredHighSchooler (talk) 01:29, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Hey Chloe! Welcome to Wikipedia :) I have a feeling you know more about this subject than I do, but I encourage you to start a discussion on the article's talk page. That way, you can work with other editors who are experienced in this subject to see how to best incorporate that information into the article. You can also learn more about how to add references to sources here at this link. Again, welcome to Wikipedia, and I hope to keep seeing you around! :) --tony 01:58, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Hey tony! I am asking for advice on when you think I should request rollback. Thanks! ArthurPlummer (talk | contribs) 02:59, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Hey @ArthurPlummer! I think you're on the right track, but administrators generally like to see at least a month of recent changes patrolling before granting rollback. I'd suggest applying in a couple of weeks :) --tony 03:02, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Well I began patrolling on the 25th of January, so you think like March 1st is a good date to request? ArthurPlummer (talk | contribs) 03:04, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

That sounds like a good date, yes. Keep in mind that it's never set-in-stone criteria, though. I was turned down for rollback the first time I requested; the responding administrator asked me to reach out on their talk page after I had a bit more recent experience under my belt. If you continue to engage with the folks on your talk page and inform editors about why you're reverting them (typically by using user warning templates), as you have been, you'll have a better chance to be granted that permission :) --tony 03:14, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Alright thanks for the advice, and thanks again for the barnstar!! ArthurPlummer (talk | contribs) 03:17, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

you rolled back my edit re Topsy Ojo, when the referneces were already attached to the paragraph, without due diligence. Great Gatekeeping- NOT ~2026-84738-1 (talk) 17:12, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

ok ... since this was SO bad faith heres a reference

https://www.espn.co.uk/rugby/story/_/id/15405107/brown-ojo-found-guilty-misconduct ~2026-84738-1 (talk) 17:19, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello! I can't find the term "rape" in there, which is the unsourced material which was added to the biography. tony 17:22, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Waymo on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (botop|talk) 23:39, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

MediaWiki message delivery 23:29, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

Hey Tony! Hope all is well. Going to the question; when I am eventually granted rollback, should I use CVPI or stick with Ultraviolet? ArthurPlummer (talk | :) 02:49, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello! CVPI, WikiShield, AntiVandal, and Huggle are all "diff browsers" which show you the diffs of potentially problematic recent changes and let you push a button to fix them. On the other hand: UV, RedWarn, and Twinkle are all tools that assist you while you're using the regular Wikipedia web interface. You can continue to use UV and other tools alongside a diff viewer :) tony 03:08, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

I personally suggest, as a very unbiased source, CVPI and WikiShield =p – LuniZunie_(talk) 03:36, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

In all seriousness, you should try them all out! – LuniZunie_(talk) 04:13, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

@LuniZunie Wait, aren't you one of the devs for WikiShield? And say what now? They auto-report and stuff? Hmm, I think CVPI and WS are the candidates, as I do not seek to test ever tool. ArthurPlummer (talk | :) 04:22, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

Yeah I'm the person who wrote all the code. And of course, I'm always happy to happy new people you the script =D (but I suggested trying all the scripts because other scripts may work better for you) – LuniZunie_(talk) 04:24, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

@LuniZunie My analysis:

WikiShield

From what I see on the project page; it looks like RecentChanges is on the far left, in the middle is a diff, and on the far right is the info of the account that made the edit I'm assuming?. But from what I saw under the Features section, WS is a excellent candidate so far. Now to see what Sir CVPI Interceptor brings to the table.

CVPI

On the far left, the history of a page, and in the middle a diff, with the options to monitor the user, rollback now, and then a menu, and then on the far left the user's talk. ArthurPlummer (talk | :) 11:51, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

Yes, that's correct. However, both have more features that you would only see while using! – LuniZunie_(talk) 15:02, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

@LuniZunie What I'll do is spend 10 minutes using each, and whichever one is better, I'll use going forward. ArthurPlummer (talk | :) 16:12, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

@ArthurPlummer Well, both will be maintained and updated (WS has a huge update soon, and I'm sure there is a lot more planned for CVPI), so don't, like, get stuck on one for the rest of your career! – LuniZunie_(talk) 16:15, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

@LuniZunie I'll probably switch between CVPI, WikiShield, and Ultraviolet, since I have two monitors anyway (one for the live recent changes, and one for going through them) so I don't really need recent changes as a queue. ArthurPlummer (talk | :) 16:46, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

Sounds good =) – LuniZunie_(talk) 16:52, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

Going off topic, do you think my request for pending changes reviewer will be approved or denied? ArthurPlummer (talk | :) 21:17, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

I think you'll be approved. PCR was my first permission, as it is a pretty calm first permission to have. Not seeing any red flags in your edit history or talk page, only concern would be that your account is rather new. – LuniZunie_(talk) 21:21, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

@LuniZunie Yeah, my account is 25 (soon to be 26) days old, but I thought that doesn't really matter as 1) PCR isn't a really serious user right (compared to like rollback or administrator) and I have a incredible track record of editing. ArthurPlummer (talk | :) 21:42, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

Yeah, that's why I think you'll be fine. – LuniZunie_(talk) 21:43, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

@LuniZunie Unfortunately, there is a backlog, so it may take time for my request to be acted on. I think if I become an admin, whether it be through RfA or being elected, I'll help out in clearing backlogs. ArthurPlummer (talk | :) 21:46, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

So does CVPI (what does that even mean) still have like revert vandalism and warn user features or it's just to browse diffs only? ArthurPlummer (talk | :) 04:04, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

Also, can I use 2 tools at once; eg. Ultraviolet and WikiShield? ArthurPlummer (talk | :) 04:06, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

Ultraviolet and WikiShield wouldn't work together as WikiShield is basically a website. You can of course open the wikipedia page for a diff from WikiShield and then use UV, but they wouldn't work at the same time (you can have both installed). Same goes for CVPI, AntiVandal, and Huggle. – LuniZunie_(talk) 04:08, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

I was originally planning to use CVPI/WikiShield alone on their own, but I need confirmation that they can also undo problematic edits and warn users (like Ultraviolet). ArthurPlummer (talk | :) 04:12, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

Yep! They can, and both of them automatically set the warning level and will auto report. – LuniZunie_(talk) 04:12, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

The former (also has other features that are helpful) – LuniZunie_(talk) 04:09, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi Tony, the text was proofread by Gemini from my own notations. The sources were provided under the book released by the founder of the organization with full citations provided. That is a first hand source translated from french to english, and not AI generated. If you recommend using a sandbox for editting, or have feedback on the format of the writing, please let me know. I am keen on improving that page. Uatsamonga (talk) 17:19, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Uatsamonga. The text added appears to have been generated by Gemini, regardless of whether it was working from your notes. Your contributions are welcome, but please do not add Gemini-created (or "proofread") content. tony 17:23, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

Thank Tony, I've adjusted the syntax to encyclopedia's format of writing. I've also opened a sandbox for editting prior to publishings. Uatsamonga (talk) 17:38, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

		The BLP Barnstar
		Just wanted to say thanks for your hard work in general and for keeping undue weight from John W. deGravelles in particular. Seems to me that there are no sources reliable enough for inclusion.   –Skywatcher68 (talk) 17:36, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

Thank you so much :) tony 17:40, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi Tony,

I removed a large chart on the Brandon Flowers discography that I added a couple of months ago as the allotted charts on the list were not listed for the said song. After I removed it, it was automatically reverted by you, and after a second attempt with an edit summary, it was reverted again. The charts should not be there if the song didn't chart on any of them. – SassafrassAlabass (talk · contribs · articles made) 04:20, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello @SassafrassAlabass -- I've self-reverted and restored your version of the article. Take care :) --tony 04:23, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

MediaWiki message delivery 19:15, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

Im sorry for adding it in the wrong spot im quite new to this Schoolmando (talk) 23:25, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello, just a note, your comment in Zara Larsson is mentioned in a Rolling Stone article. Here's the link. Camilasdandelions (✉️) 23:39, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. tony 23:53, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

For . I could have handled that better than I did. Thanks for the follow-up. Joyous! Noise! 03:22, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

That means a lot! Glad I could help --tony 05:07, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Speedy deletion on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (botop|talk|contribs) 18:30, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

MediaWiki message delivery 19:02, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Ultrasonic atomization on a "Wikipedia technical issues and templates" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (botop|talk|contribs) 10:30, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

I make edit to productivity page so that people using new ai tools but you just remove the link. I think the link which I provided might helpful to millions on using advance technology. Keyurvp (talk) 07:20, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

I added a notice from his management. He has died, which was confirmed by email from our Rector. We attended the same church. I'll make every effort to get a better source immediately. Bearian (talk) 03:11, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello @Bearian! Thank you for reaching out. On Wikipedia, details about people have to have a reliable source attached to them. If you have a reliable source, you can add it to the article with an inline citation. If you've read the documentation and are still having issues, please let me know and I'll help add the citation on your behalf. You can read more about Wikipedia's verifiability policy by clicking this link, and more about citing sources in general here at this link. Thank you for your contributions, and happy editing :) tony 05:04, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

Apologies for this boilerplate reply -- not sure how I mistook you for a new user. I appreciate you reaching out to me. tony 16:07, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

Just ya know I'm new NCSA Mosaic (talk) 05:24, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Peter Greene § Age is 66. sjones23 (talk - contributions) 12:43, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

MediaWiki message delivery 17:50, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

There is a user who is deleting everything in Baharwa article, and his username is @sgh45 Please block him because he is a vandal. ~2026-13652-40 (talk) 23:38, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-13652-40, that's not vandalism -- the result of the delete discussion was to redirect the article because there was no one willing to work on the draft. It seems like you're saying you would be willing to work on the draft, and you've been working on it in mainspace. @Star Mississippi, sorry to ping you here, but putting aside the TA's conduct, would this be a situation where we revert to the redirect and the TA user could create a separate draft if they so wish, or (since there's apparently someone willing to work on a draft) would it be appropriate to draftify the article as it exists now? --tony 00:10, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

I worked on it and will not work on it again because it is written according to sources that discuss the Baharwa.

The article that was redirected was poorly written and had no sources at all.

But now the article is written based on sources that fully discuss the Baharwa. Please review the sources carefully.

If anyone objects to it, they should open a deletion discussion.

Redirecting it to the Nile Delta article is effectively a deletion, which is not correct because the Nile Delta is a different topic, and the section dedicated to it was removed.

I suggest leaving it as it is, and if anyone objects, they can start a new deletion discussion. ~2026-13699-34 (talk) 01:32, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks @TonySt for the ping.

@~2026-13699-34 your opinion does not override consensus which was just established earlier this year. It was not redirected due to anyone having been blocked or how the article was written. You are welcome to open a deletion review if you believe my close was in error or factors have substantially changed with regard to notability. Without that there will not be a change in the redirect status. Star Mississippi 02:40, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

There are factors that have changed substantially regarding notability.

Can the article be moved to draft space so I can work on it?

@Star Mississippi ~2026-13741-85 (talk) 03:18, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

I decline to provide it especially as you have created another draft at Draft:Egyptian Baharwa. Please go to DRV and make your case re: changes for the community to decide @~2026-13741-85 Star Mississippi 03:51, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

I believe it is my right to create a draft about any topic, and then they will decide whether it is a valid article or not @Star Mississippi ~2026-13741-85 (talk) 03:54, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Editing is a privilege, not a right @~2026-13741-85

Your opinion does not override community consensus, which has been established. You're closer to a block for disruptive editing then you are an accepted article. Please either file a Deletion Review or move on. @TonySt apologies for highjacking your Talk. Star Mississippi 03:58, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

There was no real consensus; what happened was vote canvassing.

How can I file a Deletion Review if the page is protected?

@Star Mississippi ~2026-13741-85 (talk) 04:02, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Please follow the instructions at WP:DELREVD @~2026-13741-85

You can skip the step to discuss it with me as we've done it here. None of those pages should be protected but if you run into an issue filing with a temporary account, you can use {{helpme}} or ping an active admin as I'm about to log off tor the evening. Star Mississippi 04:10, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for creating an account @Mloyfvn

It makes communicating much easier than a rotating temporary account. Star Mississippi 13:49, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello you reversed several edits I made to pages regarding the Byzantine Empire, informing me that these edits did not meet wikipedia's standards. I made these changes because the Byzantines never called themselves that and I wanted to put the correct name so it would be less misleading to readers. I am new to wikipedia editing, could you explain where I would place a citation? And why haven't other Byzantine related pages I edited been reverted? Such as the Byzantine Empire under the Justinian Dynasty. Edidor123 (talk) 05:15, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Hey @Edidor123! Thank you for reaching out. I was watching recent changes and noticed you were changing "Byzantine Empire" to "Roman Empire" in the infobox of a lot of articles, like Byzantine Empire under the Amorian dynasty and Byzantine Empire under the Macedonian dynasty. Those articles appear to pretty uniformally use the term "Byzantine Empire" and "Byzantium" instead of "Roman Empire" and "Rome", including in the titles of the articles themselves. I was about to recommend you reach out on a few article or project talk pages before making large changes like that en masse since other editors are likely to revert them in the future, and it looks like you did start a discussion on Talk:Latin Empire after your comment here. I do have another suggestion, though -- you might try starting a discussion on this particular talk page, as it appears to be relatively active with people who are familiar with the topic. If other editors agree with you, then perhaps they could help integrate your idea into even more of the project. Take care! tony 14:50, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

THe domain name was luxuryhomes.in Deb (talk) 18:18, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks so much! tony 18:21, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Just curious. It looks wrong. This one Mike Gauya (talk) 07:12, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Hey @Mike Gauya. If the article should be moved to Lumivero, please feel free to do so. tony 13:09, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Well ... something called Fawcett Publications does have a website, https://fawcettpublications.com. But the website looks cheap and badly designed and makes the operation sound like a vanity press, so even though they make a big deal out of their long tradition and how they're carrying out the vision of Captain Billy and all, I'm wondering if they're unrelated to the Fawcett Publications of yore and have usurped the name. What do you think? Largoplazo (talk) 20:24, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

I'm not sure if that's the same company or if it's just using the same name. tony 19:06, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

MediaWiki message delivery 18:51, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

How did you revert those edits so fast? XxCROSSxX (talk) 02:02, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi @XxCROSSxX! We have special tools that can help us quickly see and undo bad edits, but often we just look at the "recent changes" feed and revert changes that should be reverted. You can find more information over at this link: WP:RCP. Take care :) --tony 02:49, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

N/A — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maverickupdate (talk • contribs) 14:11, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Just wanted to applaud you on CVPI's work so far man. And also report that the tool loads up much faster now in half window mode. Yeah... the ability to patrol with a one side split-screen (without drops in refresh rate) is what I like about CVPI, creates more room to multi-task other computer apps and get a days job done! And since the tables have a new polished look, performance while scrolling and switching diffs is noticeably slower compared to your previous versions, I managed to fix that up by disabling "Anti-aliasing" FXAA, in Nvidia's settings. It's sad to really know that vandalism itself has no expiry date. Happy editing.‎ ‎ — ‎‎‎𝔅⠄J̅ ‎ ^Talk 15:50, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Hey @B.J! I appreciate the kind words :) Performance is something I'm always looking to tighten, and I have some ideas coming down the pipeline that should make it a bit smoother. Thank you for reaching out and for your efforts in counter-vandalism :) --tony 16:09, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Interceptor looks really good - I'm personally a wikishield user but you're doing great work with cvpi Heyallkatehere (talk) 02:20, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

ive been summoned 0_o
anyways, you should try out cvpi – LuniZunie_(talk) 02:21, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you :) --tony 02:21, 13 March 2026 (UTC)