User talk:TrueMoriarty

Before adding a category to an article, as you did to K. Maudood Elahi, please make sure that the subject of the article really belongs in the category that you specified according to Wikipedia's categorization guidelines. The category being added must already exist, and must be supported by the article's verifiable content. Categories may be removed if they are deemed incorrect for the subject matter. Thank you. ^SMason_Garrison 19:34, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

@Smasongarrison Thank you very much for this valuable information! I will try to follow it in my next times. TrueMoriarty (talk) 02:53, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

The page K. Mukhtar Elahi has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appeared to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appeared to be a direct copy from https://dailyasianage.com/news/279008/the-story-of-a-leader-poet-and-philosopher. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition has been be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

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. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:08, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

TrueMoriarty,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Volten001 ^☎ 05:49, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you! Happy new year to you too. TrueMoriarty (talk) 08:45, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

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

Volten001 ^☎ 05:49, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi TrueMoriarty. Thank you for your work on K. Mukhtar Elahi. Another editor, Mariamnei, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thank you for your work on this article. Please establish notability as per WP:BIO. Thanks and have a great day!

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

Mariamnei (talk) 13:56, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

@Mariamnei:. Hello. I have read your message concerning your suspicion regarding the notability of the article K. Mukhtar Elahi. I, however, disagree with your idea and will now present some points supporting my stance:

1. It is commonly agreed upon that multiple secondary sources which are independent of each other and few supplementary primary sources are needed to establish the fact that a person is notable enough to have an article in Wikipedia. If you examine the references carefully, you will notice that this person is narrowly notable enough (if you wish to follow only Wikipedia’s definition of notability).

2. K. Mukhtar Elahi died at the year of 1971, just two years after Internet was established. Not many online articles will appear about him, but the fact that people still mention Elahi in articles 40 years after his death certainly makes him notable. You can consider him even more notable, as he is from my country Bangladesh, which is very backwards and where having a single mention of someone online other than social medias makes that person somewhat of a legend.

3. The mere fact that Elahi has multiple road, a square, a student’s hall, a restroom named after him indicates his degree of notability. Also notice that this person has a monument dedicated to him, built by our government. Now from this, you can deduce how amazing of a legacy he created through his contributions in our war for independence.

4. Lastly, Elahi has a book written solely about him, but curiously that book does not have an ISBN code.

I really hope my points will satisfy you of the notability of K. Mukhtar Elahi, and you will soon give me the green signal to remove that notability tag. Good day!

TrueMoriarty (talk) 07:37, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. I have answered you on the article talk page. Have a great day! Mariamnei (talk) 08:35, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi TrueMoriarty. Thank you for your work on Anopheles confusa. Another editor, Hughesdarren, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Hi, Thanks for your article but I can't find any record of Anopheles confusa online. GBIF has Anopheles confusus (Evans & Leeson, 1935). I'm not an expert and don't have access to the reference provided in the wiki article. What do yo think? Regards

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

Hughesdarren (talk) 07:54, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

@Hughesdarren: hello. Anopheles confusus and confusa are probably not same as the authorities are different. I copied the reference and the species nane from the page Taxonomy of Anopheles.I also couldnt find anything on the internetTrueMoriarty (talk) 07:59, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

No worries, hopefully someone with more expertise than me will sort it out and review the article. Cheers. Hughesdarren (talk) 08:07, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

👍 TrueMoriarty (talk) 08:11, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Why did my edit on the Fred Flintstone page get reversed? I provided sources and an extensive explanation for trhe additions I made. Also, as I mentioned, I removed several pieces of misinformation from the character box.

Here's what I provided as an edit summary:

"Added Freida and Ferd, who are characters from Gene Hazelton's popular tie-in Flintstones comic strip that ran nationally over 20 years (Gene Hazelton also worked on the original show and is credited as the creator of Pebbles). Conversely, I removed mentions of 'James Hardrock' , 'Lucille Hardrock-Fangstone', and 'Granny Flintstone' , which are all fanmade names and not from any official production. It's ended up on other websites due to people trusting Wikipedia."

Then added sources for the respective characters.

Why did the edit get reversed? Gladstone1948 (talk) 05:54, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Your removal of the characters appeared to me like vandalism, as I could find mentions of them in websites. TrueMoriarty (talk) 06:23, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Like is said, there are no sources for the characters I removed, because they do not exist.

Their names are mentioned (without source) on fan websites, because Wikipedia mentions them. I don't think you guys should leave fanon on the page just because it's been there a long time. Note how these characters 'James', 'Lucille' and 'Granny' never had sources to begin with. They did not appear of had any mentioned in any of the television series or comics. Gladstone1948 (talk) 16:54, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Yes you are probably right TrueMoriarty (talk) 06:21, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Phalaenopsis schilleriana, 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) 08:08, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

The article Bangladesh Olympiad on Astronomy and Astrophysics has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

All coverage is either primary or WP:Routine. Not notable at all.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion based on established criteria.

If the proposed deletion has already been carried out, you may request undeletion of the article at any time. Kingsacrificer (talk) 11:16, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi, TrueMoriarty

Citing Grokipedia for this critter ain't a good look. It just scraped up what was on the internet about the Genus

As you can see from my userpage, I'm pretty much the opposite of a scientist.

OK, so let's talk about your contributions - go right ahead, right now!

Shirt58 (talk) 🦘 11:10, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello. I also added two more citations other than the Grokipedia one, so I think can just remove it.

TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 11:58, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi TrueMoriarty. Thank you for your work on Machilis appendiculata. Another editor, Sophisticatedevening, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Are you confident that this species actually exists or is still under this name? It is not listed in the references you provided and is not found in any taxonomy browsers.

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

Sophisticatedevening^(talk) 15:29, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

@Sophisticatedevening: I saw Machilis appendiculata in the list of Machilis species. The list had two references and the references itself contained lists of Machilis specieses. What might happen that the name was for some reason removed from the lists. Also taxonomy browsers frequently contradict each other (such as once I saw gbif said there were no species of a certain genus but irmng said there were eleven.) so I suggest you to google machilis appendiculata where you might find its original description in journals and things like that.

TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 15:57, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

According to a paper you can download here, Machilus appendiculata is the type species of Machiloides, but I'm not finding much of anything for Machiloides appendiculata either. It is possible (at least under the botanical code, but I think it goes for the zoological code as well) for a type species to be treated as synonym of another species in the genus without invalidating the genus name. I'm not at all sure that M. appendiculata is a synonym, but that could explain it not appearing on internet taxonomy databases. Plantdrew (talk) 21:32, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

I noticed that the type species of Machiloides is Machiloides banksi, of which I cannot find any synonyms.

TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 04:46, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi TrueMoriarty, I'm a new page reviewer and have noticed you have recently been creating a large amount of articles for different species, specifically those in the order Archaeognatha. Whilst these articles are suitable for inclusion on Wikipedia thanks to WP:NSPECIES, I have a couple suggestions to improve future articles.

The first one is very simple, simply add {{Taxonbar}} to the bottom of the article, just before the categories. This template links the article to a variety of taxonomic databases and can help with finding additional references, and you will find this template on virtually every article about a taxon.

My other suggestion will take a bit more time for each article, however it will greatly improve their quality. Adding a bit more information about the species other than their classification, such as when the species was first described and by whom (this can be easily found in databases such as GBIF and can be added to a {{Speciesbox}} under the "authority" parameter), as well as where in the world they can be found, would make them much better and easier for others to add onto in the future.

Thank you for your contributions! - harrz ^talk 16:09, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

@harrz Thank you for your suggestion. I will surely add the taxonbar from the next time. I will also try to add authority and distribution.

TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 16:45, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

Can you try responding to this? MetalBreaksAndBends (talk) 16:47, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

This is a test reply. MetalBreaksAndBends (talk) 16:59, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

Now it is working. Thank you very much!

TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 17:09, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

Sweet! You'll want to set up archiving. You can see how to set it up at Help:Archiving a talk page, the thing at the top shows how to get a dead simple archive working. MetalBreaksAndBends (talk) 17:13, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi TrueMoriarty. Thank you for your work on Machilis meijerei. Another editor, Hughesdarren, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Hi there, Thaks for your contributions but when I click on the Fauna Europaea link in the references it keeps coming up with an error. Is this just me or does the link not work? Regards

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

Hughesdarren (talk) 08:17, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

@Hughesdarren: I guess you are getting something about DNS errors? Notice that the URL is very complex and precise, and the error is probably because of that. It will either be fixed automatically within few days or perhaps the content has been moved to a slightly different URL.

TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 08:37, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi again, The error this displayed says "Hmmm… can't reach this page Check if there is a typo in fauna-eu.org. DNS_PROBE_FINISHED_NXDOMAIN" Regards Hughesdarren (talk) 08:40, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

That is due to the complexity and precision of the URL .The page's URL is probably very slightly changed so the ref URL can't reach it.

TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 08:42, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

Fair enough but I doubt anyone will review the article if one reference doesn't work and the other doesn't mention the species. Regards. Hughesdarren (talk) 08:44, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi TrueMoriarty. Thank you for your work on Machilis macedonica. Another editor, Hughesdarren, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Hi there, Thanks for your contribution but the Fauna Europaea link doesn't work and the NCBI link doesn't mention this species. Regards.

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

Hughesdarren (talk) 08:24, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

@Hughesdarren: I got machilis macdonica from the species list of the machilis articles which was referenced by the two references I used. If NCBI doesn't mention it, then it is probably mentioned by the fauna one. But I am going to add more references by today

TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 09:34, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

This same problem seems to apply to all the Machilis stubs. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:16, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

I have noted this too. So basically there are a load of articles with references that don't work or don't mention the actual species. Is there some sort of automated tool or AI being used to generate these? Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 11:30, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

@Bastun I am not an AI. Could you please try this link? I used this for reference

https://www.biolib.cz/en/taxonsubtaxa/id97121/#:~:text=species%20Machilis%20aciliata%20Janetschek%2C%201955,species%20Machilis%20gepatschi%20Riezler%2C%201941

TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 11:57, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, TrueMoriarty,

Thank you for creating Machilis meijerei.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Reference 1: site can't be reached. Reference 2: species not mentioned on this page. Reference 3: species not mentioned on this page. Can you check your referencing, please?

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Bastun}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 11:09, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, TrueMoriarty,

Thank you for creating Machilis montana.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Sole reference produces a server error.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Bastun}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 11:33, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, TrueMoriarty,

Thank you for creating Machilis multispinosa.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

The sole reference produces a server error.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Bastun}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 11:34, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi TrueMoriarty. In working on new page patrol today I came across several of your newly created article stubs that gave rise to the notices above. Essentially one of the sources you are using can't be reached at all. Other sites sometimes don't mention the particular species you have created the article about. I see other editors, above, have expressed similar concerns. So I looked at your contributions and see you have created a whole slew of these articles in a very small time period - 35 created in less than an hour, yesterday, and 33 created in just over 30 minutes the previous day - sometimes creating two or three of these stubs every minute!

I need to ask, are you using some sort of AI or other automated tool to generate these articles. And even if you're not, are you actually checking the references you are inserting, or just going "This reference is about the genus, it's good enough for the species", even though the species may not be mentioned. Your dismissive attitude when asked about this is also concerning: If NCBI doesn't mention it, then it is probably mentioned by the fauna one. Frankly, that's not good enough. It is incumbent upon you to ensure the accuracy of references. And the "complexity of a URL" has absolutely nothing to do with DNS errors! Lastly, please use edit summaries!

Pinging DoubleGrazing, Hughesdarren, Harrz. Regards, Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 11:58, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

please try this link. I tried this in the server error one https://www.biolib.cz/en/taxonsubtaxa/id97121/#:~:text=species%20Machilis%20aciliata%20Janetschek%2C%201955,species%20Machilis%20gepatschi%20Riezler%2C%201941

TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 12:01, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

I really don't know why it should not work as a reference as I can see no server error for this address if I enter the link TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 12:02, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

I created some Jujubinus articles in even less time and there were no problems about that.

TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 12:04, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

Could you please respond to Bastun's points without deflecting? If you are using some sort of automated tool, as seems likely, be upfront about it rather than saying that you've done something similar before and "there were no problems about that" (meaning, no one has yet raised such problems).

Picking up on your earlier comment about reusing the sources from the genus article, it is certainly possible that those sources may be useful in the species articles as well, but you cannot take that as given, you do need to check that the sources actually support the content in the articles you're creating.

Which also raises the obvious question that if the contents of these articles didn't come from the sources cited, where did they come from? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:11, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

If you must know, I got the species name from here. The authority I got from here . And I also used no tools whatsoever except copypasting the authority and species name. Thank you.

TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 12:22, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

by authority I meant the one who described the species first, just to clarify

TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 12:23, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

So just to make sure I got that right – are you saying you cited sources that didn't provide the information, but didn't cite a source that did? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:09, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

Not exactly that. Notice the URL provided above and the URL of the reference showing server error are the same.

TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 14:47, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

I have to agree that whilst reviewing these articles I have noticed issues with sourcing several times. I have always used GBIF to verify a species' existence, and would recommend using it as a source for the specific species rather than a uninformative list based on the genus. There have been a couple instances where you have created articles which are actually just synonyms of other species, such as Machilis meijerei, which I only found out once looking for it on GBIF, so I strongly advise you to at least check these species actually exist before creating articles for them. It may take a bit longer for each article, but you should always prioritise quality over quantity and speed. harrz ^talk 12:35, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

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

• A generic name error. References show this error when author or editor name parameters use place-holder names. Please edit the article to include the source's actual author or editor name. (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) 16:18, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

Hey, just coming here quickly to notify you (i dont know if you're aware of this) but a user has recently placed a topic at WikiProject Insects asking about the legitimacy of some species you have created articles about. (These articles also source GBIF as a source, which is not a reliable source, though I know you've been notified of this before). If you have anything to contribute to this discussion, or can assist in sorting out the confusion.

Another note, but some of these articles don't even describe what the article is about, (e.g Machilis oudemansi) and I'd think spending slightly more time providing details to these articles would be greatly appreciated and mean that editors would have to spend less time down the line improving them. I understand your goal is to "create all insect species articles" but creation of articles should by no means take priority over quality of articles. Creating hundreds of stub-class articles is often a job completed by bots. FranticSpud (talk) 20:11, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

Noted. I will try to follow your advices from the next time. Thank you and have a good day.

TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 02:47, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

Hey there,

I noticed that you reverted an edit by Special:Contributions/~2025-34273-07 in Jakarta (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jakarta&oldid=1334975089) but as per MOS:UNITNAMES, the first time the units are mentioned, it should be "square kilometers" and afterwards "km²" right?

Did you accidentally revert their edits? Sorry if I am misunderstanding something.

— Dulcetia ^{texting is free} 18:19, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

You are absolutely correct. Sorry for the mistake. I saw that the IP was unnecessarily turning cvt to convert at the first glance so I reverted. Thank you very much for pointing out the mistake.

TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 15:19, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

hey, no worries haha. Just wanted to double-check with you to ensure that I wasn't overlooking anything before editing!

have a nice day!

— Dulcetia ^{texting is free} 15:26, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

Hey there,

I noticed that you got in a very long talk page discussion with a TA on Talk:Abraham Maslow#Actualizing where you struggled to read their messages because they were indented so far out. I just wanted to let you know that {{Outdent}} lets you keep the thread going while resetting the indentation so it's easier to read. enbi [they/them] • [talk] 07:01, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the suggestion!

TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 10:01, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

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

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

William Avery (talk) 14:48, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Please read my comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Machilis acuminithorax Eastmain (talk • contribs) 21:01, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Your recent edit incorporated text that is in the public domain but still requires attribution. Can you fix it please? S Philbrick(Talk) 15:13, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Notice that the text in question is completely changed currently. Thanks

TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 15:35, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

An article you recently created, Next Bangladeshi general election, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Dan arndt (talk) 08:48, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

This page existed before I created it as a redirect TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 12:26, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

Why did you remove the Jon Taffer mezcal/tequila controversy? It was cited with multiple sources, factual and a real incident that continues to follow Taffer's reputation. Why are you whitewashing? ~2026-10897-96 (talk) 15:59, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

It was because the reference format was not followed. You are welcome to add the information again with proper refernce. TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 16:02, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

Got it. thank you for clarifying! ~2026-10897-96 (talk) 16:04, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing hoaxes, such as K. Mushtaq Elahi, is considered to be vandalism and is prohibited. If you are interested in how accurate Wikipedia is, a more constructive test method would be to try to find inaccurate statements that are already in Wikipedia—and then to correct them if possible. If you would like to make test edits, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges.

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. Mehedi Abedin 20:06, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

The reason of CSD is: freedom fighter Elahi is different from this Elahi. According to your article, he was alive after the indepence. But fighter Elahi died in 1971! Did you use LLM to write the article? Mehedi Abedin 20:09, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

@Mehedi Abedin From what I can infer, there are three freedom fighters in the elahi family, one of the, K. Mukhtar Elahi died in 1971 but the other two (mushtaq and manzoor) survived the war.

TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 08:02, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

@TrueMoriarty My bad, their names are similar. I misunderstood. Mehedi Abedin 13:07, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

More information Views/Day, Quality ...

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
80		Rangpur District (talk)	Add sources
160		Barisal Division (talk)	Add sources
170		Game Boy Player (talk)	Add sources
69		Barisal District (talk)	Add sources
103		Shahid Beheshti University (talk)	Add sources
172		Barisal (talk)	Add sources
3		Chenchrirampur Union (talk)	Cleanup
17		Kaliganj Upazila, Satkhira (talk)	Cleanup
107		Arthropod leg (talk)	Cleanup
935		Elementary particle (talk)	Expand
287		2005 in video games (talk)	Expand
30		History of subatomic physics (talk)	Expand
3,505		Hatsune Miku (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
49		Islamic fundamentalism in Iran (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
390		Virtual band (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
28		National symbols of Barbados (talk)	Merge
64		Ranghar (talk)	Merge
43		To Kill a Mockingbird in popular culture (talk)	Merge
759		Weak interaction (talk)	Wikify
57		Socialism in Iran (talk)	Wikify
1,586		People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran (talk)	Wikify
2		Dudhalmou (talk)	Orphan
2		Kodaldhoa (talk)	Orphan
2		Padri Shibpur (talk)	Orphan
23		Dynamite Duke (talk)	Stub
7		Trigoniophthalmus (talk)	Stub
21		Barisal Sadar Upazila (talk)	Stub
25		Bakerganj Upazila (talk)	Stub
23		Babuganj Upazila (talk)	Stub
15		Lalmohan Upazila (talk)	Stub

Close

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:53, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

Welcome, welcome, welcome TrueMoriarty! I'm glad that you are joining the March 2026 drive! Please, have a cup of WikiTea, and go cite some articles.

Cielquiparle (talk) 18:02, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

More information Views/Day, Quality ...

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
1,114		Standard Model (talk)	Add sources
37		Timeline of atomic and subatomic physics (talk)	Add sources
10		Hossainpur Upazila (talk)	Add sources
183		Timeline of operating systems (talk)	Add sources
4		Md. Mahabub Elahi Ronju (talk)	Add sources
20		Mathbaria Upazila (talk)	Add sources
232		Source lines of code (talk)	Cleanup
22		Matlab Uttar Upazila (talk)	Cleanup
15		Jagat Joity Das (talk)	Cleanup
1,938		Higgs boson (talk)	Expand
14		Desert (particle physics) (talk)	Expand
159		Flavour (particle physics) (talk)	Expand
958		Smiley (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
299		Irony punctuation (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
747		ASCII art (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
12		Ctenobethylus goepperti (talk)	Merge
370		Pundit (talk)	Merge
32		Middlebury Panthers (talk)	Merge
300		Western conifer seed bug (talk)	Wikify
83		2011–2012 Iranian protests (talk)	Wikify
47		Big5 (talk)	Wikify
4		Mahilara (talk)	Orphan
2		Paysa (talk)	Orphan
2		Gazirpar (talk)	Orphan
16		Bhola Sadar Upazila (talk)	Stub
14		Dashmina Upazila (talk)	Stub
12		Barguna Sadar Upazila (talk)	Stub
23		Wazirpur Upazila (talk)	Stub
12		Betagi Upazila (talk)	Stub
21		Gournadi Upazila (talk)	Stub

Close

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:17, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi TrueMoriarty. Thank you for your work on List of unions in Barisal Division. Another editor, Mariamnei, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thank you for your work on this article. Unfortunately, it is not yet ready for main space. Please add sources and establish notability as per WP:NLIST. I will be moving it to draft. Please feel free to republish once it meets the above criteria. Thanks and have a great day!

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

Mariamnei (talk) 06:34, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

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

• A ISBN error. References show this error when the ISBN value or formatting is invalid. Please edit the article to ensure the value is correct, that only one ISBN is used, that the proper optional separators are used, and that no other text is included. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 14:26, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Afrochilis, a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cerci was added.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 21:59, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi Moriarty

Yesterday you reverted en edit I did on St Bride's Church -- this one. It was done in good faith. It was done from my work IP address (as this is) which I rarely use - which is why it may have been flagged as possible vandalism (by Twinkle?). I've been the main contributor to that page now for about six months - Site archaeology, Chapels, Dedication to St Bride, and Well - are what I've contributed. I've put in a lot of work and will often tweak things to improve readability or clarity. The talk page is pretty much moribund. There's a still a lot to add.

I take it i should get an account ... ~2026-13470-42 (talk) 02:26, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-13470-42 Hi. The problem was that your edit changed the tone of the article to being slightly emotive, which is not suggested in Wikipedia (you used words like cry, groundbreaking, etc). But the fact that the edit was marked as a vandalism was a mistake of mine, sorry about that.

You should get an account. It will eventually let you edit extended confirmed protected pages.

Thank you

TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 05:36, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

You've got that wrong. Kelisi (talk) 16:11, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

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

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Gommeh ^{(talk! sign!)} 17:00, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Morphology of Archaeognatha requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia, as it exhibits signs of having been generated by an AI model with no clear human review. Text produced by these applications can be unsuitable for an encyclopedia and output must be carefully checked. For further information, see the section G15 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think these signs were incorrectly identified and you assert that you did carefully check the content, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Additionally – if you would like to create an article but find it difficult, please ask for help at the Teahouse. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 06:15, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

@Helpful Raccoon check out the deletation contestation TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 07:39, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is TrueMoriarty defending AI hallucinations. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 09:30, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

@Helpful Raccoon Responded to your complaints about me in the ANI. TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 09:46, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Per Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#TrueMoriarty_defending_AI_hallucinations you are prohibited from using LLMs anywhere on the English Wikipedia. This is logged here. Additionally, your pending changes and ECR have been removed. Star Mississippi 15:14, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Yes, I understand. But I can reapply later? TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 15:15, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

(Non-administrator comment) To quote Star Missisipi's close of the thread, There is no clear timeline on when TrueMoriarty may re-apply for those privileges, or request permission to use LLMs. I'd advise in my capacity as an independent admin that TM wait a minimum of six months after which they should also show a productive editing history. The ban is indefinite, but WP:Indefinite is not infinite, so the answer to your question seems to be "yes". I'd echo Star Missisipi's advice about waiting at least six months, and build a corpus of productive edits in that time. EducatedRedneck (talk) 15:39, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification! TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 15:40, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Please strike out this comment of yours, which violated WP:CT/A-I. You can do so by adding <s> at the start of your comment and </s> at the end of your comment. Remember, you are not an extended-confirmed user and so are not permitted to edit about the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly construed. --Yamla (talk) 11:31, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you. Please be careful around articles that require extended-confirmed status. You should not edit such articles. --Yamla (talk) 16:08, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions to Zindabazar. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing as a live article at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and See my source evaluation in Special:Diff/1342939424. I have converted it to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. bonadea contributions talk 11:24, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

As you set up Royal Turquoise to evade your block and continue editing articles, I have extended your block site-wide. --Yamla (talk) 15:33, 17 March 2026 (UTC)