User talk:Van1985

Hi Van1985. Thank you for your work on Babanango Game Reserve. Another editor, 11wallisb, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Hello. This article has multiple issues which need immediate attention. Firstly, there are multiple citation errors visible in the references relating to author names. Secondly, at least one of the references is a bare URL which needs to be converted into proper citation style. Finally, a third of this article has been detected as being generated by an LLM, this is not acceptable on Wikipedia. Please edit the article so these issues are resolved as soon as possible. Thank you.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|11wallisb}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

11WB (talk) 21:53, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi @11wallisb

I hope you are well. Please could I ask you to review my article changes, if it is acceptable as is, or best to leave for a bit while others make further edits?

Please advise. Still a newby editor here, so trying to learn the ropes! Van1985 (talk) 07:47, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello! I have only just come online today, but I will make sure to take a look at this in the next few hours and will get back to you! (Replying now so that you know I've seen your reply!) 11WB (talk) 11:41, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

@Van1985, sorry for the delayed response. I can see the bare URLs are no longer an issue and the citation errors are fixed. Just make sure the article isn't written using generated LLM text. I have marked the article as reviewed. Thanks! 11WB (talk) 17:40, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

It is best not to remove the tag about llm content yourself. Instead, ask the editor who placed the tag if they are satisfied with your fixes. Abductive (reasoning) 07:31, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Abductive

Ok thank-you for your response - I misunderstood the guidelines here on this then. I will reply to the reviewer and ask them to review my fixes.

Thank-you! Van1985 (talk) 07:42, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, don't worry too much. Leave it for a few days, people may come along and improve the article. Then look at your wording with fresh eyes. Abductive (reasoning) 07:44, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions to Annie Minogue. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and it is promotional and reads like an advertisement. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:46, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Dclemens1971

Thanks for your review and feedback. Would you be able to guide me as to what parts of the article you view as promotional? And would it better to remove those parts completely, and just keep the article simple, with introduction, early life and education, and maybe parts of her career? And take out the rest for now? Van1985 (talk) 06:30, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

Some examples of promotional language:

• The band has been described as combining rock attitude with pop sensibility and blues undertones. Without a source here, this sounds like marketing language.
• In 2023, Minogue released NOW!, an album centered on themes of resilience, social responsibility, and personal truth. What does this even mean?
• She has been profiled in Who’s Who of Professional Women, Passion Vista, and WomLead Magazine, which highlighted her longevity in the music industry and her emphasis on authenticity. (Who's Who is a pay-to-play directory and WomLead is I'm guessing the same since there's no byline there and the article is a puff piece.)

But you could still take those sentences out and the article would still have an overall promotional tone due to its reliance on non-independent sources like WomLead. I would focus on rewriting in straightforward language with every statement sourced to an independent, reliable, secondary source. The WP:TEAHOUSE is a great place to ask for help as well! Dclemens1971 (talk) 10:46, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

Ok thanks for your feedback @Dclemens1971, I really appreciate it.

I will work on the article more and then ask for further assistance at The Teahouse. Van1985 (talk) 13:00, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, Van1985, for your query on the Women in Red talk page. I think it would be useful for you to become a member of the project: see New registrations on Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/New members. In connection with the biography you are writing, you'll find some useful tips in our Ten Simple Rules. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 10:28, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for signing up and welcome to the project. Please let me know if you run into any difficulties.-Ipigott (talk) 11:54, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks @Ipigott

Appreciate your input here! Van1985 (talk) 12:55, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

Annie Minogue, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

João^hola 07:47, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Josedimaria

Thanks so much for approving my article for creation. Much appreciated! Van1985 (talk) 18:33, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions to Renishaw Hills. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it consists of machine-generated text. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Aesurias (talk) 08:14, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Aesurias

Thanks for your review of my article Renishaw Hills.

I have made some edits to the parts of content that I thought may be seen as machine-generated text - it should be good now.

I am usually able to see the button "Submit the draft for review" at the top of the article, but I don't see that option now - please could you take a look and let me know if I have missed it?

Thanks! Van1985 (talk) 19:06, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi. The entire article is AI-generated using an LLM - the giveaway is the unnecessary capitalization in section titles. Aesurias (talk) 20:32, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

Have you run this article through any AI content detectors to back your claim?

You can use any tools likes https://quillbot.com/ai-content-detector or https://www.grammarly.com/ai-detector, which I have just done and it has confirmed for me that none of the text is LLM content, so please tell me how you got to your conclusion? Van1985 (talk) 05:55, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Renishaw Hills 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/Renishaw Hills 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.

🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 14:02, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

Women in Red | November 2025, Vol 11, Issue 11, Nos. 326, 327, 353, 354 Recognized as the most active topic-based WikiProject by human changes. Online events: New: Alphabet run: U, V, W | Asian women Continuing, year-long initiatives: #1day1woman | Music Announcements: Women in Red's Asian women event is part of the global Wikipedia Asian Month 2025 campaign. You are welcome to add your contributions to both event pages. Tip of the Month: Verifiability is increasingly important as AI evolves. You should ensure that every statement made is adequately sourced. There should be no less than three independent reliable sources for each biography, including at least one source for each paragraph. Progress ("moving the needle"): Statistics available via various tools: previously, Humaniki tool; currently, QLever. Thank you if you contributed one or more of the 20,473 articles created in the past year. 21 Oct 2024, 19.963% of biographies on EN-WP were about women (2,030,245 biographies; 405,305 women) 28 Oct 2025: 20.23% of biographies on EN-WP were about women (2,094,677 biographies; 423,778 women) Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help wanted! Want to apply your skills or learn new ones? Help us plan monthly events, design event logos, come up with a tip-of-the-month, and/or provide any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest

--Rosiestep (talk) 17:08, 30 October 2025 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Women in Red | November 2025, Vol 11, Issue 12, Nos. 326, 327, 355, 356, 357 Recognized as the most active topic-based WikiProject by human changes. Online events: New: Alphabet run X, Y, Z | Food and drink | Women who died in 2025 Continuing, year-long initiatives: #1day1woman | Music Announcements: Global Translat-a-thon 2025 06 December 2025 Tip of the Month: Lists of deaths by year is a good resource for the December / January meet-up Women who died in 2025 Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help wanted! Want to apply your skills or learn new ones? Help us plan monthly events, design event logos, come up with a tip-of-the-month, and/or provide any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest

--Rosiestep (talk) 22:20, 28 November 2025 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Hello, I'm Scope creep. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Joekels have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. scope_creep^Talk 07:31, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Joekels 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/Joekels 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.

scope_creep^Talk 07:35, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2026!

Hello Van1985, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2026. Happy editing, Abishe (talk) 11:10, 25 December 2025 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Abishe (talk) 11:10, 25 December 2025 (UTC)

Women in Red | January 2026, Vol 12, Issue 1, Nos 357, 358, 359, 360 Online events: New: Sports (year-long initiative) | Alphabet run - countries starting with A Continuing: #1day1woman ( year-long initiative) | Women who died in 2025 Announcements from other communities Wikipedia turns 25! Celebrate Wikipedia Day on Jan 15, 2026. Tip of the month: Consider becoming a new page reviewer to help reduce the huge backlog of women's biographies. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest

--Rosiestep (talk) 23:34, 26 December 2025 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Women in Red | February 2026, Vol 12, Issue 2, Nos 358, 359, 361, 362, 363 Online events: New: Alphabet run: countries starting with B | Black Women | Works by women: theatre, opera, music Continuing: #1day1woman ( year-long initiative) | Sports (year-long initiative) Announcements from other communities Join Wikipedia:26 for '26 and create or substantially improve twenty-six Wikipedia articles during the year 2026, at least one for each letter of the English alphabet. Tip of the month: Our redlists are a great resource, but not every redlinked subject is notable. Be sure to research before starting a new article. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest

--Lajmmoore (talk 22:50, 31 January 2026 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Women in Red | March 2026, Vol 12, Issue 3, Nos 358, 359, 364, 365, 366 Online events: March 1-31: Artists & Activists | Artworks by women | Alphabet run: countries starting with C Continuing (year-long initiatives): #1day1woman | Sports Announcements from other communities: Celebrate Women Unreferenced articles backlog drive Wiki Loves Ramadan Tip of the month: Those experiencing difficulties with new articles can follow the guidance in our essays, perhaps starting with our Ten Simple Rules. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest

--Rosiestep (talk) 09:31, 25 February 2026 (UTC) via MassMessaging

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Denodo 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/Denodo (2nd nomination) 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.

AllWeKnowOfHeaven (talk) 04:35, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Van1985. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  PhilKnight (talk) 15:00, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Please provide evidence of this? My IP address is only linked to one Wikipedia account, and I have only ever created pages using this profile. I have been unfairly attacked today by the user @Athanelarfor whatever reason, because I asked for help at the Teahouse, and they have proceeded to call me out on something that is simply not factual. Van1985 (talk) 15:09, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

As you can see in the sockpuppet investigation, a CheckUser has confirmed based on technical information that you are linked to User:Southa79, an account which you used to vote 'keep' on deletion discussions of your articles. Athanelar (talk) 15:14, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Show me the evidence of how I am linked to that account? Can you show me that we are the same IP address? I can guarantee the answer is NO, because I don't know that person. Van1985 (talk) 15:16, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Checkusers are able to see more technical information than just IP addresses, including details of the devices that log into or use certain accounts. The details are not public, but if a CheckUser confirms a link, there is no doubt. Athanelar (talk) 15:18, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

You could also try to be at least a bit more subtle than dragging the account out of 2 months of inactivity just to leave a keep vote on an article you also wanted to keep and then disappear again. Athanelar (talk) 15:25, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

@PhilKnight Please see my request for unblock on my talk page, with explanation, and let me know what the next steps are. Thanks so much! Van1985 (talk) 17:34, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

@PhilKnight please review my request below for unblock. I have been transparent in my response, and would appreciate the opportunity to keep editing on Wikipedia.

Thank-you! Van1985 (talk) 18:05, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Please don't keep pinging admins to review your unblock. It's in the queue, and one of the volunteers that are administrators will review it in due course. Pinging an admin about your particular unblock request three times in two days (you did it in the unblock request too) is far more likely to hurt your case than to help it. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 18:32, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Van1985 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)

---

Request reason:

Your reason here: @PhilKnight I understand the reason for being blocked indefinitely on Wikipedia, based on being connected to another user account, @Southa79. This account does not belong to me as was originally stated, but it belongs to my husband, so the block is not wrong, in that I am associated to that account. However, it is not my account, nor is it linked to my IP address or my email. I am willing to share evidence of this if needed. My husband originally created his own Wikipedia account to edit an old band page that he used to be a part of, called Crossingpoint - you can see evidence of this edit linked to his account. He also made edits on other pages of interest to him. When I had 2 articles nominated for deletion, I asked him to help with a Keep vote for these, to help the case. I was not aware at this point that this was not allowed, and did not think I was doing anything against Wikiepedia policies. I have not asked him to vote in my most recent AFC nomination, because after the last nomination, a comment was made about his account being spam, or something along those lines, so I thought at that point that it may not be the best option. I am being completely transparent here, and have nothing to hide or no reason for suspicion further to the above. I have made consistent edits on Wikiepdia over the last 6 months, editing mostly South African articles of interest to me, and creating articles that are lacking in South Africa. I would appreciate my account being reviewed so that I can continue to make meaningful contributions to Wikipedia, and continue to learn from more experienced editors. Van1985 (talk) 17:30, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Accept reason:

I'll convert this block to a time-limited one. Cheers. asilvering (talk) 03:20, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Van1985 (talk) 17:30, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Asilvering thanks so much, I really appreciate that. Have a great day! Van1985 (talk) 05:15, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Question: I am not an admin, have no say over your block, and you are under no obligation to answer this; but why did you respond above that I can guarantee the answer [to whether there is any technical connection between the accounts] is NO, because I don't know [Southa79]. if indeed that account is your husband and you didn't believe you were doing anything wrong in asking his help at the deletion votes initially? When you realised that the sockpuppetry block was because of your husband's account, it seems odd to me that your first response would be to categorically deny a connection rather than explain. Athanelar (talk) 19:02, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

@Van1985 Please be aware that the edit history of every page is public, meaning that I (and anybody else) can easily see where you attempted to conceal the denial I referred to. Per WP:REDACT please refrain from editing comments which have already been replied to, as it obviously changes the context in which people replied to you. I have therefore restored what you removed/changed, but I left your reply to my comment here out because nobody had replied to it yet and I am charitably assuming that you chose to remove it to withdraw the aspersions against me that it contained. Athanelar (talk) 11:56, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank-you, I am aware that anyone can see the edit history, so that is fine that you have restored the comments - I simply removed them because what I originally said was not true. And yes, I also removed my last reply here to you, because I did not think it was worth my time arguing with you on this matter any longer, I will wait for an admin to respond to my appeal.

Have a fabulous day! Van1985 (talk) 12:05, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

{{checkuser needed}} - is this story consistent with the technical data? Although even if it's true soliciting meatpuppets to support your case isn't the greatest idea, however that by itself isn't a stand-alone indeffable offence in my book. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:37, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

From what data I have available, this story is plausible. Izno (talk) 23:26, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

@PhilKnight, what do you think about converting both of these to one-week first-time sock blocks instead? -- asilvering (talk) 04:20, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

@asilvering - good idea. PhilKnight (talk) 11:55, 15 March 2026 (UTC)