Hey Eric! It’s AWB. Thanks for editing my page. Nobody remembers but I was a founding writer and correspondent for the Daily Show’s first 3 years. I even hosted it a few times. Gone, like tears in the rain. Cheers, Whit

Thanks for uploading File:Zum zum zum - La canzone che mi passa per la testa.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:45, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on File:Howard Sackler.jpeg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a non-free file from a commercial source (e.g. Associated Press, Getty Images), where the file itself is not the subject of sourced commentary. If you can explain why the file can be used under the non-free content guidelines, please add the appropriate non-free use tag and rationale.

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.  REAL 💬 ⬆   23:58, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 20:24, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Burned Haystack Dating Method has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for information on how to contribute your work appropriately. For legal reasons, Wikipedia strictly cannot host copyrighted text or images from print media or digital platforms without an appropriate and verifiable license. Contributions infringing on copyright will be removed. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. Excessive quotation is a copyright violation. lp0 on fire () 11:03, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at I'm Like a Lawyer with the Way I'm Always Trying to Get You Off (Me & You), without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources to see how to add references to an article. Thank you. ResPM (T🔈🎵C) 14:47, 23 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 15:39, 23 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I did the deed that you brought upon me and added those posters. You're welcome. Jibblesnark86 (talk) 22:44, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You are the king (or queen) depending on your pronouns! Everyone is SO sensitive about that these days! Alright, not everyone. Thanks again! Eric Carpenter (talk) 17:50, 23 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Of course! Don't worry, I'm not sensitive lol! Always a pleasure to help! Jibblesnark86 (talk) 19:54, 23 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The article Native New Yorkers Historical Society has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Does not appear to meet GNG, WP:BEFORE turned up very little.

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.

David Palmer//cloventt ^(talk) 22:16, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

References for material inside parentheses also go inside the parentheses; see MOS:REFPUNCT. Thank you. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 15:40, 23 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The article Paul Selig has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

subject does not appear to pass WP:GNG

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.

David Palmer//cloventt ^(talk) 22:43, 25 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

David Palmer//cloventt ^(talk) 03:22, 26 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Jun Kunimura, a link pointing to the disambiguation page Desert Moon was added.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:55, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. MrMarmite (talk) 13:40, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Pooka Lives! (Into the Dark episode requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a recently created redirect from an implausible typo or misnomer, or other unlikely search term.

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. I am bad at usernames (talk · contribs) 22:10, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

• A URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters contains an invalid URL. Please edit the article to add the valid URL. ( | )

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can . Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 22:31, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Fire and Ice (1986 film), a link pointing to the disambiguation page Spectre was added.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 11:53, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Eric Carpenter. Thank you for your work on Eduard Peters. 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 add a source for "After his retirement in 1925, Peters studied geology at the Albert Ludwig University of Freiburg, with minor subjects in botany, zoology and prehistory. He began excavations in Hegau in 1926, which continued until 1932." 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) 07:59, 3 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Mariamnei: Thanks for your comment, I searched online and could not find references for the section you mentioned in the Eduard Peters article so I removed it. I'll leave it up to other Wikipedia editors to fill out the article, thanks again. Eric Carpenter (talk) 17:31, 3 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that the source previously listed at the bottom of the article was for all of the content of the article as it stood when created. By moving that citation to the end of the first sentence, you have made it appear that almost all of the rest of the article is unsourced, when most of it is supported by that source. I know the article is not up to current standards, but I think your edit makes it appear that it is less supported by a reliable source than it actually is. - Donald Albury 01:14, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Donald Albury:

I re-edited to article to add references to the rest of the text using the reference that was previously at the bottom of the page. Also added a link to an Internet Archive copy of the referenced book, thanks. Eric Carpenter (talk) 16:46, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I know the article was not properly referenced when created. I can only plead that I was still new to Wikipedia at the time, and did not have a clear understanding of referencing. Another weakness is that I used only one source, and I have not had access to that source since 2008. If someone had nominated the article for deletion, I would have been hard put to defend it. Donald Albury 18:45, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

Wisenerd (talk) 09:38, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]