Archives

bot messages 2009 - 2010 Archives 2011 Archives 2012 Archives 2013 (Jan. - Jun.) Archives 2013 (Jul. - Dec.) Archives 2014 (Jan. - Jun.) Archives 2014 (Jul. - Dec.) Archives 2015 (Jan. - Jun.) Archives 2015 (Jul. - Dec.) Archives 2016 (Jan. - Jun.) Archives 2016 (Jul. - Dec.) Archives 2017 (Jan. - Jun.) Archives 2017 (Jul. - Dec.) Archives 2018 (Jan. - Jun.) Archives 2018 (Jul. - Dec.) Archives 2019 (Jan. - Jun.) Archives 2019 (Jul. - Dec.) Archives 2020 (Jan. - Jun.) Archives 2020 (Jul. - Dec.) Archives 2021 (Jan. - Jun.) Archives 2021 (Jul. - Dec.) Archives 2022 Archives

Dear Mr. 78.26,

updating on Sinfonia Latina Music Festival/Roberto McCausland Dieppa, both seminal.

Regards,

Cherkes

https://www.elheraldo.co/sociedad/el-pianista-roberto-mccausland-revive-su-sinfonia-latina-964305

page 22

https://laolacaribe.com/wp-content/uploads/edicion-168-LA-OLA-CARIBE.pdf 2603:6011:100:8115:210A:F36F:EEB1:84E5 (talk) 01:28, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 21:47, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey 78.26 Hope you are doing good!! You had deleted the page Vineet Singh (Now after his name's spelling change Vinit Singh) as per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vinit Singh (2nd nomination) in 2018. He now got featured in Indian Idol 13 as one of the most prominent contestant because he has a playback career as he has playbacked in movies like Khiladi 786, Prem Ratan Dhan Payo, Policegiri, Action Jackson (2014 film), Moods with Melodies,etc after he debuted with Sa Re Ga Ma Pa Challenge 2005, there are now sources about him which are notable sources, So i am willing to recreate the page, Please share your opinion regarding this, Thanks

A couple of new sources which are notable and independent too are :[1], [2], [3].

Thanks Surya^{beej   ⋠talk⋡} 07:20, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Suryabeej: I'd be willing to restore it to draft space so you can work on it, unless you want to start from scratch. I'm not entirely convinced by all of the sources you sent (the first one seems like breathless idolizing, not neutral reporting), but if you think it can pass AfC then go ahead and try that process. Let me know. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 00:58, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

78.26: Hey apologies for responding late! Sure, If you can Restore the draft I am willing to work on it. Thanks!! Surya^{beej   ⋠talk⋡} 08:11, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm running into some Wikipedia server errors when attempting to restore. I'm going to be mostly offline for the next few days, so I beg patience. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 11:37, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Third time was the charm. @Suryabeej: I have restored to draft: Draft:Vinit Singh. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 11:41, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You were kind enough to quickly remove several defamatory edits of Rory Phillips (DJ) made by User_talk:95.147.222.131 but the defamatory elements are still visible in the two edits made to remove them by User_talk:162.195.122.96 is it possible to remove these too? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Letsnotstart (talk • contribs) 21:25, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Letsnotstart: - you are correct, and good catch. Done. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 00:39, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@78.26: The Seventh-day Adventist Church article is still being persistantly vandalized. Can you please protect it again. Catfurball (talk) 16:23, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Catfurball: I dunno. These are pretty watched pages and they've been reverted (and blocked) very quickly. It's a borderline case. A better place to make this request is Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. I'm online/editing more sporadically than I used to be, so might not be able to respond before the report goes "stale". All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 23:52, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

17:12, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:78.26#c-2806:2F0:62C0:C653:137F:9572:3CA0:414-20240629171200(UTC) 2806:2F0:62C0:C653:137F:9572:3CA0:414 (talk) 17:12, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, 78.26. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Oghema Niagara".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:40, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It always feels strange to leave these notices on the talk pages of long-time editors and admins. Of course, if you want to work on this draft, you can restore it whenever you like. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:42, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz: Yeah, sorry about that. I should finish that up, it's a very interesting story and highly notable, but there's so much conflicting information. I'll restore it when I'm ready to take it up again. In the meantime, thank you so much for all the hard work you do here. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 02:16, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. It's nice to see you around, I've noticed at AFD that we are a little light on admin help on Saturdays. I think folks take a well-deserved day off. Then they show up mid-day Sunday and things are back to normal. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:15, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, well count me among those who don't help out on Saturdays, sorry. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 04:26, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Grey Gull Records artists indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:12, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Here... did you mean to say do not? ;) Regardless, thanks for watching the page. Silikonz💬 01:43, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Silikonz: Oof, thanks for catching that! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 01:45, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No prob :) Silikonz💬 01:45, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering if you could hide the edit summaries of this recently blocked IP's edits as they promote racial hatred and uses a racial slur. Thank you in advance. Yue🌙 01:21, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Yue: Thank you.  Done 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 01:40, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Unless I am mistaken you are an admin on this project and have expressed willingness to provide the text of deleted pages to users who may need them. If this is correct, may I please ask you to send me the text of I due evasi di Sing Sing. I had opened a deletion review to have the page restored but was advised to recreate it instead. Which I might do more easily with whatever material had already been written. If you agree, could you please input the text on this page for instance? Thank you very much for your help. Yours, — MY, OH, MY! 21:41, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mushy Yank: I have restored the page to your user space. You'll find it at: User:Mushy Yank/I due evasi di Sing Sing. Please don't restore it to main space until it is properly sourced to reliable sources. Happy editing! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 00:22, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and thank you again. The page is now in the Main, as you can see. Only the editing history is missing (it is on my user's space page, though). I sort of remember there was a template or possible transfer to credit users who started the page before it was deleted. I will look up and try to do it. Apologies if it was needed before restoring it to the Main, Yours, — MY, OH, MY! 22:25, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mushy Yank: This could be resolved by deleting what's currently on the main page, and moving what's currently in your user space. Would you like me to do that? 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 23:12, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. If it is not too much work, I'd be very grateful if you can, yes. It seems the page has already been modified in the Main by another user, but if it's still possible for you to do it, thank you. I had also let a merge request (I guess) on the TP but if that does not interfere with your effort, again, thank you for help! — MY, OH, MY! 23:20, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mushy Yank: Yeah that gumms it up. I don't have time to do it right now, so I requested a history merge. I'm not sure I agree with the intervening edit, but I don't know much about WP:FILMMOS. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 00:25, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, thank you! I am not sure either about that edit (I've left a note on the project page). Anyway, thanks again. — MY, OH, MY! 00:30, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, again. I was wondering if you could hide the edit summaries of this recently blocked IP's edits as they contain hateful and racist messages. Have a great weekend and thank you once again. Yue🌙 23:39, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

maybe a tps admin could do this? I’m basically offline and will be until Monday evening. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 23:51, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Got it, have a great weekend then! Yue🌙 00:53, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings from Delhi! Could you please put the drafts of my deleted edits in my userspace and point me to them? I will combine them into a single redraft. I have been communicating with Grayfell. Awaiting your message. SuchetaR (talk) 08:58, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There's nothing to restore to your userspace, as none of your edits have been deleted. The self-promotion edits can be viewed in the article history. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 01:55, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, 78.26. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! interstatefive  00:04, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello 78.26, May I bother you again and ask you to send me the text of I Crab Goalkeeper or its draft Draft:Crab Goalkeeper. As I found some sources, I would like to recreate the page and, again, I might do it more easily with whatever material had already been written. If you agree, could you please create the subpage on my behalf User:Mushy Yank/Crab Goalkeeper? (or what's the most easy for you) Thank you very much for your help. If you'd rather have me ask another admin next time, just let me know. Thanks again. Yours, — MY, OH, MY! 10:13, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mushy Yank:  Done 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:38, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much. Yours, — MY, OH, MY! 16:41, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Aoidh (talk) 00:03, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 78.26, I'm a little confused how you get NC for this? The first three keeps were rebutted by three different people and no additional sources had been added/found after that. The fourth keep had no P&G basis at all, and the sixth keep spuriously claimed GNG from tabloid coverage was allowed. Most editors acknowledged the generally poor, tabloid quality of the sources, so given that everything alleged to be SIGCOV was exclusively on minor criminal events that received only fleeting attention in local news, wouldn't BLP and NOTNEWS policy override a claim of meeting GNG? JoelleJay (talk) 01:36, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@JoelleJay: I think my closing statement explains it well enough. I'm sure you think that your side has utterly destroyed the other side's argument, but there were significant source analysis on both sides, and I found no way to reconcile the positions. I'm sure the other side feels just as strongly they obliterated your side's arguments. Both are policy based. There is fundamental disagreement as to whether or not there is SIGCOV in independent, reliable sources, and there is fundamental disagreement as to whether or not this is BLP1E. Any close other than NOCONSENSUS would be a supervote, in my opinion. If you feel the close is that erroneous that it needs to be overturned without re-litigating the article, then take it to DRV. Happy editing!78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 02:27, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your explanation...I was under no impression that the delete side was clearly stronger, rather my confusion was that the close doesn't address at all the BLP arguments, in particular the tabloid sourcing issues for negative content. Almost everyone agreed that the sources "weren't good", and the ones called SIGCOV were uniformly negative news announcements, so I would have appreciated more assessment of how an article written from those sources could comply with Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources. [...] Biographies of living persons ("BLPs") must be written conservatively and with regard for the subject's privacy. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid: it is not Wikipedia's job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives and NOTNEWS. JoelleJay (talk) 03:41, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tabloid sourcing for negative content isn't a notability discussion, that is a content discussion. AfD is the wrong venue. I also disagree with the characterization that "almost everyone" agree the sources weren't good. I'd call it much closer to 50/50. Some of the keeps arguments stated that "some" of the sources weren't good, but that overall there were enough "good" sources to pass notability. If "almost everyone" agreed the sources "weren't good", I would have readily closed as delete. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 03:54, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 78.26. Thank you for the excellent close at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Japan Time (TV series) based on the strengths of the arguments. I really appreciate it. Cunard (talk) 08:05, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2023).

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, editors indefinitely site-banned by community consensus will now have all rights, including sysop, removed.
• As a part of the Wikimedia Foundation's IP Masking project, a new policy has been created that governs the access to temporary account IP addresses. An associated FAQ has been created and individual communities can increase the requirements to view temporary account IP addresses.

Technical news

• Bot operators and tool maintainers should schedule time in the coming months to test and update their tools for the effects of IP masking. IP masking will not be deployed to any content wiki until at least October 2023 and is unlikely to be deployed to the English Wikipedia until some time in 2024.

Arbitration

• The arbitration case World War II and the history of Jews in Poland has been closed. The topic area of Polish history during World War II (1933-1945) and the history of Jews in Poland is subject to a "reliable source consensus-required" contentious topic restriction.

Miscellaneous

• Following a community referendum, the arbitration policy has been modified to remove the ability for users to appeal remedies to Jimbo Wales.

---

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2023).

Administrator changes

Novem Linguae

• Deckiller
• Electionworld
• MBisanz
• Penwhale
• Raul654
• Roadrunner
• Viridae
• Yannismarou

Bureaucrat changes

MBisanz

Guideline and policy news

• Contributions to the English Wikipedia are now released under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA 4.0) license instead of CC BY-SA 3.0. Contributions are still also released under the GFDL license.

Technical news

• Discussion is open regarding a proposed global policy regarding third-party resources. Third-party resources are computer resources that reside outside of Wikimedia production websites.

Arbitration

• Two arbitration cases are currently open. Proposed decisions are expected 5 July 2023 for the Scottywong case and 9 July 2023 for the AlisonW case.

---

@78.26: Share your thoughts regarding the album if you wish to. 2001:D08:2901:372C:176E:668A:26DB:24BF (talk) 18:23, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The third round of the 2023 WikiCup has come to an end. The 16 users who made it to the fourth round had at least 175 points. Our top scorers in round 3 were:

• Thebiguglyalien, with 919 points from a featured article on Frances Cleveland as well as five good articles and many reviews,
• Unlimitedlead, with 862 points from a high-scoring featured articles on Henry II of England and numerous reviews,
• Iazyges, with 560 points from a high-scoring featured article on Tiberius III.

Contestants achieved 11 featured articles, 2 featured lists, 47 good articles, 72 featured or good article reviews, over 100 DYKs and 40 ITN appearances. As always, any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met. Please also remember that all submissions must meet core Wikipedia policies, regardless of the review process.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:17, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

By longtime precedent, record labels were judged by a inverse interpretation of NMUSIC #5.. carrying on from your comment on AfD. I don't want to go further in discussion and stray too far off from the actual discussion AfD. Can you maybe link me to some notable decisions spread over time? Graywalls (talk) 23:28, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Graywalls: thanks for your patience. Some illuminating discussions have occurred at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/430 West Records, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New Orleans Records, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kung Fu Records, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Afternoon Records (3rd nomination), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Skunk Records, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eulogy Recordings (2nd nomination). Plus the myriad discussions at NMUSIC and WP:N [(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(organizations_and_companies)#Categorization_of_notability_requisite_for_record_labels,_recording_studios,_art_collectives_and_like)]. Your question ultimately demands an empirical proof, which I have neither time nor inclination to provide. Not because this is what you intend, but because is no point in time where the most ardent inclusionist can say "Consensus is that anything possibly meeting NMUSIC#5 is kept" any more that someone else could say "By consensus record labels must always meet strictest interpretation of NCORP." Some other discussions of varying degrees of usefulness: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DeSoto Records Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jarrah Records, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Topshelf Records, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CandyRat Records, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Springman Records, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Silkheart Records. I hope that's helpful. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:43, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ten years ago, you were found precious. That's what you are, always. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:35, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2023).

Administrator changes

Firefangledfeathers

• AlisonW
• Amberrock
• Closedmouth
• Scottywong

Interface administrator changes

Novem Linguae

Technical news

• The tag filter on Special:NewPages and revision history pages can now be inverted. This allows hiding edits made by automated tools. (T334338)
• Special:BlockedExternalDomains is a new tool that allows easier blocking of plain domains (and their subdomains). This is more easily searchable and is faster for the software to use than the existing MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. It does not support regex (for complex cases), URL path-matching, or the MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist. (T337431)

Arbitration

• The arbitration cases named Scottywong and AlisonW closed 10 July and 16 July respectively.
• The SmallCat dispute arbitration case is in the workshop phase.

---

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2023).

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, TFAs will be automatically semi-protected the day before it is on the main page and through the day after.
• A discussion at WP:VPP about revision deletion and oversight for dead names found that [s]ysops can choose to use revdel if, in their view, it's the right tool for this situation, and they need not default to oversight. But oversight could well be right where there's a particularly high risk to the person. Use your judgment.

Technical news

• Special:Contributions now shows the user's local edit count and the account's creation date. (T324166)

Arbitration

• The SmallCat dispute case has closed. As part of the final decision, editors participating in XfD have been reminded to be careful about forming local consensus which may or may not reflect the broader community consensus. Regular closers of XfD forums were also encouraged to note when broader community discussion, or changes to policies and guidelines, would be helpful.

Miscellaneous

• Tech tip: The "Browse history interactively" banner shown at the top of Special:Diff can be used to easily look through a history, assemble composite diffs, or find out what archive something wound up in.

---

The fourth round of the competition has finished, with anyone scoring less than 673 points being eliminated. It was a high scoring round with all but one of the contestants who progressed to the final having achieved an FA during the round. The highest scorers were

• Epicgenius, with 2173 points topping the scores, gained mainly from a featured article, 38 good articles and 9 DYKs. He was followed by
• Sammi Brie, with 1575 points, gained mainly from a featured article, 28 good articles and 50 good article reviews. Close behind was
• Thebiguglyalien, with 1535 points mainly gained from a featured article, 15 good articles, 26 good article reviews and lots of bonus points.

Between them during round 4, contestants achieved 12 featured articles, 3 featured lists, 3 featured pictures, 126 good articles, 46 DYK entries, 14 ITN entries, 67 featured article candidate reviews and 147 good article reviews. Congratulations to our eight finalists and all who participated! It was a generally high-scoring and productive round and I think we can expect a highly competitive finish to the competition.

Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them and within 24 hours of the end of the final. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.

I will be standing down as a judge after the end of the contest. I think the Cup encourages productive editors to improve their contributions to Wikipedia and I hope that someone else will step up to take over the running of the Cup. Sturmvogel 66 (talk), and Cwmhiraeth (talk)

I was wondering if you could draftify/userfy this article for me. You deleted it five years ago per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steve Turley, but I think the subject might be notable now, having received coverage with The Return of the American Patriot, a film he directed in 2022.[4][5] StAnselm (talk) 19:49, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@StAnselm:  Done You'll find it at User:StAnselm/Steve Turley. Let me know if I messed it up somehow. Happy editing! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 22:53, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. StAnselm (talk) 02:34, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, 78.26,

You recently restored this draft but because you didn't make a minor edit to the page after restoration, it was tagged for CSD G13 speedy deletion. Luckily, an editor checked the page log and saw that it was recently restored and untagged it before it was deleted. I recommend checking out User:SD0001/RFUD-helper to help with REFUND as it will take care of these steps so you don't have to remember them.

Hope all is well with you...have a great weekend! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:59, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz Thanks so much! What would I do without those who can write these scripts? Works like a charm. Likewise, hope you're doing very well. All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 01:08, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, 78.26. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Bernadine Strik, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 19:01, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2023).

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC is open regarding amending the paid-contribution disclosure policy to add the following text: Any administrator soliciting clients for paid Wikipedia-related consulting or advising services not covered by other paid-contribution rules must disclose all clients on their userpage.

Technical news

• Administrators can now choose to add the user's user page to their watchlist when changing the usergroups for a user. This works both via Special:UserRights and via the API. (T272294)

Arbitration

• Remedy 9 ("MarioProtIV topic ban") of the WikiProject Tropical Cyclones case has been rescinded.

Miscellaneous

• The 2023 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process has concluded with the appointment of one new CheckUser.
• Self-nominations for the electoral commission for the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections opens on 2 October and closes on 8 October.

---

Hello, 78.26. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Robert Cherry (author), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 03:01, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiCup is a marathon rather than a sprint and all those reaching the final round have been involved in the competition for the last ten months, improving Wikipedia vastly during the process. After all this hard work, BeanieFan11 has emerged as the 2023 winner and the WikiCup Champion. The finalists this year were:-

• BeanieFan11 with 2582 points
• Thebiguglyalien with 1615 points
• Epicgenius with 1518 points
• MyCatIsAChonk with 1012 points
• BennyOnTheLoose with 974 points
• AirshipJungleman29 with 673 points
• Sammi Brie with 520 points
• Unlimitedlead with 5 points

Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether they made it to the final round or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the competition, some of whom did very well. Wikipedia has benefitted greatly from the quality creations, expansions and improvements made, and the numerous reviews performed. All those who reached the final round will win awards. The following special awards will be made based on high performance in particular areas of content creation and review. Awards will be handed out in the next few days.

• Unlimitedlead wins the featured article prize, for 7 FAs in total including 3 in round 2.
• MyCatIsAChonk wins the featured list prize, for 5 FLs in total.
• Lee Vilenski wins the featured topic prize, for a 6-article featured topic in round 4.
• MyCatIsAChonk wins the featured picture prize, for 6 FPs in total.
• BeanieFan11 wins the good article prize, for 75 GAs in total, including 61 in the final round.
• Epicgenius wins the good topic prize, for a 41-article good topic in the final round.
• LunaEatsTuna wins the GA reviewer prize, for 70 GA reviews in round 1.
• MyCatIsAChonk wins the FA reviewer prize, for 66 FA reviews in the final round.
• Epicgenius wins the DYK prize, for 49 did you know articles in total.
• Muboshgu wins the ITN prize, for 46 in the news articles in total.

The WikiCup has run every year since 2007. With the 2023 contest now concluded, I will be standing down as a judge due to real life commitments, so I hope that another editor will take over running the competition. Please get in touch if you are interested. Next year's competition will hopefully begin on 1 January 2024. You are invited to sign up to participate in the contest; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors. It only remains to congratulate our worthy winners once again and thank all participants for their involvement! (If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.) Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:51, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2023).

Administrator changes

0xDeadbeef

Tamzin

Dennis Brown

Interface administrator changes

Pppery

• Ragesoss
• TheresNoTime

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

• The WMF is working on making it possible for administrators to edit MediaWiki configuration directly. This is similar to previous work on Special:EditGrowthConfig. A technical RfC is running until November 08, where you can provide feedback.
• There is a proposed plan for re-enabling the Graph Extension. Feedback on this proposal is requested.

Arbitration

• Eligible editors are invited to self-nominate themselves from 12 November 2023 until 21 November 2023 to stand in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections.
• Xaosflux, RoySmith and Cyberpower678 have been appointed to the Electoral Commission for the 2023 Arbitration Committee Elections. BusterD is the reserve commissioner.
• Following a motion, the contentious topic designation of Prem Rawat has been struck. Actions previously taken using this contentious topic designation are still in force.
• Following several motions, multiple topic areas are no longer designated as a contentious topic. These contentious topic designations were from the Editor conduct in e-cigs articles, Liancourt Rocks, Longevity, Medicine, September 11 conspiracy theories, and Shakespeare authorship question cases.
• Following a motion, remedies 3.1 (All related articles under 1RR whenever the dispute over naming is concerned), 6 (Stalemate resolution) and 30 (Administrative supervision) of the Macedonia 2 case have been rescinded.
• Following a motion, remedy 6 (One-revert rule) of the The Troubles case has been amended.
• An arbitration case named Industrial agriculture has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case close 8 November.

Miscellaneous

• The Articles for Creation backlog drive is happening in November 2023, with 700+ drafts pending reviews for in the last 4 months or so. In addition to the AfC participants, all administrators and New Page Patrollers can conduct reviews using the helper script, Yet Another AFC Helper Script, which can be enabled in the Gadgets settings. Sign up here to participate!

---

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2023).

Guideline and policy news

• Following a talk page discussion, the Administrators' accountability policy has been updated to note that while it is considered best practice for administrators to have notifications (pings) enabled, this is not mandatory. Administrators who do not use notifications are now strongly encouraged to indicate this on their user page.

Arbitration

• Following a motion, the Extended Confirmed Restriction has been amended, removing the allowance for non-extended-confirmed editors to post constructive comments on the "Talk:" namespace. Now, non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace solely to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided that their actions are not disruptive.
• The Arbitration Committee has announced a call for Checkusers and Oversighters, stating that it will currently be accepting applications for CheckUser and/or Oversight permissions at any point in the year.
• Eligible users are invited to vote on candidates for the Arbitration Committee until 23:59 December 11, 2023 (UTC). Candidate statements can be seen here.

---

... nice closure. Paul August ☎ 18:52, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2024 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page ready for you to take part. Any questions on the scoring, rules or anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close on 31 January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email), Epicgenius (talk · contribs · email), and Frostly (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2023).

Arbitration

• Following the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Aoidh, Cabayi, Firefly, HJ Mitchell, Maxim, Sdrqaz, ToBeFree, Z1720.
• Following a motion, the Arbitration Committee rescinded the restrictions on the page name move discussions for the two Ireland pages that were enacted in June 2009.
• The arbitration case Industrial agriculture has been closed.

Miscellaneous

• The New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in January 2024 to reduce the backlog of articles in the new pages feed. Currently, there is a backlog of over 13,000 unreviewed articles awaiting review. Sign up here to participate!

---

Welcome, welcome, welcome 78.26! I'm glad that you are joining the drive! Please, have a cup of WikiTea, and go cite some articles.

CactiStaccingCrane (talk)17:54, 1 February 2024 UTC [refresh]via JWB and Geardona (talk to me?)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2024).

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC about increasing the inactivity requirement for Interface administrators is open for feedback.

Technical news

• Pages that use the JSON contentmodel will now use tabs instead of spaces for auto-indentation. This will significantly reduce the page size. (T326065)

Arbitration

• Following a motion, the Arbitration Committee adopted a new enforcement restriction on January 4, 2024, wherein the Committee may apply the 'Reliable source consensus-required restriction' to specified topic areas.
• Community feedback is requested for a draft to replace the "Information for administrators processing requests" section at WP:AE.

Miscellaneous

• Voting in the 2024 Steward elections will begin on 06 February 2024, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 27 February 2024, 14:00 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
• A vote to ratify the charter for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is open till 2 February 2024, 23:59:59 (UTC) via Secure Poll. All eligible voters within the Wikimedia community have the opportunity to either support or oppose the adoption of the U4C Charter and share their reasons. The details of the voting process and voter eligibility can be found here.
• Community Tech has made some preliminary decisions about the future of the Community Wishlist Survey. In summary, they aim to develop a new, continuous intake system for community technical requests that improves prioritization, resource allocation, and communication regarding wishes. Read more
• The Unreferenced articles backlog drive is happening in February 2024 to reduce the backlog of articles tagged with {{Unreferenced}}. You can help reduce the backlog by adding citations to these articles. Sign up to participate!

---

The 2024 WikiCup is off to a flying start, with 135 participants. This is the largest number of participants we have seen since 2017.

Our current leader is newcomer Generalissima (submissions), who has one FA on John Littlejohn (preacher) and 10 GAs and 12 DYKs mostly on New Zealand coinage and Inuit figures. Here are some more noteworthy scorers:

• AirshipJungleman29 (submissions), with one FA on Hö'elün, two GAs on Mongolia-related articles, and two DYKs;
• Vami_IV (submissions), with one FA on Doom (2016 video game), one GA on Boundary Fire (2017), and 11 reviews;
• MaranoFan (submissions), with one FA on Holidays (Meghan Trainor song), a nine-article FT on 30 (album), and two DYKs;
• Skyshifter (submissions), with one FA on OneShot and one DYK;
• Sammi Brie (submissions), with five GAs and five DYKs on television and radio stations;
• voorts (submissions) and Elli (submissions), both with one FA and one DYK each.

As a reminder, competitors may submit work for the first round until 23:59 (UTC) on 27 February, and the second round starts 1 March. Remember that only the top 64 scoring competitors will make it through to the second round; currently, competitors need at least 15 points to progress. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAN, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges (Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), Epicgenius (talk · contribs), and Frostly (talk · contribs)) are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:57, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, I hope this finds you well, i will like to get more information while my page was deleted and how to get it approved under the wikipedia guidelines Brightheseer (talk) 09:52, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Brightheseer:. Your page was deleted because user pages are to describe who you are in relation to your activities on Wikipedia. The Conflict of Interest disclosure was appropriate, even necessary. The advertisement for a seer is entirely inappropriate for Wikipedia. Articles about topics belong in mainspace when developed, and in your personal sandbox or in draftspace while in development. However, your text would be unacceptable in any location on Wikipedia because it was blatantly promotional (see WP:NPOV). It also does not meet the notability requirements for an article, so this must also be addressed before the topic can be considered for inclusion. Because you have a conflict of interest, you must use the Articles for Creation process. I hope that helps. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 17:39, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, 78.26,

Hey, I hope you are doing well this winter. I'm just leaving you a reminder that any time you restore a draft article or user sandbox that has been deleted due to CSD G13 criteria, you need to make an edit to the page or it shows up as eligible for deletion again. This is, as you might guess, because there have been no edits to this article in a few years so it is considered stale and abandoned. I've made an edit to the draft so you are good for another 6 months. Take care, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:51, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, hope all’s well?

Can you please copy my article to the user page please? Claudy Beats (talk) 22:43, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Claudy Beats: I'm afraid I don't understand your request. Your article is already at your user page. (User:Claudy Beats/sandbox). Please clarify. Thanks! PS, this draft very strongly violates our WP:NPOV policy. I hope that is helpful. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 03:07, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh okay, if it is in the userpage ok. I was trying to write a biography, O don’t know how to do that correctly. Thank you! Claudy Beats (talk) 12:37, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First of all you need to read and adhere to WP:COI, WP:NPOV and WP:PROMO. I do not want to be unkind, but frankly if someone asked me to delete your draft for advertising, I would do so. I understand it is not your intent to do anything "wrong", but this is an encyclopedia, not a place to post your resume or press releases. Phrases like "remarkable journey and accomplishments serve as an inspiration to many" have no place in an encyclopedia. How can that possibly present an objective, dispassionate view of the topic? That's why you really shouldn't create an Wikipedia:Autobiography. How can someone be expected to be objective about themselves? You make such claims as "has published several books that have received critical acclaim." What critical acclaim? From whom? Without citations to reliable, independent sources, these claims are empty and completely promotional. I hope that is helpful. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 04:29, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The first round of the 2024 WikiCup ended at 23:59 (UTC) on 27 February. Everyone with at least 30 points moved on to Round 2, the highest number of points required to advance to the second round since 2014. Due to a six-way tie for the 64th-place spot, 67 contestants have qualified for Round 2.

The following scorers in Round 1 all scored more than 300 points:

• Generalissima (submissions), who has 916 points mostly from one FA on John Littlejohn (preacher), 15 GAs, and 16 DYKs on a variety of topics including New Zealand coinage and Inuit figures, in addition to seven reviews
• Vami_IV (submissions), who has 790 points from two FAs on Felix M. Warburg House and Doom (2016 video game), two GAs, one DYK, and 11 reviews
• AirshipJungleman29 (submissions), who has 580 points from one FA on Hö'elün, two GAs on Mongolia-related articles, two DYKs, and five reviews
• Sammi Brie (submissions), who has 420 points mostly from nine GAs and seven DYKs on television and radio stations
• MaranoFan (submissions), who has 351 points from one FA on Holidays (Meghan Trainor song), a nine-article FT on 30 (album), and three DYKs
• Skyshifter (submissions), who has 345 points from one FA on OneShot, one DYK and two reviews

In this newsletter, the judges would like to pay a special tribute to Vami_IV (submissions), who unfortunately passed away this February. At the time of his death, he was the second-highest-scoring competitor. Outside the WikiCup, he had eight other featured articles, five A-class articles, eight other good articles, and two Four Awards. Vami also wrote an essay on completionism, a philosophy in which he deeply believed. If you can, please join us in honoring his memory by improving one of the articles on his to-do list.

Remember that any content promoted after 27 February but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, feel free to review one of the nominations listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:40, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2024).

Guideline and policy news

• Phase I of the 2024 RfA review is now open for participation. Editors are invited to review, comment on, and propose improvements to the requests for adminship process.
• Following an RfC, the inactivity requirement for the removal of the interface administrator right increased from 6 months to 12 months.

Technical news

• The mobile site history pages now use the same HTML as the desktop history pages. (T353388)

Miscellaneous

• The 2024 appointees for the Ombuds commission are だ＊ぜ, AGK, Ameisenigel, Bennylin, Daniuu, Doǵu, Emufarmers, Faendalimas, MdsShakil, Minorax, Nehaoua, Renvoy and RoySmith as members, with Vermont serving as steward-observer.
• Following the 2024 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: Ajraddatz, Albertoleoncio, EPIC, JJMC89, Johannnes89, Melos and Yahya.

---

Hamisi Gift Musitwa popularly known as Volvexzshawa kindly research his Wikipedia was deleted and his a notable musician in Kenya Teresia Akinyi Achilo (talk) 06:26, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Teresia Akinyi Achilo: I cannot restore this. It was deleted by community discussion. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Volvexzshawa If you think the deleting administrator misjudged the discussion you can file a report at WP:DRV. As I have read the discussion I would strong urge against this. If you have multiple reliable WP:INDEPENDENT sources from which to write an article, then I would start an article in draftspace via WP:AFC. I hope this helps. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 12:15, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

		Citation Barnstar
		This award is given in recognition to 78.26 for collecting 25 points during the WikiProject Unreferenced articles's FEB24 backlog drive. Your contributions played a crucial role in sourcing 14,300 unsourced articles during the drive. Thank you so much for participating and helping to reduce the backlog! – – DreamRimmer (talk) 18:17, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there,

I am new to wikipedia and have had my recent article submission deleted. Can you please copy the content to my user page, so I can save the content and make the requested changes for resubmission?

Thanks Preet Kalkat (talk) 00:28, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Preet Kalkat: I'm sorry, but your page was deleted for copyright reasons, and I can't restore copyright violations. Please write your proposal in your own words, with different phrasing and structure than your sources. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 12:25, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am creating a new page for me but unable to add pictures Ambarish2anand (talk) 09:13, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ambarish2anand: Your page was deleted, because frankly it's one of the worst examples of self-promotion I've ever seen. I don't want to be unkind, but this is an encyclopedia, not a place to advertise yourself. Definitely read WP:COI and WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY before you attempt to make any further edits about yourself. I hope that is helpful. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 00:02, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2024).

Administrator changes

• Kbdank71
• Kosack
• NrDg
• TLSuda

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC is open to convert all current and future community discretionary sanctions to (community designated) contentious topics procedure.

Technical news

• The Toolforge Grid Engine services have been shut down after the final migration process from Grid Engine to Kubernetes. (T313405)

Arbitration

• An arbitration case has been opened to look into "the intersection of managing conflict of interest editing with the harassment (outing) policy".

Miscellaneous

• Editors are invited to sign up for The Core Contest, an initiative running from April 15 to May 31, which aims to improve vital and other core articles on Wikipedia.

---

We are approaching the end of the 2024 WikiCup's second round, with a little over two weeks remaining. Currently, contestants must score at least 105 points to progress to the third round.

Our current top scorers are as follows:

• Sammi Brie (submissions) with 642 points, mostly from 11 GAs about radio and television;
• voorts (submissions) with 530 points, mostly from two FAs (Well he would, wouldn't he? and Cora Agnes Benneson) and three GAs;
• Generalissima (submissions) with 523 points, mostly from 11 GAs about coinage and history;
• SounderBruce (submissions) with 497 points, mostly from a FA about the 2020 season of the soccer club Seattle Sounders FC and two GAs;
• Tamzin (submissions) with 410 points, mostly from a FA about the drink Capri-Sun and three GAs;
• Kusma (submissions) with 330 points, mostly from a FA about the English botanist Anna Blackburne and a GA.

Competitors may submit work for the second round until the end of 28 April, and the third round starts 1 May. Remember that only competitors with the top 32 scores will make it through to the third round. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAN, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs. As a reminder, competitors are strictly prohibited from gaming Wikipedia policies or processes to receive more points.

If you would like to learn more about rules and scoring for the 2024 WikiCup, please read Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring. Further questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges (Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), Epicgenius (talk · contribs), and Frostly (talk · contribs)) are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:05, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear 78.26,

I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Fifteen Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for fifteen years or more. ​

Best regards, Chris Troutman (talk) 13:04, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You know I am confused by this AfD deletion, how does a person with SIGCOV like [6], [7], [8], who has won the Los Angeles Live Score Film Festival, and also a recipient of a Global Music Award of Excellence for The Four Players, the Clive Davis Award for Excellence in Music? [9]. Govvy (talk) 10:03, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

None of that was brought up in the discussion. If I were to close any other way than what I did, it would be a super vote, because I would be inserting my own opinion into the close. Because discussion consensus was clear-cut I closed without resisting. I am willing to re-open the discussion if you wish to present new information for consideration. All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 13:36, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you reopen the discussion I would post a similar comment. He is not that well known in his field, but has a certain amount of recognition to get those awards, I would have thought it would easily pass WP:BASIC, well that's my two-cents, Regards. Govvy (talk) 16:56, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The second round of the 2024 WikiCup ended on 28 April. This round was particularly competitive: each of the 32 contestants who advanced to Round 3 scored at least 141 points. This is the highest number of points required to advance to Round 3 since 2014.

The following scorers in Round 2 all scored more than 500 points:

• Sammi Brie (submissions) with 707 points, mostly from 45 good article nomination reviews and 12 good articless about radio and television;
• Generalissima (submissions) with 600 points, mostly from 12 good articles and 12 did you know nominations about coinage and history;
• SounderBruce (submissions) with 552 points, mostly from a featured article about the 2020 Seattle Sounders FC season, three featured lists, and two good articles;
• BennyOnTheLoose (submissions) with 548 points, mostly from a featured article about the snooker player John Pulman, two featured lists, and one good article;
• voorts (submissions) with 530 points, mostly from two featured articles (Well he would, wouldn't he? and Cora Agnes Benneson) and three good articles.

The full scores for Round 2 can be seen here. So far this year, competitors have gotten 18 featured articles, 22 featured lists, and 186 good articles, 76 in the news credits and at least 200 did you know credits. They have conducted 165 featured article reviews, as well as 399 good article reviews and peer reviews, and have added 21 articles to featured topics and good topics.

Remember that any content promoted after 28 April but before the start of Round 3 can be claimed during Round 3, which starts on 1 May at 00:00 (UTC). Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed.

If you would like to learn more about rules and scoring for the 2024 WikiCup, please see this page. Further questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges (Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), Epicgenius (talk · contribs), and Frostly (talk · contribs)) are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:37, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2024).

Guideline and policy news

• Phase I of the 2024 requests for adminship review has concluded. Several proposals have passed outright and will proceed to implementation, including creating a discussion-only period (3b) and administrator elections (13) on a trial basis. Other successful proposals, such as creating a reminder of civility norms (2), will undergo further refinement in Phase II. Proposals passed on a trial basis will be discussed in Phase II, after their trials conclude. Further details on specific proposals can be found in the full report.

Technical news

• Partial action blocks are now in effect on the English Wikipedia. This means that administrators have the ability to restrict users from certain actions, including uploading files, moving pages and files, creating new pages, and sending thanks. T280531

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Conflict of interest management has been closed.

Miscellaneous

• This may be a good time to reach out to potential nominees to ask if they would consider an RfA.
• A New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in May 2024 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles in the new pages feed. Currently, there is a backlog of over 15,000 articles awaiting review. Sign up here to participate!
• Voting for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) election is open until 9 May 2024. Read the voting page on Meta-Wiki and cast your vote here!

---

Original message: I'd like the Michael Masch draft page to be restored to draft status even though it's been through the AfD process. I've been told to contact the admin of the Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Michael_Masch discussion and it looks like that was you. New references are available for this person since page was deleted due to NPOL concerns. He passed away in 2021 and there are obituaries in The Philadelphia Inquirer and The Jewish Exponent. There are also articles about him preceding his death but I don't know if they were cited in the original draft so I'd like to see it. Is there a way I can do that?

Update: I'd mistaken the admin of the AfD process who told me 78.26 was the actual admin. 78.26 asked me to provide the three best references, which I list below. There are more as well.

• First set includes obituaries in The Philadelphia Inquirer, The Jewish Exponent, and Howard University
• The Philadelphia City Council passed a resolution honoring Masch after he passed which lists notable achievements - to me this is a reliable secondary source but would be curious for an opinion.
• There are also two articles in The Philadelphia Inquirer about him from his time as chief budget director for Philadelphia (1994) and as Budget Secretary for Pennsylvania (2003). Note Ed Rendell was Mayor of Philadelphia for the first one and Governor of Pennsylvania for the second one.

Nnev66 (talk) 15:38, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker)

The deleted article had none of those citations. Most of the citations were to .edu site pages, a couple of blogs, a press release, and primary sources. There is one citation to Howard University but not that obituary (and I would say that university newspapers don't count toward notability). It isn't surprising it got deleted with such poor sourcing. I think it's worth restoring to draft space based on what you found, but I'll leave that up to 78.26, who closed the AFD and deleted it. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:13, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note the AfD discussion happened in 2019 and this person passed away two years later in 2021 so sources in my first two bullets weren’t available at the time of the AfD discussion. I don’t know why the original page creator(s) didn’t use more reliable secondary sources from earlier times though… Nnev66 (talk) 17:11, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Nnev66: So the short story is that this person is semi-notable, and if it went to AfD with the sources you give here I'd give it a 60% chance of deletion and 40% chance of being kept through "no consensus" or "keep". To be more specific about your sources, everything is quite local. The Inquirer obituary is ok, as is the Jewish Exponent. These do not appear to be obituaries sent in, but written by journalists. That's good. The others seem like routine coverage. The City Council resolution is likewise merely local coverage. All of these sources are good to use in an article, but I'm not sure they'd add up to notability. Can you find coverage outside the Philadelphia area? In any case, I'm going to restore it to draft space, and if you feel like working on it given, and want me to look at it when you're done, I'll be happy to. Keep in mind that my views on notability are my own, and although I'm fairly well versed on the Notability policy, in marginal cases like this you'll get different answers from different editors, which is why we have the consensus process here. (I should note that my opinion as an admin carries no more weight than any other editor.) I hope you find that helpful. All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 03:58, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can find it at Draft:Michael Masch. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 04:03, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for restoring the Draft which I see is written like a resume with no reliable secondary sources. In the next couple of weeks I'll revise it to read more like an encyclopedia entry, extracting what is notable about the subject and adding reliable secondary sources. Not sure I'll find references outside Philly/PA since the subject is mainly notable there. There are a lot of articles about Philadelphia topics and notable people that need attention. Nnev66 (talk) 02:02, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to ping me also if you want another set of eyes to look it over when you're done. ~Anachronist (talk) 15:10, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Anachronist! I've revised the draft and have a question I'd love to get your input on. Should I do that on your Talk page (sorry, I'm still learning protocol here)? Nnev66 (talk) 14:30, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can do it on any page but may be best to ping me on the draft talk page. I do respond to pings. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:38, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, draft talk page is best. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 19:26, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I put a question and a comment about notability on the Draft talk page. I'll stop posting here. Thanks both. Nnev66 (talk) 19:58, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Myself along with a group of other people are trying to dig up some info about the band Cojum Dip, its early history being somewhat fuzzy. As such, would you be able to send me a copy of the page Cojum Dip, and the dates of edits that were made to the page before its deletion? Although it redirects to Tally Hall since 2023, it used to have some content in 2005 before being deleted shortly after in 2006. That page also used to contain Image:wow.jpg, and I would also appreciate if you can recover this image.

Thank you very much. 57EML (talk) 19:54, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@57EML: sorry for the slow reply, and I messed up anyway. Perhaps it'll be kept, but I meant to create a sandbox for you where you could see the history. Anyway, you can now see the deleted history at the redirect page. There's absolutely nothing encyclopedic about the deleted versions, but you can see what the band thought about itself at the time. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 01:23, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! 57EML (talk) 15:21, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2024).

Guideline and policy news

• Phase II of the 2024 RfA review has commenced to improve and refine the proposals passed in Phase I.

Technical news

• The Nuke feature, which enables administrators to mass delete pages, will now correctly delete pages which were moved to another title. T43351

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Venezuelan politics has been closed.
• The Committee is seeking volunteers for various roles, including access to the conflict of interest VRT queue.

Miscellaneous

• WikiProject Reliability's unsourced statements drive is happening in June 2024 to replace {{citation needed}} tags with references! Sign up here to participate!

---

Hello 78.26, how are you? @DareshMohan told me he was willing to recreate an article deleted in 2009 (Indonesian horror film, 2007, titled Kuntilanak 2). Do you think you could create a page with the deleted content (Draft or User space), if you prefer), so that we can make sure the pages are different (and also save time and restore potential credits, maybe). Thanks a lot! Best, -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:52, 6 June 2024 (UTC) Note: DareshMohan had left a similar request on User:JzG's TP ([10]) but is JzG still an administrator? (I see a Rouge admin box on their page; but otherwise cannot confirm it); If they are, sincere apologies for this fauxpas and confusion. If they aren't, 78.26 do you mind doing it? Thanks a lot. Best,-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:18, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. @Mushy Yank: You can find it at User:Mushy Yank/Kuntilanak 2. JzG is no longer an administrator, but continues to greatly benefit the encyclopedia. Looks like he hasn’t been online for a few days. Anyway, hope that’s helpful. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:41, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, as always. Yours, -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:59, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I received a notice that my sandbox page was deleted. It said to message one of you about getting my deleted content restored to just my 'draft' page. Any help is appreciated. Sethzindler (talk) 15:39, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sethzindler: I'm a little confused as to what you are referring. The only talk page message you've received is the welcome message. You have a sandbox, which remains intact. You also have a draft article, which is also intact. Neither have been tagged for deletion. Do you have an alternate account where this happened? 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 17:45, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Terribly sorry. I must have been referencing something that doesn't exist now. I apologize. Feel free to delete this chain.

No worries, happy editing. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 18:45, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would appropriate to AfD this article but not CSD as there are sources but not very great ones (by looking at RS/P).

There is Dexerto but it is not really good.

There are many sources not listed in RS/P. Don't know what to do with them. Seems like Arab News and Legit are the only good secondary sources so far. (altough I have doubts about Legit) Rrjmrrr (talk) 18:54, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's not "Unambiguous advertising or promotion". It is my artist autobiography. Please restore it on my sandbox. Heylenny (talk) 23:04, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Heylenny: I'm going to decline this request. First of all, take a look at what you linked to, advertising, where point #4 directly addresses self-promotion. Your draft contained phrases such as "This passion evolved..."; "His academic fervor..."; " "diversified his experience..." "dedicated himself to assisting the community..." each of these blatantly violates WP:NPOV, they are strictly designed to promote the topic, namely yourself. How can your draft possibly be construed as encylopedic? Please refer to Wikipedia:Autobiography as well as the other policies linked to here, included the one you yourself linked to. If you feel I am in error, you may bring my actions up at WP:AN to get another administrator's opinion, but I must forewarn you I don't think that will work out well for you, because if you fundamentally can't tell the difference between self-promotion and encyclopedic writing, you will be blocked because competence is required (this is an essay, not policy, but it does a good job of explaining things). I do wish you luck, and if you need editing assistance other than promoting yourself or other topics in which you have a conflict of interest, I truly am ready to help. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 02:36, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@78.26 I understand you, but my intention was not really an autobiography or promote myself, but rather to write information about my artistic career. I didn't know I couldn't use the draft for this, so I ask you to restore it to my sandbox. And actually, I have only one song on Spotify, iTunes, etc. I have no relevance to having an article on Wiki, that's why it was in the draft. I'm not going to bring this up to other admins because it's an irrelevant topic. I'm currently at a standstill musically, as you read in the draft. I'm focused on my college. But yeah, thank you anyway :) Heylenny (talk) 03:03, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, 78.26. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Neely Plumb, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 03:06, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you help my article for creation submit for review?Draft:Soulboy (Khalil Fong album) has been four months and no one has reviewed it for me. I see that you are a person related to this topic. Can you please help me? Thank you very much 78.26!! musiccat (talk) 08:28, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@王炯浜: it's hard for me to review this since I don't know the language or the sources. The topic seems notable based on the sales rewards. However, the article also seems promotional to me. Everything written praises the artist, his background, and his art. I would recommend re-writing much of it from a dispassionate standpoint, not from a fan's standpoint. I hope that helps. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 00:31, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The third round of the 2024 WikiCup ended on 28 June. As with Round 2, this round was competitive: each of the 16 contestants who advanced to Round 4 scored at least 256 points.

The following editors all scored more than 400 points in Round 3:

• Generalissima (submissions) with 1,059 points, mostly from 1 featured article on DeLancey W. Gill, 11 good articles, 18 did you know nominations, and dozens of reviews;
• Skyshifter (submissions) with 673 points, mostly from 2 featured articles on Worlds (Porter Robinson album) and I'm God, 5 good articles, and 2 did you know nominations;
• Sammi Brie (submissions) with 557 points, mostly from 1 featured article on KNXV-TV, 5 good articles, and 8 did you know nominations; and
• AryKun (submissions) with 415 points, mostly from 1 featured article on Great cuckoo-dove, with a high number of bonus points from that article.

The full scores for round 3 can be seen here. So far this year, competitors have gotten 28 featured articles, 38 featured lists, 240 good articles, 92 in the news credits, and at least 285 did you know credits. They have conducted 279 featured article reviews, as well as 492 good article reviews and peer reviews, and have added 22 articles to featured topics and good topics.

Remember that any content promoted after 28 June but before the start of Round 4 can be claimed during Round 4, which starts on 1 July at 00:00 (UTC). Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether for a good article, featured content, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed.

If you would like to learn more about rules and scoring for the 2024 WikiCup, please see this page. Further questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges (Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), Epicgenius (talk · contribs), and Frostly (talk · contribs)) are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:29, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2024).

Administrator changes

• Elli
• HouseBlaster
• Pickersgill-Cunliffe

• Brianga
• De728631
• Georgewilliamherbert
• Hyacinth (deceased)
• ProveIt
• The Night Watch

Technical news

• Local administrators can now add new links to the bottom of the site Tools menu without using JavaScript. Documentation is available on MediaWiki. (T6086)

Miscellaneous

• The Community Wishlist is re-opening on 15 July 2024. Read more

---

Hey, 78! I've been meaning to ask about this, Closing as keep, as no one has challenged (5 days) the sources used to improve the article, which I really like but am wondering if I've seen before. In an AfD, I always wonder about early !votes by folks who don't circle back. Is this a close rationale that's used often? I definitely approve, but I'm trying to think if I've seen it before. Valereee (talk) 00:29, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Valereee:! Always good to hear from you. I don't know if you've seen it before, but I don't know that it's a "novel" close rationale. I could have closed it as "Consensus is keep, GNG met", but given the !vote count was 3 to 3 (counting nom statement), I thought it required a bit more explanation regarding my judgement of consensus. I suppose another close could have been "Consensus is keep by strength of arguments" as nobody refuted the sources you added to the article. So if you'd added the sources a within a couple days of the 17th, I would have relisted it. However, in my judgement 5 days is plenty of time for editors to analyze sources and poke holes in them. Good luck finding a rule or hard precedent for that, but I don't think there would be too many who would argue against it. Since an article meeting GNG is presumed to be notable in most cases (WP:CORP being one exception) and the claim to GNG was not refuted by further arguments, and the coverage you provided refuted the argument that there was no evidence of sufficient reliable secondary sourcing, I could only judge that consensus was "keep". Does that help at all, or have I made it worse? All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 01:31, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, that totally helps! I don't close AfDs often, and I just thought it was quite the elegant rationale: new additions, no rebuttals. Thanks! Valereee (talk) 11:05, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I know you closed the discussion for List of Soaring Sky! Pretty Cure episodes afd discussion but we need someone to close List of Wonderful Pretty Cure! episodes afd discussion here is the link: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Wonderful_Pretty_Cure!_episodes#List_of_Wonderful_Pretty_Cure!_episodes Anime9000 (talk) 00:50, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion needs to run a full week. Don’t worry, almost all AfD discussions are closed in a timely manner. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 00:54, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think most users don't follow Wikipedia guidelines and policies because they never knew them in first place? Anime9000 (talk) 02:34, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

When I first I joined wikipedia I didn't know there was guidelines and policies because it was never mention when you create an account Anime9000 (talk) 02:35, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if you're asking a question or making an observation. Of course most new Wikipedia users make mistakes because they don't know rules/guidelines/style manuals. I certainly made my share of mistakes as a new new user. A not-so-secret: I still mess up sometimes. The question really is: Is the user willing to listen to guidance, and are they willing (and in rare instances the question is are they able) to learn from their mistakes and improve. (You also have editors who edit contrary to the purposes of Wikipedia, promoting things, vandals, etc, but they don't count.) Anyway, that's why we try to point new editors to the WP:TEAHOUSE, where there are numerous editors who make it their point to help new editors (and occasionally even the experienced ones.) So if you see a new editor who is floundering, invite them!. All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 02:03, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2024).

Technical news

• Global blocks may now target accounts as well as IP's. Administrators may locally unblock when appropriate.
• Users wishing to permanently leave may now request "vanishing" via Special:GlobalVanishRequest. Processed requests will result in the user being renamed, their recovery email being removed, and their account being globally locked.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee appointed the following administrators to the conflict of interest volunteer response team: Bilby, Extraordinary Writ

---

Hello, 78.26. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "78rpm".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:41, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The fourth round of the 2024 WikiCup ended on 29 August. Each of the 8 contestants who advanced to Round 4 scored at least 472 points, and the following contestants scored more than 700 points:

• Generalissima (submissions) with 1,150 points, mostly from 3 featured articles, 2 featured lists, 7 good articles, and 13 did you know nominations;
• Arconning (submissions) with 791 points, mostly from 2 featured lists, 8 good articles, 4 did you know nominations, and plenty of reviews;
• AirshipJungleman29 (submissions) with 718 points, mostly from a high-multiplier featured article on Genghis Khan and 2 good articles; and
• BennyOnTheLoose (submissions) with 714 points, mostly from 1 featured article on Susanna Hoffs, 2 featured lists, and 3 good articles.

Congratulations to our eight finalists and all who participated. Contestants put in extraordinary amounts of effort during this round, and their scores can be seen here. So far this year, competitors have gotten 36 featured articles, 55 featured lists, 15 good articles, 93 in the news credits, and at least 333 did you know credits. They have conducted 357 featured content reviews, as well as 553 good article reviews and peer reviews, and have added 30 articles to featured topics and good topics.

Any content promoted after 29 August but before the start of Round 5 can be claimed during Round 5, which starts on 1 September at 00:00 (UTC). Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. If two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether for a good article, featured content, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Remember to claim your points within 14 days of earning them, and importantly, before the deadline on 31 October.

If you would like to learn more about rules and scoring for the 2024 WikiCup, please see this page. Further questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges (Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), Epicgenius (talk · contribs), and Frostly (talk · contribs)) are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:11, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2024).

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, there is a new criterion for speedy deletion: C4, which applies to unused maintenance categories, such as empty dated maintenance categories for dates in the past.
• A request for comment is open to discuss whether Notability (species) should be adopted as a subject-specific notability guideline.

Arbitration

• Following a motion, remedies 5.1 and 5.2 of World War II and the history of Jews in Poland (the topic and interaction bans on My very best wishes, respectively) were repealed.
• Remedy 3C of the German war effort case ("Cinderella157 German history topic ban") was suspended for a period of six months.
• The arbitration case Historical Elections is currently open. Proposed decision is expected by 3 September 2024 for this case.

Miscellaneous

• Editors can now enter into good article review circles, an alternative for informal quid pro quo arrangements, to have a GAN reviewed in return for reviewing a different editor's nomination.
• A New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in September 2024 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles and redirects in the new pages feed. Currently, there is a backlog of over 13,900 articles and 26,200 redirects awaiting review. Sign up here to participate!

---

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2024).

Administrator changes

• Asilvering
• Significa liberdade

• Good Olfactory
• Hesperian
• I JethroBT
• TommyBoy
• Woody

CheckUser changes

• Barkeep49
• Izno

• Doug Weller
• Spicy

Guideline and policy news

• Administrator elections are a proposed new process for selecting administrators, offering an alternative to requests for adminship (RfA). The first trial election will take place in October 2024, with candidate sign-up from October 8 to 14, a discussion phase from October 22 to 24, and SecurePoll voting from October 25 to 31. For questions or to help out, please visit the talk page at Wikipedia talk:Administrator elections.
• Following a discussion, the speedy deletion reason "File pages without a corresponding file" has been moved from criterion G8 to F2. This does not change what can be speedily deleted.
• A request for comment is open to discuss whether there is a consensus to have an administrator recall process.

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Historical elections has been closed.
• An arbitration case regarding Backlash to diversity and inclusion has been opened.
• Editors are invited to nominate themselves to serve on the 2024 Arbitration Committee Electoral Commission until 23:59 October 8, 2024 (UTC).

Miscellaneous

• If you are interested in stopping spammers, please put MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist and MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist on your watchlist, and help out when you can.

---

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:23, 23 October 2024 (UTC) [reply]

78.26,

I am still here! How are you doing?

I am interested in writing an article about the Old National Bank Building in Houston, which has already for many years been re-adapted for use as the Islamic Da'wah Center of Houston. I am confident that I can build a solid Start-class or C-level article with a local architecture survey, the historic preservation report, and two local online news reports. This is an important site in Houston, and it would be a shame not to have a solid article on it.

My other interest relates to my original research. This is not relevant to the article, but it is relevant to my motivation for creating it. I have traced the history of this site to its original owners and original use until a fire destroyed the property in 1859. After that it was rebuilt as a theater before that was torn down and the bank was built in the early 20th-c.

Given the concerns about the article, I understand the need to compose this article in draft space, so I am requesting your help as an administrator to enable to write this in draft space, but with the understanding that an administrator would need to vet the draft before publishing to main space. I would also need to devise a care plan, in order to ensure that the article is not corrupted.

Best regards, Oldsanfelipe2 (talk) 10:29, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Oldsanfelipe2: So good to hear from you! I'm not sure how I can help. It appears your asking for editorial assistance, and not administrator assistance. Everything in Wikipedia is owned by the editing community, Wikipedia:Ownership of content so I can't promise to keep your work "pure". However, if you're looking to develop this article in peace I'd recommend creating it in your user space and not in draft space. It's highly unlikely anyone would interrupt your work there. Once it's move to mainspace it's subject to the same abuse and improvement as all other articles. I'm terribly sorry if I'm missing your point, and I'll do what I can to help, I've always thoroughly enjoyed working with you. All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 02:11, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry that I did not make my request clear. Currently, I cannot save the title as a draft in my sandbox. What just occurred to me is that I could retitle it in my sandbox, and the reviewer can correct the title when they approve the content for main space. So I think I just answered the first question.

Second, before I publish this in main space, it would be good if for me to find a few other editors to help me with vandalism patrol. So I will also reach out to some other Texas-based editors for this.

I have been writing history essays, so there is a small, non-zero chance that I will create RS for Texas history. Best regards, Oldsanfelipe2 (talk) 16:45, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The 2024 WikiCup has come to an end, with the final round being a very tight race. Our new champion is AirshipJungleman29 (submissions), who scored 2,283 points mainly through 3 high-multiplier FAs and 3 GAs on military history topics. By a 1% margin, Airship beat out last year's champion, BeanieFan11 (submissions), who scored second with 2,264 points, mainly from an impressive 58 GAs about athletes. In third place, Generalissima (submissions) scored 1,528 points, primarily from two FAs on U.S. Librarians of Congress and 20 GAs about various historical topics. Our other finalists are: Sammi Brie (submissions) with 879 points, Hey man im josh (submissions) with 533 points, BennyOnTheLoose (submissions) with 432 points, Arconning (submissions) with 244 points, and AryKun (submissions) with 15 points. Congratulations to our finalists and all who participated!

The final round was very productive, and contestants had 7 FAs, 9 FLs, 94 GAs, 73 FAC reviews, and 79 GAN reviews and peer reviews. Altogether, Wikipedia has benefited greatly from the activities of WikiCup competitors all through the contest. Well done everyone!

All those who reached the final will receive awards and the following special awards will be made, based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, these prizes are awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round, or in the event of a tie, to the overall leader in this field.

• Generalissima (submissions) wins the featured article prize for 3 FAs in round 4, and 7 FAs overall.
• Hey man im josh (submissions) wins the featured list prize for 23 FLs overall.
• MaranoFan (submissions) wins the featured topic prize for 9 articles in featured topics in round 1.
• Hey man im josh (submissions) wins the featured content reviewer prize for 110 FA/FL reviews overall.
• BeanieFan11 (submissions) wins the good article prize for 58 GAs in round 5, and 70 GAs overall.
• Fritzmann (submissions) wins the good topic prize for 6 articles in good topics in round 2.
• Sammi Brie (submissions) wins the good article reviewer prize for 45 GA reviews in round 2, and 78 GA reviews overall.
• BeanieFan11 (submissions) wins the DYK prize, for 131 Did you know articles overall.
• Muboshgu (submissions) wins the ITN prize, for 15 In the news articles in round 1, and 36 overall.

Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2025 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement!

If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), Epicgenius (talk · contribs), and Frostly (talk · contribs). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:48, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2024).

Administrator changes

• Crisco 1492

• Babajobu
• Daniel
• Elf
• Jayron32
• Thue
• Wugapodes

CheckUser changes

Maxim

Oversighter changes

Maxim

Guideline and policy news

• Following a discussion, the discussion-only period proposal that went for a trial to refine the requests for adminship (RfA) process has been discontinued.
• Following a request for comment, Administrator recall is adopted as a policy.

Technical news

• Mass deletions done with the Nuke tool now have the 'Nuke' tag. This change will make reviewing and analyzing deletions performed with the tool easier. T366068

Arbitration

• RoySmith, Barkeep49 and Cyberpower678 have been appointed to the Electoral Commission for the 2024 Arbitration Committee Elections. ThadeusOfNazereth and Dr vulpes are reserve commissioners.
• Eligible editors are invited to self-nominate from 3 November 2024 until 12 November 2024 to stand in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections.
• The Arbitration Committee is seeking volunteers for roles such as clerks, access to the COI queue, checkuser, and oversight.

Miscellaneous

• An unreferenced articles backlog drive is happening in November 2024 to reduce the backlog of articles tagged with {{Unreferenced}}. You can help reduce the backlog by adding citations to these articles. Sign up to participate!

---

Hello,

I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.

Take the survey here.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 00:18, 13 November 2024 (UTC) [reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2024).

Administrator changes

• Ahecht
• DoubleGrazing
• Dr vulpes
• FOARP
• Peaceray
• Queen of Hearts
• Rsjaffe
• SD0001
• SilverLocust
• Sohom Datta
• ThadeusOfNazereth
• Voorts

• Ajpolino
• Fathoms Below
• Pppery
• Tamzin
• Worm That Turned

• Aervanath
• Christopher Sundita
• Dank
• Dennis Brown
• Dragons flight
• Fastily
• Graham87
• JaGa
• Kbh3rd
• Marine 69-71
• Sir Nicholas de Mimsy-Porpington
• Yamamoto Ichiro

Interface administrator changes

• SD0001
• Sohom Datta

Pppery

CheckUser changes

• Spicy
• TheresNoTime

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RFC, the policy on restoration of adminship has been updated. All former administrators may now only regain the tools following a request at the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard within 5 years of their most recent admin action. Previously this applied only to administrators deysopped for inactivity.
• Following a request for comment, a new speedy deletion criterion, T5, has been enacted. This applies to template subpages that are no longer used.

Technical news

• Technical volunteers can now register for the 2025 Wikimedia Hackathon, which will take place in Istanbul, Turkey. Application for travel and accommodation scholarships is open from November 12 to December 10, 2024.

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Yasuke (formerly titled Backlash to diversity and inclusion) has been closed.
• An arbitration case titled Palestine-Israel articles 5 has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case will close on 14 December.

---

Greetings! Happy Winters.

I hope you're doing great. While looking at Instant Bollywood, I came to know that it was deleted under G5 (created by a banned or blocked user). I liked to create it, as it seems notable. Is it fine to recreate this? Zuck28 (talk) 11:25, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2025 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor, we hope the WikiCup will give you a chance to improve your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page ready for you to take part. Any questions on the scoring, rules or anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page.

For the 2025 WikiCup, we've implemented several changes to the scoring system. The highest-ranking contestants will now receive tournament points at the end of each round, and final rankings are decided by the number of tournament points each contestant has. If you're busy and can't sign up in January, don't worry: Signups are now open throughout the year. To make things fairer for latecomers, the lowest-scoring contestants will no longer be eliminated at the end of each round.

The first round will end on 26 February. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email), Epicgenius (talk · contribs · email), Frostly (talk · contribs · email), Guerillero (talk · contribs · email) and Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:13, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2024).

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RFC, Wikipedia:Notability (species) was adopted as a subject-specific notability guideline.
• A request for comment is open to discuss whether admins should be advised to warn users rather than issue no-warning blocks to those who have posted promotional content outside of article space.

Technical news

• The Nuke feature also now provides links to the userpage of the user whose pages were deleted, and to the pages which were not selected for deletion, after page deletions are queued. This enables easier follow-up admin-actions.

Arbitration

• Following the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been elected to the Arbitration Committee: CaptainEek, Daniel, Elli, KrakatoaKatie, Liz, Primefac, ScottishFinnishRadish, Theleekycauldron, Worm That Turned.

Miscellaneous

• A New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in January 2025 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles and redirects in the new pages feed. Sign up here to participate!

---

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

Administrator changes

• Arcticocean
• Wugapodes

Euryalus

CheckUser changes

• Firefly
• L235

Oversighter changes

• Firefly
• Guerillero
• L235
• Moneytrees

Technical news

• Administrators can now nuke pages created by a user or IP address from the last 90 days, up from the initial 30 days. T380846
• A 'Recreated' tag will now be added to pages that were created with the same title as a page which was previously deleted and it can be used as a filter in Special:RecentChanges and Special:NewPages. T56145

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Palestine-Israel articles 5 has been closed.

---

The first round of the 2025 WikiCup ended on 26 February. As a reminder, we are no longer disqualifying the lowest-scoring contestants; everyone who competed in round 1 will advance to round 2 unless they have withdrawn or been banned from Wikipedia. Instead, the contestants with the highest round-point totals now receive tournament points at the end of each round. Unlike the round points in the main WikiCup table, which are reset at the end of each round, tournament points are carried over between rounds and can only be earned if a competitor is among the top 16 round-point scorers. This table shows all competitors who have received tournament points so far.

Round 1 was very competitive compared with previous years; two contestants scored more than 1,000 round points, and the top 16 contestants all scored more than 500 round points. The following competitors scored more than 800 round points:

• Gog the Mild (submissions) with 1,168 round points, mainly from 4 featured articles and 4 good articles on old military history, in addition to an assortment of GA and FA reviews.
• Generalissima (submissions) with 1,095 round points, mainly from 2 FAs, 2 featured lists, 8 GAs, and 16 Did You Know articles mainly on historical topics.
• BeanieFan11 (submissions), with 866 round points from 20 GAs, 23 DYKs, and 2 In the News articles primarily about athletes.
• Sammi Brie (submissions), with 846 round points from 16 GAs about radio and TV stations, 45 GA reviews, and 3 DYKs.
• Hey man im josh (submissions), with 816 round points from 5 FLs about sports and Olympic topics, 46 FL reviews, 3 ITN articles, and a large number of bonus points.
• MaranoFan (submissions), with 815 round points primarily from 3 FAs and 1 GA about music, in addition to 9 article reviews.

The full scores for round 1 can be seen here. During this round, contestants have claimed 18 featured articles, 26 featured lists, 1 featured-topic article, 197 good articles, 38 good-topic articles and more than 100 Did You Know articles. In addition, competitors have worked on 23 In the News articles, and they have conducted nearly 550 reviews.

Remember that any content promoted after 26 February but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2, which begins on 1 March. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, feel free to review one of the nominations listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:12, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Administrator changes

• Jarry1250
• Lethe

CheckUser changes

• AmandaNP
• Drmies

Oversighter changes

AmandaNP

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment is open to discuss whether AI-generated images (meaning those wholly created by generative AI, not human-created images modified with AI tools) should be banned from use in articles.
• A series of 22 mini-RFCs that double-checked consensus on some aspects and improved certain parts of the administrator elections process has been closed (see the summary of the changes).
• A request for comment is open to gain consensus on whether future administrator elections should be held.

Technical news

• A new filter has been added to the Special:Nuke tool, which allows administrators to filter for pages in a range of page sizes (in bytes). This allows, for example, deleting pages only of a certain size or below. T378488
• Non-administrators can now check which pages are able to be deleted using the Special:Nuke tool. T376378

Miscellaneous

• The 2025 appointees for the Ombuds commission are だ＊ぜ, Arcticocean, Ameisenigel, Emufarmers, Faendalimas, Galahad, Nehaoua, Renvoy, Revi C., RoySmith, Teles and Zafer as members, with Vermont serving as steward-observer.
• Following the 2025 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: 1234qwer1234qwer4, AramilFeraxa, Daniuu, KonstantinaG07, MdsShakil and XXBlackburnXx.

---

Hello 78.26, I hope you are well. May I ask you the texts of 2 deleted pages that I wish to work on? Two actresses, one Indian, one Pakistani.

One is Khushi Dubey For the record, one was the object of a Deletion review (where I didn't !vote and was not "involved" in the editing of the page (at all, I think), but I did mention I would ask for the text of that page; it's long, sorry, hope you don't have to read it....). Other users seemed to implicitly agree she's notable (but I'll make sure it's the case and cannot be challenged, before moving it to Main).

The other is Sahar Hashmi and the page was G5-s-deleted. And there too I mentioned my intention to request the deleted the text on the TP of the admin who deleted it). Her notability has been challenged (obviously) so I'll make sure I provide coverage showing she meets the guidelines for notability. Again I was not deeply involved (apparently one edit only, though) in the editing of the page itself. The AfD showed that one user at least disagrees on her notability so I'll be even more cautious with that one. Can you put them in my user space (in one page or two) or in Drafts as you think best, please? I am not sure about the history (if you want to restore it or not (what's the word?)). I always thought that having the history of a page is better but you know better. Again, I will not publish them unless I think I have enough to do so. As always, thank you very much! Best, -Mushy Yank. 00:37, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Mushy Yank: - apologies this took so long. I've been away for a bit and forgot to come back to this when I returned. I've restored to User:Mushy Yank/Khushi Dubey and User:Mushy Yank/Sahar Hashmi. Happy editing! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 02:39, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello 78.26, no problem at all, and thank you very much. Yours, -Mushy Yank. 08:10, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of a group of Wikipedians to better understand their experiences! We are also looking to interview some survey respondents in more detail, and you will be eligible to receive a thank-you gift for the completion of an interview. The outcomes of this research will shape future work designed to improve on-wiki experiences.

We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this survey, which shouldn’t take more than 2-3 minutes. You may view its privacy statement here. Please contact me if you have any questions or concerns. Kind regards, Sam Walton (talk) 16:35, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Administrator changes

• Giraffer
• Goldsztajn

Dennis Brown

• Cyclonebiskit
• Nohat
• Someguy1221

Bureaucrat changes

Barkeep49

CheckUser changes

0xDeadbeef

Oversighter changes

GB fan

Moneytrees

Miscellaneous

• Sign up for The Core Contest, a competition running from 15 April to 31 May to improve vital articles.

---

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Shehzad Shaikh. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review.Iamaninnocentsoul (talk) 05:24, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The second round of the 2025 WikiCup ended on 28 April at 23:59 UTC. To reiterate what we said in the previous newsletter, we are no longer disqualifying contestants based on how many points (now known as round points) they received. Instead, the contestants with the highest round-point totals now receive tournament points at the end of each round. These tournament points are carried over between rounds, and can only be earned if a competitor is among the top 16 round-point scorers at the end of each round. This table shows all competitors who have received tournament points so far. Everyone who competed in round 2 will advance to round 3 unless they have withdrawn or been banned.

Round 2 was quite competitive. Four contestants scored more than 1,000 round points, and eight scored more than 500 points (including one who has withdrawn). The following competitors scored at least 800 points:

• BeanieFan11 (submissions) with 1,233 round points from 24 good articles, 28 Did you know articles, and one In the news nomination, mainly about athletes and politicians
• Thebiguglyalien (submissions) with 1,127 round points, almost entirely from two high-multiplier featured articles on Black Widow (Natasha Romanova) and Grace Coolidge, in addition to two GAs and two reviews
• History6042 (submissions) with 1,088 round points from four featured lists about Michelin-starred restaurants, nine good articles and a good topic mostly on Olympic-related subjects, seven ITN articles, and dozens of reviews
• Gog the Mild (submissions) with 1,085 round points from three FAs, one GA, and four DYKs on military history, as well as 18 reviews
• Arconning (submissions) with 887 round points, mostly from four FLs, six GAs, and seven DYKs on Olympic topics, along with more than two dozen reviews

In addition, we would like to recognize Generalissima (submissions) for her efforts; she scored 801 round points but withdrew before the end of the round.

The full scores for round 2 can be seen here. During this round, contestants have claimed 13 featured articles, 20 featured lists, 4 featured-topic articles, 138 good articles, 7 good-topic articles, and more than 100 Did You Know articles. In addition, competitors have worked on 19 In the News articles, and they have conducted nearly 300 reviews.

Remember that any content promoted after 28 April but before the start of Round 3 can be claimed in Round 3. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, feel free to review one of the nominations listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:02, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Administrator changes

Rusalkii

NaomiAmethyst (overlooked last month)

• Master Jay
• Orderinchaos
• Roger Davies
• Tinucherian

Interface administrator changes

Galobtter

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, administrator elections were permanently authorized on a five-month schedule. The next election will be scheduled soon; see Wikipedia talk:Administrator elections for more information. This is an alternate process to the RfA process and does not replace the latter.
• An RfC was closed with consensus to allow editors to opt-out of seeing "sticky decorative elements". Such elements should now be wrapped in {{sticky decoration wrapper}}. Editors who wish to opt out can follow the instructions at WP:STICKYDECO.
• An RfC has resulted in a broad prohibition on the use of AI-generated images in articles. A few common-sense exceptions are recognized.

Miscellaneous

• A New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in May 2025 to reduce the backlog of articles in the new pages feed. Sign up here to participate!

---

Hi! In this edit you reverted my removal of the detailed Personnel section from In the Wee Small Hours. This section is one of numerous such sections that have been added to many articles about Frank Sinatra albums by one editor. There was a discussion of this editor's "Personnel" sections at Wikiproject Music here and at ANI here. In both discussions I argued that these sections (mostly consisting of mind-numbingly long lists of personal names) are unnecessarily detailed and fail WP:INDISCRIMINATE. It seems to me that the result of both of those discussions was a consensus clearly against retaining these sections. Do you read the consensus differently, or do you think this issue needs more discussion? CodeTalker (talk) 03:11, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@CodeTalker: Thank you for writing! Also, thank you for bringing my attention to those discussions, of which I was unaware. Please note that what follows is just my thoughts on the matter and nothing more, but I hope you will consider them. (Also consider the fact that I've been known to be wrong on several occasions.) First, I think I would agree that the incredibly long list of personnel on that exhaustive compilation CD is probably not worthwhile, probably crossing into WP:UNDUE territory (perhaps a novel interpretation, but nontheless...) However, I think that the personnel is encyclopedic for instances such as In the Wee Small Hours because the article is about the album and the specific making of that one album, and the artists listed have a direct impact upon the artistic quality of that recording, therefore I don't think the information is INDISCRIMINATE. As a music researcher, I find this information useful and informative. Many of the musicians are notable in their own right, and the names give an indication of the timbre and quality of the recordings for the given tracks. Don't confuse specialized information with INDISCRIMINATE. I get that this is a judgement call, and I most certainly understand that discographical information such as this is not most reader's cup of tea, but Wikipedia is both a general and specialized encyclopedia. The position at the end of the article is not intrusive to the average reader, and Wikipedia's feelings aren't hurt if most readers think "boring" and skip that section. MOS:ALBUM suggests a Personnel section, and in fact if this article were a Featured Article I would expect it to have exactly this sort of information. I also would be cautious of using localized discussions to project consensus broadly. At least the discussion on WikiProject Music is likely to bring knowledgeable editors to the topic, but before I would consider this type of information to be deemed unencyclopedic I'd like the input of WikiProject Albums and WikiProject Discography, or at least give them the opportunity to participate. I understand your frustration with the editor who has been disruptive, but the information has been significantly improved upon regarding formatting, and it is currently referenced to a superior academic source.

I hope that is at least somewhat helpful. Thank you for all you have done and continue to do for this encyclopedia. All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 02:44, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC is open to determine whether the English Wikipedia community should adopt a position on AI development by the WMF and its affiliates.

Technical news

• A new feature called Multiblocks will be deployed on English Wikipedia on the week of June 2. See the relevant announcement on the administrators' noticeboard.
• History merges performed using the mergehistory special page are now logged at both the source and destination, rather than just the source as previously, after this RFC and the resolution of T118132.

Arbitration

• An arbitration case named Indian military history has been opened. Evidence submissions for this case close on 8 June.

Miscellaneous

• Voting for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) election is open until 17 June 2025. Read the voting page on Meta-Wiki and cast your vote here!
• An Articles for Creation backlog drive is happening in June 2025, with over 1,600 drafts awaiting review from the past two months. In addition to AfC participants, all administrators and new page patrollers can help review using the Yet Another AFC Helper Script, which can be enabled in the Gadgets settings. Sign up here to participate!
• The Unreferenced articles backlog drive is happening in June 2025 to reduce the backlog of articles tagged with {{Unreferenced}}. You can help reduce the backlog by adding citations to these articles. Sign up to participate!

---

The third round of the 2025 WikiCup ended on 28 June. This round was again competitive, with three contestants scoring more than 1,000 round points:

• BeanieFan11 (submissions) with 1,314 round points, mostly from articles about athletes and politicians, including 20 good articles and 48 did you know articles
• Gog the Mild (submissions) with 1,197 round points, mostly from military history articles, including 9 featured topic articles, two featured articles, and four good articles
• Sammi Brie (submissions) with 1,055 round points, mostly from television station articles, including 27 good articles and 9 good topic articles

Everyone who competed in round 3 will advance to round 4 unless they have withdrawn. This table shows all competitors who have received tournament points so far, while the full scores for round 3 can be seen here. During this round, contestants have claimed 4 featured articles, 16 featured lists, 1 featured picture, 9 featured-topic articles, 149 good articles, 27 good-topic articles, and more than 90 Did You Know articles. In addition, competitors have worked on 18 In the News articles, and they have conducted more than 200 reviews.

Remember that any content promoted after 28 June but before the start of Round 4 can be claimed in Round 4. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, feel free to review one of the nominations listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:49, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Administrator changes

NuclearWarfare

Interface administrator changes

L235

Guideline and policy news

• Following a talk page discussion, speedy deletion criterion G13 has been amended to remove "Userspace with no content except the article wizard placeholder text."
• WP:Manual of Style/Superscripts and subscripts was upgraded to a guideline following a RfC discussion.

Miscellaneous

• The 2025 Developing Countries WikiContest will run from 1 July to 30 September. Sign up now!
• Administrator elections will take place this month. Administrator elections are an alternative to RFA that is a gentler process for candidates due to secret voting and multiple people running together. The call for candidates is July 9–15, the discussion phase is July 18–22, and the voting phase is July 23–29. Get ready to submit your candidacy, or (with their consent) to nominate a talented candidate!

---

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

Guideline and policy news

• Following a request for comment, a new speedy deletion criterion, G15, has been enacted. It applies to pages generated by a large language model (LLM) without human review.
• Following a request for comment, there is a new policy outlining the granting of permissions to view the IP addresses of temporary accounts. Temporary account deployment on the English Wikipedia is currently scheduled for September 2025, and editors can request access to the permission ahead of time. Admins are encouraged to keep an eye on the request page; there will likely be a flood of editors requesting the permission when they realize they can no longer see IP addresses.

Technical news

• Administrators can now restrict the "Add a Link" feature to newcomers. The "Add a Link" Structured Task helps new account holders get started with editing. Administrators can configure this setting in the Community Configuration page.

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Indian military history has been closed.
  • South Asia (WP:CT/SA) is designated a contentious topic. The topic area is specifically defined as All pages related to the region of South Asia (India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal), broadly construed, including but not limited to history, politics, ethnicity, and social groups.
  • The contentious topic designations for Sri Lanka (SL) and India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan (IPA) are folded into this new contentious topic.
  • The community-authorized general sanctions regarding South Asian social groups (GS/CASTE) are rescinded and folded into this new contentious topic.
• The arbitration case Article titles and capitalisation 2 has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case closed on 31 July.
• The arbitration case Transgender healthcare and people has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case will close on 11 August.

Miscellaneous

• Wikimania 2025 is happening in Nairobi, Kenya, and online from August 6 to August 9. This year marks 20 years of Wikimania. Interested users can join the online event. Registration for the virtual event is free and will remain open throughout Wikimania. You can register here now.

---

The fourth round of the 2025 WikiCup ended on 29 August. The penultimate round saw three contestants score more than 800 points:

• BeanieFan11 (submissions) with 1,175 round points, mainly from sports-related articles, including 17 good articles, 27 did you know articles, and 9 in the news articles
• Arconning (submissions) with 1,090 round points, mainly from articles about athletes and politicians, including a featured article on Philippines at the 1924 Summer Olympics, 9 good articles, 28 did you know articles, and a wide assortment of featured and good article reviews
• AirshipJungleman29 (submissions) with 854 round points, mostly from a high-scoring featured article on the Indian leader Rani of Jhansi and two good articles, in addition to 13 featured and good article reviews

Everyone who competed in Round 4 will advance to Round 5 unless they have withdrawn. This table shows all competitors who have received tournament points so far, while the full scores for Round 4 can be seen here. During this round, contestants have claimed 9 featured articles, 12 featured lists, 98 good articles, 9 good topic articles, more than 150 reviews, nearly 100 did you know articles, and 18 in the news articles.

In advance of the fifth and final round, the judges would like to thank every contestant for their hard work. As a reminder, any content promoted after 29 August but before the start of Round 5 can be claimed in Round 5. In addition, note that Round 5 will end on 31 October at 23:59 UTC. Awards at the end of Round 5 will be distributed based on who has the most tournament points over all five rounds, and special awards will be distributed based on high performance in particular areas of content creation (e.g., most featured articles in a single round).

Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, feel free to review one of the nominations listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges – Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), Epicgenius (talk · contribs), Frostly (talk · contribs), Guerillero (talk · contribs) and Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) – are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck!

If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:47, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could you revoke TPA for 新明珠 17? The account is an LTA, TPA will be unhelpful (as proven by what they are using it for right now). 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 23:06, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@45dogs: Done. sheesh. thanks! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 23:12, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Should the page also be deleted and re-created with the block notice or revdeled? I thought I remembered reading that that was generally the procedure with attack pages, but I can't actually find that guideline anywhere so maybe its not necessary. Emk9 (talk) 01:20, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Usually these aren't outright deleted as the block messages are kept in the edit history. Certainly blanking is appropriate. I think the policy you may be looking for is Wikipedia:CBLANK. I'm indifferent as to whether or not this should be deleted, perhaps someone at WP:MFD will have a stronger opinion than I if you think there's potential that irreparable harm will occur to an individual if the attack page remains available in history. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 01:34, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stockhausenfan (talk) 22:29, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC is open on whether use of emojis with no encyclopedic value in mainspace and draftspace (e.g., at the start of paragraphs or in place of bullet points) should be added as a criterion under G15.

Technical news

• Administrators can now access the Special:BlockedExternalDomains page from the Special:CommunityConfiguration list page. This makes it easier to find. T393240

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Article titles and capitalisation 2 has been closed.
• An RfC is in progress to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the Arbitration Committee election and resolve any issues not covered by existing rules.

---

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

Administrator changes

• Billinghurst
• Crisco 1492
• DarkFalls
• Spike Wilbury
• Valereee
• Ergo Sum

CheckUser changes

Vanamonde93

Arbitration

• After a motion, arbitration enforcement page protections no longer need to be logged in the AELOG. A bot now automatically posts protections at WP:AELOG/P. To facilitate this bot, protection summaries must include a link to the relevant CT page (e.g. [[WP:CT/BLP]]), and you will receive talk page reminders if you forget to specify the contentious topic but otherwise indicate it is an AE action.

---

Hello, 78.26. This message is being sent to remind you of significant upcoming changes regarding logged-out editing.

Starting 4 November, logged-out editors will no longer have their IP address publicly displayed. Instead, they will have a temporary account (TA) associated with their edits. Users with some extended rights like administrators and CheckUsers, as well as users with the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will still be able to reveal temporary users' IP addresses and all contributions made by temporary accounts from a specific IP address or range.

How do temporary accounts work?

• When a logged-out user completes an edit or a logged action for the first time, a cookie will be set in this user's browser and a temporary account tied with this cookie will be automatically created for them. This account's name will follow the pattern: ~2025-12345-67 (a tilde, year of creation, a number split into units of 5).
• All subsequent actions by the temporary account user will be attributed to this username. The cookie will expire 90 days after its creation. As long as it exists, all edits made from this device will be attributed to this temporary account. It will be the same account even if the IP address changes, unless the user clears their cookies or uses a different device or web browser.
• A record of the IP address used at the time of each edit will be stored for 90 days after the edit. Users with the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will be able to see the underlying IP addresses.
• As a measure against vandalism, there are two limitations on the creation of temporary accounts:
  • There has to be a minimum of 10 minutes between subsequent temporary account creations from the same IP (or /64 range in case of IPv6).
  • There can be a maximum of 6 temporary accounts created from an IP (or /64 range) within a period of 24 hours.

Temporary account IP viewer user right

• Administrators may grant the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right to non-administrators who meet the criteria for granting. Importantly, an editor must make an explicit request for the permission (e.g. at WP:PERM/TAIV)—administrators are not permitted to assign the right without a request.
• Administrators will automatically be able to see temporary account IP information once they have accepted the Access to Temporary Account IP Addresses Policy via Special:Preferences or via the onboarding dialog which comes up after temporary accounts are deployed.

Impact for administrators

• It will be possible to block many abusers by just blocking their temporary accounts. A blocked person won't be able to create new temporary accounts quickly if the admin selects the autoblock option.
• It will still be possible to block an IP address or IP range.
• Temporary accounts will not be retroactively applied to contributions made before the deployment. On Special:Contributions, you will be able to see existing IP user contributions, but not new contributions made by temporary accounts on that IP address. Instead, you should use Special:IPContributions for this (see a video about IPContributions in a gallery below).

Rules about IP information disclosure

• Publicizing an IP address gained through TAIV access is generally not allowed (e.g. ~2025-12345-67 previously edited as 192.0.2.1 or ~2025-12345-67's IP address is 192.0.2.1).
• Publicly linking a TA to another TA is allowed if "reasonably believed to be necessary". (e.g. ~2025-12345-67 and ~2025-12345-68 are likely the same person, so I am counting their reverts together toward 3RR, but not Hey ~2025-12345-68, you did some good editing as ~2025-12345-67)
• See Wikipedia:Temporary account IP viewer § What can and can't be said for more detailed guidelines.

Useful tools for patrollers

• It is possible to view if a user has opted-in to view temporary account IPs via the User Info card, available in Preferences → Appearance → Advanced options → Enable the user info card
  • This feature also makes it possible for anyone to see the approximate count of temporary accounts active on the same IP address range.
• Special:IPContributions allows viewing all edits and temporary accounts connected to a specific IP address or IP range.
• Similarly, Special:GlobalContributions supports global search for a given temporary account's activity.
• The auto-reveal feature (see video below) allows users with the right permissions to automatically reveal all IP addresses for a limited time window.

Videos

• How to use Special:IPContributions
• How automatic IP reveal works
• How to use IP Info
• How to use User Info

Further information and discussion

• For more information and discussion regarding this change, please see the announcement from the Wikimedia Foundation at Wikipedia:Village pump (WMF) § Temporary accounts rollout.

Most of this message was written by Mz7 (source). Thanks, 🎃 SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 02:48, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. In closing the AfD on Brigadoon Lodge, you said, "It should be noted that sources do not have to be primarily about a topic, they do need to have WP:SIGCOV to help indicate notability". I disagree with that, at least regarding the particular sources identified in that discussion.

WP:Notability is established when a subject has "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." Significant coverage means the reliable source "addresses the topic directly and in detail". While the subject doesn't need to be the "main topic" of the reliable source, it has to be more than a trivial or shallow mention.

As I stated in the discussion, many of the sources provided as alleged RS fail this bar, with the lodge receiving passing and shallow mentions, typically in lists of similar locations, that can hardly be described as "significant" (as required by both WP:N and WP:NBUILD). Regardless of the wrong decision, the fact remains that this subject does not have significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.

Let's hope the last 16 years of verifiability doesn't meet WP's bar will change, and someone will find sources that actually provide "direct and in-depth" coverage. Jcgaylor (talk) 03:17, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Most other editors disagreed with your conclusions regarding whether the sources contained significant coverage. I made the statement I did because one editor made an argument directly contradicting our notability guideline as stated in SIGCOV. If you believe I have misread the discussion you are welcome to take this to WP:DELREV and have my close assessed by other uninvolved editors. All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 11:36, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That others agreed to a wrong decision isn't really the point. AfDs aren't votes and this isn't a democracy.

Whether or not there is sigcov is the core issue. Did you review the sources? Jcgaylor (talk) 14:52, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jcgaylor: Yes, sigcov was the issue. Most editors were of the opinion that the available coverage is significant, and that it meets GNG. You are correct, AfD is not a democracy, but there is nothing deficient from a policy standpoint on the other side's position. You are asking me to make a WP:SUPERVOTE. My job as the closer is not to make a decision based upon my own opinions. Rather, it is to read the discussion and weigh the discussion for consensus, which includes making sure arguments are policy based. So no, I did not read the sources because then I would be !voting, making myself biased when I closed the discussion. Again, if you feel I did weigh policy, did not correctly read consensus, or if the arguments for Significant Coverage are so egregiously wrong that my judgement of consensus must be overturned, please take it to Deletion Review. I've been wrong before, and I'll be wrong again, but I believe my judgement of consensus on this discussion was correct. All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 01:25, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Without reviewing the sources, how can one make a determination that the "keep" argument correctly applied the relevant notability policies?

According to the deletion guidelines for administrators, "consensus is not determined by counting heads, but by looking at strength of argument and cited recorded consensus". Your job as the closer is to ensure that policies and guidelines are successfully upheld. You are allowed to decide in favor of a minority viewpoint. That isn't, necessarily, a super vote.

If you did not review the sources, it is hard to imagine how you evaluated the strength of the "keep" argument.

I appreciate your time, and will consider pursuing a challenge to your decision. Wikipedia isn't bettered by having an unsourced, non-notable article stay up after 16 years of failing to meet site guidelines. Jcgaylor (talk) 01:45, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My job is to read the discussion and ensure that the arguments are policy based. They were. The participants’ opinions varied, but a significant majority of the participants were of the opinion that the available sources mean GNG is met, and the article therefore needs improving, not deletion. You may have the last word if you want, but I won’t be replying regarding this again. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 01:56, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Again, if you did not review the sources, you cannot say that you evaluated the arguments by their strength (which is what you are supposed to do according to the guidelines cited above).

Going forward, I hope that you follow the proper closing procedure, which may mean siding with a minority vote.

Cheers, Jcgaylor (talk) 02:03, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Administrator changes

Toadspike

• Elahrairah
• Juliancolton
• Magnus Manske

CheckUser changes

asilvering

Guideline and policy news

• The speedy deletion criteria U5 has been repealed, with U6 and U7 replacing it. See the FAQ for more clarifications.
• Community-designated contentious topics may now be enforced and appealed at the arbitration enforcement noticeboard (AE) as a result of an RfC.

Technical news

• You can enable a handy user info card next to usernames, which when clicked displays edit count, blocks, thanks, and other information. To enable this feature, visit Preferences → Appearance → Advanced options → Enable the user info card

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Transgender healthcare and people has been closed
  • Uninvolved administrators may impose an AE participation restriction on any thread at the Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard.

Miscellaneous

• An unreferenced articles backlog drive is happening in November 2025 to reduce the backlog of articles tagged with {{Unreferenced}}. You can help reduce the backlog by adding citations to these articles. Sign up to participate!

---

Hey 78.26 I need your help deleting my revisions in the following articles: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Electric_YF120 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Electric_F118 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Electric_F101 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprotor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_Boeing_V-22_Osprey as soon as possible. According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Revision_deletion#Changing_visibility_settings, there are be either three or four options to choose from: Delete revision text Delete edit comment Delete editor's username or IP Suppress data from administrators as well as others. I request for all of these options executed, and all of my edits completely expunged from revision history logs. If you can't help me with my request, will you please forward my request to another administrator willing to handle RevisionDelete requests? Overlordchaos1000000 (talk) 00:42, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Overlordchaos1000000: There needs to be valid reasons to delete revisions. It's not obvious to me why these edits need to be redacted. See WP:CRD. If there are privacy concerns, you may e-mail me privately. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 01:12, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've just sent you an email. Please check your inbox. Overlordchaos1000000 (talk) 05:22, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Administrator changes

• Chaotic Enby
• Rjjiii

Valereee

• Fathoms Below
• Tamzin

CheckUser changes

Spicy

Technical news

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

Miscellaneous

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

---

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

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

The first round will end on 26 February. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email), Epicgenius (talk · contribs · email), Frostly (talk · contribs · email), Guerillero (talk · contribs · email) and Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

Guideline and policy news

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

Arbitration

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

---

{{Help me}} A few more modifications have been made which appear to resolve most of the remaining issues. Could someone assist with the final review of this draft? Thanks in advance! ~2026-10873-46 (talk) 17:22, 18 February 2026 (UTC)NHPL[reply]

Ciao 78.26- Glad to learn of your interest in historical recordings. I recently modified a draft article Draft:Pietro Deiro Presents the Accordion Orchestra. It might be ready for a move to the main page. References have been improved and notability of the participating musicians has been clarified as per the request of another editor.. The article only utilizes only one reference from discogs.com to a photograph of the album cover to support a direct quotation. I think this may be ok as per the WP:RSDISCOGS consensus discussion in 2019 which indicates that the site discogs.com has not been deprecated and the discussion in 2024 which indicates that photographs of albums posted on Discogs.com may or may not be useful as a reference source. Feel free to delete the quotation of the paragraph from the liner notes if it is problematic. When you have time, kindly take a look at the new draft. Many thanks in advance for your kind assistance and enjoy the music. Respectfully, ~2026-41286-5 (talk) 18:03, 19 January 2026 (UTC)GCL[reply]

Greetings, and thanks for writing! I'm greatly pleased to be discussing these topics. Unfortunately my time has been limited lately, for reasons which are positive on a personal level but bad for spending extended periods of time on Wikipedia. I did take a quick look at your draft. Although I'd really *like* this to be an encyclopedia article, I'm not sure it meets our notability guidelines. The Billboard article of 1960 counts towards notability, but I'm having trouble finding other sources that talk in-depth about the album itself. BNS Pubs is a reliable source, for instance, but it is a listing of albums, and doesn't give any artistic analysis or historical information about the album, it merely confirms it exists. Also, please remove the discogs reference. Instead, use the album itself as the source (use Template:Cite AV media notes). You can link to discogs, but don't cite it.

Can you give me another source besides Billboard that directly discusses the album in particular? If not, may I gently suggest that you include this information into Pietro Deiro's article, where it may be more appropriate? All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 03:46, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Great to learn of your interest in the article---as per your suggestion a few references supporting "notability" have been included from a critical review in The Catholic Digest as published by the College of St. Thomas (University of St. Thomas (Minnesota) along with a few more references from the Discography of American Historical Recordings. I've also included a few more references to confirm the notability of the orchestral musicians who participated in the recording. While they do not mention the album directly, they do confirm the prominent role which these musicians played in demonstrating the suitability of the accordion as a "serious & legitimate" instrument for the classical music concert hall stage in the early 20th century. I hope the additional references are helpful along with the links to relevant Wikipedia articles on the history of the accordion orchestra in the USA (See (Accordion in music in the section on "The Accordion Orchestra in Classical Music"). Thanks again for your kind assistance and best wishes for your continued editorial success on Wikipedia. With best regards ~2026-43837-1 (talk) 20:25, 20 January 2026 (UTC)NHPL[reply]

P.S See a few of the additional new references here: ^{[1] [2][3][4][5]}

Thanks again~2026-43837-1 (talk) 20:39, 20 January 2026 (UTC)NHPL~2026-45691-1 (talk) 16:11, 21 January 2026 (UTC)NHPL[reply]

You're trying to prove the notability of the participating artists. That's not in doubt. You need to establish notability for the album itself. You may have it with the Catholic Digest, but I'd at least mention what they say about the album. I did a search on newspaperarchive.com, and several papers covered this album, [11]. Use some of these, and notability will be proven. I hope that helps! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 03:40, 22 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ciao 78.26 thanks for the superb advice. I've tracked down the request quotation from the Catholic Digest on archive.org and also included a link to a Swedish publication for accordionists : Accordeon Journalen which mentions the album, but I'm note certain that it offers a review since it is written in Swedish. I also included links to come of the newspapers in the USA which mention the album as per your suggestion. That is about all I could find, so thanks again and good luck with the final review. With thanks ~2026-47646-7 (talk) 18:09, 22 January 2026 (UTC)GCL[reply]

I'm not going to review this article for promotion to mainspace, as I am WP:Involved at this point. However, if you give me time I'll help incorporate those sources into the article. Also, if you want, I can clean up some other parts I think are mostly irrelevant to the topic and in my opinion would make it stronger to stand on its own and look less like the article is trying to WP:INHERIT notability. Let me know, and all the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 17:58, 23 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ciao 78.26: Great to hear from you again! Thanks once again for your suggestions. Feel free to make any modifications or deletions from the draft as you deem necessary whenever you have some spare time. Your expertise as a professional editor is more than welcome. I attempted to incorporate additional text from the references which you provided on newspaperarchive.com. Alas, i do not have direct access to this website, so I am unable to provide additional detailed content from these newspaper references. Similarly, I was not able to acquire sufficient text from the Swedish journal "Accordion Journalen" to create a translation from Swedish or Norwegian into English. Google AI indicates that "Accordion Journalen" was published from 1949-1963 and is considered to be a primary resource in academic research into the role of female accordionists in Swedish music during the mid-20th century, along with the encyclopedia "Svenska dragspelare" (1946). The journal was founded by Andrew Walter: (born Anders Walter Kejving, 1914–1978) who was a prominent Swedish accordionist and composer and one of the most influential figures in Scandinavian accordion music during the mid-20th century according to Google AI. Physical copies of the journal and related materials are said to be preserved in the Svenskt visarkiv (The Centre for Swedish Folk Music and Jazz Research) presumably in Sweden. Google Ai claims there is a searchable database for past editions of "Accordion Journalen" at Music Work's library catalog (Gathenhielm). While physical copies of the journal may exists in Sweden, I did not have much success in searching this database online. A search on Google Books suggests that the album may have been reviewed within the magazine "Stereo Review" in 1961, but the link to this issue does not provide any detailed text. Google Books also lists a potential review of the album in the magazine "High Fidelity" (September 1960, Vol. 10, NO 9) and to my amazement I was able to retrieve a clear copy of the review as posted on Worldrradiohistory.com, so I incorporated it into the 'Reviews Sections" of the draft. See ^[1]

^[2] I hope that it is OK. In any case, thanks again for your assistance and good luck with the modifications! Happy editing ~2026-58654-6 (talk) 18:13, 27 January 2026 (UTC)NHPL[reply]

~2026-58654-6 (talk) 19:19, 27 January 2026 (UTC)NHPL[reply]

Hi 78.26 - A quick note to let you know that a few more modifications were made to the draft to reduce the number of references and to use a more neutral tone. Perhaps if you have time you can take another look. Thanks.~2026-10873-46 (talk) 17:22, 18 February 2026 (UTC)HNPL[reply]

You are wrong that WP:PRODUCER is not a guideline-based argument[12][13]. Kelob2678 (talk) 08:49, 22 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Kelob2678: A couple of mentions and a re-direct created by an editor, even a knowledgeable one, without community discussion and consensus, does not make this Wikipedia policy. It's not that anyone, including yourself, has done anything wrong. However, I am hardly infallible, so if you feel I have misread consensus you are free to take this to Wikipedia:Deletion review. All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 17:55, 23 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think the outcome of the AfD was wrong and notable content was deleted, however, you evaluated the consensus correctly, so there is no need for a DRV. I disagree that there is a community consensus that producers do not fall under the other creative professionals or filmmakers clauses of the guideline. WP:DIRECTOR is also just a redirect, but I doubt anyone would argue that film directors do not fall under the guideline. I linked two talk page discussions in which editors said that producers can fall under the guideline, here is another discussion in which an editor from the AfD brought up the topic on the talk page, no one supported him, but no one objected either. Here is a sample of AfDs in which editors took WP:PRODUCER seriously[14][15][16].

Your closure implied the existence of this consensus, so I would like to understand why you think so. Regarding the AfD, I am asking you to amend the closing statement so it no longer implies the presence of this consensus, namely, that producers don't fall under the guideline. Kelob2678 (talk) 18:32, 23 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Kelob2678:, thank you for your thoughtful reply. First I need to point out, my close in no way establishes any sort of consensus, just as the links to other discussions in no way establish any sort of consensus. Directors are very different than Producers. Directors have creative impact on a work of art. Producers rarely do. Looking at the article, I think you're argument that Gopalan meets CREATIVE would perhaps have held more sway if you'd mentioned his acting and how his producing aspects weren't merely financial, but had creative input as well. Unfortunately you don't have the sources to back up that claim (regarding the creative aspect of his producing) if it's true. I just can't see that using a redirect that has not received any general community consensus is a policy-based argument. That said I'd be more than happy to restore the article to your personal user space, if you want time to develop it because you know there are sources. Given the number of notable films he produced I'd be surprised if there aren't non-English sources available about him. As it is, the article says he produced films, and then a number of negative things about him. Frankly, that doesn't seem balanced, and I think the article may best deleted from a BLP standpoint because of that imbalance. I hope that helps. All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 03:06, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

Arbitration

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

Miscellaneous

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

---