See Special:Diff/1283820024, in an attempt to remove the AMP url, it made the URL an unhelpful ambiguous URL.
Luckily, the URL wasn't really necessary before since it was syndicated from another source, which I replaced with the original source. I would not be surprised if a lot of yardbarker links did this, since they mostly syndicated then pull articles from other sources, but these become harder to find when they go from this amp url to a more ambiguous one. Might need a quick review to see if this happened anywhere else. If you have a list, I can go through and try and fix them with the original source. Chew(V • T • E)22:29, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Chew: Hi. Yes, none of the yardbarker URLs were usable when I found the issue a few weeks ago. So I added the yardbarker domain to the ignore list, and removed all the problematic yardbarker URLs from the database. There were quite a few of them. Currently there are only seven yardbarker URLs in the database that were operational. I undid all the changes I could find, seems like I missed some. Unfortunately, I do not have a list (as I removed them from the database), but most of the problematic edits were undone. —usernamekiran (talk)15:09, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome, thank you! I'll try and go through and just remove them all if I can for my prior reasons, just wanted to make sure you were aware as well. Appreciate it Chew(V • T • E)00:37, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Suggestions: Notable People to Write Wiki Article About
Hello.
I wish to SUGGEST three prominent people to write a Wiki article about. There actions affected 1000s of people across the USA and were in front of national media cameras. They graduated from my high school. But you are impartial. I cant add their names into Wiki content unless there is already an article about them.
Here are the suggested Three Names and Major Newspaper Articles or Bio Sites about them to help you write a suggested article. They often made quite a few articles and headlines! These articles or Bios were all retrieved today, July 5, 2025.
Request for Full Review of Ravi Kumar Punia Article
Hello fellow editors,
I’m currently working on the Ravi Kumar Punia article and would appreciate it if someone with more experience could review the entire page for structure, formatting, and adherence to Wikipedia’s content guidelines.
My goal is to ensure the article is well-organized, neutrally written, and properly sourced. If you notice any areas that need improvement—such as notability, tone, layout, or citation quality—I would be grateful for your feedback or any edits you may suggest. I’m happy to collaborate and make revisions where needed to ensure the article meets Wikipedia’s standards.
Hey, there's a bug with your bot on nlwiki where nieuwsblad.be links are getting converted to hbvl.be, even though nieuwsblad.be doesn't use AMP. You can see it happening in these diffs: 69654475, 69574270.
Could you take a look at what's causing this? It's messing up citations and potentially affecting other Belgian news sites too (though not entirely sure). XXBlackburnXx (talk) 21:11, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@XXBlackburnXx: Hello. The bot is thinking the original URL is an AMP url because of the "amper" in it. Then the bot is trying to find a canonical URL for that amp url. The issue is, original URL/page (nieuwsblad.be) is mentioning the hbvl.be URL as the canonical urls. Looking at the pages, they both seem to be exactly the same. If you want, I can blacklist the hbvl.be URLs. Kindly let me know how should I proceed. —usernamekiran (talk)22:00, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Blacklisting would be nice. The main issue isn't necessarily the websites themselves, but rather that when a site within a citation is replaced with hbvl.be, the rest of the citation parameters, such as |publisher= or |work=, no longer match appropriately. Hope you understand :). XXBlackburnXx (talk) 22:22, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@XXBlackburnXx: Hi. I was going through the logs of the bot, and I came across: Failed to save Limburg United in het seizoen 2025/26 on nl.wikipedia: Edit to page nl:Limburg United in het seizoen 2025/26 disallowed by the AbuseFilter. This action has been automatically identified as harmful, and therefore disallowed. If you believe your action was constructive, please inform an administrator of what you were trying to do. A brief description of the abuse rule which your action matched is: KiranBOT bug I could not find the edit filter on nlwiki. Has it been deleted/deactivated? —usernamekiran (talk)04:16, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding your bot on Chinese Wikipedia
Hello, and thanks for your bot, KiranBOT’s contributions. According to Chinese Wikipedia policy, global bots are required to obtain local approval unless they are solely performing tasks related to fixing interwiki links or double redirects (policy). Please submit a request for local approval at this page. Otherwise, your bot may be temporarily blocked. Thank you for your understanding! Stang00:17, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Stang: Hello. Thanks for reaching out. I had gone through the policy page beforehand, I misunderstood the policy — I thought global bots were allowed. I will stop KiranBOT in a couple of hours from now. Thanks again, —usernamekiran (talk)00:57, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Usernamekiran, I noticed that there's no article yet for TRMS (The Real Me Studios), even though it's listed on MusicBrainz and is the label behind artist SXMRXXT and releases like NOTHING IS OFFICIAL. Since you enjoy working on overlooked topics, I was wondering if you'd be willing to create a stub for it? It would really mean a lot. Thank you! 117.194.108.43 (talk) 02:12, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! I kindly ask you to increase the delay time of the bot in the Russian Wikipedia after edits made by unregistered users and newly registered accounts. At the moment, your bot makes edits just a few seconds after any change. Sometimes such edits include vandalism or other violations, which makes them harder to detect or leads to incorrect reverts (1, 2, 3). I would like to request that the bot’s edits be made only a few days after such changes. Mitte27 (talk) 09:25, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Mitte27: Hello. I understand your point. The bot's edit are whitelisted, so the vandalism must get whitelisted as well. I'm currently out of town. I will get back home in 4-5 days. I will look at it as soon as I get home. —usernamekiran (talk)13:59, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Purpose of having KiranBOT
Hi Kiran, I just read User:KiranBOT/AMP which explains what is done and how is that done, but I missed a reasoning about why Wikipedia needs this done. Is removing AMP done to improve reader experience, to reduce the data flow to Google, to work around bugs or for some other reason ?
If Wikipedia already has a place where this is explained, I would be happy if you could link there from the bot's page, otherwise could you please add a section "Reasoning" or the like to this page ? Thank you, -- Juergen 5.147.163.199 (talk) 15:11, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Juergen. Yes, you are correct, I somehow missed/forgot to add the reasoning section. I will do it soon. You are correct. It is not entirely to "reduce the data flow to Google". The AMP URLs are, in short, privacy invasive; and they also pose a security risk. The other reason is that AMP URLs often seem to become non-operational after a while. That creates difficulties with Wikipedia's verifiability policy in case the URL was not archived. So it is preferable to use the canonical URLs. Thanks for reminding, I will add the "reasoning" section soon. —usernamekiran (talk)16:42, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Jlwoodwa. I have no issues with deletion, I will request for speedy after this edit. There were a few moves, and rewrites of the template, and doc. It was created as part of me trying to simplify the documentation, but then it was redirected and moved (page history) The current documentation is not confusing, and that particular edit notice has been rendered useless as well. Thanks for contacting me first, it saved a lot of community time at Tfd. It is appreciated a lot. —usernamekiran (talk)10:04, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
November article improvement drive
Starting on 1 November, the month-long 2025 Article Improvement Drive will target a number of content improvement areas and backlogs. Participating editors will be in line for barnstars and other awards; articles from all aspects of the project will be eligible so there will be something for everybody. Interested editors are encouraged to sign up now!MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:18, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Looking up on this talk page it seems like most mentor questions you are asked aren't being answered. If you still want to be a mentor, please attempt to respond to questions more actively, otherwise you can resign or mark yourself as away via Special:MentorDashboard. * Pppery *it has begun...20:59, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Pppery: Hello. I have responded to most of the questions on their talk pages. Some of them were not responded to, as they already welcome-message/warning on the talk page, like User talk:Yubrajpandeya02. A few days ago, on the dashboard, I had changed the frequency to non-manual lowest — "about half the average". I will look for what happens for a week or two, if I cant respond to the questions properly till then, I will mark myself as away. —usernamekiran (talk)14:34, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The process will have a seven day call for candidates phase, a two day pause, a five day discussion phase, and a seven day private vote using SecurePoll. Discussion and questions are only allowed on the candidate pages during the discussion phase.
The outcome of this process is identical to making a request for adminship. There is no official difference between an administrator appointed through RFA versus administrator elections.
Ask any questions about the process at the talk page. Later, a user talk message will be sent to official candidates with additional information about the process.
If you are interested in the process, please make sure to watchlist the appropriate pages. A watchlist notice will be added when the discussion phase opens, and again when the voting phase opens.
You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.
On December 9, we will start the voting phase. The candidate subpages will close to public questions and discussion, and everyone will have a week to use the SecurePoll software to vote, which uses a secret ballot. You can see who voted, but not who they voted for. Please note that the vote totals cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see an individual candidate's totals during the election. You must be extended confirmed to vote.
Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which typically lasts between a couple days and a week. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the results page (you may want to watchlist this page) and transcluded to the main election page. In order to be granted adminship, a candidate who has not been recalled must have received at least 70.0% support, calculated as Support / (Support + Oppose), and must also have received a minimum of 20 support votes. A candidate that has been recalled must have at least 55.0% support. Because this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no bureaucrat discussions ("crat chats").
Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page. Thank you for your participation. Happy electing.
You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.
Hi i want to create a new page for Dinesh Thyagarajan. He is a hollywood actor who acted in superman. I tried publishing it multiple times but it is rejected.
i have the below links where his details are published and they are published in super man
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superman_(2025_film) and many other news publications.
Example:
www.comicbook.com
slashfilm.com
dcuniverse.fandom.com
He has played the character of Malik Ali.
In the voting phase, the candidate subpages close to public questions and discussion, and everyone who qualifies to vote has a week to use the SecurePoll software to vote, which uses a secret ballot. You can see who voted, but not who they voted for. Please note that the vote totals cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see an individual candidate's vote total during the election. The suffrage requirements are similar to those at RFA.
Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for a few days, perhaps longer. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the results page (this is a good page to watchlist), and transcluded to the main election page. In order to be granted adminship, a non-recall candidate must have received at least 70.0% support, calculated as Support / (Support + Oppose), and a minimum of 20 support votes. Recall candidates must achieve 55.0% support. Because this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no bureaucrat discussions ("crat chats").
Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page. Thank you for your participation. Happy electing.
You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.
@Samoasambia and Lentokonefani: I fixed the bug, and removed the stopper from the article page. Lets see how it works out. I will be watching that article from now on. Lentokonefani, thank you for your kind words, it is appreciated a lot. —usernamekiran (talk)15:55, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for letting me know, none of the logged-in editors either didnt notice, or didnt care to notify me. That makes your message even more appreciated. I fixed the previously posted message, as well as the problematic code. Thanks again, —usernamekiran (talk)05:14, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is now open for military historian of the year and newcomer of the year awards for 2025!
Thank you Kudpung, and same to you! apologies for the delayed reply. How have you been? It was nice to see you becoming active last year after your wikibreak. —usernamekiran (talk)17:22, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
New pages patrol January–February 2026 Backlog drive
New Pages Patrol is hosting a one-time, two-month experimental backlog drive aimed at reducing the backlog. This will be a combo drive: both articles and redirects will earn points.
The drive will run from 1 January to 28 February 2026.
The drive is divided into two phases. Participants may take part in either phase or across both phases, depending on availability.
Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled during the drive.
Two-month drive-exclusive barnstars will be awarded to eligible participants.
Each article review earns 1 point, while each redirect review earns 0.2 points.
Streak awards will be granted based on consistently meeting weekly point thresholds.
Barnstars will also be awarded for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive.
@Havies100: Hello. You currently have two pages under work: User:Havies100/John Goodacre, and Draft:John Goodacre. I recommend to pick any one, and stick to it. Another strong recommendation is to read WP:AUTOBIO. To answer your question directly, Draft:John Goodacre was declined after it was reviewed. The reason(s) for declining are provided at the top of that page. Once you address/fix these reasons, you can resubmit the page for review. The other page (User:Havies100/John Goodacre) was never submitted for review. If you still want to peruse creating an article about yourself (which I dont recommend), I suggest to work on Draft:John Goodacre. —usernamekiran (talk)18:14, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you I have amended the Draft:John Goodacre page and resubmitted this after correcting the queries.. Do I just ignore the User:Havies100/John Goodacre) page or delete that. Can you tell me what you think this may also require to get published. Also I have tried to upload an image, but can't see it as yet, will it come later ? Havies100 (talk) 09:48, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Hello! I noticed you're a bot operator, so I thought you might be interested in a hackathon we're organizing: the Wikimedia Hackathon Northwestern Europe 2026, on 13–14 March in Arnhem, Netherlands.
It's a two-day, technically oriented hackathon bringing together Wikimedians from the region. Whether you want to work on bot frameworks, tools, or other technical projects, this could be a great opportunity to collaborate with fellow developers. Registration closes mid-January or when full. Let me know if there are any questions. Hope to see you there! Daanvr (talk) 09:25, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Bot is now flagged, crat says request itself will remain open for a month — no problems expected given the past run :P — regards, Revi02:31, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Revi C.: I was translating the comments on google translate when you posted the message here hehe. Thanks for your help, it is much appreciated. —usernamekiran (talk)02:34, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@usernamekiran, Sir, clear my conundrum. Few months back, I saw a movie and wanted to write about director, I wrote and left it. Then after a few days, I got a bot message to work on it. So, i worked on the article and made live.
But Wiki has moved it back to drafts, I found out that, the same subject already had a draft.
Now my confusion is, if there are two drafts on which i should work?. As I can see the other draft has tamil references in the ref section, usually I keep english references.
@Filmybuff: generally speaking, pick the draft that has contributions from more editors, or more number of edits to the draft. Copy relevant/necessary content to that draft from other, with edit summary "copied content from <wikilink to other draft>". Regarding the language for references, any language is acceptable, as long as it is a reliable source. —usernamekiran (talk)15:35, 18 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
—usernamekiran (talk) 22:39, 25 July 2025 (UTC)
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:21, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
.jpg)
Administrator changes
Fathoms Below
CheckUser changes
Oversight changes
Guideline and policy news