Sample Page

Archives

Archive 1

Why u removing my stuff who even are u mate you don’t know anything Wikipedisedit (talk) 22:09, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi – as stated on your talk page, any information added to Wikipedia must be verifiable from another source. I’m sure the statements you added are true, but if they aren’t listed in a reputable online source or published material we can reference, then they can’t remain on Wikipedia. Happy to help if you have any more questions. Epsilon.Prota ^talk 22:14, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

which particular additions do you reference? 2600:4041:562F:B400:D14B:EDBE:1D86:1307 (talk) 11:37, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! The reliable sources are videos on YouTube of the Indiana Christmas parade. You can also find many sources on other sites about the Christmas parade. I do only have a small source of the Indiana junior high schools spirt band playing a bit before the parade and this is, there are a few newspaper pages and when I was younger I played in that band! I have lived in Indiana for a long time so I wouldn’t lie about the parade. Its an amazing sight to see MillieMcGhen (talk) 18:38, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but as most videos on YouTube are anonymous, self-published, and unverifiable, they can’t be used as a reference. If you can find online copies of the newspaper pages or reputable sites including the information, then you can read more about how to cite them here. Epsilon.Prota ^talk 22:16, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Epsilon.Prota,

After reviewing your request, I have added your account to the rollback group. Keep in mind these things when using rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Users should be informed (or warned) after their edits have been reverted. If warnings repeatedly don’t help, WP:ANI is the default place to go. In cases of very clear ongoing intentional damage to the encyclopedia, WP:AIV can be used.
• Reverting someone’s edits may confuse or upset them. Whenever other users message you on your talk page, please take the time to respond to their concerns; accountability is important. For most users who message you, the tone and quality of your answer will permanently influence their opinion about Wikipedia in general.
• Because the plain default rollback link does not provide any explanatory edit summary, it must not be used to revert good faith contributions, even if these contributions are disruptive. Take the time to write a proper summary whenever you’re dealing with a lack of neutrality or verifiability; a short explanation like “[[WP:NPOV|not neutral]]” or “[[WP:INTREF|Please provide a citation]]” is helpful.
• Rollback may never be used to edit war, which you’ll notice to be surprisingly tempting in genuine content disputes. Please especially keep the three-revert rule in mind. If you see others edit warring, please file a report at WP:ANEW. The most helpful essay I’ve ever seen is WP:DISCFAIL; it is especially important for those who review content regularly.
• If you encounter private information or threats of physical harm during your patrols, please quickly use Special:EmailUser/Oversight or Special:EmailUser/Emergency; ideally bookmark these pages now. See WP:OS and WP:EMERGENCY for details. If you’re regularly patrolling recent changes, you will need both contacts sooner or later, and you’ll be happy about the bookmarks.

To try rollback for the first time, you may like to make an edit to WP:Sandbox, and another one, and another one, and then revert the row with one click. I’m sure you’ll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into trouble or have any questions about rollback. Thank you for your time and work in cleaning up Wikipedia. Happy editing!

Best regards,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 12:22, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

hello, sorry about that, I was editing the wrong wiki page. G-Baby Buggz (talk) 21:47, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies. I didn’t realize I had neglected to add the reflinks re edits to Jessica Dragonette. Should be OK, now. ([1]). Yours, 65.88.88.56 (talk) 22:07, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No problem – thanks very much for letting me know! Epsilon.Prota ^talk 22:11, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The original rollback did not specify a cause or reason, so I assumed it was erroneous. 65.88.88.56 (talk) 22:23, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes that can be frustrating – the quick-revert tool I use prompts for a talk page template which helps avoid that sort of thing Epsilon.Prota ^talk 22:25, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I noticed your signature, the “Talk” text seems to have an incorrect link, as it doesn’t lead to your talk page. Just a heads-up in case it’s a mistake. – Arcrev1 (talk) 17:26, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Arcrev1 Thanks for catching that! A colon went walkabout in the markup… Epsilon.Prota ^talk 17:59, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It said the population was 22,000 . What? Ethnologue gives 33,000 speakers (1980), Andrews (1989) gives 45,000 speakers, Feuerstein (1983) 250,000 speakers, Holisky (1991) estimates it between 50,000 and 500,000. I changed it to 45,000 to 500,000, since that’s what’s more credible, plus it’s sourced. So why did you change ? IT IS MORE CREDIBLE 82.16.126.180 (talk) 15:41, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That is me . I just forgot to log in . So can you NOT change it if I change it back .Thank you for your understanding and cooperation . ThatOneBoyFromEssex (talk) 15:48, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi – which change are you referring to? Epsilon.Prota ^talk 16:15, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

which particular additions do you reference? 2600:4041:562F:B400:D14B:EDBE:1D86:1307 (talk) 11:37, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Much of the content you added with these edits is not supported by a reliable source and so has been removed. Epsilon.Prota ^talk 11:46, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Georg Ludwig Ulex, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

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

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 23% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

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

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

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Lijil (talk) 16:43, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the “pending changes reviewer” userright, allowing you to review other users’ edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes#Requirements to accept an edit, when to accept an edit
  

* Pppery * _{it has begun…} 01:27, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Epsilon.Prota. Per your request, your account has been granted temporary account IP viewer rights. You are now able to reveal the IP addresses of individuals using temporary accounts that are not visible to the general public. This is very sensitive information that is only to be used to aid in anti-abuse workflows. Please take a moment to review Wikipedia:Temporary account IP viewer for more information on this user right. It is important to remember:

• You must not share IP address data with someone who does not have the same access permissions unless disclosure is permissible as per guidelines listed at Foundation:Policy:Wikimedia Access to Temporary Account IP Addresses Policy.
• Access should not be used for political control, to apply pressure on editors, or as a threat against another editor in a content dispute. There must be a valid reason to investigate a temporary user. Note that using multiple temporary accounts is not forbidden, so long as they are not used in violation of policies (for example, block or ban evasion).

It is also important to note that the following actions are logged for others to see:

• When a user accepts the preference that enables or disables IP reveal for their account.
• Revealing an IP address of a temporary account.
• Listing the temporary accounts that are associated with an IP address or CIDR range.

Remember, even if a user is violating policy, avoid revealing personal information if possible. Use temporary account usernames rather than disclosing IP addresses directly, or give information such as same network/not same network or similar. If you do not want the user right anymore then please ask me or another administrator and it will be removed for you. You may also voluntarily give up access at any time by visiting Special:Preferences. Happy editing! * Pppery * _{it has begun…} 01:28, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You stated that you have removed a duplicate sentence. I disagree, there is no other place in the opening paragraph which states this. Please undo your revert.123.103.210.114 (talk) 12:34, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@123.103.210.114 →Pageantry – Barber was additionally the first member of the military to win the Miss USA title and declared her intentions to promote veterans issues during her reign.

Apologies if my edit summary was a little vague – I didn’t mean solely in the lead, but that the fact she is the first member of the military to win is already in the article. I don’t think the point is really significant enough to bear reiteration. If you’d like to continue this discussion, let’s move to the associated talk page. Epsilon.Prota ^talk 12:42, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This has been discussed on the talk page so please do not delete it. 123.103.210.114 (talk) 13:41, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

End it 84.3.54.24 (talk) 14:16, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good afternoon, the article which is being referenced is based on a fabrication. There is no means of disproving the allegations which were made but they are also not substantiated in any way in the article. The inclusion of this information factually incorrect and the publication have been contacted to correct their allegation. LeslieArchives (talk) 14:51, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@LeslieArchives – re Sir John Leslie, 4th Baronet – Thank you for letting me know, but until the SMH issues a retraction or you can supply an opposing source for your claim, then the SMH reference will be taken as reliable. If you find any other references supporting your position, please add them to the article or hightlight them on its talk page. Epsilon.Prota ^talk 14:57, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning, please note the claim has now been removed from the article and the reference cited is no longer correct. I have edited the article. https://scanner.topsec.com/?d=2661&r=show&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.smh.com.au%2Ftraveller%2Finspiration%2Fcastle-leslie-county-monaghan-ireland-the-beautiful-irish-castle-thats-played-host-to-a-series-of-misfits-20180702-h1249t.html&t=7c4220b92ca6cd9cd1f652d6d81a1e78307541ee — Preceding unsigned comment added by LeslieArchives (talk • contribs) 09:33, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @LeslieArchives, thanks for letting me know. I can’t view the article unfortunately, but I’ll take your word for it. Epsilon.Prota ^talk 11:31, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Epsilon.Prota, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the new page reviewer user right to your account. This means you now have access to the page curation tools and can start patrolling pages from the new pages feed. If you asked for this at requests for permissions, please check back there to see if your access is time-limited or if there are other comments.

This is a good time to re-acquaint yourself with the guidance at Wikipedia:New pages patrol. Before you get started, please take the time to:

• Add Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers to your watchlist to follow NPP-related discussions
• If you use Twinkle, configure it to log your CSDs and PRODs
• If you can read any languages other than English, add yourself to the list of reviewers with language proficiencies

You can find a list of other useful links and tools for patrollers at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Resources. If you are ever unsure what to do, ask your fellow patrollers or just leave the page for someone else to review – you’re not alone! _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:42, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i see that you have been removingmy links about Finham’s languages and history. In Finham we truly do have our own language but many think we are just joking but it is true! Can you please advise us on a way to add that on wikipedia 2A02:C7C:C44C:1600:E0CC:EE93:886C:F846 (talk) 14:53, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @User:2A02:C7C:C44C:1600:E0CC:EE93:886C:F846! All content added to Wikipedia must be supported by a verifiable and reliable source. If you can find one online or in a book, you can read about how to reference it properly here. Epsilon.Prota ^talk 14:56, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

sadly the only references i have is the Linguifex site 2A02:C7C:C44C:1600:E0CC:EE93:886C:F846 (talk) 15:00, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@User:2A02:C7C:C44C:1600:E0CC:EE93:886C:F846 – as the Linguifex article itself is unreferenced and can be edited by anyone, unfortunately it can’t be used as a reliable source. You might consider sending the user Linguman a message on Linguifex as I see they are responsible for creating the article recently [2]. Epsilon.Prota ^talk 15:05, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

that is me 2A02:C7C:C44C:1600:27F4:D432:319:721D (talk) 15:09, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@User:2A02:C7C:C44C:1600:27F4:D432:319:721D In that case, as there’s no reference for the information I’m afraid it can’t be added to the article. Epsilon.Prota ^talk 15:23, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am unsure how to cite a source, but the previous cited source proves that the result listed for the 2024 Senate race is wrong. Was 51-47 Hovde but listed as 51-47 Baldwin. Please fix for me if you can, thanks. 75.6.209.128 (talk) 22:13, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If that’s the case, then my apologies – please change the article! I reverted your original edit because you hadn’t provided an edit summary to explain what had happened, but thanks for letting me know. Epsilon.Prota ^talk 09:38, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Epsilon.Prota,

Thank you for your message. I understand my recent edits to the Tokina page were reverted over concerns about LLM-based sources. The content I added came from verifiable sources that I included and was not generated by an LLM. For example, the product and lens names I added can be independently confirmed on Tokina’s official website. 05:31, 20 August 2025 (UTC) Ethanmurphy95 (talk) 05:31, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Ethanmurphy95, thanks for your message. Can you explain why in these edits the tag “utm_source=chatgpt.com” is present, indicating these links were generated by ChatGPT? Epsilon.Prota ^talk 08:47, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Epsilon.Prota The sources were only cross-checked using GPT, once found independently, to ensure they met Wikipedia’s neutrality standards. At the time, I wasn’t aware that clicking links inside GPT could insert tags into the citation URL — which I did not notice. While that was a mistake, the actual content added to the article was written independently, not generated by GPT.This applied only to a few early sources added as a newcomer, and I’ve since corrected the issue.11:41, 20 August 2025 (UTC) Ethanmurphy95 (talk) 11:41, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Ethanmurphy95 thanks for clarifying! As long as you’ve independently verified the sources the LLM may generate then they’re suitable for inclusion. If this is a regular part of your editing workflow, I’d suggest reading the guidance on LLM usage and disclosure to make sure everything’s ship-shape. Happy editing! Epsilon.Prota ^talk 11:47, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Epsilon.Prota Thanks for the clarification! Is it possible to roll back the changes, as I’m not sure how to do that myself? I also noticed that another editor had already removed the tag from one of the links I added and re-posted it — ideally that should remain in place if the rollback is applied; otherwise, I’m happy to fix it again manually.Ethanmurphy95 (talk) 12:04, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Ethanmurphy95 You can go to the “View history” tab at Tokina, find the revision you are happy with, and click “Restore this revision”. I’d recommend removing the ChatGPT tag from the references as well. Epsilon.Prota ^talk 12:10, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

It appears you removed my edit on Jillian Segal profile. The section I edited stated without any citation that Segal is known for her role in business communities and government. Segal is far more widely known for her controversies over her role in the NAB scandal, and more recently her role in pushing for legislative changes to censor criticism of Israel.

Who exactly are you? Are you Australian? Why do you know better than me? 2405:6E00:22D:7255:2CF5:85E9:71CC:DE26 (talk) 13:35, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @2405:6E00:22D:7255:2CF5:85E9:71CC:DE26. Who I am is irrelevant – the content you added to the article Jillian Segal was unsourced and contentious. As I mentioned on your talk page, it’s important that article information be verifiable. If you’d like to resubmit your edit with a supporting citation, you can read more about how to properly format the reference here. Epsilon.Prota ^talk 13:39, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is relevant because you’re clearly not an authority on the topic and you’re trying to censor a less positive view of Segal than the already existing, unsourced assertion of her.

Why is the assertion that Segal is known for her contributions to business, etc., allowed without citation? Known to whom?

Again, if you were Australian, you would know that Segal is known to the vast majority of Australians for her role in the NAB scandal, and now more recently for her role in censoring criticism of Zionism.

Your credentials matter here, mate. 2405:6E00:22D:7255:2CF5:85E9:71CC:DE26 (talk) 13:48, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@2405:6E00:22D:7255:2CF5:85E9:71CC:DE26 I’m not trying to “censor” anything here – Wikipedia is not a publisher of your original thoughts. If a reliable source has published similar claims to those you added to Jillian Segal, then you may by all means add it, so long as you reference where it was said. My credentials are irrelevant, as are yours – Wikipedia is simply a collection of externally published sources. If you’d like assistance in properly referencing any claims you’d like to add, I’m more than happy to help. Epsilon.Prota ^talk 13:56, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It’s past midnight and I’m on my phone, but I will get those citations and I don’t think I need the hell of a chronically online moderator.

You ignored the question. Why does the current assertion about what Segal is known for not require any citation? 2405:6E00:22D:7255:2CF5:85E9:71CC:DE26 (talk) 14:21, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@2405:6E00:22D:7255:2CF5:85E9:71CC:DE26 I’ll ask you to remain civil while we’re discussing this. I assume you’re referring to the statement “She is known for her contributions on the boards of government, commercial and non-profit organisations.“. You’re right, this wasn’t referenced in the text, and in its current state should be removed. However, sources like these: [3],[4], [5] support her positions as commisioner of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission, a member of the board of Sydney Opera House, and the chairman of the General Sir John Monash Foundation. We can use these references to support such a claim, so if you check the article now, you’ll see I’ve re-added the statement you removed, now with the supporting references. If you can find references that similarly support your earlier statement that she is more widely known for her role in the NAB scandal, and more recently for her controversial plan to censor criticism of Israel, then it can similarly be included. Epsilon.Prota ^talk 14:36, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

September 2025 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
On 1 September 2025, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You’re receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:31, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for message. I deleted the text by mistake, but I thought I had checked and nothing was missing. Thank you for saving this. I am open to any advice, and I’m keen to learn. For instance, is this the correct place to message you? Darrin Baines (talk) 22:58, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Darrin Baines – no problem, thanks! This is absolutely the right place to message me, and please feel free to if you have any questions – happy to help. Epsilon.Prota ^talk 19:47, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. This is very helpful. Basically, I want to transfer the contents from this series onto wikipedia because most of the infprmation is missing because it is pre-internet: History of Medicine » Dr Baines. I am not doing this for self promotion, and would like advice on how to make this work. I am happy to take guidance. I’m really interested in sharing knowledge. Darrin Baines (talk) 22:35, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Darrin Baines – apologies for the delay in getting back to you. Wikipedia really values expert contributors like yourself, so thank you for volunteering! There’s a lot of good advice for new expert editors at Wikipedia: Expert editors, and you can read about how to properly cite sources using the Wikimedia markup here. Please let me know if you have any more questions. Epsilon.Prota ^talk 08:21, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, this is an automated reminder as part of Global reminder bot to let you know that your permission “patroller” (New page reviewers) will expire on 00:00, 14 September 2025 (UTC). For most rights, you will need to renew at WP:PERM, unless you have been told otherwise when your right was approved. To opt out of user right expiry notifications, add yourself to m:Global reminder bot/Exclusion. Leaderbot (talk) 19:41, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Epsilon.Prota, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the new page reviewer user right to your account. This means you now have access to the page curation tools and can start patrolling pages from the new pages feed. If you asked for this at requests for permissions, please check back there to see if your access is time-limited or if there are other comments.

This is a good time to re-acquaint yourself with the guidance at Wikipedia:New pages patrol. Before you get started, please take the time to:

• Add Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers to your watchlist to follow NPP-related discussions
• If you use Twinkle, configure it to log your CSDs and PRODs
• If you can read any languages other than English, add yourself to the list of reviewers with language proficiencies

You can find a list of other useful links and tools for patrollers at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Resources. If you are ever unsure what to do, ask your fellow patrollers or just leave the page for someone else to review – you’re not alone! Sohom (talk) 14:46, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comment regarding notability. This author is an international best-selling writer with works reviewed by The New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Christian Science Monitor as well as Kirkus Review and Publishers Weekly. Their publishing history spans decades with major publishers such as HarperCollins and WW Norton. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the assessment. Further references may be added but I did to want to overburden the entry with references to the author’s complete bibliography. UCLA Lex (talk) 20:15, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please make specific re commendations as to links for additional references you find acceptable. A blanket denial is not helpful. UCLA Lex (talk) 22:16, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve not received any update from you regarding the proposed article. UCLA Lex (talk) 20:42, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Epsilon.Prota. 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) 02:47, 31 October 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.

If you wish to participate in the 2025 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:53, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, this is an automated reminder as part of Global reminder bot to let you know that your permission “patroller” (New page reviewers) will expire on 00:00, 9 December 2025 (UTC). For most rights, you will need to renew at WP:PERM, unless you have been told otherwise when your right was approved. To opt out of user right expiry notifications, add yourself to m:Global reminder bot/Exclusion. Leaderbot (talk) 19:41, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January–February 2026 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
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. Interested in participating? Sign up here.
You are receiving this message because you are a New Pages Patrol reviewer. To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself from here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:22, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am a 90 yearold woman having fun with my grandson but i understand why u want it back. Sorry ~2026-16569-85 (talk) 15:55, 15 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

May 2026 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
On 1 May 2026, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You’re receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:23, 29 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Epsilon.Prota,

Backlog update

At the time of this message, there are 15,282 articles and 32,951 redirects awaiting review.

After the January–February drive the article backlog was reduced to 15,179 articles and the redirect backlog to 19,053 respectively. Great job! However, both queues are growing rapidly and any additional reviews are highly appreciated.

2024 and 2025 NPP Awards

JTtheOG was selected as the NPP reviewer of the year for both 2024 and 2025, for reviewing the most articles amongst all reviewers.

Hey man im josh and MPGuy2824 won the Redirect Ninja Master Award for 2024 and 2025 respectively, for reviewing the most redirects.

Overall in 2024, one Platinum, two Gold, eight Silver, 12 Bronze and 45 Iron Barnstars were awarded. Additionally, 66 reviewers got the NPP barnstar for doing more than 100 reviews through the year. In 2025, one Platinum, ten Silver, 13 Bronze and 38 Iron Barnstars were awarded. Additionally, 38 reviewers got the NPP barnstar for doing more than 100 reviews through the year.

BoyTheKingCanDance, Rosiestep, SunDawn, and Vanderwaalforces were inducted into the NPP Hall of Fame for having two separate years of 2,000+ article reviews.

January–February backlog drive

The experimental two-month long backlog drive concluded with 183 reviewers patrolling over 27,761 articles and 35,309 redirects, earning over 36,836 points. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 6,484.6 points in this drive.

May backlog drive

An article-only backlog drive is currently underway. We are hoping to make a big dent in the backlog. You can read more about it or join at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Backlog drives/May 2026.

PageTriage

An attempt was made to get the New Pages Feed to sort by date marked as reviewed instead of date created. However we had to revert it due to bugs. We may try again in the future. You can subscribe to the Phabricator ticket if you’re interested in following along.

Reminders:

• You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
• Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:37, 14 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

According to the official USGS Planetary Names database, the lunar crater named “Osman” was named after a Turkish male given name. Therefore, it is incorrect to define this name as an “Arabic name”; the name in question is a Turkish proper noun and should not be attributed to an Arabic origin. link: https://planetarynames.wr.usgs.gov/Feature/4511 ~2026-30323-14 (talk) 12:22, 21 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@~2026-30323-14 Great, thanks for checking this! I’ve updated the article with the new source. Epsilon.Prota ^talk 12:50, 21 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a revision and have explained why the academic meets the requirements you have stated as I believe you may have not read the honours and notable works. So please read the reply.

A revision has been done and this professor mets the criteria for academic notability as outlined below. Under Wikipedia’s academic-notability guideline, an academic is considered notable if any one of the listed criteria is met and substantiated through reliable sources. The relevant criteria include: significant impact in the person’s scholarly discipline, receipt of a highly prestigious national or international academic award, election to a highly selective and prestigious scholarly society or association, and certain distinguished academic appointments. Wikipedia also states that publication count alone is not enough; the issue is the impact of the work on the field. Professor Mukhamedov clearly satisfies Criterion 3, which concerns election to a highly selective and prestigious scholarly society or association. His official profile at The World Academy of Sciences, TWAS, identifies him as a Fellow, lists his affiliation as United Arab Emirates University, and records his election year as 2022 in the Mathematical Sciences section. TWAS’s own membership criteria state that election is based on scientific excellence, and that only scientists who have attained the highest international standards and made significant contributions to the advancement of science can be nominated. TWAS also states that candidates must be nominated by TWAS members, evaluated by Membership Advisory Committees and the TWAS Council, and elected by the Fellows at the General Meeting; on average, up to 50 new members are elected each year and membership is for life. This supports the conclusion that TWAS Fellowship is not a routine membership but a selective international scholarly honor. The International Science Council describes TWAS as representing the “elite of scientific accomplishment” in, or related to, the developing world, with more than 1,400 elected fellows from 112 countries, including Nobel laureates. Professor Mukhamedov also satisfies, Criterion 2, which concerns receipt of a highly prestigious national or international academic award or honor. His TWAS profile records that he received the TWAS Prize for Young Scientists in Developing Countries in 2005. TWAS describes its awards as recognizing outstanding contributions to scientific knowledge, including in Mathematical Sciences, and states that selection is made on scientific merit and on the recommendations of selection committees composed of TWAS members. TWAS further describes honours awarded by TWAS and its partners as “among the most prestigious given for research in the developing world.” Therefore, the 2005 TWAS Prize is relevant not merely as a biographical award but as evidence of internationally recognised academic distinction.Moreover he is recognised in Uzbekistan as he has been awarded the Mathematics Prize of the Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Uzbekistan which is awarded by the country. Therefore he has awards internationally and nationally. Professor Mukhamedov also has evidence supporting Criterion 1, which concerns significant impact in a scholarly discipline. Wikipedia’s notes for Criterion 1 state that the usual way to demonstrate such impact is through highly cited scholarly work or a substantial number of scholarly publications with significant citation rates, while also noting that citation expectations vary by field. Professor Mukhamedov’s institutional research profile at United Arab Emirates University lists him as a Professor in the Department of Mathematical Sciences, reports 288 research outputs, and gives Scopus-based metrics including more than 3,300 citations and an h-index of around 30. His Google Scholar profile identifies him as a full professor at UAEU and reports more than 4,700 citations, with research areas including operator algebras, functional analysis, and dynamical systems. In pure mathematics and mathematical physics, where citation rates are generally lower than in many experimental sciences, this record is substantial evidence of scholarly influence. His TWAS profile also states that his research interests include operator theory, dynamical systems, non-commutative ergodic theory, p-adic analysis, and quantum probability, and that he has published over 300 papers and seven books or edited books. Accordingly, Professor Mukhamedov does not need to satisfy every criterion. The available evidence indicates that he satisfies at least Criterion 3 through election as a TWAS Fellow, and also presents strong evidence under Criterion 2 through the TWAS Prize for Young Scientists in Developing Countries and a nationally recognised award by Uzbekistan. His citation record, publication record, and international research profile further support Criterion 1 regarding significant impact in his scholarly disciplines

Hi @Farzona.uz – Given I declined your submission over a year ago, you’ll forgive me if the details are a little hazy. Looking at your current draft, while I don’t disagree that the subject is notable, in its current state the article doesn’t have nearly enough references to support the claims made. A list of useful places for finding sources can be found here. Epsilon.Prota ^talk 13:42, 27 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Epsilon.Prota would you be able to advise on what the minimum requirement for sources are as I do not see any information regarding this. Farzona.uz (talk) 13:50, 27 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Farzona.uz All claims in an article must be supported with reference to a reliable source. If you reread your draft, there are a number of claims made without any backing. Epsilon.Prota ^talk 14:48, 27 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the relevant reliable sources. could you please let me know if this is alright with you now. You may compare it to Alexander Gorban’s wikipedia as well based on what is provided as citations for him as well. The citations from relevant places are equivalent. Farzona.uz (talk) 18:57, 31 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Epsilon.Prota I have added the relevant reliable sources. could you please let me know if this is alright with you now. You may compare it to Alexander Gorban’s wikipedia as well based on what is provided as citations for him as well. The citations from relevant places are equivalent. Farzona.uz (talk) 18:58, 31 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Epsilon.Prota: I have added the relevant reliable sources. could you please let me know if this is alright with you now. You may compare it to Alexander Gorban’s wikipedia as well based on what is provided as citations for him as well. The citations from relevant places are equivalent. I would also ask you to look at vera kurkova’s wikipedia as she only has 5 references. Therefore I believe the reference amount that has been added now is sufficient. Farzona.uz (talk) 18:22, 1 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Farzona.uz Thanks for your work on improving Draft:Farrukh Mukhamedov – Wikipedia depends on people like you. However, looking at the draft now, I’m concerned there are still no references in following sections:

• Early life and education
• Academic career
• Research grants and funded projects
• Selected books and publications
• Honours and awards.

Additionally, large sections of International collaborations and conference leadership and Editorial activites and professional service are unreferenced. I’d encourage you to read some guidance on creating your first article. At present, comparing the draft to one of the articles you mention, Alexander Gorban, you’ve rattled off a list of fields Mukhamedov has contributed to, but failed to mention why/if this is notable. The level of detail is also too advanced to be stated without hyperlinks to relevant articles. You can read more about how to do this here.

As an aside, though I may have been the one who declined your initial draft, I do not currently hold new page reviewer rights. As such, though I’m happy to offer feedback, I ultimately have no control over the approval of your draft when you choose to resubmit it.

Thanks again for your work here, and please don’t be discouraged – this project is built on incremental progress. Epsilon.Prota ^talk 19:31, 1 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @Epsilon.Prota: for your help. would you be able to say how I can resubmit because I do not see a button for it other than publish draft which changes the page. Can you please refer me to where I can find the person who can look over this with publishing rights.

In terms of

Early life and education

Academic career

Research grants and funded projects

Selected books and publications

Honours and awards

I do not understand what you want since it is the same as Gorban’s. It just seems to me as excuses since I have added the references for his journal publications his profiles and his awards. As you can see from Gorban’s page as well he has only 5 references one being his death. The other references are for some of his books and publications. I have already added those for this professor. Therefore I do not see why there is a new criteria being made for him. Farzona.uz (talk) 19:56, 1 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

For example Vera has only 5 references. Therefore I don’t see why this profile would be declined. Farzona.uz (talk) 19:58, 1 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Also you have outright rejected it so I would appreciate at least if you could change it so that I am able to resubmit. Farzona.uz (talk) 20:37, 1 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Farzona.uz You are able to submit the article for approval at any time, but the issues I have highlighted will likely lead to it being declined by any other reviewer. It’s irrelevant to compare it to any other article (and the two you have chosen are actually rather poor) – the main things that matter is that the subject is notable, has received significant coverage, and that claims in the article are verifiable with reference to supporting citations. I’m happy to advise on any of these, but I strongly recommend you read and apply these standards before submitting your article. Epsilon.Prota ^talk 20:47, 1 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Epsilon.Prota, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the new page reviewer user right to your account. This means you now have access to the page curation tools and can start patrolling pages from the new pages feed. If you asked for this at requests for permissions, please check back there to see if your access is time-limited or if there are other comments.

This is a good time to re-acquaint yourself with the guidance at Wikipedia:New pages patrol. Before you get started, please take the time to:

• Add Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers to your watchlist to follow NPP-related discussions
• If you use Twinkle, configure it to log your CSDs and PRODs
• If you can read any languages other than English, add yourself to the list of reviewers with language proficiencies

You can find a list of other useful links and tools for patrollers at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Resources. If you are ever unsure what to do, ask your fellow patrollers or just leave the page for someone else to review – you’re not alone! Extraordinary Writ (talk) 03:25, 2 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Epsilon.Prota. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Magicpin, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Soruces present in the article represent a credible claim of impoirtance negating A7. Use WP:AFD if you feel this should be deleted. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 14:05, 2 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Recently, you accepted the draft article for creation 2012 Muscat Sikorsky MH-53E crash and moved it to mainspace. This had previously been rejected at AfC due to notability concerns. Since there had not been any significant changes to the article since its previous rejection, I will be moving it back to draft space. nf utvol (talk) 14:47, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Epsilon.Prota, you recently declined, removed text from and requested revdel on Draft:Philippine Qualifications Framework. The text was from a Philippines government website and in the public domain (You can see the notice at the bottom of [6]). I’ve requested the revdel to be undone and I would like to ask you to undo your review and restore the text so that the submitter can have a fair re-review on other grounds. Sophisticatedevening^(talk) 11:35, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Sophisticatedevening – thank you for highlighting this. I’ve restored the article to its state prior to my review. Epsilon.Prota ^talk 13:20, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nosy Parker here. Policy still requires that attribution be provided even when copying public domain text. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources#Can I copy from open license or public domain sources?. I’ve left the author a message about providing attribution. — Whpq (talk) 13:31, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I just wanted to let you know that I deleted the redirect Battle of Mount Haemus to make room for the draft’s acceptance. Ca ^{talk to me!} 04:26, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Ca Done! Epsilon.Prota ^talk 21:59, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the page approval! <3

MorriganKingma (talk) 20:28, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]