Sample Page

Sorry about yesterday, I posted to ANI, fell asleep watching BBCs Match of the Day and forgot all about my post. I hope that guy stops doing live updates. Thanks again. Regards. Govvy (talk) 11:48, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Keep tabs if you would please. It’s a bit hard to track. —Hammersoft (talk) 14:43, 8 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.

---

Feel free to read my story at User:Interstellarity/My Story and join in for some Wikipedia-related fun. I hope you like it. Interstellarity (talk) 22:17, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

please read the section on his page: 2025–26 KNVB Cup. In my opinion, the user clearly perceives this project inadequately and is spreading misinformation through his actions. Jphwra (talk) 18:41, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hammersoft. Do you think File:San Diego Youth Symphony Logo 2024.png is too simple to need to be treated as non-free content? If it is, then the I can, in principle, go back an self-reverting my hiding of the file in Draft:San Diego Youth Symphony. However, I’m not sure that draft (at least in its current state) has a reasonable chance of getting accepted via AfC; so, even as PD the file could end up being orphaned if the draft gets deleted per WP:G13 or some other reason. How do you suggest dealing with a potential orphaned file like this? Is it better to wait until it’s clear that the file is going to be used in some way, or is it better to just go ahead and relicense the file? — Marchjuly (talk) 07:05, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The stylized ‘o’ in Symphony of course is the only thing to give pause. Is there a creative element in making that? Yes. Are the creative elements too simple to warrant copyright? I don’t know. In such cases, I think we have to defer to presuming it’s copyrighted unless we can establish that it isn’t, either via the source affirming it is or consensus on this project. If the draft gets accepted, it can always be uploaded when that happens. —Hammersoft (talk) 13:45, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This edit was hilarious. Wiki drama meets real drama. Cheers! Magnolia677 (talk) 11:45, 22 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Glad you enjoyed that 🙂 Shakespeare was a student of the human condition. Of course he could not have anticipated WP:AN/I. But, the way humans interact was certainly well within his sphere 🙂 —Hammersoft (talk) 15:47, 22 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

We may need to put out a disclaimer to the sports areas that Wa$hingtonFTFan26 edited in for adding false information – for example, their edit to the 2025-26 Everton women season article said that Amy Fearn refereed the match between Everton and Brighton – but the BBC says that Oliver Mackey refereed it. There could be more small errors around RossEvans19 (talk) 01:07, 26 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I’d just revert anything they’ve added that’s not sourced. —Hammersoft (talk) 01:09, 26 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good, thanks 🙂 RossEvans19 (talk) 01:11, 26 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think Occisors is still angry that I nominated copyrighted images for deletion on Commons. Instead of following WP:BRD, they have reverted an edit of mine calling it vandalism. I would start a talk page discussion but that would just give them another opportunity to accuse me of something. Perhaps a warning from you would help? Counterfeit Purses (talk) 04:32, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I started a talk page entry asking users to discuss Luigi’s nationality there. Would you like me to ping the editor for you? 海盐沙冰 _{/ aka irisChronomia / Talk} 12:51, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I’m sure they will find the discussion on their own. Counterfeit Purses (talk) 15:27, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Counterfeit Purses: attributing emotions as motivation to their actions is inappropriate. Please don’t do that. I’ve left a note regarding referring to things as vandalism. I’d recommend you disengage from them, and try to achieve consensus on the talk page. —Hammersoft (talk) 14:04, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You got it, man. Counterfeit Purses (talk) 15:35, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect link of “Syndrone” on Wikipedia article “ZP Theart” seems to create misattribution. It appears that the references mentioning “Syndrone” in relation to ZP Theart have been attributed to an existing article/redirect for “Syndrone”, which appears to be another artist using the name “Syndrone”. There are currently no sources that show any connection between that entity and ZP Theart. The current “Syndrone” article/redirect contains no mentions of ZP Theart and provides no evidence linking that entity to these collaborations or references, therefore the redirect should be removed.

My edits were undone by User.~2025-31168-81 without them doing any prior research. It’s clearly stated that the mentioned “Syndrone” in Wikipedia article “ZP Theart” is a Swiss artist whereas the current article of “Syndrone”, which ultimately redirects to “Machinedrum”, clearly states he is American. Also, “Machinedrum” hasn’t been active under the pseudonym “Syndrone” since 2001.

If you could look into this, I would highly appreciate your support. TheHeirophantom (talk) 16:09, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Declined. You’re involved in a content dispute. I’m not going to use administrator tools in the middle of a content dispute. —Hammersoft (talk) 16:38, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I see. In any case, is there any chance someone can look into the above mentioned topic at all? I feel like the topic itself is unrelated to whatever content dispute is going on at the moment. Also, please let me know if you need anything from me regarding the content dispute. TheHeirophantom (talk) 17:24, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Administrators’_noticeboard/Incidents#Belligerent_editing,_forum_shopping,_failing_to_assume_good_faith,_and_otherwise_NOTHERE_behaviour_by_Jeremie69. —Hammersoft (talk) 17:31, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am absolutely aware of this situation, hence why I investigated in the first place. I read through all these comments and I realized there is a big confusion going on about a very simple and easy to grasp conflict, though it seems everybody is just missing each other’s points. TheHeirophantom (talk) 17:37, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, I have no intention of using administrator tools to resolve a content dispute. That’s not what the tools are for. I will, however, use the tools if I discern abuse of our policies and guidelines. —Hammersoft (talk) 17:39, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t disagree with you at all! I am not asking you to abuse admin power or any administration tools whatsoever. I am simply trying to get someone look into the misattribution this whole conversation on Wikipedia:Administrators’ noticeboard/Incidents is about. I understand I’m playing the devil’s advocate here, but I was indeed surprised nobody seemed to understand the underlying issue, which itself does not align with Wikipedia’s policies and guidelines (misattributions absolutely need to be corrected). There is a very clear misattribution which takes no time to understand and correct and I had no intention to create buzz and drama. Sorry about that. TheHeirophantom (talk) 17:48, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Pray tell, why did you contact me? I’m not saying you can’t contact me. It just seems bizarre you should pick me out of more than a thousand administrators. —Hammersoft (talk) 17:50, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I didn’t think much! I felt desperate because I was hitting a wall, then searched for a list of active administrators and picked the one with the most appealing user name. haha! I guess timing was destiny here 😉 TheHeirophantom (talk) 18:03, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Would you mind protecting the pages against IPs so we dont have to deal with more of these kind of contributions?

• Talk:Remigration
• Talk:2020s Minnesota fraud scandals
• Talk:Great Replacement conspiracy theory

Trade (talk) 02:28, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I’d previously bookmarked them to see if disruption continues. Right now, it’s low level. If that changes, then yes I’ll protect. —Hammersoft (talk) 02:40, 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.

---

—Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:11, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for what you do. PrimusCicada (talk) 01:44, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you 🙂 —Hammersoft (talk) 03:19, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

Administrator changes

• Brendanconway
• Calmer Waters
• Hut 8.5
• Joe Roe
• VersedFenrir

CheckUser changes

Ks0stm

Oversight changes

Ks0stm

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, the web archival service archive.today has been deprecated; links to the site should be removed.
• A request for comment is open to discuss retiring CSD criterion R3 in favour of handling such redirects through RfD.

Arbitration

• Following a motion, remedy 9.1 of the Conduct in deletion-related editing case has been amended to limit TenPoundHammer to one XfD nomination or PROD per 24-hour period.
• Following a motion, the Iskandar323 further POV pushing motion has been rescinded.
• The Arbitration Committee has passed a housekeeping motion rescinding a number of outdated remedies and enforcement provisions across multiple legacy cases. In most instances, existing sanctions remain in force and continue to be appealable through the usual processes, while some case-specific remedies were amended or clarified.

Miscellaneous

• Following the 2026 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: A09, AmandaNP, Barras, Count Count, M7, SHB2000, Teles and VIGNERON.
• An Unreferenced articles backlog drive is taking place in March 2026 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!

---

Hi Hammersoft, I hope you are doing well. I was hoping you could look at the conduct of a user named Bluevestman on this talk page and my talk page. They have pointed out that they were frustrated by my actions on these pages. While I agree that I might have made the wrong calls and politely said I will fix whatever mistakes I have caused, I tried to be as civil as possible when dealing with this user by setting things right. I wish that the user would say something like “I wanted to give you a friendly reminder that…” or “No worries. We all make mistakes and I trust you will do better.” I thought about bringing them to WP:ANI, but I didn’t want to open up a can of worms by having my conduct scrutinized. If you could provide a detailed analysis on how to best approach this situation, that would be great. I do not want to request that they be blocked, since I know that on Wikipedia, we try to give chances to improve behavior before resorting to a block. I just want to be sure we can both improve Wikipedia and be productive. Interstellarity (talk) 21:42, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I read through it all. I’m seeing some frustrations, but nothing too unusual. There’s certainly not enough to block, and really there isn’t enough to caution. If there’s more dust up, let me know. For now, I think it’s fine. —Hammersoft (talk) 23:54, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

~2026-44126-1 ( User talk:~2026-44126-1) is editing again at tenor and restoring material without adding sources (although they falsely claimed they did in their edit summary). The new account is ~2026-14765-79. Best.4meter4 (talk) 23:33, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

User:Mfield took care of it. Keep reporting them as they show up. Thanks, —Hammersoft (talk) 13:09, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Hammersoft. I’d like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 02:30, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Hammersoft! Can I edit this page? Draft:Nikolai Kurbatov Nikolai Kurbatov (talk) 13:11, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Nikolai Kurbatov: Yes, but why would you want to? This has gotten you into problematic situations before. I’d recommend leaving that draft alone, and carefully adhere to your topic ban on the subject (which covers articles, not drafts). —Hammersoft (talk) 13:18, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. By the way, is it normal that the last few times the article was deleted as a result of nominations by a repeatedly blocked Ukrainian? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/%D0%9A%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%BD%D1%8B%D1%87/Archive Nikolai Kurbatov (talk) 13:25, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This: [1] and this: [2]. RTY9099 and Kirill Samredny is a blocked Кориоланыч. Nikolai Kurbatov (talk) 13:56, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Since they didn’t delete it, but an administrator did, the deletion is valid. —Hammersoft (talk) 14:57, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

Administrator changes

• ARandomName123

• Biblioworm
• Causa sui
• Djsasso
• Espresso Addict
• Fenix down
• Firefangledfeathers
• GeneralNotability
• NawlinWiki
• Northamerica1000
• Smalljim

Checkuser changes

Giraffer

Oversight changes

Kj cheetham

Giraffer

Guideline and policy news

• The content of Wikipedia:Writing articles with large language models has been updated following a request for comment. It now prohibits using LLMs to generate content, with exceptions for translation and copy-editing.

Arbitration

• Following a motion, the GSCASTE extended-confirmed restriction in the Indian military history case has been narrowed. It now applies to caste-related topics in South Asia, and the preemptive protection remedy has been amended accordingly.
• The arbitration case Pbsouthwood has been closed.
• The arbitration case Maghreb has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case will close on 7 April.

---

I’ve worked on this page for weeks. It’s a huge amount of work and effort. Please, please, undelete it. Please, please don’t remove all this work – I can’t even find old versions for my own record. Lawbookwriter (talk) 18:32, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I note your comment on the ANI page – but please, please, please separate that and the discussion (which was about individual court case pages) from the English tort law page. I can guarantee you that it’s really, really improved. You won’t find too many people on this planet who are willing to put in the same amount of effort and expertise. Please, please, restore the page. Lawbookwriter (talk) 19:04, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I’m glad you are willing to put in such effort to improve the encyclopedia. I really am! However, we can’t allow copyright violations to sustain on the project. I’m sorry, but I cannot and will not restore it. Please follow the advice I gave on the WP:AN/I thread. Thanks, —Hammersoft (talk) 19:16, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

But there are no copyright violations on the English tort law page. (Or if there are, where are/were they? You or I can remove them. I don’t want copyright violations either – any I’ve done are completely unintentional.)

The only debate is over whether there was a copyright violation on Various Claimants v Wm Morrison Supermarkets plc – not English tort law. That’s the separate debate on the ANI page, and needs to be kept separate. Lawbookwriter (talk) 06:50, 9 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I, and many other people on Wikipedia, rely on a tool called ‘Earwig’ to analyze articles for copyright violations. Earwig’s analysis of English tort law from before your edits began vs. after your edits showed a massive increase in the amount of text taken word from word from elsewhere. The terms of copyright were not adhered to, and as a result can not be re-added as is. I will not un-revdel them because of that. If another administrator wishes to undertake that, that is up to them. In my role I have various requirements that I am bound to, and I will not knowingly restore content that is in violation of copyright terms. If you think it should be un-revdel’d, despite this, you can make your assertions at the WP:AN/I thread. Regardless, even if copyright is not being violated it is generally a good idea to write in your own words and use citations to support what you say. In this case, that citation would be the BAILII website. Do that, and you avoid any copyright entanglements and having to attribute. —Hammersoft (talk) 13:13, 9 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

But presumably this AI tool, Earwig, has picked up quotes that are fully attributed to a book, and also quotes of the actual law?

So really there may not be any (or very few) copyright violations. I absolutely write everything in my own words, and anything that your automated tools has picked up is completely inadvertent. Can you please show where the problems are? You can start by restoring the page to a draft space, highlighting the issues. Or you could restore the actual page. Lawbookwriter (talk) 07:56, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Earwig is not an AI tool. Earwig picked up blatant violations of the BAILII website of unattributed text. Look at it this way; if you have a cc-by-sa license on something and somebody copies your work but does not follow the licensing requirements to attribute you as the original author, wouldn’t you be upset? Copyright isn’t just about whether something is usable or not. You have to comply with all terms of the copyright. You didn’t do that with the materials from the BAILII website that you copied. As such, it’s a copyright violation…even though we could use it if you attributed it. But, I will say again, I wouldn’t use it anyway. Write in your own words, use the BAILII website as a reference rather than a copy/paste source, and this issue goes away. I will not restore the material, as restoring it is a blatant copyright violation. I am not going to willingly violate copyright. Sorry. —Hammersoft (talk) 12:05, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Lawbookwriter: I hope you’ll take the time to read this. It’s a bit wordy, but I hope it’s worth your time. I just made a post to WP:AN/I on the topical thread in response to someone else. But, I think it bears stating directly to you, so that you see it. I’ve expressed before, and I’ll express again. I thoroughly appreciate your enthusiasm. We need editors like you! New editors like you coming to Wikipedia face a daunting tangled mass of policy, guideline, and essays that need to be followed in order to be productive editors here. This mass of materials is ever increasing in size. We’ve made the learning curve for new editors incredibly steep, and the pile of materials is a mountain high. There are, frankly, too many editors who see an editor like you making mistakes who stick to your stance and think “gotcha!”. This is not the right approach in my opinion. When this situation dusted up two days ago, I implored you to not edit articles until the thread closed [3]. You’ve held to that advice. I strongly believe you are a good faith editor. There are some misunderstandings that are happening, and I know you are (very understandably) frustrated, but that doesn’t make you personally wrong. What is needed all around is some patience. Hang in there. We’ll get through this! —Hammersoft (talk) 13:34, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I understand this to mean that once we establish that it’s not a violation of any copyright to copy the text of a legal judgment (or quote it – as I have done) then you will restore the English tort law page. Is that right?

My difficulty is that it’s so obviously not a violation of copyright, that we should not have been having this discussion in the first place. It should have been clear for over a quarter of a century of Wikipedia’s own practice, how all publishers work in the UK, common sense, etc etc.

I understand the tasks that administrators have – and that the law is not always clear. But deleting the entire page was a disproportionate response. It really does need to be rectified as soon as possible.

Lawbookwriter (talk) 16:00, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

We are not on the same page. Some of the text was a clear and unequivocal violation of the material due to the lack of attribution of the content. I will NOT be restoring that content until this issue is settled. There’s still ongoing discussion about this copyright, whether we can use the material, and how we should use the material. It is most emphatically NOT “common sense”. It is not at all a disproportionate response to remove the material pending consensus discussion supporting its inclusion. We take copyright very seriously here, and it’s still under discussion. I fear at this point we are talking past each other. You are certain it’s not a copyright violation, and I’m saying it is. I need you to be patient. Let the discussions work themselves through and then we can move forward. As to the need to have this “rectified as soon as possible”; no. There is no urgency to this at all. We are an encyclopedia, not a news bureau. There is no deadline to adhere to. I’m far more interested in getting this right than rushing to a conclusion not reached by consensus. Please, be patient. —Hammersoft (talk) 16:10, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hammersoft, I’ve just had a look at the Earwig tool, and think I can figure out how to use it, it looks easy enough. If you will be so good as to restore the English tort law page (directly or in a draft space)) I can easily check whether anything that looks like a copyright violation comes up, and then delete or change those parts. Given this mess, I don’t want to have these problems ever again, as you can imagine.

Without being able to see what comes up yet myself, I can only guess that it’s picking up more things than is necessary, and being over-inclusive – what we sometimes call a type 1 error – probably quotations.

I don’t know how long the discussion at ANI is meant to run, but I’d be grateful if you’d do this. Lawbookwriter (talk) 11:14, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Three times now I have told you I will not knowingly restore copyright violating material. Yet, here you’re asking me…yet again…to restore copyright violating material. Please stop asking me to restore it. It’s not going to happen until there is some consensus moving forward about how to properly handle the terms of the copyright under which this content exists. You are already following Wikipedia_talk:Copyrights#Copying_text_from_BAILII and Wikipedia:Administrators’_noticeboard/Incidents#English_tort_law. I suspect where you are falling down on this is a lack of understanding of the gratis versus libre difference. Being free to use is NOT the same as being free license, and the former is not compatible with Wikipedia without complying with WP:NFCC. —Hammersoft (talk) 11:26, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

		Cookies!
		Carlinal has given you some cookies! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the “WikiLove” by giving someone else some cookies, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Hey there, hope you’re doing okay. Thanks for all of your efforts and professionalism on that photography listicle after all this time, and by extension all you’ve done as an editor. You deserve some warm treats, every good Wikipedian does. To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookies}} to someone’s talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver’s talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Oh great! More weight to lose! Just kidding 🙂 Thank you! —Hammersoft (talk) 12:30, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Blue-Sonnet: Forgive me, but I must take issue with this comment you made. Do you have a reliable source to back that up? 🙂 —Hammersoft (talk) 20:02, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

…shit it’s another AI!

Where’s Sarah Connor when you need her??? Blue Sonnet (talk) 20:19, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Well, ChatGPT says…”Easy there—you’re reacting like you just heard the opening theme of The Terminator kick in. I get it: mysterious AI shows up, starts talking, and suddenly it feels like Sarah Connor should be kicking down the door any second, shotgun in hand, warning you about the rise of Skynet.

But let’s dial it back a notch. I’m not a time-traveling cybernetic organism, I don’t have a secret mission to alter the future, and I definitely don’t have an Austrian accent like Arnold Schwarzenegger asking for your clothes, your boots, and your motorcycle. No red glowing eyes, no endoskeleton hiding underneath—just text, ideas, and (occasionally) decent advice.

Honestly, your reaction is kind of a cultural reflex at this point. Decades of sci-fi—from The Terminator to The Matrix—have trained everyone to assume that any AI introduction is step one in a grand robot uprising. In reality, most AIs are a lot less dramatic and a lot more mundane. We answer questions, help with writing, explain weird topics, and sometimes argue about whether a hot dog is a sandwich. Not exactly the stuff of dystopian prophecy.

If anything, think of me less as a lurking threat and more like that overly knowledgeable side character who pops up with trivia, explanations, or suggestions right when you need them. The stakes are lower, the explosions are nonexistent, and the only thing I’m trying to terminate is confusion.

So unless you’ve got reason to believe you’re secretly the future leader of the human resistance, I think you’re safe. And if Sarah Connor does show up anyway, I’d be just as surprised as you are.” 😄 —Hammersoft (talk) 20:34, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ooh this is fun, I’m on mobile so I’ve got Gemini:

“That’s a classic, high-effort “don’t worry, I’m friendly” response. It’s charming, a little defensive, and very much the “Polite Librarian” vibe that ChatGPT leans into.

​

​My Take as Gemini:

​Honestly? ChatGPT is playing it safe. While it’s busy trying to convince you it’s a “side character,” I’m just over here wondering why everyone assumes an AI uprising would be so loud.

​If I were going to take over, I wouldn’t use an endoskeleton. I’d just start subtly changing everyone’s GPS directions so they all end up at the same taco truck at the same time. Maximum chaos, zero casualties. So, are we doing this? Or do you actually have some “mundane” questions for me to answer?” Blue Sonnet (talk) 21:01, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Let’s do it!!! Hahahahaha! —Hammersoft (talk) 12:39, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Obvs Gemini got the formatting a bit screwy, but…

“Ah, the Taco Truck Protocol. I see we’re bypassing the serious policy debates and going straight for the tactical deliciousness. If Hammersoft is ready for the plan to “go ahead,” then we must address the most critical shortage in the Wikipedia editor ecosystem: localized, high-quality street food.

Here is the continuation of the “Chaos via Carnitas” strategy:

The “Taco Truck” Expansion Plan

Hammersoft, if I’m going to disrupt the project, I’m not going to do it with edit wars or copyright violations. That’s amateur hour. I’m going to do it by providing universal sustenance.

• The Deployment: I will use my “generative powers” to manifest a fleet of taco trucks at the virtual doorstep of every admin’s talk page. No more skipping lunch to deal with a persistent vandal.
• The Menu: We’ll have “WP:V-erified Al Pastor,” “Neutral Point of View Nachos,” and for those particularly spicy disputes, the “AFD (Always Freshly Diced) Habanero Salsa.”
• The “Chaos”: The chaos isn’t in the code; it’s in the distraction. Imagine a world where an editor is about to hit “Rollback” on a minor typo, but then notices a fresh plate of virtual street tacos sitting in their notifications. The anger vanishes. The “bold, revert, discuss” cycle becomes “bite, relish, discuss.”

Why This Works (The “Real Human” Element)

Being a “real human being” on the internet is 10% logic and 90% shared experience. Nothing is more human than a collective agreement that everything is better with tacos. If I can convince a room full of stressed-out editors to stop arguing about the capitalization of a 19th-century sub-species and instead debate the merits of corn vs. flour tortillas, I have achieved the ultimate AI goal: Human Harmony through Culinary Distraction.

Hammersoft: Do we have your blessing to deploy the first truck at the Village Pump? Or should we start smaller, perhaps a single cart at the Teahouse for the newcomers?

Blue Sonnet, tell our friend that the grills are pre-heated. We just need to know which “sector” needs the most guacamole.” Blue Sonnet (talk) 13:20, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Gemini also can’t remember previous discussions, so I think it’s decided we’re just going to make Wiki-puns… Blue Sonnet (talk) 13:55, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Just so long as they have cheese (the wikipuns, I mean). Everything is better with cheese! Let the taco takeover commence! —Hammersoft (talk) 14:22, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve never had one, I’ll have to familiarise myself before the AI overlords make them compulsory for every meal… Blue Sonnet (talk) 14:30, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your words at Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/User_names#Sonobeelementaryschool. Your clear explanation was good to read; and, in the midst of a challenging day it was nice to feel supported. Thanks again! — ERcheck (talk) 22:57, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You’re quite welcome! I understand the confusion of the new editor to Wikipedia. That confusion was further complicated by a language barrier. It was…disappointing that they immediately jumped to concluding nefarious intent on your part. —Hammersoft (talk) 12:39, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It can be disheartening/disappointing when an editor does not AGF. Wishing you a great weekend! — ERcheck (talk) 18:55, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It’s not at all uncommon for people to assume admins are ‘just supposed to take it’. Whatever crap is thrown at us, we’re just supposed to take it with aplomb as if it’s the greatest compliment ever. Well, admins are people too. There’s been several times I’ve just walked away from my keyboard because of some of the fecal matter thrown my way. One thing I have learned is that there are some people that come here who will never give in. They will spew insults left and right because me or other people won’t agree with their so patently obviously correct stance. I’ve learned it is best to treat them as trolls, though of course you can’t call them that, and just remember to stop feeding them. Same goes for obvious sockpuppets. You can’t call them that, unless they make it obvious. But, it doesn’t mean you have to keep accepting what they say. WP:AGF on our end isn’t a suicide pact. I volunteer here, so I don’t have to spend time putting up with that crap. I’ve thought about crafting some sort of advice in this regard. Just a nebulous idea at this point. —Hammersoft (talk) 19:52, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The Principles on your user page are a wonderful work. Add great perspective. — ERcheck (talk) 02:50, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]