User Talk: Delcoan

Server-side rendered snapshot of this editor's Wikipedia talk page discussions.

October 2025 Barnstar

{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;"
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align:top;" | {{#ifeq:{{{2}}}|alt|100px ↗|100px ↗}}

|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: bottom; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Current Events Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: top; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | Your work at 2025 Virginia redistricting ↗ was sorely needed! Enjoy this barnstar ↗ as a reflection of your work. JuxtaposedJacob (talk) | :) | he/him | 00:33, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
|}

:Thank you! @JuxtaposedJacob Thefinals626472 (talk) 00:43, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

Nomination of :Ermold v. Davis ↗ for deletion

<div class="afd-notice">
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0;">48px|alt=|link= ↗</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article :Ermold v. Davis ↗ is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines ↗ or whether it should be deleted ↗.

The article will be discussed at '''Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ermold v. Davis ↗''' until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.</div> lethargilistic (talk) 08:43, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Thefinals626472. Thank you for your work on 1924 Nevada State Question 2 ↗. Another editor, Mariamnei, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol ↗ and left the following comment:

{{Bq|1=Thank you for your work on this article. Please add secondary sources. Thanks and have a wonderful day!}}

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{code|<nowiki>{{Re|</nowiki>Mariamnei<nowiki>}}</nowiki>}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation ↗ tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Mariamnei (talk) 12:58, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

:Thank you! Thefinals626472 (talk) 17:39, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

ArbCom 2025 Elections voter message

<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
<div class="ivmbox-image" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;flex-basis: 40px">40px ↗</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the '''2025 Arbitration Committee elections ↗''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2025|end}}-1 day}}. 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 '''2025|poll}}|voting page ↗'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:52, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

</div>
</div>

:)

I'm unsure if I am meant to reply at the GA nom talk page ↗, so I'll leave this here and can move it over if needed.

Thank you so much for the review and the detailed advice, especially the mentions of individual citation numbers, which was very helpful when I was making changes.
I have rectified all the issues mentioned & taken your advice by:

replacing sources when needed to match quotes (I believe I copy and pasted the wrong link when writing about ACLU)

rewriting a number of sentences that were too similar to the phrasing used in the sources

adding an Analysis of Results section with an additional comparison map between Trump's 2024 performance and the results

adding an Aftermath/Reactions section

significantly expanding the Election Logistics section and the Chester County provisional ballots section

Do I need to resubmit the article for GA or will you just re-review in due time? Best, aesurias (talk) 08:09, 27 November 2025 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Obergefell v. Hodges ↗, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Georgia ↗. Such links are usually incorrect ↗, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ{{*}} Join us at the DPL WikiProject ↗.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 07:55, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Thefinals626472. Thank you for your work on 2025 Georgia State House District 121 special election ↗. Another editor, Guessitsavis, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol ↗ and left the following comment:

{{Bq|1=Deriving notability from WP:NPOL ↗ and WP:EFFECT ↗.}}

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{code|<nowiki>{{Re|</nowiki>Guessitsavis<nowiki>}}</nowiki>}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation ↗ tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Signed, Guessitsavis ('''she''' ↗/they ↗) Talk 13:03, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Peter Arnett ↗

{{ivmbox
|1=On 23 December 2025, '''''In the news ↗''''' was updated with an item that involved the article '''''Peter Arnett ↗''''', which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page ↗. '''Schwede66''' 22:31, 23 December 2025 (UTC)
|2={{Ambox globe current red}}
|imagesize=50px
}}

New message from Narutolovehinata5

{{talkback|Wikipedia talk:Did you know|2004 Alabama Amendment 2 (nom)|ts=01:24, 31 December 2025 (UTC)}}
Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions ↗) 01:24, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Nomination of :2026 United States strikes in Syria ↗ for deletion

<div class="afd-notice">
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0;">48px|alt=|link= ↗</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article :2026 United States strikes in Syria ↗ is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines ↗ or whether it should be deleted ↗.

The article will be discussed at '''Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2026 United States strikes in Syria ↗''' until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.</div> ''Thanks, '''Glasspalace''' (talk • contribs ↗)'' 04:10, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

DYK for 2004 Alabama Amendment 2

{{ivmbox
|image = Updated DYK query.svg
|imagesize=40px
|image class=skin-invert
|text = On 19 January 2026 ↗, '''Did you know ↗''' was updated with a fact from the article '''''2004 Alabama Amendment 2 ↗''''', which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ''... that '''a 2004 ballot measure to repeal Jim Crow laws in Alabama ↗''' failed after opponents claimed that taxes would spike?'' The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/2004 Alabama Amendment 2 ↗. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, 2004 Alabama Amendment 2 ↗), and the hook may be added to the statistics page ↗ after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it ↗.
}}  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:02, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

DYK for 1876 Connecticut Question 6

{{ivmbox
|image = Updated DYK query.svg
|imagesize=40px
|image class=skin-invert
|text = On 19 January 2026 ↗, '''Did you know ↗''' was updated with a fact from the article '''''1876 Connecticut Question 6 ↗''''', which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ''... that '''more than 90 percent of Connecticut voters in 1876 agreed ↗''' to repeal the requirement of being white to vote?'' The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/1876 Connecticut Question 6 ↗. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, 1876 Connecticut Question 6 ↗), and the hook may be added to the statistics page ↗ after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it ↗.
}}  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:03, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

Good Article Review

@Delcoan, I know you said you were going to review my article, Hotel Zone, but I responded to your corrections, and whenever you get a chance, I was wondering if you could review the article again. DCAllStar (talk) 01:43, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

:Hey! Of course- I will do another source spot check tomorrow morning. Delcoan (talk) 02:59, 20 January 2026 (UTC)
::Thank you so much, I don't mean to seem upset. DCAllStar (talk) 03:06, 20 January 2026 (UTC)
:::No, don’t feel guilty at all! I apologize for not getting to this sooner. Delcoan (talk) 03:06, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 1998 South Carolina Amendment 4 ↗, a link pointing to the disambiguation page was Robert Ford ↗. Such links are usually incorrect ↗, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ{{*}} Join us at the DPL WikiProject ↗.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 07:54, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of 2021 Pennsylvania Amendment 3 ↗ is under review

Your good article nomination ↗ of the article 2021 Pennsylvania Amendment 3 ↗ is 20px|alt=|link= ↗ '''under review'''. See '''Talk:2021 Pennsylvania Amendment 3/GA1{{!}}the review page ↗''' for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have.  Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Olliefant -- Olliefant (talk) 20:43, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

DYK for 2025 Texas Proposition 15

{{ivmbox
|image = Updated DYK query.svg
|imagesize=40px
|image class=skin-invert
|text = On 24 January 2026 ↗, '''Did you know ↗''' was updated with a fact from the article '''''2025 Texas Proposition 15 ↗''''', which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ''... that more than 30 percent of Texas voters opposed '''a 2025 constitutional amendment ↗''' stating that "parents are the primary decision makers for their children"?'' The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/2025 Texas Proposition 15 ↗. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, 2025 Texas Proposition 15 ↗), and the hook may be added to the statistics page ↗ after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it ↗.
}} &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) ↗ 00:03, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

DYK for 2010 Arizona Proposition 112

{{ivmbox
|image = Updated DYK query.svg
|imagesize=40px
|image class=skin-invert
|text = On 27 January 2026 ↗, '''Did you know ↗''' was updated with a fact from the article '''''2010 Arizona Proposition 112 ↗''''', which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ''... that Arizona voters rejected '''a 2010 ballot measure ↗''' by just 194 votes out of more than 1.5 million cast?'' The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/2010 Arizona Proposition 112 ↗. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, 2010 Arizona Proposition 112 ↗), and the hook may be added to the statistics page ↗ after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it ↗.
}}  — Amakuru (talk) 00:03, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of 2021 Pennsylvania Amendment 3 ↗ has passed

Your good article nomination ↗ of the article 2021 Pennsylvania Amendment 3 ↗ has 20px|alt=|link= ↗ '''passed'''; congratulations! See '''Talk:2021 Pennsylvania Amendment 3/GA1{{!}}the review page ↗''' for more information. If the article is eligible to appear ↗ in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it ↗ within the next seven days.  Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Olliefant -- Olliefant (talk) 02:24, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

DYK for 1908 California Amendment 14

{{ivmbox
|image = Updated DYK query.svg
|imagesize=40px
|image class=skin-invert
|text = On 29 January 2026 ↗, '''Did you know ↗''' was updated with a fact from the article '''''1908 California Amendment 14 ↗''''', which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ''... that California voters approved '''a 1908 constitutional amendment ↗''' by just two votes out of more than 185,000 cast?'' The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/1908 California Amendment 14 ↗. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, 1908 California Amendment 14 ↗), and the hook may be added to the statistics page ↗ after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it ↗.
}} Z1720 (talk) 00:03, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

2026 Virginia Right to Reproductive Freedom Amendment

Just letting you know that your page, 2026 Virginia Right to Reproductive Freedom Amendment ↗, has been selected by a student editor ↗ for a course. Please keep an eye on any additions to the page and be super mindful that they are not aware of Wikipedia's rules or manual of style (I have already had to revert a large edit to the lede paragraph).

Have a good day! aesurias ''(ping me in your reply, or I won't see it)'' (talk) 23:29, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

:{{ping|Aesurias}} Thank you for letting me know. Delcoan (talk) 01:16, 31 January 2026 (UTC)
::There is now, incredibly, a second student editor working on it. aesurias ''(ping me in your reply, or I won't see it)'' (talk) 04:09, 2 February 2026 (UTC)
:::{{ping|Aesurias}} Wow! Guess it’s a popular article, lol.
:::Anyway, thanks for reverting those edits again. I’ll try to keep an eye on it as well. Delcoan (talk) 04:12, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

SC DYK

Have you considered "{{tq|that a 1998 referendum to repeal South Carolina's unenforceable interracial marriage ban was opposed by 38% of voters?}}" for this ↗? I think it flows much better than "38% opposition". "{{tq|by almost 40% of voters?}}" may also work if it isn't too lengthy. aesurias ''(ping me in your reply, or I won't see it)'' (talk) 10:54, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

:{{ping|Aesurias}} Oh, yeah, that actually makes more sense. I’ll propose that in the nomination. Delcoan (talk) 04:13, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

DYK nomination of 1918 Massachusetts Question 1

25px ↗ Hello! Your submission of 1918 Massachusetts Question 1 ↗ at the Did You Know nominations page ↗ has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at '''your nomination's entry ↗''' and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!  Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:01, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Delegates of the 1972 Montana Constitutional Convention.jpeg

64px|left|alt=|link= ↗
Thank you for uploading ''':File:Delegates of the 1972 Montana Constitutional Convention.jpeg ↗'''. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content ↗. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline ↗ is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag ↗; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion ↗. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page ↗. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 02:27, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

DYK for 2026 Virginia Repeal Same-Sex Marriage Ban Amendment

{{ivmbox
|image = Updated DYK query.svg
|imagesize=40px
|image class=skin-invert
|text = On 19 February 2026 ↗, '''Did you know ↗''' was updated with a fact from the article '''''2026 Virginia Repeal Same-Sex Marriage Ban Amendment ↗''''', which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ''... that '''Virginia voters are scheduled to decide in 2026 ↗''' whether to formally legalize same-sex marriage?'' The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/2026 Virginia Repeal Same-Sex Marriage Ban Amendment ↗. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, 2026 Virginia Repeal Same-Sex Marriage Ban Amendment ↗), and the hook may be added to the statistics page ↗ after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it ↗.
}} '''Hurricane''''''Zeta'''C ↗ 01:31, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Delegates of the 1972 Montana Constitutional Convention.jpeg

35px|text-top|left|⚠|link= ↗ Thanks for uploading ''':File:Delegates of the 1972 Montana Constitutional Convention.jpeg ↗'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use ↗. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media ↗).

Note that any non-free images not used in any '''articles''' will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion ↗. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:20, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of 1987 Mississippi Amendment 3 ↗ is under review

Your good article nomination ↗ of the article 1987 Mississippi Amendment 3 ↗ is 20px|alt=|link= ↗ '''under review'''. See '''Talk:1987 Mississippi Amendment 3/GA1{{!}}the review page ↗''' for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have.  Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Jordano53 -- Jordano53 (talk) 06:08, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of 1987 Mississippi Amendment 3 ↗ is on hold

Your good article nomination ↗ of the article 1987 Mississippi Amendment 3 ↗ has been placed 20px|alt=|link= ↗ '''on hold''', as the article needs some changes. See '''Talk:1987 Mississippi Amendment 3/GA1{{!}}the review page ↗''' for more information. If these are addressed within 7 days, the nomination will pass; otherwise, it may fail.  Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Jordano53 -- Jordano53 (talk) 07:04, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

February 2026

25px|alt=Information icon ↗ Hello, I'm Zackmann08. Thank you for your recent contributions to :Template:1998 United States elections ↗. When you were adding content to the page, you added duplicate arguments ↗ to a template which can cause issues with how the template is rendered. In the future, please use the preview ↗ button before you save your edit; this helps you find these errors as they will display in yellow at the top of the page. Thanks. '''Zackmann''' (Talk to me ↗/What I been doing ↗) 03:34, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

:Thank you for fixing that; I apologize. Delcoan (talk) 04:10, 24 February 2026 (UTC)
::If I had a nickel for every time I've made that mistake I could retire and edit full time! No worries. Just a friendly reminder. Keep up the good work! '''Zackmann''' (Talk to me ↗/What I been doing ↗) 04:13, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of 1987 Mississippi Amendment 3 ↗ has passed

Your good article nomination ↗ of the article 1987 Mississippi Amendment 3 ↗ has 20px|alt=|link= ↗ '''passed'''; congratulations! See '''Talk:1987 Mississippi Amendment 3/GA1{{!}}the review page ↗''' for more information. If the article is eligible to appear ↗ in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it ↗ within the next seven days. Please also consider reviewing ↗ somebody else's nomination to help keep the backlog down.  Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Jordano53 -- Jordano53 (talk) 17:00, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted

right|80px ↗
Hi Delcoan, 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) 04:36, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

DYK for 1998 South Carolina Amendment 4

{{ivmbox
|image = Updated DYK query.svg
|imagesize=40px
|image class=skin-invert
|text = On 3 March 2026 ↗, '''Did you know ↗''' was updated with a fact from the article '''''1998 South Carolina Amendment 4 ↗''''', which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ''... that '''a 1998 referendum ↗''' to repeal South Carolina's unenforceable interracial marriage ban was opposed by more than 38 percent of voters?'' The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/1998 South Carolina Amendment 4 (2nd nomination) ↗. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, 1998 South Carolina Amendment 4 ↗), and the hook may be added to the statistics page ↗ after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it ↗.
}} '''Hurricane''''''Zeta'''C ↗ 00:03, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

:In this edit ↗ you used the word "rationed". I think you wanted to use the word "reasoned"? Shenme (talk) 05:15, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
::Yes. Fixed. Delcoan (talk) 12:14, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 10

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2005 Texas Proposition 2 ↗, a link pointing to the disambiguation page Orlando Garcia ↗ was added.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:00, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

DYK for 2021 Pennsylvania Amendment 3

{{ivmbox
|image = Updated DYK query.svg
|imagesize=40px
|image class=skin-invert
|text = On 13 March 2026 ↗, '''Did you know ↗''' was updated with a fact from the article '''''2021 Pennsylvania Amendment 3 ↗''''', which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ''... that more than a quarter of Pennsylvania voters opposed '''a 2021 constitutional amendment ↗''' to prohibit racial and ethnic discrimination?'' The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/2021 Pennsylvania Amendment 3 ↗. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, 2021 Pennsylvania Amendment 3 ↗), and the hook may be added to the statistics page ↗ after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it ↗.
}} Epicgenius (talk) 12:03, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of 1976 Missouri Amendment 5 ↗ is under review

Your good article nomination ↗ of the article 1976 Missouri Amendment 5 ↗ is 20px|alt=|link= ↗ '''under review'''. See '''Talk:1976 Missouri Amendment 5/GA1{{!}}the review page ↗''' for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have.  Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of TheNuggeteer -- TheNuggeteer (talk) 13:00, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

DYK for 1987 Mississippi Amendment 3

{{ivmbox
|image = Updated DYK query.svg
|imagesize=40px
|image class=skin-invert
|text = On 19 March 2026 ↗, '''Did you know ↗''' was updated with a fact from the article '''''1987 Mississippi Amendment 3 ↗''''', which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ''... that '''a 1987 referendum ↗''' to repeal Mississippi's unenforceable interracial marriage ban was opposed by more than 48 percent of voters?'' The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/1987 Mississippi Amendment 3 ↗. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, 1987 Mississippi Amendment 3 ↗), and the hook may be added to the statistics page ↗ after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it ↗.
}} '''Hurricane''''''Zeta'''C ↗ 00:02, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of 1976 Missouri Amendment 5 ↗ has passed

Your good article nomination ↗ of the article 1976 Missouri Amendment 5 ↗ has 20px|alt=|link= ↗ '''passed'''; congratulations! See '''Talk:1976 Missouri Amendment 5/GA1{{!}}the review page ↗''' for more information. If the article is eligible to appear ↗ in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it ↗ within the next seven days. Please also consider reviewing ↗ somebody else's nomination to help keep the backlog down.  Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of TheNuggeteer -- TheNuggeteer (talk) 04:30, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

{| style="margin: 1em 4em;"
|- style="vertical-align: top;"
| alt=Teahouse logo|link=w:en:WP:Teahouse|File:WP teahouse logo 2.png by User:Heatherawalls, licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 ↗
| <div style="background-color: #fcfbed; color: #393D38; padding: 0.4em 1em; border-radius: 10px; font-size: 1.1em;">
Hello '''Delcoan'''! The thread you created at the Teahouse ↗, {{tq|Roll call table error for dark mode}}, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days.

You can still read the archived discussion ↗. If you have follow-up questions, please {{Edit |1=Wikipedia:Teahouse |2=create a new thread |section=new |preload=Wikipedia:Teahouse/Preload |preloadtitle=Follow-up to Roll call table error for dark mode ↗}}.


See also the help page about the archival process. ↗
The archival was done by {{noping|lowercase sigmabot III}}, and this notification was delivered by {{noping|KiranBOT}}, both automated accounts ↗. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{tlx|bots|deny{{=}}KiranBOT}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). —KiranBOT (talk) 03:04, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

<div></div>
</div>
|}

DYK for 1972 Montana Constitutional Convention

{{ivmbox
|image = Updated DYK query.svg
|imagesize=40px
|image class=skin-invert
|text = On 28 March 2026 ↗, '''Did you know ↗''' was updated with a fact from the article '''''1972 Montana Constitutional Convention ↗''''', which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ''... that Montana voters '''in 1972 chose ↗''' to keep the death penalty, allow for gambling to be legalized, have a bicameral legislature, and ratify a new constitution?'' The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/1972 Montana Constitutional Convention ↗. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, 1972 Montana Constitutional Convention ↗), and the hook may be added to the statistics page ↗ after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it ↗.
}} ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:03, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

{| style="margin: 1em 4em;"
|- style="vertical-align: top;"
| alt=Teahouse logo|link=w:en:WP:Teahouse|File:WP teahouse logo 2.png by User:Heatherawalls, licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 ↗
| <div style="background-color: #fcfbed; color: #393D38; padding: 0.4em 1em; border-radius: 10px; font-size: 1.1em;">
Hello '''Delcoan'''! The thread you created at the Teahouse ↗, {{tq|Error when referendum infobox is placed at bottom of page}}, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days.

You can still read the archived discussion ↗. If you have follow-up questions, please {{Edit |1=Wikipedia:Teahouse |2=create a new thread |section=new |preload=Wikipedia:Teahouse/Preload |preloadtitle=Follow-up to Error when referendum infobox is placed at bottom of page ↗}}.


See also the help page about the archival process. ↗
The archival was done by {{noping|lowercase sigmabot III}}, and this notification was delivered by {{noping|KiranBOT}}, both automated accounts ↗. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{tlx|bots|deny{{=}}KiranBOT}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). —KiranBOT (talk) 03:04, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

<div></div>
</div>
|}

Promotion of 1987 Mississippi ballot measures ↗

{{ivmbox
|image = Cscr-featured.svg
|imagesize=60px
|extracss=font-size:1.25em; font-family:Georgia;
|text = Congratulations, Delcoan! The list you nominated, '''1987 Mississippi ballot measures ↗''', has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best lists on Wikipedia. The '''nomination discussion ↗''' has been archived.{{parabr}}This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it ↗ to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list. Keep up the great work! Cheers, {{user0|PresN}} via FACBot (talk) 11:25, 4 April 2026 (UTC)
}}

Your thread has been archived

{| style="margin: 1em 4em;"
|- style="vertical-align: top;"
| alt=Teahouse logo|link=w:en:WP:Teahouse|File:WP teahouse logo 2.png by User:Heatherawalls, licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 ↗
| <div style="background-color: #fcfbed; color: #393D38; padding: 0.4em 1em; border-radius: 10px; font-size: 1.1em;">
Hello '''Delcoan'''! The thread you created at the Teahouse ↗, {{tq|Text not showing in collapse template}}, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days.

You can still read the archived discussion ↗. If you have follow-up questions, please {{Edit |1=Wikipedia:Teahouse |2=create a new thread |section=new |preload=Wikipedia:Teahouse/Preload |preloadtitle=Follow-up to Text not showing in collapse template ↗}}.


See also the help page about the archival process. ↗
The archival was done by {{noping|lowercase sigmabot III}}, and this notification was delivered by {{noping|KiranBOT}}, both automated accounts ↗. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{tlx|bots|deny{{=}}KiranBOT}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). —KiranBOT (talk) 03:03, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

<div></div>
</div>
|}

Unofficial manual of style for Wikipedia articles on referendums

{{ping|Aesurias|Yoblyblob|Elli|Zantastik|Gazamp|Nahida}} Hello! I have pinged you all because I have seen that you consistently write articles on referendums, and felt you might enjoy discussing this topic; if you know of someone who writes about them a lot too who was not pinged, '''please feel free to do so''', as I could not think of many people.

I would like to propose that we come up with an unofficial manual of style for referendum articles, because a lot of the time, things vary heavily, or just slightly, from article to article, which simply creates unnecessary differences. The goal of the unofficial manual would be to try and mitigate these differences. Some common differences I see include:

'''Very beginning of articles''': some start off with the entire name, (e.g. 1967 Pennsylvania Amendment 1-A ↗), others list the state name and amendment number followed by the year (e.g. 2006 South Carolina Amendment 1 ↗), others list just the amendment number (e.g. 2012 Wyoming Amendment A ↗) while others include alternate names for the amendment (e.g. 2002 Massachusetts Question 2 ↗).

'''Short descriptions''': some describe the amendment itself, (e.g. 1987 Mississippi Amendment 3 ↗), others also describe the amendment but do so in a different tense (e.g. 1998 South Carolina Amendment 4 ↗), while others describe what is being amended (e.g. 2024 Colorado Amendment 80 ↗)

'''Percentage in keys''': some use one percentage symbol per number interval (e.g. 2004 Alabama Amendment 2 ↗), while others use two (e.g. 1972 Denver Winter Olympics referendum ↗)

'''Order in keys''': some list percentages going from high to low (e.g. 1998 Alaska Measure 2 ↗), while others list percentages going from low to high (e.g. 2024 Arizona Proposition 139 ↗)

'''Key shape''': some are vertical (e.g. 2020 Utah Constitutional Amendment A ↗) while others are horizontal (e.g. 2023 Ohio Issue 2 ↗)

'''Key color boxes''': some include grey boxes around the colors (e.g. 2024 Ohio Issue 1 ↗), others use black (e.g. 1918 Massachusetts Question 1 ↗), while others do not use any boxes (I can't find an example right now but I have definitely seen it before).

'''Above 90%''': For colors above 90%, some articles say "90–100%" (e.g. 2021 Pennsylvania Amendment 3 ↗) while others say "<90%" (e.g. 2025 Texas Proposition 15 ↗)

'''Tie color''': the vast majority use white, though I have seen ones that use different colors, such as pink (2022 Montana Legislative Referendum 131 ↗)

Delcoan (talk) 22:59, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

:Agree with standardization for all of these points, though I don't have strong opinions on most of them. I do think key shape should be vertical, and that the exact tie color should be {{legend0|EBEEED|{{code|#EBEEED}}|border=1px solid #000}} (from Wikipedia:WikiProject Elections and Referendums/USA legend colors#Proposal support levels ↗). Elli (talk ↗ | contribs ↗) 23:04, 15 April 2026 (UTC)
::Also if we want to actually firm up consensus, we should have the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Elections and Referendums ↗ (but probably fine to brainstorm here first). Elli (talk ↗ | contribs ↗) 23:05, 15 April 2026 (UTC)
::I agree. Key shape 100% vertical.
::Re: the name in the lede, I think that 2012 Wyoming Amendment A ↗ is preferable because often the end of the sentence reads something along the lines of "{{tq|...that appeared on the 8 November, 2012, ballot in the state of Wyoming}}", making the full title redundant.
::For example with 2016 Colorado Amendment 69 ↗, I wrote:
::{{tq|Amendment 69 was an initiated constitutional amendment that appeared on the November 8, 2016, ballot in the state of Colorado.}}
::Adding "{{tq|2016 Colorado [Amendment 69]}}" to the start of that sentence is not necessary when the year and state are given immediately after. aesurias ''(ping me in your reply, or I won't see it)'' (talk) 02:10, 16 April 2026 (UTC)
:::Also, order of keys should be low to high. aesurias ''(ping me in your reply, or I won't see it)'' (talk) 02:11, 16 April 2026 (UTC)
:Agree with Elli about the discussion place, I only really have thoughts about a few of these points though.
:For the names, I think standardization by state should be what is needed, using the state title if applicable (I know Alabama just lists Amendment x for all theirs). Whether it is amendment/initiative/proposition, I think it is fine to differentiate if the state officially refers to it as such.
:The one percentage in keys looks best to me, but no preference how it is ordered.
:Vertical keys probably look better, but again no strong opinion.
:And then not really a preference on anything else. Thanks for starting this discussion though! Standardization helps a lot Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 23:12, 15 April 2026 (UTC)
::{{ping|Aesurias|Yoblyblob|Elli}} Okay, so it seems we all agree that:
::* The key should be vertical
::* The tie color should be white
::* One percentage symbol for key
::With the rest, there are either disagreements or not sufficient input.
::Would it make the most sense to now add this to the elections and referendums Wikiproject asking for others input, or should we add it proposing the above three to get consensus? Delcoan (talk) 17:28, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

DYK for 1976 Missouri Amendment 5

{{ivmbox
|image = Updated DYK query.svg
|imagesize=40px
|image class=skin-invert
|text = On 17 April 2026 ↗, '''Did you know ↗''' was updated with a fact from the article '''''1976 Missouri Amendment 5 ↗''''', which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ''... that Missouri did not '''repeal its school segregation laws ↗''' until 22 years after ''Brown v. Board of Education ↗''{{-?}}'' The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/1976 Missouri Amendment 5 ↗. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, 1976 Missouri Amendment 5 ↗), and the hook may be added to the statistics page ↗ after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it ↗.
}}  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:02, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

newspapers.com links

Would you be willing to clip the articles you cite going forwards, and use that as the link? This makes the articles accessible to people who don't have a newspapers.com subscription. I've done this change at 1976 Missouri Amendment 5 ↗ if you want an example. Thanks! Elli (talk ↗ | contribs ↗) 21:21, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

:Yes, absolutely. This is also a great idea because 1.) It directly shows what is referenced, and 2.) It isn't paywalled. Delcoan (talk) 21:23, 17 April 2026 (UTC)
::Awesome, thank you :) Elli (talk ↗ | contribs ↗) 21:27, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

TFL notification

Hi, Delcoan. I'm just posting to let you know that 1987 Mississippi ballot measures ↗ – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list ↗ for May 18. The TFL blurb can be seen here ↗.

At the TFL submissions page, you suggested running this article on November 3, 2027. That is a long time in the future, as you noted, but my greater concern for that date was that there is a semi-official moratorium on running election-related articles close to the date of an election. The example that sticks out in my mind is us receiving some comments on Main Page talk after running this article ↗ on the eve of the 2024 U.S. elections, even though I made every attempt to make the blurb as neutral as possible. Given that the Mississippi governor election is scheduled for November 2 and this TFL would run on that night in the state, I don't think it's worth the controversy it might cause. Better to run it now and have the attention focused on what I found to be an engaging topic. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk ↗. Regards, Giants2008 (Talk) 21:27, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

New pages patrol May 2026 Backlog drive

{| style="border: 2px solid #36c; border-radius: 4px; background: linear-gradient(to right, #ffffff, #eaf3ff); padding: 10px; color: #000;"
| style="vertical-align: middle; font-size: 130%" | May 2026 Backlog Drive ↗ | '''New pages patrol ↗''' 
| rowspan=3 | right|100px ↗
|-
|

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 ↗'''.

|-
|colspan=2 style="font-size:85%; padding-top:15px;"|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)

2025–2026 United States redistricting map

Hi Delcoan, I noticed you uploaded a new color scheme and legend for c:File:US Congress mid-decade redistricting causes 2026.svg ↗. I was wondering if you could upload this new color scheme as a separate file and return the existing file to the previous legend; the title of the current file still includes the word "causes" (which is not reflected in the new legend), and I think having separate maps of both the party gains and redistricting causes could benefit the 2025–2026 United States redistricting ↗ article. --Leviavery (talk) 22:44, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

:Done! And I added the reasoning map back to the page; it is now under the main infobox. Delcoan (talk) 23:10, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

an award

{| style="background-color: var(--background-color-success-subtle, #fdffe7); border: 1px solid var(--border-color-success, #fceb92); color: var(--color-base, #202122);"
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | 100px ↗
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''a duckling for you'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | thx for helping with getting my idea materialized in 2025–2026 United States redistricting ↗ you are greatly appreciated so here is a duckling for you. make sure you feed it ;-) Daisytheduck quack quack 22:50, 14 May 2026 (UTC)
|}

:Thank you! Great suggestion for the map :) Delcoan (talk) 23:38, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

New Page Patrol Newsletter - May 2026

<div style="border:2px solid #90C0FF; background:#F0F0FF; width:99%; padding:4px">

Hello {{BASEPAGENAME}},

thumb|400px|New Page Review queue November 2025 - May 2026 ↗

'''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'''

74px|left ↗{{no ping|JTtheOG}} was selected as the NPP reviewer of the year for both 2024 and 2025, for reviewing the most articles amongst all reviewers.
{{no ping|Hey man im josh}} and {{no ping|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.

{{no ping|BoyTheKingCanDance}}, {{no ping|Rosiestep}}, {{no ping|SunDawn}}, and {{no ping|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 {{no ping|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.

{{refbegin}}
'''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 ↗.

{{refend}}
</div>

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

Upcoming expiry of your patroller right

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, 1 June 2026 (UTC). For most rights, you will need to renew at WP:PERM ↗, unless you have been told otherwise when your right was approved. {{grey|To opt out of user right expiry notifications, add yourself to m:Global reminder bot/Exclusion ↗.}} Leaderbot (talk) 19:41, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

June 2026 GAN Backlog Drive

{| style="border: 5px solid #ABCDEF ; background-color: #FFF; padding:10px 15px 0; color: black"
|style="padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em; font-size:130%" |'''Good article nominations ↗ |''' June 2026 Backlog Drive
|rowspan=3|right|75px ↗
|-
|'''June 2026 Backlog Drive:'''
Do you want to become more experienced in the GA process?

On 1 June, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin.

Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles reviewed.

Mentors are available, and new reviewers (<6 reviews) get bonus points!

Interested in taking part? You can '''sign up here ↗'''.
|-
|colspan=2|'''Other ways to participate:'''

Join the conversations on our talk page ↗.

|-
|colspan=2 style="font-size:85%; padding-top:15px;"|You're receiving this message because you have participated in a good article review this year or participated in the previous backlog drive.
|}

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:58, 25 May 2026 (UTC)