User Talk: Somepinkdude

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

Nuisance tagging articles

If you continue nuisance tagging articles, such as you did at Outline of the Great Purge (Soviet Union) ↗ https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Outline_of_the_Great_Purge_(Soviet_Union)&diff=prev&oldid=1298034447 ↗ you may be blocked from editing. You obviously do not understand Wikipedia Outlines, the proper use of tags (not for simple problems that you can easily fix), or Wikipedia's AI guidelines. Further questions can be asked at the WP:TEAHOUSE ↗.  // Timothy :: talk  06:30, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

:Okay .Then sorry for that . ~2026-33695-44 ↗ (talk) 21:20, 7 June 2026 (UTC)
::Hi @User:~2026-33695-44. It's never too late ↗ to become a productive editor, even more so given that this is your first day editing. While comments such as "I am Cynthia Gallery" might be accepted on a forum, Wikipedia has different rules ↗, and failure to comply can come off as trolling even when done in good faith. If you aren't sure what to put on a talk page, you could always ask the teahouse ↗ or village pump ↗. Also, you might not know this, but the first section of a talk page is actually the oldest, so next time try adding your comment in the ''last'' thread. Thank you! Somepinkdude (talk) 21:34, 7 June 2026 (UTC)
:::Okay sorry for that i won't repeat it again .And how did know the problems ~2026-33695-44 ↗ (talk) 15:00, 8 June 2026 (UTC)
::::Yeah it's just an apology ~2026-33695-44 ↗ (talk) 15:11, 8 June 2026 (UTC)
:::::Are you thread me when you can also make a mistake ~2026-33909-17 ↗ (talk) 21:04, 8 June 2026 (UTC)
:::::Are you thread me when you can also make a mistake ~2026-33909-17 ↗ (talk) 21:04, 8 June 2026 (UTC)
::::::I don't quite understand what you are saying. Usually, moving or deleting others' comments is frowned upon, even if they are in the wrong section (unless there is some procedural reason to do so). It seems like you posted your comment twice, but I'll leave that alone.

::::::While we always assume good faith ↗, repeatedly adding incoherent comments can be considered disruptive, just to warn you. If you keep on doing this for a long enough time, you may be blocked from talk space (although you don't seem to be near that threshold right now). Somepinkdude (talk | contribs ↗), ''in solidarity ↗'' 22:47, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

Signing

25px|alt=Information icon ↗ Hello and welcome to Wikipedia ↗. When you add content to talk pages ↗ and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, please be sure to sign your posts ↗ (but never when editing articles). There are two ways to do this. Either:
# Add four tilde ↗s ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
# With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button 22px|link=Wikipedia:How to sign your posts ↗ located above the edit window.
This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. Yerlo (talk) 13:08, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

:Okay, sorry ~2026-33695-44 ↗ (talk) 17:25, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

Speedy deletion revision: Draft:National Socialist Liberation Party ↗

.
Hi there! I wanted to let you know that I have revised your G4 speedy deletion ↗ nomination of Draft:National Socialist Liberation Party ↗. You marked the draft as having previously been deleted via a deletion discussion, which is not the case. However, the article qualifies as a hoax and will be deleted as such. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 14:34, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

A belated welcome!

thumb|The welcome may be belated, but the cookies are still warm! {{smiley}} ↗

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Somepinkdude! I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions ↗. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

{{Div col|colwidth=18em}}

Introductory tutorial ↗

Your first article ↗

Contributing to Wikipedia ↗

Five pillars of Wikipedia ↗

Article development ↗

Help desk ↗

{{Div col end}}

If you have questions, '''{{edit|Special:MyTalk|just use this link to ask for help|section=new|preload=Help:Contents/helpmepreload|preloadtitle=Help me!}}'''; a volunteer will visit you here shortly!

Need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center ↗.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian ↗! Again, welcome! Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 14:35, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Draft:Noah Sides ↗

Hello again! I wanted to let you know I have declined your G11 speedy deletion ↗ nomination of Draft:Noah Sides ↗ because it is not unambiguously promotional. Although it has some promotional language, it does not require a fundamental rewrite. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 15:35, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

:I have also declined your G11 speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Mario Roshi ↗ because the article is not promotional (at least according to Google Translate's version). Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 15:35, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Hasty tagging

? Tagging a draft 20 minutes after its creation https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Boulanger_Initiative&diff=prev&oldid=1308175777 ↗ is not appreciated. There is a list of substantial sourcing in the article, easily visible. Please refrain from rash tagging in the future—if I witnessed this as a brand-new editor I would be highly discouraged from working on an article. '''Aza24 (talk)''' 00:00, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: :Draft:Who is Familia De Diversión on youtube ↗

Hello Somepinkdude, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of :Draft:Who is Familia De Diversión on youtube ↗, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Speedy deletion criteria starting with A only apply to articles, not drafts. You may wish to review the WP:CSD{{!}}Criteria for Speedy Deletion ↗ before tagging further pages. Thank you. jlwoodwa (talk) 00:05, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

Notifying editors about speedy deletion

Hi there, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! You recently nominated Draft:Uck ↗ for speedy deletion via A7 ↗. As jlwoodwa explained above, articles in the draftspace are not eligible for A7 deletion. As such, another admin declined this nomination. Additionally, I noticed that you did not inform the article creator about the deletion nomination. Per the speedy deletion guidelines, editors should notify major contributors to an article when they nominate it for deletion. Notifications are especially useful to new editors who may not know what they did wrong or even that their article has been deleted. I have heard many newbies ask, "Where did my article go?" Beyond this, notifying the creator and major contributors gives them an opportunity to contest the deletion. Given this, I highly recommend you make sure to notify editors when you nominate their work for deletion. If you want, you can use a tool such as Twinkle ↗ for deletions as it automatically sends the notification at the same time you nominate for deletion. If you use Twinkle, you can also create a CSD log to keep track of your speedy deletion nominations, which can be helpful for reflection. I hope all this makes sense! Let me know if you have any follow-up questions, comments, and/or concerns. Take care, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 02:34, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

:You've gone on a similar spree today as well with pages like Wikipedia:Maxton Heintskill ↗ and other contributions of {{noping|BRAXTYNYKEMA}}. Please stop doing this. Sohom (talk) 00:46, 2 September 2025 (UTC)
::@Sohom Datta Oops, sometimes it isn't easy to tell where a deletion criterion applies. I couldn't tell how to delete it, and used the wrong criterion (although the pages were later speedily deleted for a different reason). Thank you for informing me; I'll look through the documentation or avoid deletion next time. Are PRODs allowed in "Wikipedia:" space? They can be useful in cases like this, where the pages obviously shouldn't be on Wikipedia, but don't happen to fit under WP:CSD ↗. Somepinkdude (talk) 00:52, 2 September 2025 (UTC)
:::The correct way to deal with this would have been a report to WP:AIV ↗ and WP:G6 ↗ with a custom rationale. Also, no prods don't apply outside of article and file space. I would strongly suggest going through our policies on the various deletion criteria before attempting to mark pages for deletion and potentially erring on the side of not tagging if you are unsure for the time being. (Worst case scenario somebody else will get to it) Sohom (talk) 01:11, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

WP:AIV ↗ addition

I appreciate you adding extra reasons here ↗, but please don't modify what someone said. LTA is enough to explain roughly what is going on to the admins. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 22:50, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

September 2025

25px|alt=|link= ↗ Hello, I'm Frost. I noticed that in this edit ↗ to :User:Moneytrees/dummy ↗, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary ↗. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page ↗. Thank you. '''Frost''' 14:35, 6 September 2025 (UTC)
: @Frost I removed content because it was an obvious copyright violation of https://www.jstor.org/stable/4353230 ↗. I think you're supposed to blank pages before you add <nowiki>{{db-copyvio}}</nowiki>, so I blanked it.
:: Oh okay. I didn't realize what you were doing as it seemed like blanking a page in another user's userspace. '''Frost''' 14:47, 6 September 2025 (UTC)
:::Somepinkdude and {{ping|Frost}}, when not in use, :User:Moneytrees/dummy ↗ reads {{tq|This page is used to save dead links for my work at CCI, along with pasting in content that Earwig's copyvio detector can't read. You can use this page without asking me to; I have it watchlisted and will get around to revdeling any copyrighted content added.}} I think my edit was legitimate and the page will be revdelled in due course. TSventon (talk) 15:24, 6 September 2025 (UTC)
:::: @TSventon Oops, I thought it was just another copyright-violating sandbox page. It's not that often that you find a sanbox constructed for the purpose of testing Earwig's copyvio detection. Somepinkdude (talk) 15:28, 6 September 2025 (UTC)
::::Thanks for letting me know! '''Frost''' 15:30, 6 September 2025 (UTC)
:::::It's useful, but it makes sense to have one dedicated sandbox and to clean it regularly. TSventon (talk) 15:40, 6 September 2025 (UTC)

Please notify

page creators when tagging for WP:G11 ↗ and WP:U5 ↗. Users nominating a page for speedy deletion should specify which criterion/criteria the page meets, and should notify the page creator and any major contributors. ↗" Thanks, -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:59, 6 September 2025 (UTC)

:Please see above. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 14:02, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

{{ivmbox | image = Commons-emblem-notice.svg |imagesize=50px | bg = #E5F8FF | text = You have recently edited a page related to '''articles about living or recently deceased people ↗, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles''', a topic designated as '''''contentious ↗'''''. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as ''contentious topics''. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee ↗. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia's norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators ↗ have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia ↗;

comply with all applicable policies and guidelines ↗;

follow editorial and behavioural best practices;

comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and

refrain from gaming the system ↗.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics ''procedures'', you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard ↗ or you may learn more about this contentious topic here ↗. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{tl|Ctopics/aware}} template. }}

link=|25px|alt=Information icon ↗ You have recently made edits related to the region of South Asia ↗ (India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal), broadly construed, including but not limited to history, politics, ethnicity, and social groups. This is a standard message to inform you that the region of South Asia ↗ (India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal), broadly construed, including but not limited to history, politics, ethnicity, and social groups is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics ↗.  ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:09, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

:Hi {{u|Somepinkdude}}, regarding Special:Diff/1310096182 ↗, if the removal was made in good faith, WP:BLPRESTORE ↗ prohibits restoring it in unmodified form without consensus. Best regards, ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:10, 7 September 2025 (UTC)
::Sorry, I thought the general guideline on removing content was more wimportant, and was trying to remove an edit that removed content and changed facts. In the future, I'll be more careful relating to contentious topics. I was not trying to push a POV, and was simply trying to revert disruptive edits on Special:AbuseLog ↗.

About undo

how do you undo (not rollback) edits so quickly without using any tools Manualbadeditfix (talk) 02:59, 9 September 2025 (UTC)
:This is just a manual revert of multiple edits. If someone has made many successive edits to the same page, you click "history" and find the latest revision which they have not edited. You then edit that revision, which discards the changes made since then. Usually the software will mark those edits as reverted, but sometimes it can't tell if you reverted the edits. Somepinkdude (talk) 03:02, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Garbage ↗, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Runoff ↗. 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) 19:57, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

Essays are not policies or guidelines

Please be ''very'' careful about making edits on the basis of essays ↗. They are neither policies nor guidelines nor necessarily representative of either "best practice" or even a general consensus ↗. DonIago (talk) 20:20, 15 September 2025 (UTC)
:@Doniago What do you mean? I'm sure I have cited essays in my edit summary at least once, but it would help to see which edit you are referring to. Somepinkdude (talk) 21:56, 15 September 2025 (UTC)
::This edit ↗, where you cited WP:DTTR ↗ as your rationale. If you want to slap me on the wrist for 'templating a regular', you're welcome to do so, but I provide notifications in part as a courtesy, and there's no policy or guideline that prohibits using a template to do so. In this case, I looked at their Talk page first and saw there'd been very little discussion on it, so using a template seemed like the most efficient way to deliver the message I needed to deliver rather than wasting time formulating my own version of text that would essentially say the same thing. Deleting it entirely solely because it was a templated messge rather than my own text is unwarranted. If the editor themselves disagrees with the template, they can engage with me as well, or delete the message on their own. I would also note that editing or removing other users' comments on other editors' Talk pages is generally frowned upon, and that that ''is'' a guideline: WP:USERTALKSTOP ↗. DonIago (talk) 03:23, 16 September 2025 (UTC)
::Sorry, I didn't know. I assumed this was allowed because someone had done the same to me, in this edit ↗. Somepinkdude (talk) 03:27, 16 September 2025 (UTC)
:::Thank you for the apology; I appreciate it. The difference there is that the editor who removed your edit was the editor on whose Talk page you'd left the message. Editors generally have broad latitude over what messages they can delete from their own Talk pages. Hope this helps! DonIago (talk) 17:22, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

Minor nitpick

In my opinion, warnings like this ↗ aren't really appropriate for what's clearly an error and something that was meant to be made on the talk page. Wikipedia's a confusing place and that's likely what they wanted—since it's not the first time this person has done this, a polite (not-templated!) note saying why what they did is wrong, and what to do instead, can be much more productive. Perryprog (talk) 22:52, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

DNAxCAT

I understand that I've very poor relatable sources...and I truly deserved it. Sparkschu Itai (talk) 14:08, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

Rollback granted

right|130px ↗
Hi Somepinkdude. After reviewing your request, I have enabled ↗ '''rollback ↗''' on your account. Please keep the following things in mind while using rollback:

Being granted rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle ↗ or Ultraviolet ↗. It just adds a ''[rollback]'' button next to a page's latest live revision. It does not grant you any additional "status" on Wikipedia, nor does it change how Wikipedia policies apply to you.

Rollback should be used to revert clear and unambiguous cases of vandalism {{emu|only}}. Never use rollback to revert good faith edits. For more information about when rollback is appropriate, see {{section link|Wikipedia:Rollback|When to use rollback}}.

Rollback should never be used to edit war ↗, and it should never be used in a content-related dispute to restore the page to your preferred revision. If rollback is abused or used for this purpose or any other inappropriate purpose, the permission will be revoked.

Use common sense. If you're not sure about something, ''ask!''

I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, and feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into trouble or have any questions about appropriate use of rollback. If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback ↗ (even though you're not an admin) and Wikipedia:Rollback ↗. Good luck and thanks! '''Malinaccier (talk)''' 13:39, 6 October 2025 (UTC)
: Please also make sure to leave user warnings on talk pages when you make reverts. I see a few recent cases where you missed doing so: Special:Diff/1314871737 ↗ and Special:Diff/1314872213 ↗. '''Malinaccier (talk)''' 13:40, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

"Both of these users have been reported to AIV"

Thanks for the self-revert

To clarify, I was reverting the IP on Jean Montero ↗ for adding unsourced information

And then I found a block evasion IP being reported on AIV, so I went over to revert its edits

Turns out, the evasion IP's edits largely involved constantly reverting edits by @SigillumVert

And then they falsely reported both of us to AIV after a back-and-forth

So... yeah, I hope this helped you, thank you very much Whyiseverythingalreadyused (talk) 00:53, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: :Draft:Raymond Burnstein ↗

Hello Somepinkdude, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of :Draft:Raymond Burnstein ↗, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not blatantly an attack page or negative, unsourced BLP. You may wish to review the WP:CSD{{!}}Criteria for Speedy Deletion ↗ before tagging further pages. Thank you. CoconutOctopus talk 22:50, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

May I?

why did you revert the edit on Andacollo, Neuquén ↗ ?? No edit summary? Explain maybe? CoryGlee (talk) 03:06, 14 October 2025 (UTC)
:{{ping|CoryGlee}} Please read WP:NPOV ↗. Adding a section entitled "Notorious People" is absolutely non-neutral, and probably a WP:BLP ↗ violation as well. The same section, however, might be acceptable in some circumstances if you titled it "Notable People". Somepinkdude (talk) 03:09, 14 October 2025 (UTC)
::I do not need to read something I read more than six years ago ... I committed a language mishap and I was about to correct it ... You reverted in the selfsame minute.
::Nice to see that with barely five months in here you are so eager to fight vandalism, just try to do it correctly, assume good faith and contextualize common sense mistakes.
::Guess otherwise your eagerness won't last much.
::Bye and happy editing. CoryGlee (talk) 03:15, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion for no reason?

Somepinkdude

I respectfully contest this speedy deletion nomination. This article does not meet the criteria for CSD G11 (unambiguous advertising or promotion) for the following reasons:

1. **Substantial encyclopedic content remains after removing promotional material**: The article includes a comprehensive "Controversies and verification issues" section (approximately 25% of total content) that critically examines the company's claims, documents the absence of independent media coverage, notes Google Business suspension issues, and explicitly states that partnerships and financial claims are unverified. This critical analysis demonstrates the article serves an encyclopedic purpose beyond promotion.

2. **Neutral point of view and critical tone**: The article consistently uses neutral language such as "according to company materials," "claims to," and "purportedly," rather than stating unverified assertions as facts. The article explicitly compares the company unfavorably to competitors (OpenAI, DeepMind, Anthropic) by noting it "has not achieved comparable public recognition, media coverage, or documented technical achievements."

3. **Verifiable subject**: The company is a legitimate registered entity in the Norwegian business registry (organization number 936 049 575), verified through independent sources (Proff.no and NorthData). The company has operated since 2009 (16 years), demonstrating it is not a newly created promotional vehicle.

4. **Appropriate sourcing**: The article relies primarily on independent third-party sources including academic publications (Bostrom, Russell, Wooldridge, Amodei), business registries, and competitor websites. Company website citations are used sparingly (2 instances) and only to attribute claims explicitly marked as unverified.

5. **Deletion is not cleanup**: Per the CSD G11 guideline, "the mere fact that a company, organization, or product is a page's subject does not, on its own, qualify that page for deletion under this criterion." The article contains substantial encyclopedic content about the AI safety research field, Norwegian AI ecosystem context, and industry comparisons that would remain valuable even if all promotional material were removed.

The article may benefit from further editing to reduce emphasis on unverified claims, but it does not require deletion. The comprehensive critical analysis and verification issues documentation demonstrate clear encyclopedic value beyond promotion. I am willing to make additional edits to address any specific promotional concerns while preserving the encyclopedic content.

Thank you for your consideration Somepinkdude. WikiGenius2025 (talk) 23:50, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

:1. Don't use AI to generate talk messages ↗; it doesn't bode well for you.
:2. I've had a look, and the draft is blatantly promotional. We're not a vehicle for people to promote their companies.
:Aydo h8[what have I done now? ↗] 23:57, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi

Again, this is not a promotional Article, and as I have said it is my first article as an AI researcher in Norway about up and coming companies.

When I offer to clean what the promotional parts of the article are while maintaining valuable information about the AI progress outside of the giants I would assume this would be of high value as Norway has a lot happening here.

please give me guidance instead of brushing me off in a way where I have no capability of understanding how this works, instead of telling me what’s wrong can you please help me understand and fix how to do it correctly so more people than myself also learn? Thank you in advance. WikiGenius2025 (talk) 00:04, 15 October 2025 (UTC)
:Just write the article by yourself, add reliable sources, and your article will not be deleted. The article in its current state is promotional, unencyclopedic, and AI-generated. If you want more help, see Help:Your first article ↗. Please don't write about "up and coming companies", as all articles must meet the notability guideline ↗. Somepinkdude (talk) 00:07, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Ok, allow me to fix it

In addition I wrote the entire draft and did use AI as almost all people do in this age to perfect it, I see now it had a negative impact, please allow this to stay open as I correct it within 48 Hours so the contest allows the corrected Wikipedia article without any promotional parts to be written about! The AI research is incredible in Norway and I understand a lot of people dislike the AI hype, so I am a journalist vetting out bad and good companies, however I do understand your point of view and will fix this all promptly. Thank you. I will read a lot before posting it again, time is 02:15 AM in Norway now so I would appreciate a day or 2 to ensure this is 100% corrected. WikiGenius2025 (talk) 00:17, 15 October 2025 (UTC)
:First off, "as all people do" is simply incorrect. Look at the articles created by experienced Wikipedians, and most will show no signs of AI. Also, no amount of cleanup can fix the fact that you have a conflict of interest relating to the article, and creating articles about your business is strongly discouraged. Your article has been deleted as unreviewed AI content, so please do not recreate it until you have written the entire article without AI or plagiarism. Somepinkdude (talk) 01:23, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Edit filter/False positives/Reports ↗

Hi Somepinkdude! I'm bringing up the false positive reports noticeboard since I noticed you forgot to add your signature here ↗. I'd recommend getting and using User:DreamRimmer/EFFPRH, since it makes responding to reports a lot easier. Happy editing :) 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 02:07, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: :User:This is wik ↗

Hello Somepinkdude. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of :User:This is wik ↗, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not a blatant misuse of Wikipedia as a webhost. Thank you. jlwoodwa (talk) 02:16, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Lindsey Halligan ↗ article

You are removing well-sourced material from the article. Please take a closer look, and please discuss on the article talk page, thank you. 172.56.13.52 ↗ (talk) 03:40, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

:Cool, thanks for taking a second look and explaining in the edit history. 172.56.13.52 ↗ (talk) 03:43, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Page "Francisco Seixas da Costa"

Frankly, I do not understand the reason behind the decision to exclude my contributions. I had decided to introduce some changes in the page precisely to adress, in a very construtive way, the problems mentioned in the alerts existing over that page. Thus I decided to write neutral and factual texts, replacing the current list of functions, also reducing some of them, that may be considered too exagerated for the real importance of the personality. I also tried to find references and notes, in English, extracted from reliable sources. Did I use any non acceptable source? I am not an expert in Wikipedia. So please explain me what I did in a wrong way, in order to correct it. Or should I stop trying to colaborate? It is up to you. RA Noisiel RA Noisiel (talk) 03:58, 26 October 2025 (UTC)
:Oops, {{ping|RA Noisiel}} that was my mistake. I looked at the diff, and it showed cleanup tags being removed without explanation, but then of course AV reverted the whole series. I agree that you left the article better than it started, and you are free to revert it back. Somepinkdude (talk) 13:20, 26 October 2025 (UTC)
::I am not a Wikipeadia expert. Shall I re-write it again or is there a way to go back to the reverted text? RA Noisiel (talk) 15:47, 26 October 2025 (UTC)
:::It looks like you have already reverted back to your original revision, so there isn't really anything else you have to do. The way to restore a revision is to click the "history" tab, click "edit" on the revision, and click "Publish changes", which will revert it to that version. Alternatively, you can use Twinkle ↗ in some cases. Somepinkdude (talk) 16:41, 26 October 2025 (UTC)
::::Thank you for your understanding. I am doing my best and I will be always open to suggestions. RA Noisiel (talk) 16:43, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Usefulcharts supposedly "disruptive edit"

In the business category I was explaining were Usefulcharts sold there posters and in the Youtube section I explained some major events on the Usefulcharts YouTube Channel my edits were constructive and not disruptive. Due to these facts I believe my edits should be restored John George III (talk) 03:11, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
:Your series of edits I reverted (there are 3) has several problems. The first edit appears to add a promotional video in the references that is not necessary as a reference, which is commonly considered link spam. The second edit violates WP:ELNO ↗ by adding a link to UsefulCharts' website in the article body, which is also generally frowned upon as linkspam. The third edit added unsourced promotional-sounding content. Even if you are not closely related to the subject, your edits were making the article non-neutral and required reversion. Somepinkdude (talk) 03:31, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
::I have a few questions about that since well I am not affiliated with Usefulcharts and since it is in the Business section when someone goes and opens up the Wikipedia page for Usefulcharts and since the article lists them as a chart making company they should expect the information were the business sells their products. John George III (talk) 03:43, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
:::{{ping|John George III}} I can see some potential problems relting to a COI, given you have contributed heavily to the article Draft:Mr. Beat ↗, and you have stated that Mr. Beat collaborated with UserulCharts. However, even if you do not have a COI, neutral point of view ↗ is much more important than the reader's convenience. For this reason, unlike Google.com, we don't do ads or sponsored links, even if they are relevant. Ideally, links to a company's website should only be added to verify something the ''company'' said, and misuses will be reverted whether you have a conflict of interest or not. Somepinkdude (talk) 13:25, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
::::ok understood sir John George III (talk) 18:40, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

Article Rejection

Hi, I saw your rejection of the Flores article. You wrote that "One review in a reliable source is not enough to indicate notability." However, I was not relying on a single source to establish notability. You will see in the talk page I created for Flores my note that the draft article meets notability criteria for academics 2 and 5 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(academics). Given this, is it possible to reverse your rejection? Jimmylizama17 (talk) 14:28, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
:@Jimmylizama17 Thank you for the notice. I looked it over and it does pass WP:NACADEMIC ↗, so I have now accepted the draft, but I added a {{T|refimprove}} as the referencing is still subpar despite a notable subject. Somepinkdude (talk) 22:05, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
::@Somepinkdude Thanks so much! I'll start adding more citations to improve the page. Jimmylizama17 (talk) 22:30, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

House of Enríquez (Revert)

Hey, I noticed you reverted my edit that added a source. I understand that the source was another tertiary source, which is not ideal. However, there are very little English resources about houses of nobility in Spain. I figured that an ''okay'' source was better than no source.

Best regards,

Naya Writes Naya Writes (talk) 14:46, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
:{{ping|Naya Writes}} Please take another look at the edits. My AntiVandal key mappings were wrong, and I made several reverts I have just undone. Although your edit has been reinstated, please see WP:NOELBODY ↗. Even if the references are good, they should all be within <nowiki><ref></nowiki> tags. Thank you for pointing out the mistake. Somepinkdude (talk) 00:19, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation ↗: Mr. Jaggers ↗ has been accepted

<div style="border:solid 1px #57DB1E; background:var(--background-color-success-subtle, #dff2eb); padding: 0.5em 1em; color: inherit; margin: 1.5em; width: 90%;">50px|left ↗ '''Mr. Jaggers ↗, 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 '''Start-Class''', which is recorded on its talk page ↗. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop ↗ over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme ↗ to see how you can improve the article.

<div class="autoconfirmed-show">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.</div>

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the '''[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/New_question&withJS=MediaWiki:AFCHD-wizard.js&page=Mr._Jaggers 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 ↗.

Thanks again, and happy editing!
Aesurias (talk) 07:52, 5 November 2025 (UTC)</div>

Undo

<ref name="Cision2024">{{cite news | title = Artificial Solutions changes name to Teneo AI AB | url = https://news.cision.com/teneo-ai-ab/r/artificial-solutions-changes-name-to-teneo-ai-ab,c4024933 | work = Cision News | date = 2024-08-19 | access-date = 2025-11-06 }}</ref> Marangse (talk) 18:39, 6 November 2025 (UTC)
:@Marangse if I'm correct, I rollbacked the edit by mistake and reverted it already. If I haven't, you have my permission to undo my revert. I was pressing keys with nothing in my queue when your edit appeared, and my keystrokes caused rollback. I apologize if I have confused you, but your edit was clearly constructive. Somepinkdude (talk) 00:13, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

Reversing Editing on the Sequoyah Fuels Corporation

You recently reversed everything I did to this article. You called it not constructive. And I would like to ask why? What was your specific problem, so I can fix it and keep what was good. I added information to what was already present based on credible sources. Also, the Uranium processing plant section would arguable be better for readers in the form of a timeline so that it could be easier to follow and understand without taking away important details. Thank you and I look forward to your explanation for removing my content and hope we can come to a conclusion. Lillian136 (talk) 21:25, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

:@Lillian136 I'm very sorry, this was a misclick in AntiVandal. I have avoided reverting the edits, as someone else has edited the page, but you are free to add back whichever content I mistakenly removed. Somepinkdude (talk) 15:12, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

Your Articles for Creation ↗ review on V (imageboard) ↗

<div style="border:solid 1px #9accf6;background:#f1f9ff; padding: 0.5em 1em; color: #000; margin: 1.5em; width: 90%;">

50px|left ↗

Hello {{BASEPAGENAME}}. This is a reminder that your Articles for Creation ↗ review on V (imageboard) ↗ is still marked as ongoing for over forty-eight hours. After seventy-two hours, V (imageboard) ↗ will be returned to the review queue so that other reviewers may review the draft.

If you wish to continue reviewing the draft but need more time before the bot returns it to the review queue, you can place {{tlx|bots|deny{{=}}TenshiBot}} on the draft so you can continue your review. Also, if you do not want to receive these notifications, you can place the same template on your talk page. TenshiBot (talk) 09:39, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

</div>

Any tips on finding some sort of a decent secondary source for the Rose of Alabama?

Title explains my question, thanks for the quick response on the article being reviewed & the comment on verifiability being fine, by the way. Squogg (talk) 18:13, 17 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>

Rollback reversion

I made an edit on the 1980-81 Australian region tropical cyclone season page, then you undid it, then one minute later you put it back, and the same thing happened with a warning made by you on my talk page. What happened? And should I be worried if this counts towards a 3 strikes type thing I don’t know about? Lavabite (talk) 16:34, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
:@Lavabite No, you shouldn't. I was being a bit careless in AntiVandal, a semiautomatic editing tool, and ended up making a lot of misclicks. Whenever this happens, I usually revert myself and delete the automatically-created warning on the talk page. Yes, there is a four-strikes system, but in cases like this it doesn't count. Somepinkdude (talk) 17:34, 23 November 2025 (UTC)

Please don't revert constructive comments

Thanks. ~2025-34565-53 ↗ (talk) 22:47, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

Why the revert on Nude wedding ↗?

Marnanel (talk) 02:22, 26 November 2025 (UTC)
:{{ping|Marnanel}} You were adding a giant image at the beginning, which obstructed the view of the text and did not constructively contribute to the page. If you want to include the page text, you can put it in a blockquote ↗. Somepinkdude (talk) 02:24, 26 November 2025 (UTC)
::Thank you! I just looked at my edit on desktop and saw how huge the image was. It looked better on mobile. I've put it back in again with a size set in the wikitext. Marnanel (talk) 03:05, 3 December 2025 (UTC)

Hi

Hello, dude. I just wanted to drop by and make amends with my own past erratic/hostile behavior towards you when you rightfully reverted a "notorious" (literally) LOL edit by me in an edit about a town in Argentina's Neuquén. I'm truly sorry as I get more immersed into WP and its rules, that I made sarcastic and edgy comments from a completely vindictive/impulsive POV, and that you had the gallantry to avoid and ignore my unfair remarks. I do beg your pardon, and thank you for your work here. I wish you a good year's end. :-) Cheers. CoryGlee 15:06, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

About a user you have warned

{{noping|ジ・アスペルガーゼット}} is an LTA (WP:LTA/BULUT ↗). I don't think they speak English (they write on their talk pages only in Japanese) and warning them is pointless. Just report them to AIV and SRG. SuperPianoMan9167 (talk) 02:50, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer granted

right|130px ↗
Hello. Your account has been granted the "{{mono|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

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:37, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted

right|80px ↗
Hi Somepinkdude, 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!  HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:03, 21 December 2025 (UTC)

J.W. Roth

Hi, Somepinkdude, and thanks for reviewing the J.W. Roth draft ↗. I think it may have suffered from unintentional citekill ↗; I used several references that supported the assertions of the article and likely obscured the references that provided extensive coverage of J.W. Roth via independent, reliable sources:

''Billboard ↗''<ref>{{Cite web |last=Brown |first=Eric Renner |date=2025-06-23 |title=VENU Founder JW Roth On Building the Future of Premium Concerts: ‘I Have to Be Hands-On On Crazy Concepts’ |url=https://www.billboard.com/pro/venu-founder-jw-roth-building-future-premium-concerts/ |access-date=2025-08-19 |website=Billboard |language=en-US}}</ref>

''The Denver Post ↗<ref>{{Cite web |last=Wenzel |first=John |date=2022-04-06 |title=Developer of $40M Sunset amphitheater aims to pull Colorado Springs out of its entertainment desert when venue opens next year |url=https://www.denverpost.com/2022/04/06/sunset-amphitheater-venue-colorado-springs-opening/ |access-date=2022-11-01 |website=The Denver Post |language=en-US}}</ref>''

''5280 ↗'' <ref>{{Cite web |last=Lambert |first=Carly |date=2025-06-01 |title=The Man Behind Colorado Springs’ Ford Amphitheater |url=https://www.5280.com/the-man-behind-colorado-springs-ford-amphitheater/ |access-date=2025-09-08 |website=5280 ↗ |language=en}}</ref>

''Marketplace ↗'' <ref name=":1">{{Cite web |title=Concert venues in mid-sized American cities might be the next big thing in live music |url=https://www.marketplace.org/story/2025/02/12/concert-venues-in-mid-sized-american-cities-might-be-the-next-big-thing-in-live-music |access-date=2025-04-23 |website=Marketplace ↗ (Public Radio International) |language=en}}</ref>

''Pollstar ↗'' <ref>{{Cite web |last=Borba |first=Ryan |date=2025-05-16 |title='Is It World Class?' (And Maybe A Little Crazy): VENU's JW Roth Looks To Reinvent The Amphitheater Model With $1.3B (And Counting) - Pollstar News |url=https://news.pollstar.com/2025/05/16/is-it-world-class-and-maybe-a-little-crazy-venus-jw-roth-looks-to-reinvent-the-amphitheater-model/ |access-date=2025-12-22 |language=en-US}}</ref>

There are many other ''Billboard'', ''Denver Post'' and ''Pollstar'' references, as well as less substantial coverage related to Roth's first companies, Disaboom ↗, and MaxMusic. There's also a ton of Colorado Springs coverage, which I did not include.

If you would give the draft another look, I would appreciate it. I will resubmit it if not; I know that many reviewers do not re-review drafts.

Thanks, JSFarman2 (talk) 04:27, 22 December 2025 (UTC){{reflist-talk}}
:@User:JSFarman2 resubmitting your draft is definitely acceptable, but usually one reviewer will try not to review the same article twice. Keeping references that support the text is fine, even if the coverage is marginal, so you can reinstate whichever ones were useful in adding verifiability. WP:CITEKILL ↗ is more for articles where too many references, redundant to each other, are placed in front of one statement, or the editor is adding unencyclopedic references such as loosely related topics and works by the subject. If your references are not blatantly unencyclopedic and you are not using references to "puff up" your article's appearance, you should be fine. Somepinkdude (talk) 04:38, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

:OK! Thanks for your speedy reply. JSFarman2 (talk) 05:36, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

Temporary account IP viewer granted

right|80px|alt=The temporary account IP viewer logo, composed of the Wikipedia globe with a user and an IP address ↗
Hello, Somepinkdude. Per your request, your account has been granted ↗ {{mono|temporary-account-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 must 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 one or more IP address ↗es (using the CIDR notation ↗ format).

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! Sohom (talk) 18:07, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

Explaining reverts

I came across your recent rollback ↗ on Tommy Cooper ↗ and wanted to remind you that rollbacks without edit summaries are only appropriate under a limited set of criteria ↗ (none of which seem to apply to the edit you were reverting ↗). jlwoodwa (talk) 02:34, 23 December 2025 (UTC)
:Sorry, I reverted it without checking the source. It turns out the source actually did support the content, but the first appearence was a BLP vio covered up by an unrelated reference. I could also program my AntiVandal to give a summary like "Rv unsourced" instead of reverting without explanation and giving a warning. I'll be more careful next time. (ping @User:Jlwoodwa). Somepinkdude (talk) 03:19, 23 December 2025 (UTC)
:It also looked like tendentious editing since they had added the same content without the source and got reverted. Somepinkdude (talk) 03:21, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Hi, you left a comment saying I didn't cite a proper source. I would like to know if you referring to everything I cited or certain ones in particular? Intotheunknownn (talk) 04:37, 23 December 2025 (UTC)
:It looks like you are talking about this edit ↗. I can't see what you mean, as you cited no sources whatsoever, and then added false reference marks such as [1], [2], etc. Normally this either indicates plagiarism or AI, which are both prohibited. The text you had written also included losts of WP:WEASEL ↗ and WP:PEACOCK ↗, ins phrases such as "viewed as a stronghold of identity that was a resisting force in urban renewal efforts", so it seemed reasonable to expect the material to be AI-generated as well. Somepinkdude (talk) 14:27, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Rollback reversion again? Removing sources?

I am another person who has just experienced "rollbacks without edit summaries". I was going to continue adding some references and everything was set back to the original (including [citation needed]), with the labels "AntiVandal" and "Rollback" attached - what is going on? In addition I got an edit conflict when I tried to fix the references and add some more references. What's the rush?
:I was just about to give up. Then I read this page and it looks like it's happening a lot. If people can't use these things properly should they be allowed to have them? --Maracelsus (talk) 22:42, 23 December 2025 (UTC)
:Sorry, that was also a mistake. I have re-reverted the edit again. I pressed a button by mistake, and then forgot to undo my revert -- it's as easy as that to make an edit mistake with one-click rollback. I'll try to be more careful. If you received a warning generated by the AntiVandal, you are also free to remove that. (ping @User:Maracelsus)Somepinkdude (talk) 22:46, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Filing SPIs

Hi there, when you file a new SPI report, please use the form at WP:SPI ↗ rather than doing it manually - there are some important parts of the template that need to be added, and the form there will handle this for you. -- asilvering (talk) 23:14, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Speedy deletion ↗ of :Claes neeb ↗

48px|left|alt=Warning icon|link= ↗
The page :Claes neeb ↗ has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section R2 of the criteria for speedy deletion ↗, because it was a redirect from the article namespace ↗ to a different namespace ↗ except the Category ↗, Template ↗, Wikipedia ↗, Help ↗, or Portal ↗ namespaces.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines ↗. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, you may contact the {{Querylink|Special:Log|qs=type=delete&page=Claes+neeb|deleting administrator}}, or if you have already done so, you may open a discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion review ↗.  '''''L'''''iz '''''Read!''''' ↗ '''''Talk!''''' 23:50, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

reverted

Hello Somepinkdude, the edit to Tree (graph theory) ↗ was not promotional: the page simply lists all irreducible trees. Could you clarify the issue? Best regards. Gloumouth1 (talk) 16:14, 27 December 2025 (UTC)
:(ping @User:Glomouth1) Maybe I should have explained more, but your edit simply wasn't appropriate. Firstly, Wikipedia does not put external links in the body as you did (see WP:NOELBODY ↗, WP:CLICKHERE ↗). Second, you put it in a completely unrelated section (about types of tree graphs). Your username also gives the impression that you represent the website, which is against the username policy as a promotional username. Somepinkdude (talk) 14:43, 28 December 2025 (UTC)

New pages patrol January–February 2026 Backlog drive

{| style="border: 1px solid #eaecf0; background: #f0feff; color: #202122; padding: 1.5em; margin-bottom: 1.5em; border-radius: 6px; box-shadow: 0 1px 4px rgba(0,0,0,0.08);"
| style="vertical-align: middle; font-size: 150%; font-weight: 600;" | January–February 2026 Backlog Drive ↗ | New pages patrol ↗
| rowspan=3 | right|100px ↗
|-
|
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 ↗'''.

|-
|colspan=2 style="font-size:90%; color:#54595d; padding-top:15px;"|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) 17:23, 27 December 2025 (UTC)


== Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot ==

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
{| class="wikitable sortable" border="1" style="text-align: center;"
|-
! scope="col" | Views/Day
! scope="col" | Quality
! scope="col" | Title
! scope="col" | Tagged with…

|- style="text-align: center; height: 30px;"
| style="text-align: right;" | {{formatnum:112}}
| {{Hs|2.0}} 60 px|alt=Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C|link=Fiat Seicento|Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C ↗
| style="text-align: left;" | Fiat Seicento ↗ (talk ↗)
| Add sources

|- style="text-align: center; height: 30px;"
| style="text-align: right;" | {{formatnum:39}}
| {{Hs|3.0}} 60 px|alt=Quality: High, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: GA|link=Fiat 1800 and 2100|Quality: High, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: GA ↗
| style="text-align: left;" | Fiat 1800 and 2100 ↗ (talk ↗)
| Add sources

|- style="text-align: center; height: 30px;"
| style="text-align: right;" | {{formatnum:107}}
| {{Hs|3.0}} 60 px|alt=Quality: High, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: GA|link=Fiat Stilo|Quality: High, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: GA ↗
| style="text-align: left;" | Fiat Stilo ↗ (talk ↗)
| Add sources

|- style="text-align: center; height: 30px;"
| style="text-align: right;" | {{formatnum:166}}
| {{Hs|2.0}} 60 px|alt=Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C|link=Fiat Cinquecento|Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C ↗
| style="text-align: left;" | Fiat Cinquecento ↗ (talk ↗)
| Add sources

|- style="text-align: center; height: 30px;"
| style="text-align: right;" | {{formatnum:350}}
| {{Hs|2.0}} 60 px|alt=Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C|link=Wolfe Glick|Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C ↗
| style="text-align: left;" | Wolfe Glick ↗ (talk ↗)
| Add sources

|- style="text-align: center; height: 30px;"
| style="text-align: right;" | {{formatnum:81}}
| {{Hs|2.0}} 60 px|alt=Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: B|link=Economy car|Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: B ↗
| style="text-align: left;" | Economy car ↗ (talk ↗)
| Add sources

|- style="text-align: center; height: 30px;"
| style="text-align: right;" | {{formatnum:330}}
| {{Hs|3.0}} 60 px|alt=Quality: High, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: FA|link=Smith special counsel investigation|Quality: High, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: FA ↗
| style="text-align: left;" | Smith special counsel investigation ↗ (talk ↗)
| Cleanup

|- style="text-align: center; height: 30px;"
| style="text-align: right;" | {{formatnum:567}}
| {{Hs|2.0}} 60 px|alt=Quality: Medium, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: B|link=Singapore Airlines fleet|Quality: Medium, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: B ↗
| style="text-align: left;" | Singapore Airlines fleet ↗ (talk ↗)
| Cleanup

|- style="text-align: center; height: 30px;"
| style="text-align: right;" | {{formatnum:50}}
| {{Hs|3.0}} 60 px|alt=Quality: High, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: FA|link=History of social democracy|Quality: High, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: FA ↗
| style="text-align: left;" | History of social democracy ↗ (talk ↗)
| Cleanup

|- style="text-align: center; height: 30px;"
| style="text-align: right;" | {{formatnum:1374}}
| {{Hs|2.0}} 60 px|alt=Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: B|link=San Francisco International Airport|Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: B ↗
| style="text-align: left;" | San Francisco International Airport ↗ (talk ↗)
| Expand

|- style="text-align: center; height: 30px;"
| style="text-align: right;" | {{formatnum:476}}
| {{Hs|2.0}} 60 px|alt=Quality: Medium, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: B|link=Fiat 500 (2007)|Quality: Medium, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: B ↗
| style="text-align: left;" | Fiat 500 (2007) ↗ (talk ↗)
| Expand

|- style="text-align: center; height: 30px;"
| style="text-align: right;" | {{formatnum:2937}}
| {{Hs|3.0}} 60 px|alt=Quality: High, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: GA|link=Alzheimer's disease|Quality: High, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: GA ↗
| style="text-align: left;" | Alzheimer's disease ↗ (talk ↗)
| Expand

|- style="text-align: center; height: 30px;"
| style="text-align: right;" | {{formatnum:172}}
| {{Hs|2.0}} 60 px|alt=Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: B|link=Speculative realism|Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: B ↗
| style="text-align: left;" | Speculative realism ↗ (talk ↗)
| Unencyclopaedic

|- style="text-align: center; height: 30px;"
| style="text-align: right;" | {{formatnum:588}}
| {{Hs|2.0}} 60 px|alt=Quality: Medium, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: B|link=1960s|Quality: Medium, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: B ↗
| style="text-align: left;" | 1960s ↗ (talk ↗)
| Unencyclopaedic

|- style="text-align: center; height: 30px;"
| style="text-align: right;" | {{formatnum:725}}
| {{Hs|2.0}} 60 px|alt=Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C|link=New Taipei City|Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C ↗
| style="text-align: left;" | New Taipei City ↗ (talk ↗)
| Unencyclopaedic

|- style="text-align: center; height: 30px;"
| style="text-align: right;" | {{formatnum:84}}
| {{Hs|2.0}} 60 px|alt=Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C|link=Leadership core|Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C ↗
| style="text-align: left;" | Leadership core ↗ (talk ↗)
| Merge

|- style="text-align: center; height: 30px;"
| style="text-align: right;" | {{formatnum:603}}
| {{Hs|2.0}} 60 px|alt=Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: B|link=Lobbying|Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: B ↗
| style="text-align: left;" | Lobbying ↗ (talk ↗)
| Merge

|- style="text-align: center; height: 30px;"
| style="text-align: right;" | {{formatnum:3537}}
| {{Hs|3.0}} 60 px|alt=Quality: High, Assessed class: GA, Predicted class: GA|link=Hollow Knight|Quality: High, Assessed class: GA, Predicted class: GA ↗
| style="text-align: left;" | Hollow Knight ↗ (talk ↗)
| Merge

|- style="text-align: center; height: 30px;"
| style="text-align: right;" | {{formatnum:165}}
| {{Hs|2.0}} 60 px|alt=Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C|link=History of China (1976–1989)|Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C ↗
| style="text-align: left;" | History of China (1976–1989) ↗ (talk ↗)
| Wikify

|- style="text-align: center; height: 30px;"
| style="text-align: right;" | {{formatnum:11}}
| {{Hs|3.0}} 60 px|alt=Quality: High, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: GA|link=Przemysław Wipler|Quality: High, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: GA ↗
| style="text-align: left;" | Przemysław Wipler ↗ (talk ↗)
| Wikify

|- style="text-align: center; height: 30px;"
| style="text-align: right;" | {{formatnum:90}}
| {{Hs|2.0}} 60 px|alt=Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C|link=Scientific realism|Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C ↗
| style="text-align: left;" | Scientific realism ↗ (talk ↗)
| Wikify

|- style="text-align: center; height: 30px;"
| style="text-align: right;" | {{formatnum:4}}
| {{Hs|2.0}} 60 px|alt=Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C|link=Lake Phelps Site|Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C ↗
| style="text-align: left;" | Lake Phelps Site ↗ (talk ↗)
| Orphan

|- style="text-align: center; height: 30px;"
| style="text-align: right;" | {{formatnum:8}}
| {{Hs|2.0}} 60 px|alt=Quality: Medium, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: C|link=Syuejia Tzu Chi Temple|Quality: Medium, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: C ↗
| style="text-align: left;" | Syuejia Tzu Chi Temple ↗ (talk ↗)
| Orphan

|- style="text-align: center; height: 30px;"
| style="text-align: right;" | {{formatnum:34}}
| {{Hs|1.0}} 60 px|alt=Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start|link=Shamir Optical Industry|Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start ↗
| style="text-align: left;" | Shamir Optical Industry ↗ (talk ↗)
| Orphan

|- style="text-align: center; height: 30px;"
| style="text-align: right;" | {{formatnum:117}}
| {{Hs|2.0}} 60 px|alt=Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: C|link=Fiat 600 (2023)|Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: C ↗
| style="text-align: left;" | Fiat 600 (2023) ↗ (talk ↗)
| Stub

|- style="text-align: center; height: 30px;"
| style="text-align: right;" | {{formatnum:4}}
| {{Hs|1.0}} 60 px|alt=Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start|link=Dlagnya Rocks|Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start ↗
| style="text-align: left;" | Dlagnya Rocks ↗ (talk ↗)
| Stub

|- style="text-align: center; height: 30px;"
| style="text-align: right;" | {{formatnum:3}}
| {{Hs|1.0}} 60 px|alt=Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start|link=Gregory Ibe|Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start ↗
| style="text-align: left;" | Gregory Ibe ↗ (talk ↗)
| Stub

|- style="text-align: center; height: 30px;"
| style="text-align: right;" | {{formatnum:14}}
| {{Hs|3.0}} 60 px|alt=Quality: High, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: GA|link=Panchagarh Sadar Upazila|Quality: High, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: GA ↗
| style="text-align: left;" | Panchagarh Sadar Upazila ↗ (talk ↗)
| Stub

|- style="text-align: center; height: 30px;"
| style="text-align: right;" | {{formatnum:31}}
| {{Hs|1.0}} 60 px|alt=Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start|link=Barradão|Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start ↗
| style="text-align: left;" | Barradão ↗ (talk ↗)
| Stub

|- style="text-align: center; height: 30px;"
| style="text-align: right;" | {{formatnum:15}}
| {{Hs|2.0}} 60 px|alt=Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C|link=Debiganj Upazila|Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C ↗
| style="text-align: left;" | Debiganj Upazila ↗ (talk ↗)
| Stub
|}
''Note:'' All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have ''feedback'' on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page ↗. Thanks from {{User0|Nettrom}}, SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 17:45, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

AfC decline of Draft:Crow's Theatre ↗

Hello, I saw your decline of this article via Wikiproject Theatre. I have made some small improvements to the sourcing, but I think you should take another look at the sourcing already there. This is a stub but notability is pretty clearly established. I think you are mistaken regarding routine and "tangential" coverage. The Star article on the opening of the theater is well beyond routine, and the coverage of the plays is not "tangential": this is a theater company, that is the core of their operations, which is generating significant coverage and for which they're winning major awards. BrechtBro (talk) 22:07, 4 January 2026 (UTC)
:I revisited it and refs #3, #4, and #10 seem to provide SIGCOV, so I have accepted the draft. However, those sources are still not the ones about plays or award rankings, which I still do not believe to constitute notability. Unlike WP:NBIO ↗, no business is presumed notable for having a certain class of award, and for the plays, an argument could be made that notability should not be inherited ↗ from them. Somepinkdude (talk) 15:33, 5 January 2026 (UTC)
::ty. I'm not claiming notability is inherited from plays, just that a production isn't tangential. Especially when taken together with the pieces that are more directly sigcov, those pieces often contain discussion of the theater that can provide a fuller picture of notability. BrechtBro (talk) 17:36, 5 January 2026 (UTC)
:ping @User:BrechtBro. Somepinkdude (talk) 15:34, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Balram Iyer ↗

Greetings. Your close here appears to be a bad one--the article was not G7 deleted, it was moved to Balram (singer) ↗ by the author. They may have requested a G7 on the resulting redirect at the original title, but that of course is not a valid reason close the AfD. --Finngall talk ↗ 02:18, 5 January 2026 (UTC)
: Sorry @User:Finngall. Most of the time, articles are G6 deleted when moved, not G7, and I forgot to check that possibility. Of course, I couldn't see what was there on the deletion template, and the admin wasn't being very helpful by adding the boilerplate G7 message. Somepinkdude (talk) 03:52, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Edits to Duo Security page

Hi, thanks for the feedback on the draft of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Duo_Security
I removed two of the funding rounds as you mentioned and I added two additional references to articles that are in-depth, reliable, secodary and independent sources (CRN and Dark Reading, two independent tech publications)

Please feel free to make any changes you haveto improve and approve the page. Thanks again, Julio
Julio Fernandez (talk) 21:52, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Incorrect "problems relating to introduction as the host of SNL"

Hello and thanks for your feedback on the Draft page for Liz Patrick, in which you wrote '''"Still has WP:BLP1E ↗ problems relating to her introduction as the host of SNL." 22:03, 20 December 2025 (UTC).'''

Please note: This person has never been the host of the show. She is the director of the show for the past five years. There is no mention of her hosting, which is a talent role. Just wanted to clear that up since it was mentioned as a reason for rejecting the draft. That said, if you have any suggestions for how to improve this page, I welcome the advice. Patrick's peers' pages have far fewer citation and notable facts, yet are published. I don't know what I'm missing here BadMachine12 (talk) 00:13, 6 January 2026 (UTC)
:@User:BadMachine12 I don't know why I wrote "host", I understand now that "director" was more accurate. I still think the BLP1E argument was accurate, however, because a majority of the articles were about Liz Patrick becoming director of SNL, which wasn't really the type of sustained coverage required for notability. As a previous reviewer reported, a fair number of these were also interviews, which couldn't establish notability either. Sorry if I confused you. Somepinkdude (talk) 00:21, 6 January 2026 (UTC)
::Appreciate the quick reply. I would like to better understand what constitutes sustained coverage vs. type of coverage. Looking at many pages from the List of female film and television directors, many have fewer credits, no notable accomplishments. Whereas Patrick directed over 2,000 episodes of the Ellen Show, and is only the second female director in SNL history.
::And looking at past SNL directors like Paul Miller (TV director) ↗ I cannot see how a sparse page aligns better. Thanks in advance. BadMachine12 (talk) 00:34, 6 January 2026 (UTC)
:::@User:BadMachine12 Chances are that those directors meet WP:NDIRECTOR ↗ criteria 3, or played a major role in creating a notable set of works (obviously, SNL is one of those). I wasn't sure if Liz Patrick would pass that criterion, but I thought the article needed more non-interview sources and more sources seperate from that one incident. As it is, I think the article does indicate notability, so it should probably end up accepted this time around (although I can't review the same article twice). Somepinkdude (talk) 00:47, 6 January 2026 (UTC)
::::here's hoping! thanks for the insights. BadMachine12 (talk) 01:00, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

Help please

Kindly review other two Villages ↗ Draft:Mohina ↗ and Draft:Kamarkuchi ↗. SaTnamZIN (talk) 08:33, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

Discussion on List of best-selling books

I've started a discussion on talk:List of best-selling books ↗ under the heading "Blanket ban on "books of a religious, ideological, philosophical or political nature"" that you may be interested in. DervotNum4 (talk) 22:35, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Biting

I asked you ↗ why you issued a vandalism warning to a newcomer for what looks like a good-faith edit. You have continued to edit, but didn't respond.

Further investigation revealed strange discrepancies in this incident. You tagged ↗ the draft as G11 blatant advertising, but left an edit summary that has nothing to do with promotional content. You left ↗ a G3 pure vandalism warning on the newcomer's user talk page.

Numerous complaints have been made about sloppy and overzealous reverts. Someone said ↗ a few weeks ago "Then I read this page and it looks like it's happening a lot. If people can't use these things properly should they be allowed to have them?" I urge you to take far more care when labeling edits as vandalism. Uhoj (talk) 21:04, 10 January 2026 (UTC)
:@User:Uhoj sorry about not responding. I had written a response, and closed my tab by mistake before hitting "Publish changes", although that's hardly an excuse. As for the g11, you were right that I didn't intend to mark it as spam. I was quickly G11-ing a lot of promotional drafts at Special:NewPages ↗ using a copy-pasted template, and copy-pasted it in even when what I meant was a G3. As for the draft itself, it could have gone both ways, so although vandalism was a possibility, I probably should not have tagged it to begin with, and I'll be more careful next time. Somepinkdude (talk) 02:57, 11 January 2026 (UTC)
::You say "it could have gone both ways". Please explain how the draft is arguably vandalism. You said ↗ that it "is clearly an attack, which is vandalism." What subject is the draft disparaging or threatening? What evidence is there that it's deliberately intended to obstruct or defeat the project's purpose? What policy says that an attack constitutes vandalism? I am concerned that you're definition of vandalism may be significantly different from the one ↗ that's generally agreed on. Uhoj (talk) 17:04, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Inquiry

Hello Somepinkdude, it appears you left a comment on my AfC page, Draft:First Kazakh–Dzungar War ↗ about if it can be a hoax. I am not here to defend anything, i am here if you have any questions to ask about it. - The Khan of the universe and the Hoofed animals. (talk) 14:08, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

How rude

how rude ~2026-36475-0 ↗ (talk) 15:15, 17 January 2026 (UTC)
:your edit ↗ is clearly vandalism ("woop woop"?), as well as a BLP violation. It is also editorializing. Somepinkdude (talk) 15:17, 17 January 2026 (UTC)
::you suck ~2026-36475-0 ↗ (talk) 15:26, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Sex (book) ↗

Please template vandals? It helps to get them blocked. Four warnings are recommended before reporting. See wp:warn#Multi-level templates ↗. Cheers Adakiko (talk) 20:08, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Andy Muller Jr: Denial for AoC

Hello @Somepinkdude,

My submission for '''Andy Muller Jr's''' article of creation (AoC) was declined on 1/17/26 because of the page referencing more about the Reading and Northern Railroad rather than Mr. Muller himself. With respect, after multiple declines from other moderators who cited similar issues, I made sure that > 75% of my references were specific to Muller's interests - with or without the railroad. Allow me to provide my work...

'''References & Support'''

'''NOTE: The numbers I'm providing are the citations I used. Please refer to the page for continuity and to verify my claims.'''

2) This supported Muller's college education, coin collecting > entrepreneurial efforts, and teaching at a public school. '''(No mention of the railroad)'''

3) RBMN & Coal: In the article, it lists Muller's contributions as a driving force that allowed for the railroad to expand its export efforts.

4) Andy's award for "Most Influential ''Leader''" '''(not the railroad itself)'''.

5) Please see the awards and recognition section to support the introduction where the article focuses on a bridge project in Carbon County. This article directly names Muller as being the individual who spearheaded the project & coordinated the infrastructure. This is why the Regional of the Year was granted to RBMN. Not because of RBMN itself (this was a coordinated project with the state). RBMN was a beneficiary of the efforts FROM Muller's work behind the scenes.

6) Information about Andy's mother, additional support for coin collecting as a passion in his youth, and further support for his teaching background and college career. '''(No mention of the railroad)'''

7) Progression of his interests from coin collecting > establishing his coin business. This eventually evolved into precious metals trading. '''(No mention of the railroad)'''

8) Wildlife conservation for Red Creek Wildlife. He is listed as a primary donor for the establishment which supports another aspect of his personal life. '''(No mention of the railroad)'''

9) This ''Trains'' (magazine) write-up has a full history of the Reading & Northern. But, the points referenced about acquiring additional branch lines, mileage expansion, and building supporting infrastructure near the coal producers specifically points out that Muller was a sole driver of all of these efforts. Yes, it is about the railroad, but it proves that Andy himself was instrumental in these efforts. No Andy = no progress made.

10) Supports No.9 above to make sure the point was well referenced

11) The quote I provided from the Reading Eagle specifically names Muller's efforts, again, as the primary reason that RBMN has had the success it did. Even if this is, arguably, 50-50 between Muller and the railroad, it isn't JUST about the railroad.

11-15) Passenger Locations: The majority (i.e., >50%) of the articles list Muller as the reason these efforts existed. The fact that a railroad was involved does not negate his influence.

14) The Chairman Award from Carbon County. '''(No mention of the railroad for this bullet-point. However, the railroad is mentioned in the article for add'l context)'''

18) The Heritage Rail Award for Preservation: This may seem like it is for Muller's railroad. But, please read the quote I pulled. It is specific to Muller. Most people would not go deeper than this. But, if you follow the next breadcrumb, the Heritage Rail Alliance focuses on Muller's contributions to restore a steam locomotive (the 2102), the methods Muller used to rebuild it, and the PERSONAL cost of restoration. Yes, it is a railroad object, but Muller's work is the focus.

It is with high confidence that I believe my work is in alignment with Wikipedia's standards for an AoC regarding a living person. If this is still not satisfactory, please allow me to direct you to a page which has similar structure but has been accepted: Henry Posner III - Wikipedia ↗

If you can guide me as to why Mr. Posner's page is allowed and why Andy Mullers is not, that may help me understand my shortcomings. It may also allow me to elaborate further.

I thank you for your time.

```` RBMNML (talk) 22:03, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
:@User:RBMNML, you have added exactly 4 sources since the last decline (#7, #8, #11, and #18), and none of them seem to indicate notability (the first two are trivial mentions and non-independent, the 3rd source is a trivia mention, and the fourth is a non-notable award). You are free to contact the previous reviewer, but I would agree that this version ↗ was in a declinable state. I'm also concerned that you might have written this comment with AI, as the four backticks are indicative of LLM edits. Somepinkdude (talk) 22:18, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
::Thank you for the clarification. This is helpful.
::I’d like to address the points raised and ensure my submission is defended appropriately and in regards to Wikipedia's standards...
::'''On source additions:'''
::While four sources were added since the prior decline (#7, #8, #11, #18), the draft as a whole includes multiple '''independent, secondary sources''' that provide '''non‑trivial coverage''' of Andy Muller Jr. as a subject. Notability is not cumulative by count, but established when several reliable sources offer significant discussion.
::'''On independence and triviality:'''
::* '''#7''' is not company-published and not industry-controlled. It names Muller directly in substantive context.
::* '''#8''' supports verifiable aspects of personal life and civic involvement. While it is not a primary notability driver, it does strengthen biographical completeness.
::* '''#11''' is a regional newspaper. Regional and local coverage is commonly accepted when it provides meaningful discussion of the subject.
::* '''#18''' represents third-party recognition from an established preservation organization. I understand that awards alone do not confer notability, this source documents independent acknowledgment of individual contribution.
::'''On structure:'''
::I’ve reorganized the article to reduce institutional emphasis and foreground Muller’s biography, career progression, and independent public impact.
::'''On formatting and AI concerns:'''
::The formatting in my prior comment was based on an online resource which suggested using a code shortcut to digitally sign a reply. My apologies if this appeared automated.
::'''Conclusion:'''
::My goal is to ensure the draft meets policy standards cleanly and is easy for any reviewer to assess. If you have any additional insights, it is appreciated. RBMNML (talk) 23:18, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
:::I strongly believe this comment is wholly AI-generated. You aren't even attempting to refute my argument (For example, whether something is a "local newspaper" does not matter when it is a trivial mention, and source 7 is non-independent as an interview). I notice that you have created this article 3 times, and I also suspect that a COI could be at play. Please stop this "talk page bombing", or your comments will be collapsed. Somepinkdude (talk) 23:25, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
:::forgot to ping @User:RBMNML. Somepinkdude (talk) 23:26, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
::::I have nothing further of interest to add and I've stated my policy-oriented position as well as I can. I'll respond if any outstanding concerns arise. RBMNML (talk) 00:03, 19 January 2026 (UTC)
::@Somepinkdude Just a passerby comment, but the four backticks (`) aren't an AI sign, that's typically the key pressed with shift to get a tilde on most keyboards. Definitely a human error. Sarsenet•he/they•(talk) 03:31, 19 January 2026 (UTC)
:::::@User:Sarsenet I still suspected that the first comment was AI-edited, and the second one appears to be outright AI-generated. Note also that I looked over the user's contribs and they have a history of questionable AI edits. Somepinkdude (talk) 03:43, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

Top AfC Editor

{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;"
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align:top;" | 110px ↗

|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: bottom; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Articles for Creation Barnstar 2025 Top Editor'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: center; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | In 2025 you were one of the top AfC editors ↗, thank you! --Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 18:16, 21 January 2026 (UTC)
|}

Your nomination of Black rat ↗ has failed

Your good article nomination ↗ of the article Black rat ↗ has 20px|alt=|link= ↗ '''failed'''. See '''Talk:Black rat/GA1{{!}}the review page ↗''' for more information. If or when the reviewer's feedback has been addressed, you may nominate the article again.  Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Reconrabbit -- Reconrabbit (talk) 16:47, 5 February 2026 (UTC)

your comment

Hi! You left a comment on my page, but I think the issue is resolved and I did not mean to disturb you. I had a discussion here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#WindsorMaster47_and_Skild_AI ↗ here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:WindsorMaster47#February_2026 ↗, and removed quarantine. The page you tagged is neutral, I was not paid for it and it does not require clean up. I cleaned up everything. Abhinav Gupta ↗ Let me know if you have any question. I was about to leave wikipedia, it is my only edit. WindsorMaster47 (talk) 17:46, 8 February 2026 (UTC)
:@User:WindsorMaster47, it was probably a mistake, as I thought you were removing the Draft template in draftspace, but you were really editing in mainspace. You should be careful, however, about moving pages into mainspace that have been draftified recently. Somepinkdude (talk) 17:50, 8 February 2026 (UTC)
::@Somepinkdude I did not mean to disturb you. I was just confused about why two reliable sources I added were removed. Both sources state that the person is the Director of the AI Lab at Facebook. This was not intended to be promotional, only to reflect his job title. I only removed the quarantine because there were no objections to my response for a few days. WindsorMaster47 (talk) 17:55, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

?? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Workers%27_Party_of_Korea&diff=prev&oldid=1337308764. ~2026-86276-0 ↗ (talk) 18:00, 8 February 2026 (UTC)
:The editnotice on my talk page should explain this. I hit a wrong key and ended up reverting your edit, then I reverted myself to correct it. Somepinkdude (talk) 18:03, 8 February 2026 (UTC)
::@Somepinkdude no worries, I understand. I thought it was fine since nobody made any further comments. And because I do not edit wikipedia, others can edit it in the mainspace and draft does not disappear. WindsorMaster47 (talk) 18:28, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

February 2026

25px|alt=Information icon ↗ I noticed that a message you recently left to a newcomer may have been unduly harsh. Please remember not to bite the newcomers ↗. If you see others making a common mistake ↗, consider politely pointing out what they did wrong and showing them how to correct it. It may take some time, but it helps us retain new editors. Thank you. '''Zackmann''' (Talk to me ↗/What I been doing ↗) 18:17, 8 February 2026 (UTC)
:@User:Zackmann08, I have written on a few talk pages today. Which specific user are you talking about? Somepinkdude (talk) 18:19, 8 February 2026 (UTC)
::The one that I reverted... User talk:Rigved007. '''Zackmann''' (Talk to me ↗/What I been doing ↗) 18:20, 8 February 2026 (UTC)
:::Oops, maybe I shouldn't have AV'd that edit. I mistook it for talk page junk, and the difference between "Can I cute instagram post" and "Can I cite instagram post" is quite significant. I should have assumed ↗ that it was a typo, instead of spam. Somepinkdude (talk) 18:25, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

Kanuru heggadati edit reverts

hey
I don't think you have read the novel or watched this movie, just a basic google search will let u know that entire plot mentioned in the wiki article is wrong.
I will update the crct plot but I don't have time for now.
Untill then , I don't think having a wrong plot on a wiki page is not that smart of Wikipedia.
Plz look into this and reinstate my edits. Zu al faqr (talk) 03:43, 9 February 2026 (UTC)
:@User:Zu al faqr the plot may well have been inaccurate, but you can't just add "commentary" to articles. Maybe I should have explained better, but in this situation I would have blanked the plot section with an edit summary indicating it was inaccurate. I can see why plot summaries would be more prone to unsupported claims, given that they don't require sources, and thanks for helping fix this problem. Somepinkdude (talk) 04:12, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

Moving 2 articles from draftspace to mainspace

Hello @Somepinkdude, can you move Draft:Manon Bannerman ↗ to Manon Bannerman ↗ and Draft:Megan Skiendiel ↗ to Megan Skiendiel ↗ because this article been a few weeks to publishing an AFC to move to the mainspace, thank you. Octaviyanti Dwi Wahyurini (talk) 01:48, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

Link repair

Hi. I did a little repair on your link at :User_talk:Owld26#March_2026 ↗. I hope you don't mind. Joyous! Noise! ↗ 23:28, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

I wanna help

i wanna help Wikidude davo (talk) 00:10, 16 March 2026 (UTC)
:If you would like to be here to build an encyclopedia ↗, there are a few places to start, such as the newcomer tasks ↗. If you are wondering why your edits were reverted, that was because Wikipedia is not a forum ↗, and off-topic comments on talk pages are frowned upon, even in user talk space. Somepinkdude (talk) 00:14, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Draft I'm reviewing

You previously rejected the Piper Rubio draft, and it now looks like this ↗. Do you think it's properly sourced now? 🚂ThatTrainGuy1945 Peep peep! 21:55, 24 March 2026 (UTC)
:@User:ThatTrainGuy1945, I don't think notability has increased very much. The first source is about the FNAF movie and not the actor, and the second is an interview, which doesn't qualify for notability ↗. The other sources consist of two interviews, a list of Piper Rubio's advertisements, and this one ↗ which just might be notable. I'll leave it up to the next reviewer to see if this one source tips the balance, but the overall notability has not changed that much. Somepinkdude (talk) 22:46, 24 March 2026 (UTC)
::I was reviewing, so I was asking for your opinion. Thanks, 🚂ThatTrainGuy1945 Peep peep! 22:54, 24 March 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) 11:24, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Speedy deletion ↗ nomination of :Pe. Maniyarasan ↗

48px|left|alt=|link= ↗

A tag has been placed on :Pe. Maniyarasan ↗ requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R2 of the criteria for speedy deletion ↗, because it is a redirect from the article namespace ↗ to a different namespace ↗ except the Category ↗, Template ↗, Wikipedia ↗, Help ↗, or Portal ↗ namespaces.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may '''contest the nomination''' by visiting the page ↗ and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines ↗. 

John B123 (talk) 09:57, 13 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) 23:38, 14 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) 21:59, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

Please

don't do this ↗. There was nothing wrong with appellant seeking guidance on requesting unblock. Thanks. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:01, 5 June 2026 (UTC)
:I apologize for the mistaken revert. Somepinkdude (talk) 18:03, 5 June 2026 (UTC)
::No problem. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:36, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

You removed my response.

Hello.. you removed a response I posted on my own talk page saying it was AI generated. I wrote that response myself. It was addressing a content dispute about the Ika people article where my sourced edit was reverted. Can you please restore it or explain why a response I personally wrote was removed? Jeremiah uduak nome (talk) 17:25, 6 June 2026 (UTC)
::I have undone your edit ↗; sorry for the misidentification. Somepinkdude (talk) 17:28, 6 June 2026 (UTC)
:::Thank you & no problem. Jeremiah uduak nome (talk) 17:31, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

{{trout}}

Massive revert

On Myo Minn Soe ↗ if you identify a bad edit, revert THAT edit, do not simply revert a series of good edits to deal with one minor issue. You broke the page in multiple ways by mass reverting. '''Zackmann''' (Talk to me ↗/What I been doing ↗) 18:27, 7 June 2026 (UTC)
:Maybe I should have explained better. There was a long series of unsupported date changes starting with this edit, ↗, and I thought it would be too tedious to find and reverse each edit one by one. It turns out I massi vely underestimated the amount of editing that had gone on since then. I'll fix them manually later, when the vandalism DEFCON is not at level 2. Somepinkdude (talk) 18:33, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

Help

Hey there,

I am just writing to you here as I think you missed my reply to you regarding a user who has made AI edits. The link to the discussion is here Wikipedia:AI noticeboard#User: CotswoldCowboy ↗.

I just need help to remove their edits on Healthcare in England, as the page is protected. Thanks so much. ~2026-35041-12 ↗ (talk) 11:49, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

6daEXIt article rejection

I do not mean to be offensive, but I really have to say this, and I will say it as politely as I can. You rejected this article because it “appears to contain text generated by a large language model”. Now, this explanation is at least unfortunate and a sign of poor judgement because the draft is entirely written by humans and 0% LLMs! Not being able to recognize this simple fact is both an insult for the Wikipedia community and unfortunately for our entire species. The article was written following the guidelines of Wikipedia for being as neutral as possible, not nuanced and not promotional. The article was written by me, and me alone, after I interviewed current members of the ensemble. So, if you actually DO have any sort of meaningful feedback (and that means being specific about anything that seems bothering to you or anything that needs more elaboration), please feel free to share your thoughts and I will be happy to re-submit. Rejecting an article solely on the false and un-supported premise that is AI generated diminishes Wikipedia itself and all the brave volunteers that invest their time for the advancement of human knowledge. Finally, if you seem unable and incompetent to re-examine the draft, I kindly ask you to reassign the task to another reviewer. Thank you. * I do apologize for my tone, but this is to my opinion entirely and utterly unacceptable. Polite texts are NOT necessarily LLM generated. ~2026-35156-23 ↗ (talk) 14:24, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
:I'll give you some leeway for being a new user, but what you said is a clear personal attack ↗. I have tagged hundreds of AI pages for deletion, and this one is no different from all the others. Take two sentences for example: {{quote|The social dimension of collective improvisation holds a primary position in the ensemble’s identity, and decisions are taken in a democratic, non-hierarchical manner. The constant search for new timbral, rhythmic and textural possibilities are central for 6daEXIt, as is the purely social and political dimension of collective music-making.}}
This has all of WP:RO3 ↗, WP:SUPERFICIAL ↗, and WP:AILEGACY ↗. Even if you wrote all of that yourself, it has severe neutrality ↗ and sourcing ↗ issues, and would have been declined anyway. The lack of formatting does not help your case, and neither does the odd HTML comment included: {{quote|<nowiki>
</nowiki>}}.
The above comment appears to be an AI rephrasing of the standard AFC one: {{quote|<nowiki>
</nowiki>}}. Somepinkdude (talk | contribs ↗), ''in solidarity ↗'' 23:12, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

Requesting for an explanation for declining an article

Respected sir/mam,

I am writing this message to know why my article had been declined. And what should now I do, and after my action, what happens. Since, I am an new user, please tell me what to do, and what will happen after my action.

Yours faithfully,

EBENEZER-IND Ebenezer-IND (talk) 01:52, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
:Your article was declined because there are no independent sources ↗ to establish notability. An example of such sources would be a news article on the subject's career, or a biography written by someone unconnected with the subject. Once you have added at least three such sources ↗, try re-submitting the article. If you can't find those three sources, it might be time to choose a different subject. Somepinkdude (talk | contribs ↗), ''in solidarity ↗'' 15:57, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

Help BRIGHTBLACK MORNING LIGHT page accurate

Hey Volunteer, we are actually the band BRIGHTBLACK MORNING LIGHT who sae our page was sloppy in a few places. To be exact if you read the reports nobody in our band or the Founder ever cited Carlos Castaneda or Allen Ginsberg as a influence or spoke of those 2 to a reporter & twas written at WIKI wrongly many years. Also past-tense is also not accurate portrayals. The LA TIMES quote: "Closest to the Earth" should be prominent & was never at the page until today.. we dont know how to link that article yet is very much a alive LA TIMES link.
You will notice today we took away any 'past-tense' vocabulary because I am a Living Export, a Living Writer.
If you can link this fact we'd be helped also: "invited to open for Queen of England favorite Folk Singer VASHTI BUNYAN 1st California showbill which was in 2006." Such a fact really is positive & truthful. Other invitations include University of Cambridge England, University Stockholm Sweden, Cornell University & U.K. ALL TOMMORROWS PARTIES curated by 2009 re-union of the band MY BLOODY VALENTINE. ~2026-38226-00 ↗ (talk) 20:45, 5 July 2026 (UTC)
:# If you are a member of the band, use the article's talk page for edit requests ↗ instead of directly editing the page. See WP:COI ↗ for more information.
:#Your edit was reverted because of nonsensical additions like "{{tq|"MOST ROOTED TO THE EARTH" -LA TIMES & 1st Alabama born to sign to England for SongWriter products level"}}". Please fix issues like thsi ''before'' you request an edit. Thank you! Somepinkdude (talk | contribs ↗), ''in solidarity ↗'' 20:49, 5 July 2026 (UTC)

My edits

Just to clarify my edits you claimed that I was adding unsourced content, I wasn't. ~2026-36965-14 was the one that changed the retirement year from 1959 to 1960 and I was only restoring the original edit back to the way it was to what the source directly says. ~2026-38332-53 ↗ (talk) 21:35, 5 July 2026 (UTC)
:Very sorry {{ping|~2026-38332-53}}. It turns out ~2026-36965-14 ↗ is a persistant vandal and sockpuppeteer who has been vandalising pages related to EMD ↗ trains. In fact, I reported ↗ them for vandalism yesterday, but unfortunately received no response. I have therefore re-reported them to WP:ANI ↗ for a quick block. Thanks for notifying me! Somepinkdude (talk | contribs ↗), ''in solidarity ↗'' 16:51, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

Frank Epperson

@Somepinkdude I saw that you re-added the LLM deletion tag to the Frank Epperson ↗ article. I was the user who originally accepted the AfC, and once I saw that it had been nominated for deletion, I made major alterations to the article. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Frank_Epperson&diff=1362892401&oldid=1362720274 ↗

The user who had originally LLM PRODed it, @Kowal2701, told me it was okay to remove the LLM PROD tag https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Kowal2701#c-Kowal2701-20260706221700-EaglesFan37-20260706221000 ↗. Is there more that needs to be changed? EaglesFan37 (talk) 00:01, 7 July 2026 (UTC)
:Sorry, I saw the new AINB notice and assumed another round of LLMPROD was needed. In its fixed state, it's fine; I was just mass-prodding the creator's articles. I'll look over the others to make sure they haven't also been improved past pure AI. Somepinkdude (talk | contribs ↗), ''in solidarity ↗'' 00:39, 7 July 2026 (UTC)
::No worries! EaglesFan37 (talk) 00:45, 7 July 2026 (UTC)