User Talk: Whyiseverythingalreadyused

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

{{User:Whyiseverythingalreadyused/Page tabs}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
| algo = old(90d)
| archive = User talk:Whyiseverythingalreadyused/Archive %(counter)d
| counter = 1
| maxarchivesize = 400K
| archiveheader = {{Archive}}
| minthreadstoarchive = 1
| minthreadsleft = 0
}}
Would you like to see ''The Signpost'' ↗?{{bots|deny=DPL bot,KiranBOT}}
{{Archives|bot=Lowercase sigmabot III|age=90|banner=yes}}
{{Talk header}}
{{ct/aware|a-i|ab|ap|blp}}

"Unreliable sources" tag for Draft:Accessibility Initiatives (National Library Board, Singapore)

Hi WIEAU. You added an "Unreliable sources" tag to the abovementioned draft article at 02:17 on 18 March 2026. Thank you for pointing this out. In order to improve the reliability of the sources, could you let me know which sources you have found to be unreliable? Thank you. TozenChristos (talk) 04:21, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

:@TozenChristos: sources originating from a government agency or other affiliated body (e.g. the NLB itself, the Ministry of Social and Family Development ↗; see {{slink|Wikipedia:Verifiability|Self-published or questionable sources as sources on themselves}}) and social media (specifically your use of HardwareZone ↗; see {{slink|Wikipedia:Reliable sources|User-generated content}}) Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c ↗ · he/him ↗) 04:46, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
::Dear @Whyiseverythingalreadyused: Thank you for the reminder. I guess cos I saw that a few published articles had done the same (e.g. National Library, Singapore ↗, Punggol Regional Library ↗, Mass Rapid Transit (Singapore) ↗...) that I thought it was ok. But thank you for pointing it out. As I am not intending on publishing this very soon; I will slowly review all the primary sources and try to find suitable secondary sources to verify the information. If I can find a secondary source, can I cite it together with the primary one, cos the primary source gives more details? If not, I will be happy to delete the information. For the time being though, is it ok for me to leave the primary source in the draft, even after I find a secondary source? I would like to download the completed draft for my own record, so the list of sources, primary and secondary, would be useful for me. Thank you. TozenChristos (talk) 14:55, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
::Hi WIEAU. May I ask how much is considered "'''rely[ing] excessively on sources too closely associated with the subject ↗?"''' I realise the article currently does that, and I am contemplating either editing it so that it doesn't, or just deleting it. But it would be good to have a rough guide, as in, would it be ok if half the citations are primary sources? Or it has to be much less, like a quarter or even less? Knowing this would help me make the decision to either edit or delete.
::I have found other sources to corroborate some of the events and activities; unfortunately, they don't give as much details. For other items, I am unable to find other sources, so I will have to delete those sections/paragraphs. Then I will end up with an article that is brief and vague, and so may not be useful to anyone.
::Would appreciate your thoughts on this matter. Thank you. TozenChristos (talk) 08:00, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Non-Mandarin Chinese romanisations

I have noticed you recently reverted a large number of edits which include romanisations of names in non-Mandarin varieties of Chinese. The MOS:NONPINYIN ↗ policy explicitly allows non-pinyin romanisations (even if it is rather vague, "including, but not limited to, articles on Hong Kong and Xinjiang subjects"). I have not checked all the edits, but at least some of the reverted material seems appropriate for inclusion in Wikipedia, and these reverts should not have been carried out without prior discussion with the editors involved, including {{ping|Warpswitch|Cr1ngef1sh|p=}} (and maybe others). Freelance Intellectual (talk) 17:16, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

:My opinion on this is that since Speak Mandarin Campaign was only introduced in Singapore in 1979. All those in the murder articles who died before 1979 would never have heard their name in mandarin, hence i find it illogical that their "dialect" mame in the appropriate romanistation should not be mentioned yet the Pinyin name stay there just fine. At minimum the "dialect" name should be present. Even then most of the others have their English name based on the "dialect" pronunciations (e.g. Lee Juay Heng (李锐兴, 1940(?)-1987). Wikipedia ought to name people by names they were called in-life.
:And unlike the wiki articles of ancient people, it is not a case where we can say "we don't know what they called themselves". All of these "dialects" are still alive. We have the appropriate pronunciations and romanistations available to us. Why not put them then? These were real people, not columns on a government census roll, it would be a disrespect to them and their families for their names to be recorded as names their families did not call them by and names which they did not call themselves by. Wikipedia ought to name people by names they were called in-life.
:- Cr1ngef1sh Cr1ngef1sh (talk) 01:37, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

::This is a topic that should be moved to WP:SG ↗ for further discussion. Mandarin romanisations for non-mandarin romanised chinese names are not relevant to english wikipedia as the goal here is to educate people based on what is closest to the non-mandarin romanised name which is by using the standardised romanisations used for non-mandarin chinese varieties the names originate from. Also regarding the reversion of my Teochew romanisation for Ngee Ann Kongsi ↗, the association is known as being a Teochew association so there is also no grounds for removing my romanisation on that. Warpswitch (talk) 02:52, 13 April 2026 (UTC)
::See WP:SPA ↗, WP:NOTADVOCACY ↗ and WP:MEATPUPPET ↗. See also Special:Contributions/Vampyricon ↗; I now strongly suspect an SPA ring defensive of dialectal romanisations. Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c ↗ · he/him ↗) 03:33, 13 April 2026 (UTC)
:::(I also forgot to state that Cringefish and Warpswitch have been editing coordinated since at least late March; see Special:History/Singapore Polytechnic stabbing ↗) Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c ↗ · he/him ↗) 03:36, 13 April 2026 (UTC)
::::Can we just compromise and have both mandarin and non-mandarin romanisations? Warpswitch (talk) 03:42, 13 April 2026 (UTC)
:::There is no need to resort to insults or denigration. Of the reverted material, the majority seem like edits made to reflect the correct/relevant languages of the articles' subject matter. So I believe the onus of explaining your mass-revert of pages to Mandarin is on you, as it appears nonsensical to me to put the wrong language on a page that has no relevance to that language whatsoever, while removing the language that the characters are actually used for (and which help English Wikipedians read & understand the text correctly). This is not a matter of advocacy but a logical improvement that appears to have a decent consensus at the moment.
:::I note you have already been warned in the past for revert warring so I would encourage you to civilly discuss your stance with the editors you reverted on why these languages' romanizations were removed. Danielbunchie (talk) 03:42, 13 April 2026 (UTC)
::::I note that Danielbunchie also created their user page today and came to my user talk page without prior interactions
::::As I do not see interaction between the three accounts opposing me on their own user talk pages, I assume that Warpswitch was canvassed earlier off-wiki ↗, and that Danielbunchie was canvassed off-wiki just today Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c ↗ · he/him ↗) 03:48, 13 April 2026 (UTC)
:::::Can you give a follow up on my question regarding wether we can just compromise at having both mandarin and non-mandarin romanisations? You seem to have skipped over my question. Warpswitch (talk) 03:56, 13 April 2026 (UTC)
::::::I mean, if we need that to stop the war, let's go to WT:SG ↗ then Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c ↗ · he/him ↗) 03:57, 13 April 2026 (UTC)
:::::The user page is irrelevant, you'll see I have been contributing to wikipedia for years. I want to assume good faith but for that you need to engage in the discussion points instead of just levelling ad hominems. Danielbunchie (talk) 04:55, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

April 2026

<div class="user-block" style="padding: 5px; margin-bottom: 0.5em; border: 1px solid var(--border-color-base, #a2ab91); background-color: var(--background-color-warning-subtle, #fef6e7); color:inherit; min-height: 40px">40px|left|alt=Stop icon with clock ↗<div style="margin-left:45px">You have been '''blocked ↗''' from editing for a period of '''24 hours''' for edit warring ↗. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions ↗. </div><div style="margin-left:45px">During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes ↗ and seek consensus ↗. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution ↗, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection ↗.</div><div style="margin-left:45px">If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks ↗, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: <code><nowiki>{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}</nowiki></code>.  – robertsky (talk) 06:01, 17 April 2026 (UTC)</div></div>

Yrrla

Why Yrrla not Yrral. Polygnotus (talk) 23:23, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

Page moving

Hello, thank you for renaming and rating my article at Autonomous shuttle (Singapore) ↗, I named it to Autonomous shuttle (Singapore), because I was afraid that users may mistakenly confuse it with autonomous shuttles in Singapore in general, or the autonomous shuttle service in Sentosa. Is there a way for us to meet Wikipedia:Concise ↗ while preventing this? Thanks!! :):) 𝕲𝖎𝖑𝖊𝖘𝖊𝖑𝖎𝖌™ :) 02:07, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

:I once thought to move it to {{-r|Autonomous shuttle}}
:But then I eventually created that one as a redirect to {{slink|Vehicular automation#Shuttle}} because the title was considerably more international than your article and because I could find the concept of an autonomous shuttle in that article (and fixed ↗ a broken redirect in the meantime lol) Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c ↗ · he/him ↗) 02:30, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

Albert Kushlick

You seem to have replaced my edit of this page with an earlier version. Why? Paulgwilliams (talk) 14:06, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

:Please see Wikipedia:Single-purpose account ↗ and Wikipedia:Conflict of interest ↗. On the latter page, see especially the section {{slink|Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#Paid editors|nopage=y}}, which also deals with undisclosed paid editing ↗. Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c ↗ · he/him ↗) 14:26, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

May 2026 Administrator Elections – Schedule

<div style="border: 5px solid #ABCDEF; padding: 0.5em 1em 0 1em;" role="article">
right|80px ↗

The May 2026 administrator elections ↗ are set to proceed.

We plan to use the following schedule:

* April 29–May 5: Candidate sign-up

* May 8–May 12: Discussion phase

* May 13–May 19: SecurePoll voting phase

If you have any questions, concerns, or thoughts before we get started, please ask at Wikipedia talk:Administrator elections ↗.

You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list ↗.
</div>

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:04, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

May 2026 Administrator Election – Call for Candidates

<div style="border: 5px solid #ABCDEF; padding: 0.5em 1em 0 1em;" role="article">
right|80px ↗
The administrator elections process has officially started! Interested editors are encouraged to self-nominate or arrange to be nominated by reviewing the instructions at '''Wikipedia:Administrator elections/May 2026/Candidates ↗'''.

Here is the schedule:

April 29 – May 5: Call for candidates

May 8–12: Discussion phase

May 13–19: SecurePoll voting phase

Please note the following:

The requirements to run are identical to RFA ↗—a prospective candidate must be extended confirmed ↗.

Prospective candidates are advised to become familiar with the community's expectations of administrators, which are much higher than the minimum requirement of having extended confirmed status. This includes reviewing successful ↗ and unsuccessful ↗ RFAs, reading the essay Wikipedia:Advice for admin elections candidates ↗, and possibly requesting an optional poll on their chances of passing ↗.

The process will have a seven day call for candidates phase, a two day pause, a five day discussion phase, and a seven day private vote using SecurePoll. Discussion and questions are only allowed on the candidate pages during the discussion phase.

The outcome of this process is identical to making a request for adminship. There is '''no official difference''' between an administrator appointed through RFA versus administrator elections.

Administrator elections are also a valid means of regaining adminship for de-sysopped editors ↗.

Ask any questions about the process at the talk page ↗. Later, a user talk message will be sent to official candidates with additional information about the process.

If you are interested in the process, please make sure to watchlist the appropriate pages. A watchlist notice will be added when the discussion phase opens, and again when the voting phase opens.

You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list ↗.
</div>

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:31, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

{{ombox
| name = First Edit Day
| image = 50px ↗
| imageright = 50px ↗
| style = border: 2px solid CornflowerBlue; background: linear-gradient(300deg, AliceBlue, LavenderBlush 30%, LavenderBlush 70%, AliceBlue);
| textstyle = padding: 0.75em; text-align:center;
| plainlinks = yes
| text = <big>'''Happy First Edit Day!'''</big> Hi Whyiseverythingalreadyused! On behalf of the Birthday Committee ↗, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of the day you made your first edit ↗ and became a Wikipedian! ☘︎☘︎☘︎'''ALEX'''Hammeke (talk | guestbook | sandbox) 04:51, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
}} ☘︎☘︎☘︎'''ALEX'''Hammeke (talk | guestbook | sandbox) 04:51, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

{{ombox
| name = First Edit Day
| image = 50px ↗
| imageright = 50px ↗
| style = border: 2px solid CornflowerBlue; background: linear-gradient(60deg, MistyRose, AntiqueWhite, Ivory, Honeydew, Azure, GhostWhite);
| textstyle = padding: 0.75em; text-align:center;
| plainlinks = yes
| text = <big>'''Happy First Edit Day!'''</big> Hi Whyiseverythingalreadyused! On behalf of the Birthday Committee ↗, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of the day you made your first edit ↗ and became a Wikipedian! DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 08:39, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
}}

Congrats on three years!

Happy first-edit-aversary. I don't always congratulate editors for these sorts of things but your username made me chuckle so I figured I'd drop by and say thanks for sticking around and for making the encyclopedia better. Cheers to three more! Crunchydillpickle🥒 (talk) 15:42, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

請教

我想新增這個條目.. 要多少內容才不算過短？
https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:%E5%A4%A9%E5%A4%A7%E7%A0%94%E7%A9%B6%E9%99%A2 Arlags0519 (talk) 02:57, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

:@Arlags0519：请到我的华文讨论页面 ↗；你现在在英文维基百科。(Please go to my Chinese talk page ↗; this is English Wikipedia.) Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c ↗ · he/him ↗) 02:59, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

Schools in Singapore

Hello, Please see the talk page of List_of_secondary_schools_in_Singapore ↗. Thanks, Alarics (talk) 12:57, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

May 2026 Administrator Elections – Discussion Phase

{{Wikipedia:Administrator elections/May 2026/MMS/Discussion phase}} -- MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:22, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

May 2026 Administrator Elections – Voting Phase

<div style="border: 5px solid #ABCDEF; padding: 0.5em 1em 0 1em;" role="article">
right|80px ↗
The voting phase of the May 2026 administrator elections has started and will continue until {{Administrator elections status/data|May 2026|end}} at {{Administrator election time|end}} UTC. You can participate in the voting phase at '''Wikipedia:Administrator elections/May 2026/Voting phase ↗'''.

As a reminder, the schedule of the election is:

{{Administrator elections/Header/daterange|May 2026|begin|end}}: SecurePoll voting phase ('''we are here''')

Scrutineering phase

In the voting phase, the candidate subpages close to public questions and discussion, and everyone who qualifies to vote ↗ has a week to use the SecurePoll ↗ software to vote, which uses a secret ballot ↗. You can see who voted, but not who they voted for. Please note that the vote totals cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see an individual candidate's vote total during the election. The suffrage requirements ↗ are similar to those at RFA.

Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for a few days, perhaps longer. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the results page ↗ (this is a good page to watchlist), and transcluded to the main election page ↗. In order to be granted adminship, a non-recall candidate must have received at least 70.0% support, calculated as Support / (Support + Oppose), and a minimum of 20 support votes. Recall ↗ candidates must achieve 55.0% support ↗. Because this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no bureaucrat discussions ↗ ("crat chats").

Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page ↗. Thank you for your participation. Happy electing.

You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list ↗.
</div>

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:11, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

May 2026

30px|alt=Stop icon ↗ '''You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war ↗, according to the reverts you've made to :Gurkha ↗.''' This means that you are repeatedly reverting content back to how you think it should be, despite knowing that other editors disagree. Once it is known that there is a disagreement, users are expected to collaborate ↗ with others, avoid editing disruptively ↗, and try to reach a consensus ↗ – rather than repeatedly reverting the changes made by other users.

Important points to note:
# {{strong|Edit warring is disruptive behavior ↗ – regardless of how many reverts you have made;}}
# {{strong|Do not engage in edit warring – even if you believe that you are right.}}
You need to discuss the disagreement on the article's talk page ↗ and work towards a revision that represents consensus among everyone involved. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard ↗ or seek dispute resolution ↗ if discussions reach an impasse. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection ↗. {{strong|If you continue to engage in edit warring, you may be blocked ↗ from editing.}}  soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A '''TALK''' 13:55, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

Conrad Murray

Hi, your recent revisions https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Conrad_Murray&diff=prev&oldid=1355003408 ↗https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Conrad_Murray&diff=prev&oldid=1355015688 ↗ removed the date of article for People Magazine source, and added a Japanese website? can you please explain this Cena332 (talk) 16:21, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

Concerns on Havelock MRT station GAN review

Hi, thanks for reviewing Havelock MRT station ↗. I was talking to a couple of editors off-Wiki and they view that the review was unfortunately not of sufficient depth/quality, and I have to agree with them. A proper GAN review must assess the article against the six GAN criteria; your review only focused on two of the six criteria. Could you reopen the review to include the assessments against the other criteria? '''Icepinner''' (Come to Hakurei Shrine!) 14:47, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

:I have also removed the icon on the main page ↗ for the timebeing. You are free to add it back when you have finished your review and feel that the article of sufficient quality to merit GA status; if otherwise, feel free to post a message on WT:GAN ↗ requesting for its removal from GA status. '''Icepinner''' (Come to Hakurei Shrine!) 14:58, 20 May 2026 (UTC)
::Ah fuck Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c ↗ · he/him ↗) 15:01, 20 May 2026 (UTC)
:::I was betting on Talk:Boon Keng MRT station/GA2 ↗, or whatever easy thing I thought it was (it basically got speedrun) Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c ↗ · he/him ↗) 15:04, 20 May 2026 (UTC)
::::Hi @Whyiseverythingalreadyused, just dropping by as the reviewer of that GA you linked. I'd like to clarify some things to you: A fast GA review and a rushed GA review are not the same thing. You are expected to visibly demonstrate that you have thoroughly evaluated the article against the criteria, even when it already meets them. Wikipedia:Good article reviewing guide ↗ says, for instance, {{tq|Don't just mark the criteria as pass or fail without providing feedback. If the article passes a criterion, why?}}, which is what you did at your review by saying {{tq|I don't see any violations of the GAC}} and not following it up. A third person reading your review cannot follow your thought process and understand that you really worked through each criterion if you don't explain what and how you evaluated them. As an example, in my review, I noted things like {{tq|Infobox image is adequate and captioned. All ok.}} Comments like {{tq|I think I'll skip the SMRT sources}} are concerning and come across as careless. Someone reading that might wonder ''why'' you decided that all SMRT sources are automatically reliable and in order. Looking at your former reviews, it should be clear to you that if a second reviewer finds that many comments to note even after you already "finished" your review, your initial review might not have been thorough enough. I implore you to give the guide I linked above another good read, and maybe considering getting a WP:GAMENTOR ↗ who can look over your work. YuniToumei (talk) 07:54, 21 May 2026 (UTC)
:::::Thanks
:::::I feel kinda horrible rn, so expect me to be somewhat less active (I also have mfing exams) Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c ↗ · he/him ↗) 14:55, 21 May 2026 (UTC)
::::::Ah, I didn't mean to upset you, WIEAU, sorry about that. I was hoping to share some perspective as someone who is also new to GAs. Remember that it's okay to make mistakes. ↗ With short of 1000 GANs your help in reviewing articles is valuable, so thank you first and foremost for contributing! I hope your exams go well and that you find the time and spirit afterwards to give GA reviews another shot. There is a drive coming up next month ↗ which could be the perfect opportunity to get some more practice and have experienced reviewers look over your work. Hope to see you there! Cheers, YuniToumei (talk) 15:37, 21 May 2026 (UTC)
:::::::Your words weren't the problem, for the record
:::::::I was just depressed over what I thought was a wasted GAN lol Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c ↗ · he/him ↗) 15:40, 21 May 2026 (UTC)
::::::::I've undone @Icepinner's removal, that wasn't valid under reviewing process. WP:GAR ↗ must be followed for this. Once a GAN is complete, neither editor can unilaterally undo that without another review. 11WB (talk) 18:11, 21 May 2026 (UTC)
:::::::::Oh.... whoops, not sufficiently familiar with this scenario. I have raised it on GAR ↗. '''Icepinner''' (Come to Hakurei Shrine!) 18:43, 21 May 2026 (UTC)
::::::::Please don’t feel depressed; everyone has to start somewhere with a GA review. The next one will go better! 😃 '''Bgsu98''' (Talk) 22:27, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Havelock MRT station ↗

Havelock MRT station ↗ has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page ↗. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. '''Icepinner''' (Come to Hakurei Shrine!) 18:41, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

Mediacorp Chinese dramas

Hi. Recently I’ve noticed you have been putting Notability tags on a couple of these dramas such as A New Life ↗. While yeah, they’re unsourced but by my experience, almost all of them have secondary sources with significant coverage. For this particular article, a quick search on NewspaperSG or Newslink proves Notability. It would be good if you can search around these archives for sources before tagging, cause if unnoticed it leads to unnecessary AfDs. Alternatively, if you are still unable to find sources, you can message me on my talk page, I’ll see what I can do Infodump0 (talk) 06:54, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Whyiseverythingalreadyused. Thank you for your work on Resignation of Raeesah Khan ↗. Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol ↗ and left the following comment:

{{Bq|1=Thank you for writing the article. Have a nice Sunday!}}

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

&maltese; '''SunDawn''' &maltese; Contact me! 13:52, 24 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)

Draftification of Serangoon Bus Interchange ↗

I just realised that your draftication of this article is not in line with deletion policy, specifically {{tq|Older articles—as a rule of thumb those older than 90 days—should not be draftified without prior consensus at AfD.}} (WP:NOTBACKDOOR ↗). The explanatory essay also lays out a list of reasons on when draftification is not to be used, WP:DRAFTNO ↗. Be mindful of these when you want to draftify next time. Cheers! – robertsky (talk) 16:27, 29 May 2026 (UTC)

:<nowiki>:</nowiki>) (yeah I realised that lol) Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c ↗ · he/him ↗) 16:28, 29 May 2026 (UTC)

Note

{{hat|Please take the saga off my talk page. Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c ↗ · he/him ↗) 02:57, 9 June 2026 (UTC)}}
please stay alert until Jurong article protected, and if ip user shows up Эльдар Шукоров (talk) 16:54, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

:https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jurong_FC&diff=prev&oldid=1358251563
:revert and warning needed Эльдар Шукоров (talk) 11:40, 8 June 2026 (UTC)
::When I said I could vouch for you, I didn't say that I had the time to revert the next person to edit-war against you
::But fine
::Two only warnings given, one ↗ for BLP violations and one ↗ for making personal attacks (xenophobia at Sembawang Rangers FC ↗) Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c ↗ · he/him ↗) 11:47, 8 June 2026 (UTC)
:::i dont know how to revert... it's clear vandal sock user so should be stopped, pages protected Эльдар Шукоров (talk) 11:49, 8 June 2026 (UTC)
::::https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jurong_FC&diff=prev&oldid=1358424686
::::https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sembawang_Rangers_FC&diff=prev&oldid=1358425500
::::two more examples, ip blocked Эльдар Шукоров (talk) 17:00, 8 June 2026 (UTC)
:::::{{ping|Asilvering|Blablubbs|Daniel Case|EatingCarBatteries|LuniZunie|Gommeh|Yamla|Giraffer}} Эльдар Шукоров (talk) 17:09, 8 June 2026 (UTC)
::::::(please someone protect both pages after revert, and block that range) Эльдар Шукоров (talk) 17:10, 8 June 2026 (UTC)
:::::::'''STOP IT'''. Deeply inappropriate of you to ping multiple users in this manner. If you want a page protected, use WP:RFPP ↗. --Yamla (talk) 17:30, 8 June 2026 (UTC)
::::::::many request unnoticed, i ping few reliable users... don't know large reverts myself, but it will resolve... best regards Эльдар Шукоров (talk) 17:33, 8 June 2026 (UTC)
::::::What? If you want to have a page protected, go through WP:RFPP ↗ as said.
::::::There isn't anything any of the people you pinged can do here about it EatingCarBatteries (contribs ↗ | talk ↗) 02:05, 9 June 2026 (UTC)
{{hab}}

Happy Birthday!

{{ombox
| name = Happy Birthday
| image = 50px ↗
| imageright = 50px ↗
| style = border: 2px solid SlateBlue; background: repeating-linear-gradient(300deg, MistyRose, AntiqueWhite, Ivory, Honeydew, Azure, GhostWhite, MistyRose 50%);
| textstyle = padding: 0.75em; text-align:center;
| text = <big>'''Happy birthday!'''</big> Hi Whyiseverythingalreadyused! On behalf of the Birthday Committee ↗, I'd like to wish you a very happy birthday! Enjoy this special day! DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 13:14, 10 June 2026 (UTC)
}}

Birthday Cookies!

{{ombox
|type = notice
|image = 75px ↗
|style = border: 1px solid #CC9999; background-color: #f8eaba;
|text = Hungry? Here's a little snack for you on your birthday, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee ↗! Have a great day, '''Whyiseverythingalreadyused'''! --☘︎☘︎☘︎'''ALEX'''Hammeke (talk | guestbook | sandbox) 19:22, 10 June 2026 (UTC)
}} ☘︎☘︎☘︎'''ALEX'''Hammeke (talk | guestbook | sandbox) 19:22, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Birger corleis page

Did you delete my page? And if so why and you better revert it then. Thetruthofdb (talk) 05:36, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

:i do get why you deleted it but do you have the info i had on that page saved? Thetruthofdb (talk) 05:44, 29 June 2026 (UTC)
::I am not an administrator and cannot access that information for you. I was not the person who deleted it; see the [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=Birger_Corleis}} log] for the mainspace name. Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c ↗ · he/him ↗) 05:45, 29 June 2026 (UTC)
:::(by "mainspace name" I specifically refer to the page, or article, at the exact name Birger Corleis ↗, that you converted into an article while it was awaiting speedy deletion) Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c ↗ · he/him ↗) 05:47, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

Speedy deletion ↗ nomination of :Draft:Djdhurbd ↗

{{hat|Not my fault Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c ↗ · he/him ↗) 06:07, 29 June 2026 (UTC)}}
48px|left|alt=|link= ↗

Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, the introduction of inappropriate pages, such as :Draft:Djdhurbd ↗, is considered vandalism ↗ and is prohibited. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox ↗. Repeated vandalism may result in the '''loss of editing privileges''' ↗. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion ↗, the page has been nominated for deletion.

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 ↗.  jolielover♥talk 05:54, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

:(sorry, automatic Twinkle message - somebody else moved the page to this nonsensical name) jolielover♥talk 05:55, 29 June 2026 (UTC)
{{hab}}

Draft:BullionStar — independent editor, seeking feedback

Hi, I noticed you moved BullionStar to draftspace citing the long-term SPA history. I want to flag that I have no connection to the company and am editing independently. Before I submit the draft through AfC, I wanted to ask if you have specific concerns about the current draft's content or sourcing that I should address first. Happy to discuss on the draft's talk page if easier. Thanks! Pristine-Radio (talk) 03:23, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

":Internet state sockpuppetry ↗" listed at Redirects for discussion ↗

30px ↗
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Internet_state_sockpuppetry&redirect=no Internet state sockpuppetry] has been listed at redirects for discussion ↗ to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines ↗. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at '''{{section link|1=Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 July 3#Internet state sockpuppetry}}''' until a consensus is reached.  Rusalkii (talk) 21:11, 3 July 2026 (UTC)

Not necessary to group refs

Hello. I appreciate your efforts to highlight which are the primary sources on the Downtown Line ↗ page. But as far as I'm aware, it's not required at any stage of the article review process. As such, I don't think it's necessary and I find it cumbersome. I'd rather if you refrain from further edits on the page.--ZKang123 (talk '''·''' contribs ↗) 09:56, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

Thank you LOL

Hello, I saw that you removed a draft I did and said that I was sus. I was so confused, anyway looked at it again and you are correct, I edited the wrong draft. Thank you for noticing! Cavemandraws (talk) 02:59, 10 July 2026 (UTC)