This user is busy in real life due to work and graduate school, and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Wikipedia ads	file info – show another – #158

Gramix13 has eaten your {{cookie}}! The cookie made them happy and they'd like to give you a great big hug for donating it. Spread the WikiLove by giving out more {{subst:cookie}}s, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Thanks again!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat a cookie with {{subst:munch}}!

You reverted the move as per a WP:RMT, Special:Diff/1353105161 by User:Itcouldbepossible but this actually reverted the move made 2 days ago meaning the village is now at Swalwell and the DAB page is at Swalwell, Tyne and Wear. I'm assuming this was a mistake and the DAB should be at the base name. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:47, 8 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Crouch, Swale, hmm. Itcouldbepossible, can you clarify what pages ought to have been moved where?

If this is a mistake owing to a move being executed before the move listed at RMTR goes through, then I’m happy to fix things. But we need to be very clear on what goes where, otherwise history gets really messy.

ICBP, I try, when using Move+, a fork of rmCloser, to move pages in an order that avoids destination ambiguity. Not trying to cast aspersions or denigrate the actions here, but I can’t figure out how to phrase my message. Iseult ^Δx talk to me 18:55, 8 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The village in England was at the base name Swalwell until 2 days ago when it was moved to Swalwell, Tyne and Wear per Talk:Swalwell#Requested move 14 April 2026 and was moved by User:Annh07 so that the village was at "Swalwell, Tyne and Wear" and the DAB was at the base name "Swalwell". You have now moved the village back to "Swalwell" which it shouldn't be because there is consensus that it isn't primary but you have also moved the DAB page to "Swalwell, Tyne and Wear" which doesn't make sense. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:59, 8 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Crouch, Swale, ah. So the moves had already been effectuated even while the listing at RMTR stayed up. Iseult ^Δx talk to me 19:06, 8 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes they had, I don't know why it ended up at RMT again, probably Itcouldbepossible made a mistake and though the moves hadn't been made. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:14, 8 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I’ll revert when I get home in a few hours. In the meantime, I’d appreciate ICBD and Ang’s confirmations. Iseult ^Δx talk to me 19:20, 8 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi everyone, sorry for the confusion here! I can clarify what happened.

I closed the RM correctly, but because I thought I needed technical help to move the disambiguation page, I listed it at WP:RMTR. I wasn't aware of the fact that Annh07 had already performed the page move, without closing the the move request. I think, my technical request was still lingering at RMTR and as Iseult ran their move script on pages that had already been moved by Annh07, which caused the script to scramble the pages into the wrong places. When I was on the point of closing the requested move, I was a bit confused because it said that the page already existed and hence I submitted a request at the technical moves. It is still a bit confusing, and I admit that I still don't understand where it went wrong and how it went wrong. Is it the fact, that all the necessary page moves had already been performed without closing the RM? Itcouldbepossible ^Talk 05:18, 9 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Itcouldbepossible, looking closer at this move, I think that Annh fulfilled your request but then missed removing it from RMTR.. When I then tried to swap the pages, I saw that move in the history but didn't think much of it/got confused by the two moves requested in the RM. You seem to have done fine (does rmCloser automatically list at RTMR?). The fault, dear ICBP, is not in our stars, but in me. Iseult ^Δx talk to me 05:26, 9 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I am not very sure about how rmCloser works. Yes, it does list pages at RMTR if required. But the script currently cannot handle the scenario where two RTMRs required (as it might have happened in this case). Dunno, I might have a look at the code if I get time later on. Thanks for your kind understanding! It is very easy to frustrate senior editors with wrong moves and other stuff like that. Itcouldbepossible ^Talk 08:31, 9 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

By any chance, are you going to Event:Bay Area Meetup May 2026? I plan to go. Jasper Deng (talk) 21:09, 8 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Jasper Deng, unfortunately not; I've always had issues with making weekday meetups, especially when most of the Bay Wiki meetings are held in SF. Even when I spent a lot of time in the East Bay, it proved impossible. Now, well, with RTO and me being two hours away, it'll probably not happen in the near future (got a job for me in Oakland?). But I'd love to do wiki meetups and get to know you in person. Iseult ^Δx talk to me 05:31, 9 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinate with me privately over email if you'd like to meet privately separately. I'm pretty flexible with where and when I can be. Jasper Deng (talk) 06:19, 9 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Could you revert your edit [1] please. No one asked you to decide the point and extraordinary claims should not be stuck in especially on rather fraught topics like that. NadVolum (talk) 10:05, 9 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@NadVolum it was listed at WP:CR. Katzrockso (talk) 11:27, 9 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Well he shouldn't have done it. Leave it to some admin if you must. NadVolum (talk) 15:05, 9 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean I shouldn’t have done that? Discussions were open close to 30 days. That’s long enough time. Since your last comment on 28th April - no one responded. So yah - I listed it for closure. 🐈Cinaroot   01:35, 10 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway the point as I see it is that two other people before me have removed the bit because what it said is extraordinary. There is just one real source, it attributes what it says to the workers retrieving bodies who use the term evaporation or vaporized for when they can't find a body where they think there should be one. No evidence has been given that this actually ever happens. The article makes claims about thermobaric bombs but neither I nor anyone else can find anything that supports what they say even though those type bombs have been around for a long time. I fail to see why they are so desperate to include it in the article, it doesn't really contribute to the topic except in shock value when the citation is read. It is a source of ridicule amongst their enemies so they stick to it is the best I can come up with. NadVolum (talk) 16:19, 9 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Katzrockso; yes, I closed based on the CR listing, as you can see from my various other CR closures. NadVolum, per WP:NAC, I'm well within bounds. If your objection was to the compromise text, first, you had plenty of opportunity over the past two weeks to do that as opposed to continuing to litigate the extraordinary claim. You chose not to even while remaining active in replies to comments containing those propositions. which implied tacit agreement. Second, the compromise text does not contain the words "evaporated" or "vaporized". "Without recoverable remains" is a considerably lower bar too. You are disputing a situation which does not exist.

The claim of evaporation may be contentious and extraordinary. I consider it extraordinary (an aside: I read the AJ article as having misinterpreted the Gaza Civil Defence quote — treating bodies as evaporated does not mean considering them evaporated. Unless you're saying that the claimed dead aren't actually dead? The very next section in the article describes how bodies are turned quickly to ash. Hardly evaporation!). But at this point, there's only one person keeping up the contention.

So, no, I will not revert given your comments in the thread. Iseult ^Δx talk to me 17:07, 9 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

What I said was that what they were proposing was not a summary of the article, they were writing their own stuff which ignores most of the stuff in the citation. That is an objection to what is written. And the article says no sign except scraps of scalp or specks of blood. We don't know if the people found ash or if it is made up by al Jazeera, they just say people were turned to ash. And if this actually happened why is there no indication of it partially happening to anyone? There are so many ways to make it less extraordinary and yet none are satisfied. And I was not the only one complaining at the end, Alansohn has a comment saying it is the very definition of WP:EWCREE on 27 April near the end. I agree the original objector إيان disappeared after 10 April. Can't say I blame them when people push so far for supid things like this. Why does this need to be in, what's wrong with waiting for some extra source or evidence that thermobaric weapons actually do things like make two people in a room completely disappear and leave the bodies of three? In fact any evidence thermobaric weapons do this vaporization business? Why can we not follow the policy? NadVolum (talk) 21:29, 9 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@NadVolum do you disagree that the closer correctly evaluated the consensus of the discussion? If so, please explain the basis of doing so. Katzrockso (talk) 23:49, 9 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I do disagree. "Merely continuing the evaporation debate" dismissed the whole business about it coming under extraordinary. Attributing the statements to Al Jazeera does not absolve editors on Wikipedia from following WP:ECEE. They agree it is extraordinary and they are pushing it into the article complete with the reference to a citation saying "Israel used weapons in Gaza that made thousands of Palestinians evaporate". We don't even know if any of those thousands died or just they weren't found where expected. This is just an end run around core policy. NadVolum (talk) 00:11, 10 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@NadVolum that is your right, but you cannot circumvent consensus by removing the content yourself against the declared consensus. Please self revert your removal on the Gaza genocide article and go through the typical process for initiating a Wikipedia:Closure review if you disagree with the close. Katzrockso (talk) 00:31, 10 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

NadVolum, had you phrased your argument that way in the two weeks between the first proposition and my close, I might have weighed an ECEE argument more heavily. As it stands now, this all reads like reaching for reasons — any reason at all — to exclude mention of the use of thermobaric weapons.

Alan in the discussion has made a case far stronger than you have, and even so, I find the various counterpoints reasonable and the rough consensus to attribute to AJ, if included. IOHANNVSVERVS provided sources supporting both the use of thermobaric weapons and even something involving evaporation. Cinaroot (pinging, as they listed the discussion on CR to begin with) offered to and followed through on framing that didn't hew precisely to AJ as a compromise. Later, JasonMacker called you out for switching things up. Early in the discussion, Katzrockso had to clarify to you that BLP applies only to specified individuals. When the first proposal came out, you challenged the presumed use of thermobaric weapons. When the second proposal came out, you went straight back to vaporization.

If you think that further scrutiny of this thread and your comments there are warranted, appeal. Otherwise, drop the stick. Decide quickly, before I leave for vacation next week. Iseult ^Δx talk to me 01:15, 10 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

WP:LOCALCONSENSUS does not override policy, and you said you found it extraordinary. And then you go and ask me to break policy by inserting a bit into the article which I removed. I do not see how breaking policy is supposed to do anything good or support Wikipedia. You could have done it yourself if you really believed that putting it in is a good idea. Anyway I'll do it and not get bothered with contending as that would be a situation like [2]. NadVolum (talk) 09:50, 10 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You can challenge the closure at AN. See WP:CLOSECHALLENGE 🐈Cinaroot   04:22, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, How do i create a wiki page for a person? --Shanyl27 (talk) 04:11, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Shanyl27, I'd start with reading through Help:Your first article. May I ask what person you are interested in writing about? Iseult ^Δx talk to me 05:02, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Azneen Rashad Maldivian, i have kinda create Shanyl27 (talk) 07:58, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Azneen Rashad (Maldivian Body Builder) Shanyl27 (talk) 08:36, 13 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Who creat this site --Shakaa Saab .12."00 (talk) 05:10, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I am working on improving the quality and quantity of information about Japan on wikipedia. I have trouble with formatting and how to site sources but will continue to work on it. I hope to gain enough experience to translate the existing articles in Japanese to English for other to read! --HanaJapan (talk) 09:17, 13 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! I want to request a page, but I was having a really hard time following the instructions. I just want to request to have information about a company added. I've been trying to boost the AEO for our organization and having a page on Wiki would really help with that. Just information about the company, what the company does, a brief history etc. --Sonnylumens2026 (talk) 15:16, 13 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sonnylumens2026, as you have a conflict of interest with your company, you must first disclose that specific conflict. The second link contains instructions to do that; let me know if you have trouble there.

Then, you'd go to the talk page for the article and add {{edit COI}} to the bottom of that page, much as you have here. The best way to do that is to select "New section" near the top of the page. Instructions for using that template can be found here. The template adds your edit request to a queue where editors like me will fulfill the request, either accepting or rejecting the changes. What specific parts of the instructions that you referenced have you found confusing? I will clarify those to the best of my ability. Iseult ^Δx talk to me 18:33, 13 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! One of my irl friends found out about my wiki acc and he loves the work I do! :) But,he really wanted me to do a user page... I have 2 questions... 1.How do you create a user page? 2.If I edit my user page,does it count on my total edits? --BrendenAaronsonfan37 (talk) 13:04, 14 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

BrendenAaronsonfan37, 1) go to User:BrendenAaronsonfan37. 2) yes. Iseult ^Δx talk to me 18:10, 14 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Iseult,

Backlog update

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

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

2024 and 2025 NPP Awards

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

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

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

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

January–February backlog drive

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

May backlog drive

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

PageTriage

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

Reminders:

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

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

Good evening, I am looking to get a new article written on myself. I have sources and information but I am so confused on how to go about all this. Is there any way to show me how this all works? Ive read the how-tos and all the pages but I am not good at this at all. --Chef Matt Lare (talk) 04:22, 15 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Chef Matt Lare, have you happened upon WP:YFA? If so, please tell me what specific elements can be better explained so that I can help. Iseult ^Δx talk to me 01:22, 19 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, what benefits do i get from editing --Odisaac (talk) 06:00, 15 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

What are you for your my mentor what are you for --Djpanda1024 (talk) 21:10, 15 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, its nice to meet you Boss --Asare Kesse (talk) 13:12, 18 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have a company of AI services what kind of blogs and articles can I publish here? --Markeltree (talk) 23:50, 18 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Markeltree, no sort of blog is allowed. You might be able to write an article about your company, provided that it passes the general notability guideline, among other things, following the guide to writing your first article. But I would strongly discourage you from adding anything resembling promotional material and strongly encourage you to disclose your conflict of interest on your user page. Iseult ^Δx talk to me 01:19, 19 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: User-npc's mentor Phoenix is away.

How would I create a new page? --User-npc (talk) 20:53, 19 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7, Hog Farm and Nick-D look at four recent works Timeline: This month in military history

Hi Iseult, nice to meet you! I don't have a question for now, just figuring things out. I'll reach out when something comes up. Thanks! --Ahmet FMP (talk) 14:37, 20 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, how can I post my work? --PAPA IMAFLOW (talk) 14:18, 21 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello everyone I need to know what the best thing to get a new project at this moment --Charlin88 (talk) 00:20, 23 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Iseult, I want to copy-edit the Dienedione page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dienedione) under Applications to make the bullet point list more consistent. Is there a style guide noted for list formatting besides this one (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Accessibility#Bulleted_vertical_lists).

I thought to delete the extra information beyond the names of the drugs, and to add to the talk page that the extra details about the chemistry can be added to the drug pages themselves instead of in this list. Would appreciate your thoughts! --Kalgash (talk) 18:26, 23 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Kalgash, I’m not aware of contravening guidance; your intentions are good and I encourage you to do as you propose. Iseult ^Δx talk to me 14:55, 25 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Iseult, thank you for your assistance. Wikipedia is suggesting for me to make ‘small’ edits to articles. Is this something that I should do? Thanks --Cauliflowerpetal (talk) 08:56, 24 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Cauliflowerpetal, I’m biased, but of course! Take the opportunity to dip your toes into the wide world of editing. Iseult ^Δx talk to me 14:56, 25 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

hello i want to know that how i should make a profile like anybody can search it and read about me like celebs --Itskaranverma7 (talk) 03:54, 25 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Itskaranverma7, unfortunately, Wikipedia is not a social network; it's unlikely that you'd be allowed an article about yourself here. In solidarity, Iseult ^Δx talk to me 06:01, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red | June 2026, Vol 12, Issue 6, Nos 358, 359, 373, 374, 375 Online events: New: LGBTQ+ women | Alphabet run: Countries starting with I, J, K and L Article improvement campaign: Orphaned women Continuing (year-long initiatives): #1day1woman | Sports Announcements, tips, participation... Announcements from other communities: Eiffel women Tip of the month: Consider contributing to two of our monthly events at once, and improve coverage of LGBTQ+ women by de-orphaning their articles. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram & Pinterest

--Rosiestep (talk) 22:50, 25 May 2026 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Hello, mentor! As a new person to Wikipedia, I would love to help others learn and keep up accurate knowledge. I doubt I'll need to make any big contributions, but I'm here for all the help I can give! I have a few questions, and I'll list them here. 1. How do most people go about gathering the information for writing a Wikipedia article? (ie., searching for other related articles, videos, archives) 2. How often do Wikipedia articles need to be edited on average, and why? 3. Is there a big reason why so many people create an account other than editing? I know these are probably self-explanatory, but hey, a question is a question and questions should be answered. Thanks! --Mysticality2077 (talk) 09:46, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Mysticality2077, glad to have you here! I too haven't made significant individual contributions, but the sum total of my work here is, to someone unfamiliar with the inner workings of Wikipedia, formidable. I hope that you too will find a niche here and that you will be able to contribute to the encyclopedia in great ways. Every bit counts, even if they aren't flashy. As for your questions:

1. I can't answer this too well, not having done much true article-writing myself. But when I add content to articles, it's usually in response to a problem I see in articles or when I read something interesting online or in print. This reading takes the form of my news diet and nonfiction reading, which sometimes includes journal articles. If you don't have journal access, the Wikipedia library is a good resource. Otherwise, physical libraries are great, particularly university libraries; scan what you can, though you might run into an issue of mine. Seeking out something specific, then, can mean judicious Google searches (avoid AI), focused on news or on appropriate articles, depending on the subject. Or searches on JSTOR or whichever journal is best suited for your subject. For classical music, the Grove Dictionary would be a good start; I'd then go to sources listed therein and supplement with musicology articles, biographies, and cross-checks of program notes. Don't forget Google Books! Though I haven't really figured out how access works there.
2. I don't know about need. Highly-trafficked articles (e.g. current events) might see upwards of 50 edits a day. On the other hand, Red kuri squash was edited last November. Each article sees improvements when people are interested in them, when circumstances or scholarship changes, and to rework phrasing/fix templates, add sourcing. Then there's inevitable vandal-fighting.
3. This is covered by WP:LOGIN. I created my account because I wanted a record of my edits; over time, this justification has evolved to include having more advanced editing permissions, being recognizable to other people on the project (not that it should be the case, but your standing as a logged-in editor will invariably be higher than if you were logged-out, which can help you if you get into slightly sticky situations), and customizing my editing/reading layout. I use an array of editing scripts and tools, including WP:TWINKLE and WP:UV, which are inaccessible to non-usernamed editors; for reading, I use Vector 2010, as that's how I've used WP from the beginning (although, if the info there is to be believed, my first exposure was through Monobook). I dislike Vector 2022 and the current mobile view. In solidarity, Iseult ^Δx talk to me 06:19, 29 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

my first account but i dont want to accidently get banned --Thegoatisthegreatestof67 (talk) 10:39, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thegoatisthegreatestof67, so long as you're here to build an encyclopedia and willing to take feedback from more experienced editors, you'll be fine. Should you get into sticky situations, let me know and I'll work to help you out. We have policies against biting newer editors like you. In solidarity, Iseult ^Δx talk to me 05:52, 29 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Iseult, well i dont have any questions now, just wanted to send you a hello as you are the mentor assigned to me. --Yodha74k (talk) 18:22, 31 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yodha74k, hi, welcome! Happy editing! In solidarity, Iseult ^Δx talk to me 16:17, 3 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings new Mentor! My question is regarding your pronouns: what's He/They? i always get confused whenever a normal/common pronounce like she or he is with 'They', can you please help me a bit with this consept of Pronounce? Because me, by myself, I go either by She/her or it/its. It was nice texting you! regards ÆWeirdø (Evelyn) Penny 1280 (talk) 05:20, 1 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Penny 1280, I go by either he/him or they/them pronouns; whichever set or combination you choose is fine. Thanks for asking for clarification, Evelyn! In solidarity, Iseult ^Δx talk to me 16:18, 3 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou Iseult! hope you do well! (⁠ ⁠╹⁠▽⁠╹⁠ ⁠) Penny 1280 (talk) 16:22, 3 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, this is an automated reminder as part of Global reminder bot to let you know that your permission "extendedmover" (Page movers) will expire on 00:00, 12 June 2026 (UTC). For most rights, you will need to renew at WP:PERM, unless you have been told otherwise when your right was approved. To opt out of user right expiry notifications, add yourself to m:Global reminder bot/Exclusion. Leaderbot (talk) 19:41, 5 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I am a student leader in a very recognized national student association. how can i create a profile about myself on wikipedia? --Daniel Arhin Oduro (talk) 00:54, 6 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]