User talk:CactusWriter

Latest comment: 19 days ago by CactusWriter in topic deletation english site of Cornel Stan

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2025).

Administrator changes

added Toadspike

removed

• Elahrairah
• Juliancolton
• Magnus Manske

CheckUser changes

added asilvering

Guideline and policy news

• The speedy deletion criteria U5 has been repealed, with U6 and U7 replacing it. See the FAQ for more clarifications.
• Community-designated contentious topics may now be enforced and appealed at the arbitration enforcement noticeboard (AE) as a result of an RfC.

Technical news

• You can enable a handy user info card next to usernames, which when clicked displays edit count, blocks, thanks, and other information. To enable this feature, visit Preferences → Appearance → Advanced options → Tick Enable the user info card

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Transgender healthcare and people has been closed
  • Uninvolved administrators may impose an AE participation restriction on any thread at the Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard.

Miscellaneous

• An unreferenced articles backlog drive is happening in November 2025 to reduce the backlog of articles tagged with {{Unreferenced }}. You can help reduce the backlog by adding citations to these articles. Sign up to participate!

---

First, thank you for the note and opportunity to get my article re-instated. I will do the necessary. That said, I would like to address what seems to be the two issues that drove the article into deletion. 1. Using ChatGPT. I literally started writing this piece last January - on my own, and my first crack at a Wikipedia entry. It's been a slow learning curve. I can imagine that the many, many edits and revisions that have been recommended over the past months have helped homogenize this piece such that it might very well seem AI-generated. With all due respect to the AI-sleuthing tool, from the start it's been my work, my words - informed by comments from reviewers. 2. Broken and 404 references. This is clearly the result of the long process I've been through. My bad for not checking them on my last submission - although this is the first time this has ever been an issue, so clearly after so many months the sources chose to archive those links. I will use the tools available to find them. Thanks for letting me vent, er, explain. Tmcfarlandpr (talk) 22:22, 7 November 2025 (UTC) Reply

Hello, Tmcfarlandpr. I've undeleted the Draft:Preston Cook so that you can correct any previously noted issues and establish the subject notability through quality referencing. My brief advice is to use only the best independent sources with significant coverage of the subject (e.g. Audubon Magazine, Minnesota Public Radio), and eliminate any that may be considered unreliable, promotional or do not cover the subject (Economic Times of India, Coastal Raptors). Good luck with your editing. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 19:37, 8 November 2025 (UTC) Reply

RE: Draft: Preston Cook It's been several months and I apologize for taking so long to get back to you with the edits and updates you suggested. I just finished the work and am hoping you can take a look at my latest, revised draft. Thank you ````Tmcfarlandpr (talk) 05:19, 19 January 2026 (UTC) Reply

@User:Tmcfarlandpr, you didn't actually remove any of the promotional text, unsourced text or unreliable sources (save one). I went ahead and whittled the text according to the sources and remove the PR links. If you believe it passes notability, you can use the submit button for review by experienced editors. However, please note that even if it is accepted into main space, it may be subject to deletion through an WP:AFD discussion. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 23:08, 20 January 2026 (UTC) Reply

CactusWriter . . . Thank you for your guidance, patience, whittling, and going above and beyond here. I absolutely appreciate your judgement and expertise. Despite months attempting to master the ins and outs of creating a clean, notable entry I clearly have more to learn. For example, I was surprised my Washington Post source didn't pass muster (perhaps because it was firewalled?). In any case, I'm going to cross my fingers and submit because I still believe Mr. Cook is a notable person - without him the Bald Eagle wouldn't have become our official national bird. WHICH leads me to asking a favor (obviously decline if you like): I'm also crafting a National Bird Initiative entry which tells the story of how the Bald Eagle came to be our national symbol (Draft: National Bird Initiative). Yes, there is overlap with Preston Cook's entry, but it was a significant moment in our country's history. I read the Bald Eagle Wikipedia page and it does make a brief reference to this subject (references 228/229), but neither piece tells the actual story nor mentions Mr. Cook. Given the significant coverage by reliable sources I think it's notable. Once I re-work that piece (more substantively than I did this one) can I send it to you for a look? Again, thank you! Tmcfarlandpr (talk) 20:49, 21 January 2026 (UTC) Reply

Tmcfarlandpr, you're welcome. However, I only did a bit of editing because I was called upon to provide a WP:REFUND. Generally, I prefer to avoid paid editors and public relations employees because they have a fundamental conflict with WP:NPOV. And NPOV is a foundation of an encyclopedia. There are already editors at AFC who are providing you with good advice. Listen to their guidance. Good luck with your editing. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 00:32, 23 January 2026 (UTC) Reply

Would it be OK if "Peter Park" redirected to Northwestern California University School of Law#Notable alumni? --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:49, 16 November 2025 (UTC) Reply

Hi, Jax 0677. I don't see a good reason to create a redirect to that page. The subject appears to be non-notable per WP:BLP1E and, as such, is unlikely to ever be the subject of an expanded article. Whereas, other Peter Parks, for example, this Peter Park, appear to be more viable subjects for an expanded articles or redirects. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 20:25, 16 November 2025 (UTC) Reply

FYI, I just created Peter Park (disambiguation). --Jax 0677 (talk) 16:00, 19 November 2025 (UTC) Reply

Looks good. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 17:00, 21 November 2025 (UTC) Reply

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Edward Asare. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Ruby D-Brown (talk) 07:16, 20 November 2025 (UTC) Reply

OK — CactusWriter ^(talk) 22:07, 21 November 2025 (UTC) Reply

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2025).

Administrator changes

added

• Chaotic Enby
• Rjjiii

readded Valereee

removed

• Fathoms Below
• Tamzin

CheckUser changes

removed Spicy

Technical news

• Starting on November 4, the IP addresses of logged-out editors are no longer being publicly displayed. Instead, they will have a temporary account associated with their edits.
• Administrators will now find that Special:MergeHistory is now significantly more flexible about what it can merge. It can now merge sections taken from the middle of the history of the source (rather than only the start) and insert revisions anywhere in the history of the destination page (rather than only the start). T382958

Miscellaneous

• The December 2025 administrator elections are scheduled from Nov 25 – Dec 15.
• An Articles for Creation backlog drive is happening in December 2025, with over 1,000 drafts awaiting review from the past two months. In addition to AfC participants, all administrators and new page patrollers can help review using the Yet Another AFC Helper Script, which can be enabled in the Gadgets settings. Sign up here to participate!

---

Hi CactusWriter, I noticed you deleted this page under WP:U2, so thanks for doing that. However, there were a couple dozen transclusions of this userpage on other editors' userpages, as it was originally intended to be a userbox before being moved some years ago. I've fixed all of these transclusions now, but this is just a heads up that this is why I left a note on the (non-existent) user's talk page rather than deleting it myself (I've deleted the talk page now). – Epicgenius (talk) 17:24, 24 December 2025 (UTC) Reply

Hi, Epicgenius. Thanks for the explanation and your clean-up. I didn't see your explanatory note on the talk page. (I think it was probably left during the couple of minutes I went down a rabbit hole tracing User:UBX and tried to figure out what was going on there.) But I should have checked for any transclusions after deleting. Thanks again for the heads-up. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 18:48, 24 December 2025 (UTC) Reply

Abishe (talk) 12:23, 25 December 2025 (UTC) Reply

Can you please restore Rats: The Rusical? This was accepted at Articles for Creation. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:36, 1 January 2026 (UTC) Reply

Hi, Another Believer. I can. But let's first check with @User:Olliefant to see if when they moved the article from AFC to Main Space, they took into account the identical language and issues from the previous AFD-deleted version. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 20:48, 1 January 2026 (UTC) Reply

Related: User_talk:Another_Believer#Lip_Sync_LaLaPaRuza_Smackdown_–_Reunited ---Another Believer _(Talk) 23:51, 1 January 2026 (UTC) Reply

Thanks for the related AFD link (however WP:OTHERSTUFF is not a valid arguement.) . More importantly, I see that User:Olliefant has now responded with this reply on your talk page -- indicating that they would have removed the speedy tag if they had seen it. Given their response, I have restored the page with instruction: if deletion is sought again, it would require a new AFD. Best — CactusWriter ^(talk) 19:57, 2 January 2026 (UTC) Reply

Thank you ---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:04, 2 January 2026 (UTC) Reply

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2025).

Guideline and policy news

• All general sanctions imposed by the community may now be enforced at the Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard (WP:AE) as a result of a recent RfC.
• Due to the result of a recent RFC, the administrator recall process is amended to extend the deadline for a re-request for adminship to 30 days or the next administrator election, whichever is later.
• Changes to the Access to Temporary Account IP Addresses Policy's disclosure rules include broadening the consecutive-blocks exception to cover all admin actions and removing the requirement to revision-delete permissible disclosures once they become unnecessary (instead requiring only their removal). See WP:TAIVDISCLOSE for more information.

Arbitration

• Following the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been elected to the Arbitration Committee: Aoidh , Asilvering , Girth Summit , Guerillero , HJ Mitchell , HouseBlaster , Izno , Sdrqaz , SilverLocust .
• The arbitration case Pbsouthwood has been suspended.

---

---

Hi CactusWriter, I noticed you deleted Jai. C under G8. I believe this was a technical error (or I would like to work on the content in my Sandbox). Could you please restore it or move it to my user space?". Writer Nagraj (talk) 05:10, 24 January 2026 (UTC) Reply

Hello, @User:Writer Nagraj. That is incorrect. That article was not deleted under WP:G8. (I think you may be confusing it with the article's talk page Talk:Jai. C.) The main article was deleted because of a consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jai. C. The consensus opinion among all discussion participants (other than you) was that the subject did not meet any of various notability criteria due to a lack of WP:SIGCOV in independent reliable sources. I can restore and draftify the article for you. However, it would be improper to duplicate a page about the same person which you have already created in main space. (Please see Content Fork.) Isn't Jaishankar Chigurula (Film director) the same person? — CactusWriter ^(talk) 20:54, 24 January 2026 (UTC) Reply

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

Arbitration

• Due to the result of a recent motion, a rough consensus of administrators at the arbitration enforcement noticeboard may impose an expanded topic ban on Israel, Israelis, Jews, Judaism, Palestine, Palestinians, Islam, and/or Arabs, if an editor's Arab-Israeli conflict topic ban is determined to be insufficient to prevent disruption. At least one diff per area expanded into should be cited.

Miscellaneous

• Voting in the 2026 Steward elections started on 06 February 2026 at 14:00 (UTC) and will end on 27 February 2026 at 14:00 (UTC). The confirmation process for current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.

---

Hey, I saw you deleted Pianie as an WP:R3, meaning it's a "recently created, implausible redirect". However, the redirect was created in 2007 so it is not recently created. Can you please restore? -- Tavix ^(talk) 00:00, 11 February 2026 (UTC) Reply

Done. You may wish to address the current RFD. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 00:06, 11 February 2026 (UTC) Reply

Thanks! I see no need to address the current RFD though. -- Tavix ^(talk) 00:09, 11 February 2026 (UTC) Reply

Hello, CactusWriter. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Roger Armstrong".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:49, 15 February 2026 (UTC) Reply

The article clearly fails GNG, due to the lack of significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Just because there is a bunch of keep !votes, non notable articles should not be kept. @CycloneYoris relisted the discussion with the comment " Further policy-based input would be helpful. Are the sources presented by the keep !voters above enough for this to pass GNG?" but there was no substantial policy-based input neither the sources presented by the Keep !voters were proved sufficient to pass GNG.

I would like to request a "relisting" for 7 days to get a better consensus.

Thank you in advance! Zuck28 (talk) 13:52, 21 February 2026 (UTC) Reply

Hello, Zuck28. Here was my analysis of that close: You opened the AFD stating that the subject did not pass WP:GNG. After the first 7 day period, the only two participants felt there was enough sourcing to pass GNG. This left the discussion as essentially "No Consensus" which would have meant a de facto keep if had been closed with only that level of participation. So CycloneYoris made the correct decision to relist, specifically asking for further input on whether or not the sources passed GNG. After 7 more days, another two more editors answered that question and agreed with the previous participants that there was enough sourcing to pass GNG. You were the only participant arguing against the sourcing. (Note that I discounted the comment by the banned sock account.) After 14 days, with substantive comments from all participants, there was a discernible consensus for "Keep." I understand that you are disappointed that the discussion did not agree with your position. But I don't think another relist would get sufficient participation for a different outcome. Of course, you have the option of submitting this to WP:DRV if you still disagree with my close. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 19:09, 21 February 2026 (UTC) Reply

I totally respect your analysis. And I do not doubt your decisions, it was just a relisting request. Also, I am not disappointed that the discussion did not agree with my positions, it is completely okay, for instance, I have withdrawn my nomination once the notability was established by other experienced editors. I respect the consensus, but the only concern was that the !Keep voters were not able to establish the notability. By the way, I started a topic of discussion on the article's talk page about it. Thank you for your detailed response. Happy editing! Zuck28 (talk) 00:23, 23 February 2026 (UTC) Reply

Hi, I recently asked for the page Tabakh Saleh to be deleted, but I’ve changed my mind. I realized I have much better sources to add and I know how to fix the issues now. Could you please restore it, but put it in the Draft space? I want to work on it there until it’s ready. Also, you can check my request for undeletion here. --Caravelli (talk) 08:11, 24 February 2026 (UTC) Reply

Hi, Caravelli. I see your page has already been draftified to Draft:Tabakh Saleh through your request for undeletion. Cheers — CactusWriter ^(talk) 18:28, 26 February 2026 (UTC) Reply

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

Administrator changes

removed

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

CheckUser changes

removed Ks0stm

Oversight changes

removed Ks0stm

Guideline and policy news

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

Arbitration

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

Miscellaneous

• Following the 2026 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: A09, AmandaNP, Barras, Count Count, M7, SHB2000, Teles and VIGNERON.
• An Unreferenced articles backlog drive is taking place in March 2026 to reduce the backlog of articles tagged with {{Unreferenced }}. You can help reduce the backlog by adding citations to these articles. Sign up to participate!

---

Could you reopen this? I had it up to comment on and it was closed before I got a chance. I think at a minimum there is a rationale to redirect it to food, but it looks like Great Depression in Australia#Sustenance would be a valid target as well, meaning this should be fixed as a dab for those two at least. ← Metallurgist (talk) 22:13, 4 March 2026 (UTC) Reply

Hi, Metallurgist. I'm sorry that you wanted to comment in that AFD discussion but didn't get the opportunity. However, it was closed after the standard 7-day discussion period. I noted that the four participants agreed the page not only failed WP:NOTDICT but that it was also invalid as a DAB page. And both food and Great Depression in Australia#Sustenance were already included as links on the page. So even with your comment, I doubt the consensus of the discussion for deletion would have changed. I can restore the page as a draft or sandbox to you if you want to build a proper disambiguation page from it. Then perhaps you can request the AFD's OP or other participants of the discussion to review your reconstructed DAB page. Let me know. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 19:52, 5 March 2026 (UTC) Reply

I noticed my template was speedily deleted before a discussion was even held regarding its status. I'm aware the page was a recreation of a previous page that was deleted due to being overdetailed. The recent template that I created addressed the previous problems by reaching satisfactory length, but it was deleted without notice rather quickly. May you perform a second reexamination of the page to determine whether or not its suited for remaining on Wikipedia? — TheFloridaTyper (talk) 19:00, 7 March 2026 (UTC) Reply

Hello, TheFloridaTyper. You did participate in the discussion several weeks ago at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2025_December_30#Template:Evolution_of_Warner_Bros._Discovery. All of the other editors in that discussion noted the template failed MOS:DONTHIDE guideline because the information is more properly contained in the article. Note that the guideline states "Templates should not normally be used to store article text, as this makes it more difficult to edit the content. They should also not be used to "collapse" or "hide" content from the reader." You then recreated a substantially identical template -- only with a few less listed items -- but now under a different name. This definitely qualified for speedy deletion as a WP:G4 repost. If you do not understand the reason for the template failing the guidelines, I suggest that you ask for clarification from the more experienced template editors who participated in the AFD. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 19:43, 7 March 2026 (UTC) Reply

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Remove rights from admins. 浅村しき (talk) 18:52, 22 March 2026 (UTC) Reply

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

Administrator changes

added

• ARandomName123

removed

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

Checkuser changes

removed Giraffer

Oversight changes

added Kj cheetham

removed Giraffer

Guideline and policy news

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

Arbitration

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

---

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:27, 8 April 2026 (UTC) Reply

Thanks, Gerda! — CactusWriter ^(talk) 16:34, 8 April 2026 (UTC) Reply

Thank you! — CactusWriter ^(talk) 21:53, 11 April 2026 (UTC) Reply

Thank you! — CactusWriter ^(talk) 21:53, 11 April 2026 (UTC) Reply

Hi! You deleted Pax Judaica and then created a redirect to Greater Israel in its place. That's OK according to the AFD discussion, but so far we don't mention "Pax Judaica" on the target page, which violates WP:RASTONISH. We should add a sentence or two about it, and references from the deleted article would be useful for that. Please undelete the article and then redirect it. Thanks! — Chrisahn (talk) 07:10, 12 April 2026 (UTC) Reply

Done — CactusWriter ^(talk) 20:47, 13 April 2026 (UTC) Reply

Hello. You speedy deleted Webisoft earlier, if I remember correctly it was created by a blocked user. A fresh account just showed up and created Webisoft (company) -- didn't tag it just yet because I think there's some socking going on. Was hoping you could take a look. Thank you, MediaKyle (talk) 13:17, 12 April 2026 (UTC) Reply

Yes, the new account recreating the page is suspicious. And there are a few other new accounts which seem to be working on the blocked account's pages. I'm not sure that there's enough clear proof of socking to file an SPI yet. In the meantime, I've moved that new page to Draft:Webisoft (company). — CactusWriter ^(talk) 20:20, 12 April 2026 (UTC) Reply

Thank you for getting back to me. I found it interesting that the editor who recreated it also added a logo to RateHighway, currently at AfD (with some interesting comments) ... that particular article was created by a different SPA with a vaguely similar username. Perhaps the same paid editor, or multiple fighting for the job? I'll keep an eye on it and see what happens. Cheers, MediaKyle (talk) 20:35, 12 April 2026 (UTC) Reply

The redirect IPad with retina display 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 Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 April 18 § IPad with retina display until a consensus is reached. ~ŤheŴubṂachine-840≈ 16:51, 18 April 2026 (UTC) Reply

Hey @CactusWriter, I noticed you declined the speedy deletion of the userpage User:KuyáMóHirowó on round things & blanked instead. Does G5 apply only for pages created after the exact account was blocked? The userpage was created by an LTA (see m:special:redirect/logid/66210311), so I thought the any pages created via the sock account after the earliest block or ban of any of that person's accounts qualify for G5 clause of WP:G5 would apply; however, if I should just blank instead of requesting speedy deletion in the future for similar cases, please let me know. Thanks, Staraction (talk · contribs) 17:58, 24 April 2026 (UTC) (please ping on reply)Reply

Hi, @Staraction. My review of that tag showed User:KuyáMóHirowó on round things was only blocked as a Vandalism Only Account and the block occurred eleven minutes after they created their user page pretending to be a legitimate doppelganger account. Although I suspect they were a sock, I found no evidence of an SPI result, nor anything on their global lock. Perhaps I missed something? You are correct that WP:G5 only applies "...while the user was actually banned or blocked. A page created before the ban or block was imposed or after it was lifted or expired will not qualify under this criterion." (I know that 11 minutes was pretty close, but I usually follow letter-of-the-law in these cases.) So blanking the page with the false doppelganger template was a better choice. However, I do place questionable pages like this on my watchlist just in case a sock returns later. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 23:08, 24 April 2026 (UTC) Reply

Hi @CactusWriter, thanks for your reply. That evening there were a couple other accounts that had similar, DUCKy contributions as the user with the userpage in question (see diff from blocked LTA, diff from our user in question), and I thought the global lock as "Long-term abuse" suggested that this was a sock account. That being said, I suppose there's not much point in trying to hash out this particular userpage. In future I perhaps should highlight the previously blocked accounts that have DUCKy behaviour, like this? Or should I just refrain from G5-ing accounts that appear to be DUCKs? Thanks, Staraction (talk · contribs) 01:32, 25 April 2026 (UTC) (please ping on reply) somehow, I also didn't get your previous ping...we'll see if it works this time, I guessReply

@Staraction:, thanks for the diffs. Your first diff certainly shows a ducky relationship to this account and this account because of obvious edit summaries and both of those were blocked on May 8. I've gone ahead and deleted the user page based on that. Yes, pointing in the right direction can help some of us more near-sighted Admins find our way. Either way, please go ahead and keep tagging the G5 accounts -- you appear to be doing great work on tracking these moving targets. Best — CactusWriter ^(talk) 19:45, 25 April 2026 (UTC) Reply

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

Administrator changes

readded

• Deepfriedokra

removed

• EvanProdromou
• Wouterstomp

Interface administrator changes

removed L235

added Chaotic Enby

CheckUser changes

removed

• TheresNoTime
• Versageek

Oversight changes

removed Moneytrees

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

• Changes to user permissions made from Meta are now included in the local user permissions log (T6055).
• The autoconfirmed user group will soon be modified such that the four-day account age requirement begins when an account makes its first edit (T418484).

Arbitration

• The arbitration case SchroCat has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case closed on 15 April.
• Per a recent motion, appeals of blocks from the conflict-of-interest VRT queue are, by default, appealed on-wiki through the normal unblock process. However, they may be heard by the Committee if COIVRTers disagree on the interpretation of the evidence or believe ArbCom would be better suited to hear the appeal. Administrators are also advised that loosening or lifting such blocks without the consent of someone with access to the queue or ArbCom can be grounds for desysopping.
• Per a recent motion, restrictions issued directly by the Committee may now be enforced with blocks which work exactly like contentious topic blocks.
• The arbitration case Maghreb has been closed.

Miscellaneous

• The May 2026 administrator elections are scheduled to run from April 29 to May 19. The call for candidates ends May 5.
• The 2026 Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) election is scheduled to run from April 25 to June 1. Candidacy submissions close on May 10.
• A new noticeboard for non-urgent, batch page protection requests has been created, primarily for the enforcement of contentious topic restrictions.

---

I made a wiki page for my micronation I've had sense 2022 and you got it removed for it being a "Hoax"? It's not a Hoax and I've again, been working on this sense 2022 and I would just like to know if there's some way you could delete your report or explain why you believe that this is a hoax. Thank you Jaxson Emke (talk) 00:56, 12 May 2026 (UTC) Reply

Hello, Jason Emke. It was noted that the content you created provided no valid reliable sources. While some leeway is given to contributing editors to have some extraneous writings, Wikipedia is not a general hosting service nor is it a personal website for WP:Original research. I would suggest that you also read both WP:MADEUP and WP:UP#GOALS. If you have further questions, please ask. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 01:15, 12 May 2026 (UTC) Reply

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

Administrator changes

added

• Asukite
• Bobby Cohn
• Bonadea
• Ca
• Drm310
• Reconrabbit
• Sammi Brie

readded

• Tamzin
• TonyBallioni

removed

• Ezhiki
• Queen of Hearts

Bureaucrat changes

removed

• WereSpielChequers

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, the "persistent usage of large language models" has been included as a common reason for a block.

Technical news

• Mandatory 2FA for bureaucrats: Bureaucrats without two-factor authentication (2FA) enabled have already lost access to their advanced rights on 26 May. Those who do not enable 2FA may be automatically removed from the groups in mid-June 2026, and from that point onward, new members must have 2FA enabled before they can be added. (T423119, T423120)

Arbitration

• The arbitration case SchroCat has been closed.
• The arbitration case Michael Jackson has opened. Evidence submissions in this case closes on 1 June.

Miscellaneous

• Voting for the 2026 Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) election closes on 1 June.

---

Hi, it would appear the editor that originally created Virunga Air Cargo has re-created the page as a redirect, despite the AfD being closed as a delete... can you perhaps re-delete? Danners430 _{tweaks made} 17:53, 24 June 2026 (UTC) Reply

Hi, Danners430. The consensus at the AFD was that the page should be deleted because there was not enough coverage to allow a stand-alone article. (The company existed but there were only brief mentions in the sources.) A redirect is fine, since it is not a recreation of the original article -- it simply points to a page where the company is listed. (See WP:R#DELETE) If you believe there is an issue with the page where Virunga Air Cargo is listed, then you should address that there. Best — CactusWriter ^(talk) 19:19, 24 June 2026 (UTC) Reply

Then I'm very confused - I originally proposed the redirect be reinstated at the AfD, but then all the voters voted delete instead instead of redirect... Danners430 _{tweaks made} 19:21, 24 June 2026 (UTC) Reply

I see no proposal or even mention of REDIRECT by you at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Virunga Air Cargo. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 19:31, 24 June 2026 (UTC) Reply

Ah, I'm mistaken - I selected "draftify", not "redirect", that's what it was. My memory failed me. I nominated it because it had been moved from draftspace long before it was ready, and I wanted to incubate it back - but it was deleted instead. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 19:33, 24 June 2026 (UTC) Reply

It's best to be very specific in your nomination. You didn't actually say you wanted it draftified again either -- so all participants will assume you are requesting deletion. After all, it is listed at Articles For Deletion. Sometimes it's really necessary to spell everything out. In the long run, though, I think the result was the correct decision. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 19:52, 24 June 2026 (UTC) Reply

I'm blaming Twinkle for that - I did select Draftify in the Twinkle menu... perhaps one for the maintainers! Danners430 _{tweaks made} 19:53, 24 June 2026 (UTC) Reply

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

Administrator changes

added

• Chipmunkdavis
• TechnoSquirrel69

removed

• Mlaffs
• SpuriousQ
• Lectonar
• Dennis Brown
• Hog Farm

CheckUser changes

readded

• Giraffer
• TonyBallioni

removed

• Dbeef
• EdJohnston

Oversight changes

readded

• Giraffer
• TonyBallioni

removed L235

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment asks whether the criteria for autoconfirmed and extended confirmed should be modified.
• A request for comment proposes an addendum for the Real name section of the Username policy.

Technical news

• The special page Special:RangeCalculator has been created for any users to use to find an IP range. (phab:T268429)
• The "indefinitely" button in Special:Block for temporary accounts can be replaced with a preferred block duration stated on MediaWiki:ipb-indefinite-expiry-temporary-account. (phab:T427125)

Arbitration

• Following a series of motions, changes to the contentious topics procedure to restructure awareness have been implemented.
• The arbitration case Michael Jackson has been closed.

Miscellaneous

• The 2026 Developing Countries WikiContest will run from 1July to 30September. Sign up now !
• 10 candidates have been appointed to the U4C.

---

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Timothy Jordan II, a link pointing to the disambiguation page Number One Fan was added.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 7 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Could you please undo the deletion? It doesn't help anyone. If someone is looking for him, they can find information here. Anyone not looking for information about Mr. Stan won't end up here. I could also send you a list of new publications — for example, with Springer Nature — or honors received since 2020, or enter them by myself. Mr. Stan is no a "normal bloke doing his job", he is a leading authority in his field. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thermodynamics01 (talk • contribs) 04:13, 13 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Hello, Thermodynamics01. The article was deleted after the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cornel Stan discussion determined that the subject does not meet the notability requirements for WP:NPROF. It was specifically noted in the discussion his membership in the Academy was neither highly selective nor prestigious, and his professorship was an honorary visiting position. Please understand that lack of notability for a Wikipedia article is not an evaluation of the person's work or life -- only that there may not be enough qualification for a stand-alone encyclopedic article. If you disagree with the deletion, you are welcome to submit a request at WP:DELREV. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 16:39, 13 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Thank you for your answer CactusWriter!

First of all, I would like to try to change your mind about the final decision to delete the page.

Here are some more recent links that likely weren't listed on the page yet:

Prof. Stan - President of Scientific & Technical Committee of following International Congresses:

https://siarcongress.eu/index.php/amma/2025

https://conat.ro/index.php/conat/2024

Scientific Books:

https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-662-64162-0_3

Energy-scenarios-for-the-future (2025) https://www.springerprofessional.de/energy-scenarios-for-the-future/27420642

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NciY5Gfa7b4&t=48s&pp=ygULY29ybmVsIHN0YW4%3D

For a retired person, those are certainly some impressive achievements, and I hope these examples have satisfied you to reverse the deletion. Thermodynamics01 (talk) 12:14, 14 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Thermodynamics01, an administrator only determines consensus of the AFD discussion -- we are uninvolved in the AFD discussion itself. As I stated above, you are welcome to submit a request at Deletion Review. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 23:40, 14 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

== Deletion review for Cornel Stan ==

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Cornel Stan. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Thermodynamics01 (talk) 09:12, 15 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

I hope I have done everything correct now! Best regards Thermodynamics01 (talk) 09:12, 15 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Yes, you have done it correctly. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 19:23, 15 July 2026 (UTC) Reply