Latest comment: 1 month ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The administrator elections process has officially started! Qualified editors are encouraged to find at least one experienced nominator. Self-nominations are also allowed. Please review instructions at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/October 2026/Candidates.
Here is the schedule:
September 29–October 5: Nominations phase (we are here)
October 8–12: Discussion phase
October 13–19: SecurePoll voting phase
Please note the following:
The requirements to run are identical to RFA—a prospective candidate must be extended confirmed. However, in practice, few candidates succeed without ~10K edits, some content creation, no recent behavioral issues, and a nominator.
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.
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.
Latest comment: 23 days ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Hello
I notice you keep an eye on main page errors; can I ask you something? I posted an error notice on 1st October (it was quite late, so it didn’t get dealt with) but I wondered how it managed to get there in the first place. It was posted on 3rd October last year (by an editor who has since been shown the door); the entry didn’t match the short description, or lead sentence of the main article, or the entry on the day page. Is that usual? Can someone just add what they see fit for a proposed inclusion? I had assumed items for OTD were simply copied over from the day page; is that not the case? And if accepted does it stay like that for future inclusions? I also noticed that only about half of the OTD items featured were on the day page; do the new ones get added, or are they archived elsewhere? Thank you in advance, Moonraker12 (talk) 21:05, 7 October 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Moonraker12: Hello! Thank you for your question. Unfortunately I don't work at OTD often so I can't give you the most informed answer, but this is what I know. As I understand it, up to a few days before the date, anyone can switch out or modify OTD entries. Usually we look for entries that haven't been featured recently that are up to good quality and are fairly interesting/important. Community involvement is at OTD, as with the rest of Wikipedia, an important part of it functioning. Unfortunately, this does mean that occasionally unsuitable articles or hooks like that one slip through the cracks. If you want to read more, additional information can be found on WP:OTD. Thanks, Chorchapu (talk|edits) 00:31, 8 October 2026 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for your comments. This caught my attention because I remember a similar thing happened when the Bethnal Green Disaster was described as a 'stampede' four times on OTD despite the article and day page entry saying it wasn’t, so I’m concerned that this particular description won’t re-surface in the future: Are they archived somewhere for future use? And if so can they be corrected? Regards, Moonraker12 (talk) 23:47, 8 October 2026 (UTC)Reply
Yes, you can see past entries, selections, and wording in each day's OTD page. For example, the history for 1 October can be seen here. Anyone can modify them unless they are for yesterday, today, or tomorrow. Each day also has a talk page; here is 1 October's. Unfortunately, these sorts of errors do occasionally happen (that's why we have WP:MPE!) but we try to minimise them by checking everything before it's published on the main page. It seems we didn't check well enough, for these examples, but hopefully we'll learn in the future. Thanks, Chorchapu (talk|edits) 00:00, 9 October 2026 (UTC)Reply
On 13 Oct, we will start the voting phase. The candidate subpages will close to public questions and discussion, and everyone will have 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.
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.
Latest comment: 22 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Dear Chorchapu, I have been made aware that the recommendation to use {{bots|allow=NervousBot}} blocks all other bots from editing your talk page. If you wish for other bots to be able to notify you, please remove it and add {{User:NervousBot/subscriber}}. If you do not update your {{bots}} template, you will continue receiving notifications from NervousBot.
I am very sorry for the inconvenience. If you have any questions, please leave a message at User talk:NervousBot.
Latest comment: 22 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Good evening.
Just a note, if english is not your first language, "Here was blurb added" is not proper english. Maybe "the blurb was added from this point"? Psephguru (talk) 18:51, 9 October 2026 (UTC)Reply
Hi, English is my first language but I tried to abbreviate or make it short. I wrote that pretty quick and looking back it's a bit oddly phrased but I think it's not unreadable. Chorchapu (talk|edits) 18:56, 9 October 2026 (UTC)Reply
October 2026 Administrator Elections – Voting Phase
October 13–19: 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.
Latest comment: 18 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
This award is given in recognition of Chorchapu for accumulating at least 10 points in the September 2026 NPP backlog drive. Your contributions helped review 14549 articles and 3163 redirects during the drive. Thank you so much for taking part and helping reduce the backlog! Max (talk) 16:27, 13 October 2026 (UTC)Reply
There is a substantial backlog of unsourced articles on Wikipedia, and we need your help! The purpose of this drive is to add sources to these unsourced articles and make a meaningful impact.
Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles cited.
Remember to tag your edit summary with NOV26, both to advertise the event and tally the points later using Edit Summary Search.
Latest comment: 3 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hey Chorchapu,
I have changed the license for File:Wikipedia notifications- I can only see 25 out of 48 notifications.png from just CC BY-SA to also include the GFDL using the Wikipedia screenshot template.
Since this isn't the first time I'm telling you about screenshot licensing (I know it's in good faith), I'd like to recommend Convenient Discussions to you, which allows for easy uploading and, more importantly, tagging, of Wikipedia screenshots. You can try taking a screenshot of this page and then paste it into the comment field once you have installed the script and you should see a dialog with this option: This is a screenshot of English Wikipedia or other Wikimedia project.
And yes, I have been recommended with this tool previously:) Happy editing! Hason-LEK-SIN ● 💬 ● 🧱 ● 🧪01:33, 29 October 2026 (UTC)Reply
Users may still edit the article, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the AfD notice from the article until the discussion is closed.
Have withdrawn, didn't realise it was at ITNC. I still believe it should be merged per rationale, but if others think it should be posted then I don't want to get in the way of that developing consensus. Kind regards, CNCin solidarity (talk) 21:48, 30 October 2026 (UTC)Reply
You are receiving this message because you created or are tracking these pages with the NervousBot template. To stop notifications for an article, remove it from the template; to stop notifications about pages you created, add {{User:NervousBot/subscriber|created=no}} to the template.
