User talk:MSK

How do I create pages and make italics or bold letters? --OrcytherealOrca (talk) 21:33, 28 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

'''bold text''' → bold text, ''italic text'' → italic text msk 22:17, 28 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

thanks! OrcytherealOrca (talk) 13:34, 8 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi MSK,

Thank you for taking the time to review the draft for Ensemble (fashion retailer). I wanted to quickly clarify the reason for the decline and explain my process (this is my first article in AfC so I understand that I might be getting some processes wrong.

I wrote the articles prose myself and after the very first draft decline for LLM use I sat down with a blank word document and rewrote the article from scratch with no LLM use at all. The draft went through 2 more declines before yours - the first for NPOV and the second for notability. I took the feedback and edited the draft in line with reviewer feedback which i sought from my reviewers on their talk pages and the AFC helpdesk.

I did not use ChatGPT to draft any of the content of the article. In the interest of full transparency, I used chatGPT in three ways: 1. Converting my word doc writeup which i did with footnote citations into Wikitext (ie. wikipedia formatting for citations etc.) which I assumed is fine as it is related to procedure and not content / wording. I did check to make sure it didn't change any words manually. 2. Understanding Wikipedia policy and procedures at the outset. eg. When I asked for additiontnal places I could ask for feedback, chatGPT suggested the AfC helpdesk. At the outset when I told it I wanted to write this page and asked how, it gave me instructions on how to do it through AfC and how to declare COI etc. 3. Following the NPOV feedback in my second decline and given my declared COI, I asked ChatGPT to flag passages / sentences that could sound promotional (it effectively flagged what I had identified myself). I rewrote these myself. (this was between the second draft declined for NPOV and the third declined for notability).

I wanted to clarify is the issue was using an LLM to convert to wikicode (I am happy to learn the semantics and do that manually myself), or whether there was some concern with a part of the articles prose (I am happy to rewrite those sections to satisfy any concerns).

Thank you very much.

PS. I don't know if word has meta-data etc. but i can share numerous versioned drafts of word documents, edit history screenshots if that would be helpful. SVP95 (talk) 08:13, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

When you used ChatGPT to convert your document to wikitext, it hallucinated sources, e.g "Ensemble, Tina Tahiliani Indian fashion show". Mint Lounge. Retrieved 1 September 2026. says the title is "Ensemble, Tina Tahiliani Indian fashion show" but the actual title is "Is Indian fashion entering its post-virality era?". I don't think this can be explained as just a formatting error. msk 14:26, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Sorry about that - it was completely my mistake. I checked that it hadn't made any changes to the article text, but had rather lazily trusted ChatGPT to format the citations with the correct information which I thought was mechanical without double-checking. Lesson learned!

I will go through and verify / update the URL sources within the wikicode block manually to ensure the citations are accurate before resubmiting.

Thank you very much for pointing this out. SVP95 (talk) 06:43, 4 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I'd like to contribute a new page about my uncle who was on the Bataan Death March in 1942-44 and ultimately died about a "Hell Ship" in Subic Bay, near Manila. I'm new at this. Can you point me to the specific steps and software requirements so what I do will be acceptable to Wikipedia? --James A Tooley (talk) 15:26, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Writing a new article is incredibly difficult, especially if you have a COI, like in this case. This means you have to publish your article through AfC, where it will be evaluated against the notability guidelines. Before you start writing, could you find the 3 best sources--that is, 3 sources that provide in-depth coverage of your uncle, are independent, and are reliable (so no blogs)--and share them here? Thanks. msk 17:04, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Sure ....

Here is an article from St. Thomas Academy in St. Paul, MN recognizing my uncle as one of it's WWII Alumni ... see pages 2-5 where William James Tooley is shown and reported on. https://issuu.com/stacadets/docs/saint_thomas_academy_saber_-_spring_2020_issue

This link will take you to a PDF, I put together about my uncle's story. It contains information I received from Dean Simmons, economics instructor and Archivist at St. Thomas Academy over the last month via email. In the PDF, I show the last letter my uncle sent to his father in Chicago, written on Feb. 11, 1942, before he was captured as a POW by the Japanese on the Bataan Peninsula, P.I. It also includes a picture of the Telegram the War Dept. sent to his father on December 6, 1942, telling him that his son was classified as a POW.

William J Tooley - A Soldier's Story

I've made this link available to family members but thought it should be available to a broader audience. James A Tooley (talk) 13:40, 7 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

The sources you presented are all primary sources and thus don't demonstrate eligibility for an article, however there might be sources. There was an United Press International that was circulated quite widely around December 1946 (e.g. https://www.newspapers.com/article/press-telegram-girl-shares-estate-of-man/208132089/), but without knowing more of his family history (the pdf you linked 404s) I can't really research further. msk 18:28, 12 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi MSK. I saw that you declined Draft:Upsun because the submission “appears to be a large language model output”. The draft was not generated by an LLM. Could you let me know what specifically in the draft led you to that conclusion? I’d like to understand the issue before making any further changes. Thanks, Toometa (talk) 19:43, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Could you let me know what specifically in the draft led you to that conclusion? I can't, sorry. Flagship LLMs now lack many of the "it's obvious" tells that we had 1-2 years ago, and much more of a general "AI vibe" that is really only apparent if one has read a lot of AI writing on Wikipedia. One note though, LLMs (Claude specifically) tend to leave "comments to reviewers" using {{AfC comment}} like the one you left, which contributed to the general "AI vibe" of the draft. Additionally, some general prose suggestions:

• The second paragraph of History should probably be moved to the Platform section
• Platform.sh operated with employees distributed across different countries. incorrect tense
• distributed across multiple time zones isn't this already implied with 120 employees in 21 countries? Regardless, "international" is probably a better descriptor.

msk 21:09, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, this is helpful.

Regarding the AfC comment, I added it because the previous decline had led to a discussion with the reviewer and then to a substantial rewrite of the draft. I thought it would be useful for the next reviewer to know that the previous feedback had been addressed and to have a direct link to that discussion. I wasn't aware that this was something Claude tends to do. I find that a little concerning as an AI tell, though, because leaving this kind of context for the next reviewer seems like good practice to me, and it would be unfortunate if editors became reluctant to do so because it might look AI-generated.

Regarding the prose suggestions, I kept the second paragraph in History because it describes how the company's distributed working model developed over time, rather than the platform itself. But I agree that either placement is defensible.

I used "operated" because I was describing Platform.sh during the period covered by the sources, rather than making a claim about how Upsun operates today. But I see how it could imply that this is no longer the case, so I'll change that.

And yes, I agree that the reference to multiple time zones is redundant after mentioning 120 employees in 21 countries.

Would you be comfortable with me making those changes and resubmitting the draft? Toometa (talk) 07:30, 2 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

because leaving this kind of context for the next reviewer seems like good practice to me It used to be, but it was also incredibly uncommon--what kind of new user discovers the {{AfC comment}} template and learns how to use it on their own? Though, as long as the prose reads well, it shouldn't matter all that much to reviewers.

Also, go ahead with the changes. By principle almost no AfC reviewer will review drafts upon request; as such I will not review this draft again. I have, however, left a comment for reviewers noting this conversation. msk 14:32, 2 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, will do. Toometa (talk) 18:31, 2 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

How do I create an update to existing text? --Prem jyoti baba (talk) 22:47, 2 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

In the article about Statesboro Blues, the section on Allman Brothers, it states Dickey Betts still plays slide on this number, live. This is unlikely as he passed away in 2024, so maybe he’s still sliding away but stretches the definition of “live” Prem jyoti baba (talk) 22:53, 2 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

There should be an "edit" button next to the "The Allman Brothers Band version" header, click it. It should open the editor. msk 23:05, 2 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Ok thanks I’ll try that Prem jyoti baba (talk) 14:45, 3 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Pls I want to see a pornographer wat should I do --Harry67677 (talk) 03:07, 3 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

I wouldn't know, however I have the nagging suspicion searching Google might surface useful results. Perhaps give that a try? msk 03:41, 3 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Note: JasonGraceREVAMP's mentor ARandomName123 is away.

Are there specific terms or words to use under an actors filmography chart if the character they play in a film has no specified name? Some films are unreleased and i am unable to find information about the role regarding the name. Thank you for your help! --JasonGraceREVAMP (talk) 03:09, 3 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

is that actor credited as anything in the credits? If so, use that name. If they were just an extra, then "extra" would probably also work. There aren't any rules about this, just use your best judgement. msk 03:42, 3 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I’ve tried that but still no clue how to make an entry Sorry I’m not used to this! --Prem jyoti baba (talk) 10:19, 3 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Does using the word "he" twice in a row count as a error in tone, instead should I use the refered to person? --.nexvii (talk) 15:16, 4 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Could you provide the full sentence where you are using "he he"? In most cases it would be a grammatical error but it is rarely grammatical. msk 15:31, 4 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello MSK! How do I go back to my article to make edits? --CrackerNinja (talk) 19:44, 6 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi MSK, I just wanted to clarify that I’ve already been officially warned about using LLM-generated text before, so I’ve been very careful about that. The writing in these drafts are my own. Most of my sources are in Spanish, so I translated the information into English and then wrote it in my own words.

I've now had two drafts declined for the same reason by you. I want to state and clarify very clearly that there is no AI use of any kind and I have never accepted AI use in the past.

Have a lovely day.

~~~~

Oswald Quinsley (talk) 23:15, 6 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

• ~2026-53898-94 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:DJ Jahmar (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

~2026-53898-94 (talk) 06:48, 7 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello @MSK, Thank you for the moved the page for The Paradise (film). Sincerely, AgentPanda🐼^(Tlk)|(Ctrb) 14:45, 7 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Dear MSK, Thank you for reviewing my draft. I already declared that I used ChatGPT to help suggest the main topics and organize the draft. I also submitted the ChatGPT shared link to show how I used it. Please also check the references in the draft. The links are working, and they include many independent, reliable, published sources that discuss 3JCN Physics Simulation and its use in physics education. English is my second language, so I sometimes use AI to help me with wording and organization. I hope the draft can be judged mainly by the Wikipedia requirements, such as reliable sources, independent coverage, notability, neutrality, and verifiability, instead of only whether AI was used to help with writing. 3JCN Physics Simulation has been used by students and teachers in many countries and has contributed to physics education. I believe the independent published sources showing this should be an important part of the review. Thank you very much for your time and consideration. Best regards, Thomas Nguyen ThomasNguyenTuan (talk) 23:44, 7 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

He also refused 2 of my drafts because I translated Spanish sources into English. I think that he did for that reason because he gave me no other answer just a generic " LLM" usage for the decline reason.

~~~~ Oswald Quinsley (talk) 06:44, 8 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi,sir ...I am sujata bhatti I don't know english very much so you can help me...?? --Sujata bhatti (talk) 06:58, 9 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

If you don't feel comfortable writing in English, you may want to try editing another language Wikipedia- see List of Wikipedias to find the language(s) you speak and write well in. Sarsenet•he/they•(talk) 08:42, 9 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi MSK,

I noticed that you removed all of my expansion to the South Pacific Cartel article on 6 October, citing WP:LLMPRV.

I'm honestly quite frustrated by this because I spent a considerable amount of time researching and expanding this specific article and that includes its history, conflict with Édgar Valdez Villarreal, and the arrests and decline of its leadership. I also included references to support the information I added naturally so.

Could you explain what specifically was wrong with my contributions? Was there an issue with the sources or the accuracy of the information because I am pretty sure that is not the case. You cannot simply remove my entire work with a lazy AI label and move on without an explanation. It is truly unprofessional and dismissive behaviour.

I've restored the adding and I'd appreciate an explanation rather than having my ENTIRE work remove just with a lazy excuse of a falsified labelling.

Thanks and have a great day with your birds,

Oswald Quinsley.

~~~~ Oswald Quinsley (talk) 01:32, 10 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Dear MSK,

Thank you for reviewing my draft, Draft:Luciano Corvaglia. I wrote the original Italian Wikipedia article after researching and personally checking the published sources. For the English version, I used ChatGPT to assist with the translation. I personally reviewed, edited, and checked the entire English text against the original article and the cited sources. Following your comments, I have substantially revised and shortened the draft and added the required translation attribution to its talk page. Please let me know if any further changes are needed before I resubmit it. Thank you for your help. Pepito65 Pepito65 (talk) 11:10, 10 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi, so sorry to bother you but I was wondering how to judge whether a species warrants its own Wikipedia article.

For example, I was looking into Grimmia plagiopodia (moss), mentioned in one of the many red links in the Grimmia article and researched a reasonable amount of info about it externally.

However I'm unsure whether creating a standalone article would be worthwhile when dedicated info is already available + accessible to read online on ie. established plant conservation networks.

I've read relevant guidelines but I'm struggling to apply them in practice. Any general help or direction would be rlly appreciated !! Thank you so much :^) --Hardnormaldaddy (talk) 06:34, 11 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Eukaryotic species are automatically notable (justify a page) because of WP:NSPECIES. I'm unsure whether creating a standalone article would be worthwhile when dedicated info is already available + accessible to read online on ie. established plant conservation networks. Most readers don't know where to find these resources though (e.g. me) so having a page on Wikipedia, even if it is just a stub with a link to the resource in the external links section, is still beneficial. msk 15:44, 11 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Oh okay I understand now, thank you for the help :) Hardnormaldaddy (talk) 00:58, 12 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello,

I am reviewing the deletion of “Istituto Marangoni Miami” and would like to understand how best to proceed in accordance with Wikipedia’s policies.

I understand the concerns raised about promotional language and AI-generated content. I would also like to review the deleted version to identify the specific issues and determine whether the topic is supported by sufficient independent, reliable sources for a standalone article.

Would it be possible to provide the deleted text in my userspace or as a draft for review?

I have a professional connection to the subject and will disclose this appropriately. I will not repost the previous version or attempt to circumvent the deletion decision.

Thank you for your guidance. Hanni Montana (talk) 09:35, 12 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

I will not respond to machine-generated messages. msk 16:10, 12 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Note: ZeroEntry's mentor ClaudineChionh is away.

What are the basic editing I can start with --ZeroEntry (talk) 12:20, 18 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

If you're going to do anti-vandalism patrolling on the article for improvement, you need to use clear, useful edit summaries when reverting, and leave appropriate warning notices. We're encouraging newbies to edit the article. Reverting them and not explaining why sends seriously mixed messages. In solidarity, asilvering (talk) 22:42, 19 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thank you for being my mentor. I've been looking at edits of other people to learn more on editing. There is one thing I noticed - when larger or longer edits are involved, some editors spread them across several edits. In other cases some do one big edit.

Is there a preferred method? --Jimjons (talk) 08:52, 20 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

(talk page stalker) Not really, do it how you wish. Please note that it can make it easier for other editors when it is seperated, but there is no restriction against Large edits given they still meet editorial Standards. Thanks, Strongshorts (talk) 08:54, 20 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi Strongshorts.

Thanks for the info. Very helpful.

Another question (2 actually):

1. I tried to do an edit with a word processor and then paste it to the Wikipedia page I'm editing. I got a warning message. If the text is mine and I use Word out of convenience, am I allowed to copy/paste?
2. I know it's a bit soon, but I saw on your page that you use tools like Twinkle and others, and also read about them a bit so my question is where can I find tools that help with edits and an explanation of what they are / how to use them, and am I allowed to use them, do I need to gain more edits, etc?

Jimjons (talk) 20:30, 20 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

1. It is fine, however as part of this whole AI craze thing that's been going on, Microsoft's crammed AI "tools" into every application imaginable, including Word--be careful not to use that, since it is disallowed.
2. Tool discoverability has been a headache for a long while now, but if you look on relevant guide pages (e.g. WP:RCP#Tools if you want to do anti-vandalism work) there will usually be a list of relevant scripts or gadgets that you can use. (Wikipedia:User scripts/List also has a list of all scripts.)

msk 20:36, 20 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi, you've been the second person to decline my draft for LLM-generated text when I wrote it by hand. I'm a bit confused as to what's tipping it off to appearing AI-generated, and how I might alter the article so that it isn't marked as such. Doikcorridor (talk) 00:53, 21 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

I've undone the decline; I had thought the original draft was AI generated and didn't find any contesting of the AI decline on your talk page so I assumed it was valid. Sorry about that. msk 01:00, 21 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Appreciate it! And no worries, thank you for your time. Doikcorridor (talk) 01:09, 21 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

HI again, I"m going over the articles that need work done as part of my self training. I came across an article that needs updating. (Qaym, a Saudi-based restaurant review service).. There is not a lot of info on it, but their linkedin page and RocketReach both say the service shut down in 2022. I can't find any other source on this. Is it ok to say that according to LnkedIn and/or RocketReach, the service shut down in 2022? I know they are normally not acceptable sources but for this info can they be used? --Jimjons (talk) 05:49, 22 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

I don't think that company is notable at all (that is, has enough coverage to justify an article), as such, I've nominated it for deletion. msk 22:30, 22 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thank you. And I agree - the page is weak. Just for future reference in more prominent cases, can LinkedIn, rocket reach and other such sources be used in any capacity as a source? Jimjons (talk) 21:00, 24 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

If a company is notable, there should be at least some amount of industry coverage/public legal paperwork/press releases of their closing, so you probably won't even have a scenario where citing LinkedIn is needed--in any case, LinkedIn, RocketReach, and similar should all be avoided as sources, since they do not undergo editorial oversight. modestly_scary^kookaburras 01:09, 25 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi,

Thanks for your review on my page:

Draft:Oracle Developer 2000

You declined the submission because of use of LLM. Since I am not a Fluent English speaker, I sometimes give it specific sentences so that they would sounds more native English, but the page was written by me, as I had the "privilege" of Using Oracle Developer 2000 as a young developer back in the days.

Can you please point me to specific areas where you think I need to revise, or should improve?

Thank you for your help!

YaEsOtoño (talk) 14:08, 23 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi, my comments about FOMO Baku:

1. I wrote the entry for FOMO Baku myself; I did not use artificial intelligence. 2. I verified the sources personally and take full responsibility for the content. 3. Any editor is welcome to check the sources. If my block is lifted, I will make any necessary corrections myself. Orkhano (talk) 18:43, 25 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

I've moved it to your userspace, where you can work on it in peace. Right now it does not show the nightclub meeting WP:NCORP, and it barely meets WP:NBUILDING -- given that it was ranked among the best clubs in the world, I would expect there to be more significant coverage that hasn't been discovered yet (perhaps in Azerbaijani). If you have any questions reply here, and I will try to answer them. modestly_scary^kookaburras 19:41, 25 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

I put a lot of work into this article. I was updating the scores. I feel like this article has been treated a bit unfairly. Can’t we edit my version instead? :/ Orkhano (talk) 20:06, 25 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

I don't see any scores being updated here, and the text reads like it is AI-generated (as is the edit summary). On the matter of AI use, that is also wholesale disallowed from making article content on azwiki, thus I've also asked on their noticeboards for assistance in cleaning up there. modestly_scary^kookaburras 21:17, 25 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

I understand the process. Can you point out the work you find inappropriate? It will be a bit easier Sid Prayag (talk) 08:49, 26 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Quoting from my edit summary: [...] I am assuming you are taking responsibility for this content. This [userspace draft] may be moved back to mainspace when all content authored by Kiilvish is removed. mw:Who Wrote That? may be useful. modestly_scary^kookaburras 16:30, 26 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello MSK, thank you for reviewing Draft:Jaeyeol Han. Could you clarify which passages raised the AI concern, and what specific changes would address it before resubmission? I am the subject of the draft and have disclosed my conflict of interest on my user page. Thank you. NeueMnemosyne (talk) 12:11, 27 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Sure. Rewrite the draft by hand, without any AI assistance at all. modestly_scary^kookaburras 14:20, 27 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

NeueMnemosyne Also, please disclose that you're using two accounts on your userpage. Sarsenet•he/they•(talk) 14:49, 27 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

How can I make a page on something --Interesting article Niviarsiaq (talk) 18:42, 27 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Can you check ✔it after I am done and make sure that I did well --Interesting article Niviarsiaq (talk) 18:54, 27 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Sure, though making a new page is among the hardest tasks on Wikipedia -- I recommend you read Help:Your first article. modestly_scary^kookaburras 18:56, 27 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

when I did edits without an account most people just deleted it except for Hundred revision and visions@ Interesting article Niviarsiaq (talk) 19:01, 27 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello --Mhliph (talk) 07:41, 28 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Who walk on the moon --Mhliph (talk) 07:46, 28 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

MSK - we have re-written our Marshall Steel draft in its entirety. Still confused as to which specific parts were determined to be AI but made sure to leave in some of the color and sacrifice some of the pith and precision of the previous which I am guessing triggered the rejection. This is our third attempt and hoping we can pass it through this time ;).- thank you for your time and all your contributions to wikipedia.

Draft:Marshall Steel Company Limited StephMarshall (talk) 17:03, 28 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

@StephMarshall Curious, who are you referring to by "we"? modestly_scary^kookaburras 17:04, 28 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

I worked with my sister on this to help review each line and re-draft. StephMarshall (talk) 17:06, 28 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. I'll try to look over the draft and provide feedback this afternoon (in a couple of hours). modestly_scary^kookaburras 17:07, 28 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thanks so much. No rush obvs and genuinely appreciate all of what you people do. StephMarshall (talk) 17:10, 28 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

FYI - i'll got back in and repopulate the wikilinks if the copy is approved. StephMarshall (talk) 18:50, 28 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

MSK - sorry to bother you again. I am not sure if you get pinged when I edit the post. I just did a final pass (found a few small things and a section that had become a bit bloated with uncecessary biographicals) and added the company logo and a photo. All noted in the wizard and editor. Hope that is all ok, and we are done. Thanks again. StephMarshall (talk) 22:14, 30 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello MSK, I was notified of your October 30 edit to Michael Cranford, with the summary linking to WP:LLMPRV. I made the corrections that were just rolled back because there were factual problems in the last series of edits, and there was carefully sourced material in the most recent version that filled important gaps. I am the subject of the article, I performed the revisions, and AI was only involved to make sure I conformed to Wikipedia guidelines and that the sources were accurate. So now, for example, the article places my philosophy degree at USC, but in fact I received it at UC Irvine. It reinstated material that wasn’t properly sourced, like the Biola teaching. So the article again contains factual errors and misses recent, objective sourced information that people researching my work will expect to locate. Could you clarify which contributions you considered eligible for presumptive removal and whether there is an underlying discussion I should read? Thank you, Michael Theinternetguru (talk) 19:59, 30 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

The 2026 WikiCup has come to an end. Our top scorers, based on the tournament point rankings (which can be seen here), are:

1. Generalissima (submissions) with 1077 tournament points, will receive the 1st place award.
2. Bgsu98 (submissions) with 1046 tournament points, will receive the 2nd place award.
3. MCE89 (submissions) with 762 tournament points, will receive the 3rd place award.
4. A.Cython (submissions) with 606' tournament points
5. Vestrian24Bio (submissions) with 537 tournament points
6. Reconrabbit (submissions) with 349 tournament points
7. BeanieFan11 (submissions) with 297 tournament points
8. Arconning (submissions) with 183 tournament points

Our three high scorers in the final round, who each got over 1,000 points, happen to all be among the top 8 as well:

1. Generalissima (submissions) with 2846 round points from 40 good articles, 4 pieces of featured content (including 2 featured articles), 11 DYK articles, and various reviews.
2. Bgsu98 (submissions) with 2603 round points from 43 good articles, 5 pieces of featured content (1 featured article and 4 featuyred lists), and various reviews.
3. Vestrian24Bio (submissions) with 1141 round points from 20 good articles, a good topic, a featured list, and 30 good article reviews.

The final round was very productive, and contestants had 29 featured articles, 8 featured lists, 1 featured picture, 150 good articles, 43 good topic articles, 189 article reviews, 28 did you know articles, and 4 in the news articles. Altogether, Wikipedia has benefited greatly from the activities of WikiCup competitors all through the contest. Well done everyone!

The top eight scorers will receive awards shortly. The following special awards will be made, based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. These prizes are awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field over the course of the competition.

• Generalissima (submissions) wins the following prizes:
  • The featured article prize, for 12 featured articles.
  • The featured picture prize, for submitting the only featured picture for the second year in a row.
  • The good article prize, for 82 good articles.
• Bgsu98 (submissions) wins the following prizes:
  • The featured list prize, for 21 featured lists.
  • The featured content reviewer prize, for 72 featured article reviews.
• Vestrian24Bio (submissions) wins the following prizes:
  • The featured topic prize, for 8 pages in featured topics.
  • The good topic prize, for 26 pages in good topics.
  • The good article reviewer prize, for 84 good article reviews.
• BabbaQ (submissions) wins the ITN prize, for 9 ITN pages.
• BeanieFan11 (submissions) wins the DYK prize, for 47 DYK pages.

A special mention also goes to these users who scored the highest in a particular category in a single round:

• A.Cython (submissions), for 20 good-topic articles in round 5.
• Olliefant (submissions), who withdrew during the competition but who had 38 featured-content reviews in round 2. Olliefant also had 43 good article reviews in round 1.
• The Robot Parade (submissions), for 5 ITN pages in round 1.

Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate. We are also looking for an experienced editor to help write the bimonthly newsletter. If you would like to help write next year's newsletters, please contact Epicgenius at his talk page.

The WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2027 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement!

On behalf of the judges, Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email), Epicgenius (talk · contribs · email), Frostly (talk · contribs · email), Guerillero (talk · contribs · email) and Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs · email):

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:13, 1 November 2026 (UTC)Reply

In our November 2026 newsletter, there was a mistake in calculating the final tournament point rankings (which have been updated here). We regret the error.

1. Generalissima (submissions) with 1461 tournament points, will receive the 1st place award.
2. Bgsu98 (submissions) with 1302 tournament points, will receive the 2nd place award.
3. Vestrian24Bio (submissions) with 793 tournament points, will receive the 3rd place award.
4. MCE89 (submissions) with 762 tournament points
5. A.Cython (submissions) with 606 tournament points
6. BeanieFan11 (submissions) with 425 tournament points
7. Reconrabbit (submissions) with 349 tournament points
8. Arconning (submissions) with 183 tournament points

On behalf of the judges, Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email), Epicgenius (talk · contribs · email), Frostly (talk · contribs · email), Guerillero (talk · contribs · email) and Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs · email):

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:42, 1 November 2026 (UTC)Reply

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Stone Key Partners. Because you closed the discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. CSGinger14 (talk) 02:51, 1 November 2026 (UTC)Reply

@CSGinger14 did you ask Explicit to restore the page to your draftspace? AFAIK you only asked them to reopen the discussion, which they said no to; however they never said they would not WP:RESTORE. It would probably be more efficient to restore, implement the sources you find, and move back to mainspace, rather than a long-winded DRV filing. modestly_scary^kookaburras 03:38, 1 November 2026 (UTC)Reply

@MSK Thanks, see my response at the DRV.

CSGinger14 (talk) 04:09, 1 November 2026 (UTC)Reply