User talk:Dclemens1971

Follow-up on refimprove tag (Luiza Andaluz)

Hi, I just wanted to follow up regarding the refimprove tag on Luiza Andaluz. Since I’ve added multiple sources and expanded the references section, I’d appreciate it if you could let me know whether further improvements are still needed, or if there are specific areas that require additional citations. Thanks again for your time. Best-- Saji • talk 17:20, 6 September 2026 (UTC)

Yes, it looks like every paragraph is appropriately cited. Thanks @Sajjadmrt! Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:19, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

'Soft redirects' in mainspace

Hello–regards on the newly minted mop! Today, I fixed four pages you converted to redirects. I may also have done this to pages that you have converted in a similar manner in the past.

Please take a look at WP:SOFTBLAR; plain (i.e. non-specialized) soft redirects are not used in the mainspace. Also, less importantly, rcats are not used on soft redirects (ibid.).

Warmest regards, — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 04:32, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

@Godsy, thanks for the note. What were the pages you needed to clean up? Dclemens1971 (talk) 10:03, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

Kendriya Vidyalaya No. 2, VizagKendriya Vidyalaya No. 2, Vizag, Harinavi DVAS High SchoolHarinavi DVAS High School, Shillong CollegeShillong College, & Don Bosco High School, HojaiDon Bosco High School, Hojai. Results of discussions that you closed; your edits to the mentioned pages were automated. — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 12:29, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

@Godsy Thank you, yes, these were done with XFCcloser, whose instructions use the language of "soft redirect" to describe a redirect that may be reverted without discussion because there was neither quorum nor any objection. Thanks for flagging that using that option creates an issue in how the redirect is formatted. Dclemens1971 (talk) 13:08, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

Yup, unfortunately "soft redirects" originally meant a completely different thing. Best ot close them as soft BLAR using the Custom option and then redirect it yourself. FaviFake (talk) 08:44, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

DYK for Chapel of the Apostles

On 9 September 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Chapel of the Apostles, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the cross-bracing trusses and geometric windows of the Chapel of the Apostles (pictured) were said to evoke a "multifaceted diamond"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Chapel of the Apostles. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (Chapel of the Apostles), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

Launchballer 00:02, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

Anniversaries notes

Out of curiosity, but as I'm not sure if it could be an actual error, I'll ask here, if you don't mind. In Selected_anniversaries/September_9 there is a "Notes" section, that mention two blurbs that "should not appear", but they actually currently are:

Residence Act appears on July 16, so Washington DC should not appear in the same year

Invasion of Poland appears on September 1, so Battle of Hel should not appear in the same year

Los Angeles appears on September 4, so California should not appear in the same year

It is something worthy mention, or those "notes" are purely optional opinion of some kind? Also weird enough is that only "Invasion of Poland" part is being true, other two articles not appeared on a given days (though both were in "staging area"). ~2026-48732-95 (talk) 02:17, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-48732-95, sorry, I am not a regular at OTD, just an admin who happened to check ERRORS when you posted. I'd suggest asking at WT:OTD. Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:23, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

Sorry for bother, and thanks for a hint, will do. ~2026-48732-95 (talk) 02:30, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Haakon VIII's swearing as King of Norway

Letting you know that the subject of this AfD, which you closed as a snowball merge, is currently up for deletion. J947 ‡ ^edits 05:14, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

Is the idea behind the notification somehow that the consensus in the AfD was something other than merge? Dclemens1971 (talk) 05:17, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

Not in my eyes. The idea is that no merge has been carried out – nor, it appears, will it – despite the consensus you found in the AfD to the contrary. J947 ‡ ^edits 05:20, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, I guess. I don't really have any interest in this subject and assumed interested editors would quickly carry out the merge since that was the strong consensus. If no one was interested enough to carry out the merge, it's up to interested editors to figure out what's next. Dclemens1971 (talk) 05:22, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Solicited administrator actions

The next time someone pings you to a discussion to ask you to close it, you can point them here. Cheers! BD2412 T 21:46, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Closing merge nominations

Heya, since I see you often close merge nominations (thank you for your AfD work, by the way!), I wanted to ask you if you could kindly also update the tag on the destination article from "{{merge" to "{{merging" when closing as "merge" (example) or remove the tag when closing as "keep" and "no consensus". Unfortunately, WP:XFDcloser doesn't do this automatically (it's being worked on) so I've been doing it manually, but maybe you could help me out with that :)   FaviFake (talk) 08:46, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

@FaviFake Thanks for the update. Didn't realise XfDcloser wasn't closing these properly. I'll avoid closing merges for the time being. Dclemens1971 (talk) 22:06, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Oh, well, I can always continue to fix it for you if you don't want to do it, as I've been doing for most of other closers. But since it's just a matter of changing three characters (or removing 1 line, in case of non-merge closures), I thought you could do it :)   FaviFake (talk) 23:45, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

@FaviFake OK, I need to take a closer look at the steps. Dclemens1971 (talk) 00:13, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

Sure! please let me know if you need anything! In short, on the destination article change "merge" to "merging" if there's consensus to merge, otherwise remove the merge tag entirely. FaviFake (talk) 00:21, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

DYK for Bryan Hollon

On 13 September 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Bryan Hollon, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that as conspiracy theories like QAnon spread among U.S. evangelicals, a theologian called for clergy to explain from their pulpits why the theories are false? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bryan Hollon. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (Bryan Hollon), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

Zzz plant (talk) 00:03, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

Nomination of Marvy for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Marvy, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marvy until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

WMT Digital

You deleted the discussion after a week with no explanation and no reasoning that the sources were literally listed as approved by wikipedia. Since its not a discussion, can you draft it so it can be worked on? There are market reports which were mentioned.. or at least return the argument to AFD for some more discussion? ~2026-49093-36 (talk) 05:46, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-49093-36, There was plenty of discussion. Your first vote was AI-generated, which is not allowed per WP:AITALK, and your second vote was also “speedy keep”, which did not apply to to this nomination and was thus correctly discarded as irrelevant. Your proposed sources failed to convince any other editors. Relisting would have wasted community time since a consensus had formed. If you don’t like the close, you may appeal at WP:DRV. Dclemens1971 (talk) 06:16, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

Request to restore Sam Sidiqi to draft space

Hello Dclemens1971,

I noticed that you closed the AfD for Sam Sidiqi as delete on 10 September. I understand the decision and would like to ask whether you would be willing to consider restoring the article to draft space for improvement.

The main concern in the discussion was significant independent coverage. In reviewing the sources again, I believe two sources may warrant closer consideration: a substantial profile of Sidiqi by Riya Mehta in WorldView, published by the National Peace Corps Association, and a substantial Knowledge at Wharton article specifically focused on Sidiqi's business career and his role as NREC CEO.

Rather than recreating the deleted article directly, I would be happy to work from a substantially more neutral draft that addresses the concerns raised in the AfD.

If you would be willing to restore it to draft space for that purpose, I would appreciate it.

Thank you. KHAJA-RAMIN (talk) 05:53, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

@KHAJA-RAMIN, the Wharton source and the Peace Corps article were already in the Sidiqi article and were thus rejected by other participants. I didn’t look at the sources until now, but the Wharton article is a Q&A interview and thus not an independent source. I don’t think you’ll find success recreating the article, especially since it already included the sources you propose to use to rebuild it. I would suggest looking elsewhere for sources. If you recreate the article please use WP:AFC to get input on sourcing before it goes into mainspace. Dclemens1971 (talk) 06:12, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

Google indexing issue with Wikipedia articles

Hello, I created the article Drunkard Morning quite some time ago, but it still does not appear to be indexed by Google. When I search for the article on Google, I cannot find it at all.

However, the Bamdad Afshar article I created was indexed by Google the very next day.

Could you please check whether there is an issue with the Drunkard Morning article that may be preventing it from being indexed? There are also several other articles I have created that do not appear to have been indexed by Google.

Thank you. KianXBe (talk) 06:27, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

@KianXBe, nothing is wrong. Your article is in the queue of 27000 articles awaiting review and will be reviewed when a volunteer gets to it. There is no particular order in which articles are reviewed. I do not review on request and I suggest you do not go around asking others as you’ve done here. Dclemens1971 (talk) 12:22, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

Obligatedly required mention due to your name having come up for someone you warned who is at ANI

Just to preface, no accusations are being levied against you, but a warning you issued was brought up for someone who has been accused of continuing to be a problem, wording this intentionally neutrally.

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Kpop777_continued_bludgeoning_AfD_discussion,_even_after_being_warned_to_stop DarmaniLink (talk) 03:29, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

And just to clarify, the warning isn't being brought up as being erroneously issued, if anything, duely issued. Your name came up in a discussion about unrelated parties in which to one this admin (in my opinion, correctly) issued a warning to one of the parties. I don't want anyone to think you did something due to the nature of these things, sorry for being a bit repetitive DarmaniLink (talk) 03:32, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2026

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

Administrator changes

Dclemens1971

• Lectonar

• Bucketsofg
• Keenan Pepper
• The Wordsmith
• Caknuck

Oversight changes

• Richwales

Guideline and policy news

• Speedy deletion criteria G15 has been renamed from "LLM-generated pages without human review" to "Unambiguously LLM-generated pages" and has an additional sign of detection added to it following a RfC.

Miscellaneous

• The September 2026 New Pages Patrol backlog drive is ongoing. Help tackle the 30,000+ article backlog!
• This week's article for improvement will be added to the Main Page to try converting readers into editors following a RfC.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:36, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

ReqRedirect

Hello! Could you please create a redirect from the name Ritch Esra to MubuTV? I am too close to the subject. SergeWoodzing (talk) 17:15, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

Please reply! SergeWoodzing (talk) 20:28, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

I don't understand why you are making this request and thus I don't intend to fulfill it. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:29, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

WP:R#KEEP point 5. Founder's name. SergeWoodzing (talk) 09:45, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

Primary Sources

I just noticed that you added a notation to many of my articles that they rely too heavily on primary sources. The only place I use primary sources are to verify enrollment data for conference members, with secondary sources utilized almost exclusively to support the history narrative and membership timeline. How would I support the enrollment data if the information doesn't come directly from the source? Moserjames79 (talk) 15:47, 17 September 2026 (UTC)

@Moserjames79 If primary sources account for most or all of the sources in the article, then the article needs to have additional secondary sources added. Even if primary sources are being used to cite material appropriately, articles should not be based primarily on them. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:49, 17 September 2026 (UTC)

Draft copy of ApplianSys

Hello. You closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ApplianSys as delete. I am not asking you to revisit the close.

By way of disclosure first: I am employed by ApplianSys in a marketing role. This is stated on my user page and I disclosed it throughout that discussion.

Would you be willing to restore the article to Draft:ApplianSys? Whatever the consensus on notability, the citations assembled there are worth keeping (a comparative lab review in Network Computing, a Network Testing Labs evaluation in Network World, and a vendor profile in an IDC market study) and I would rather not reassemble them from scratch if I can provide better sourcing later.

If it is restored, I will not move it to mainspace myself. Any future attempt would go through WP:AFC so that an uninvolved reviewer makes that decision.

Thank you for your time.

Cordsandchords (talk) 13:19, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

@Cordsandchords I have done so. As you have noted, with your conflict of interest please use AFC if you plan to submit in the future with improved sourcing. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:36, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

Trail of Tears mass revert

Hi. Sorry to bother you. I noticed that you made this edit at Trail of Tears on September 4th: . It looks like you accidentally reverted the entire page back to an old version from well over a year ago, undoing dozens of edits. For example your edit restored poorly sourced info as it reverted this edit from last December: . Your edit also reverted this fix from last November be first paragraph which is now poorly written: . Numerous edits by bots were also reverted. Edits by users fixing citations were also undone: The earliest edit I noticed that was undid by your edit was in January 2025: . This content added here looks like self published original research. Would it be possible for you to self revert and just remove this? Thanks ~2026-50413-86 (talk) 14:14, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-50413-86 Thanks for pointing that out. No idea what happened there! I intended to surgically remove a section sourced to self-published original research and have now self-reverted and done the more surgical removal. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:31, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

The Unselected Journals of Emma M. Lion

Wow! I just looked this up last night, saw there wasn't an article, and resolved to write it today. You beat me to it! StAnselm (talk) 18:12, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

Sockpuppet alert

It is to inform that a username "Sutyarashi" has been abusing many users since last few years and disrupting many pages. He is a sockpuppet and also uses another account "MSLQr". I request you to take investigations against him. ~2026-50483-17 (talk) 20:05, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-50483-17 If you have evidence for your accusation, WP:SPI is that-a way. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:10, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

DYK nominations/Battle of Lynchburg

@Dclemens1971: - Please shut down the DYK template at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Lynchburg. Whoever is working on it does not know their American Civil War history. ALT1 originally had an error with the dates for two battles that occurred one month apart. It has been fixed, but does not understand the association of the Battle of Lynchburg and the Battle of Fort Stevens. ALT2 is an embarrassment. Jubal Early was a famous (cantankerous and racist) Civil War general. There is no novelty in the fact that his last name was "Early". Please do not let this DYK nomination get used. It is as if the nominator did not read the Aftermath section of the Battle of Lynchburg. TwoScars (talk) 21:02, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

@TwoScars, that DYK is going nowhere. If you leave a note as the page creator saying you oppose the nomination, that will be enough to stop it. But I can see the obvious problems with it too and it will not proceed in anything like its current form. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:14, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

Woman of Peiting

Good morning! Yes, I would appreciate support nominating my article for GA and/or DYK. What do I need to do next? IfShrimpHadABarbie (talk) 12:22, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

@IfShrimpHadABarbie Think of a unusual/intriguing fact from the article. (The one picked by the nominator at Template:Did you know nominations/Woman of Peiting was not a good one.) See if you can phrase it in a way that sounds like the ones you can find here (Wikipedia:Did you know archive) and keep it under 200 characters. Reply here with your idea(s) and I'll give you some feedback. Once you have a good hook, you can submit it through the form at WP:DYKCNN. On GA, there's no deadline so let's focus on DYK for now. Dclemens1971 (talk) 12:26, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Something like this??

... that after about 600 years in a bog, the Woman of Peiting still had the knee-high leather boots she wore in life, complete with a patch? IfShrimpHadABarbie (talk) 13:58, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

@IfShrimpHadABarbie I like it! I suggest shortening it and reworking it to catch the reader's attention a bit more, something like "... that after spending about six centuries in a bog, a woman was still wearing knee-high leather boots? What do you think? If you like this, I will be happy to create the nomination page for you (it will involve an extra step since the first nomination page exists and I recall now that the nomination form won't work perfectly). Otherwise, feel free to suggest an alternative wording. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:17, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Oh, that is perfect! Yes, please create the page. Thank you so much for your help! IfShrimpHadABarbie (talk) 19:49, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Done, page is here: Template:Did you know nominations/Woman of Peiting (2nd nomination). Please watchlist this page and check for pings from the reviewer. Reviewers, promoters and queue movers may have questions as the nomination moves through the approval process, so please don't disappear for a long period :) Good luck! Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:11, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Forgot to ping: IfShrimpHadABarbie Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:11, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Watching like a hawk! IfShrimpHadABarbie (talk) 20:30, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Ithaka (artist)

Not going to AfD it myself, but he looks NN to me. Also, his username is blocked via CU, and other usernames have been uploading Ithaka's own photography under an "own work" license so there's quite possibly something goofy going on here--either copyright shenanigans or (more likely) self- or paid- promotion. Pinging Bbb23 and Mz7 who handled the SPIs. Jclemens (talk) 15:49, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

I agree, but also not on my list of fish to fry right now. Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:22, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

Request for Guidance on My Article

Hello, and thank you very much for taking the time to explain this to me.

This is actually my first article on Wikipedia, and I am still learning how everything works, especially when it comes to uploading and licensing images.

Regarding the photograph, I did not take the original photo. I found it and edited it in Photoshop. At the time, I mistakenly thought that because I had edited the image, I should list myself as the author. I now understand that the original photographer should be credited, and I have corrected the information accordingly.

I sincerely apologize for the mistake. I am still new here and I am trying to learn and contribute properly. I would really appreciate it if you could guide me and teach me how to handle these situations correctly in the future.

Finally, I wish I had been given the opportunity to correct these issues before the article was moved to draftspace. I would have been very happy to learn from your feedback and make the necessary changes. As you can see, I am still a new editor and I genuinely want to learn.

Thank you again for your patience and guidance. I really appreciate it. Chadburn2 (talk) 02:11, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

Replied on user's talk page. Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:22, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

Romaniatransfers69?

This might be me wanting to confirm my suspicions with you who also thinks this user used AI to write recent game company articles, but when I read over their work on Draft:Ubisoft Bucharest, Draft:EA Romania, and Draft:Gameloft Bucharest, the only things I noticed myself were promotional wording typical of an LLM as well as rule of threes. Yet they seem to be denying such use. Do you think it would be wise to address those issues with the user? In solidarity, Jalen Barks (Woof) 23:22, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

@JalenBarks Ubisoft Bucharest definitely. Thanks for flagging. Blocked from mainspace to prevent further disruption. Dclemens1971 (talk) 00:28, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ken Silverstein (business journalist)

...is now at DRV. Owen× ☎ 18:39, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

@OwenX thank you kindly for the notification. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:10, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

Dclemens1971 said to respond to his talk page and I'm trying to figure that out. I did respond to his note on my talk page, which may not be the same thing. The essence of what I said is that I've been on wikipedia two years and I'm still learning. I don't know all the rules but I try to research them. I'm a real person who makes edits in the categories I'm knowledgeable about. I've been reversed for not knowing the rules. And this is the first AfD I've been involved in. I tried to research it and get it right. I wrote the responses without using any LLM. By the time I could respond to his note, he had deleted the profile. You can't win here: those with institutional knowledge use their knowledge to overturn you. And when you research it and put a lot of thought into, they "accuse" you of something else, which is being too contrived. JEFeditor (talk) 19:59, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

@JEFeditor, the principle of assuming good faith does not require us to set aside our critical faculties, and I have seen enough LLM-generated prose to know it when I see it. Perhaps you would prefer that instead of saying your prose is LLM-generated, I rather said your prose is indistinguishable from LLM-generated text? Because it includes many elements flagged by WP:AISIGNS:

• In your appeal, you included hyphens in place of bullet points without appropriate formatting for line breaks (later added by Cryptic), which is an indicator of LLM use per WP:AILIST
• In the AfD, you constantly repeated buzzwords like "substantial" and "independent" in a way reflective of WP:OVERATTRIBUTION.
• Also in the AfD, heavy use of WP:RO3 (coverage of Silverstein’s career as an energy journalist, his work on the energy transition and geopolitics, and his forthcoming book on the UAE’s energy transition, (completely repeated in next sentence) covering energy, his expertise on energy transition and geopolitics, and his forthcoming UAE book)
• Trying to turn a discussion to its "broader context" (but that does not address the broader record or the strongest independent source available), see WP:AITREND.
• Your prose is also much longer than typical replies in a discussion, and that plus the tone of your denial resembles what we see at WP:AICOMMENT.

Perhaps this was a case of using AI to revise your original work instead of wholesale copying of LLM output, but whatever you did (whether you used AI or not), you produced something indistinguishable from the LLM output that WP:AITALK says discussion closers should not include in assessments of consensus. And assuming you did use AI, as the evidence above signals, I just spent more time examining your argument than you would have using an LLM. I hope you can see why using LLMs to communicate with human editors using human words is considered disrespectful within this community, and as you continue to learn norms and policies here, please make sure you spend time reading WP:NOLLM. And, assuming you're telling the truth about not using an LLM, you should take extra care to ensure what you write doesn't sound just like an LLM. Dclemens1971 (talk) 22:18, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

I appreciate you getting back to me. The arguments were mine in total. JEFeditor (talk) 22:37, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

User:Neatbusomyhuvk htuym rt

This user, after you moved this article to draftspace, created a NEW article with the same title as a one sentence substub, so I nominated the SUBSTUB for deletion. I saw you were warning them on their talk so I just wanted to notify you. the Doug hole (a crew 4 life) 20:58, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

This is a classic example of a page which, in my opinion, ought to be speedy-deletable, but which doesn't seem to satisfy any of the criteria. I've moved it to another draft, and given the editor a fairly serious warning. JBW (talk) 21:46, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

@DOUGDOUGFOOD @JBW Thanks for flagging their renewed activity without responding on talk page. I've blocked from mainspace to push them to communicate. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:59, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:Speedy deletion § G15 and author admitted LLM use

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Speedy deletion § G15 and author admitted LLM use. FaviFake (talk) 22:41, 25 September 2026 (UTC)e

Unban Request

I have edited Ubisoft Bucharest and EA Romania, used my own words while also adding more citations please tell me if I need to do anything else. I would really appreciate if I could get unbanned I used AI as a resource and didn't think much of it. But I have learned my lesson and I only wanted to help make articles about the biggest studios that are not on Wikipedia. Romaniatransfers69 (talk) 20:54, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

@Romaniatransfers69 I appreciate that you are now telling the truth about your AI use. But it will take time to rebuild trust that you are not using it in the future. @CoffeeCrumbs said it best on your talk page. Do good and productive work without LLMs in draftspace and using edit requests, and that will help make the case for reversing your partial block. And please read WP:BRANCH for information on how our notability guidelines apply to local subsidiaries like Ubisoft Bucharest and EA Romania. In general, you will need to show significant coverage from outside Romania to show these branches are notable. Otherwise, they can be discussed in the parent company pages. Good luck! Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:33, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

Ok I will do my best to earn the privileges back, do you know how long it will take to rebuild trust? Also can you please go on Liga III talk page and change the image with my svg cause i don't want it to get deleted automatically. Romaniatransfers69 (talk) 12:52, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

There is no set time, but it will be a balance of the volume of your work, the quality of your work, and the time elapsed. Please be patient and listen carefully to the feedback you get from Articles for Creation reviewers on drafts and from other editors on edit requests. Dclemens1971 (talk) 13:07, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

I also know this is probably going to be a no, but might as well try. Wouldn't it be possible to just have me unbanned and if I ever use AI again to get permanently banned cause I mean in my opinion banning me indefinitely does more harm then good. I never destroyed any sites they were just redirects and now I'm being held back by not being able to edit existing articles and adding new images. I know that the whole idea is for me to show that I understand the rules and will never use AI, and I won't use AI on Wikipedia ever again. But 90% of my activity on Wikipedia is just changing crappy looking images of companies to svg's. I very rarely write articles, and now that I know the notability & AI rules it won't happen again. The whole talk thing in articles also take a while most people don't even look at them. Romaniatransfers69 (talk) 13:09, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

It's simple. You're not permanently banned. You're blocked from editing articles directly because of your very recent actions using AI, admitting it and then insisting you hadn't. You can use edit requests to suggest all the changes you wish to make directly. What you need to do to rebuild trust has been clearly stated. Please make any further unblock requests on your talk page, not on mine. Dclemens1971 (talk) 13:21, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer

Hi @Dclemens1971 I hope it’s not an issue that I’m reaching out here. I submitted a request for a New Page Reviewer. If you have a moment, I would really appreciate it if you can take a look at mine and let me know if there’s anything I need to improve. I would like to become more involved with NPP and I would be very grateful for your feedback. Thank you. Hasekidms (talk) 19:38, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

Your close of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glasgow Airport Link

Hi, thanks for closing that AfD. Unfortunately I think you've misunderstood; I don't think anyone was suggesting merging Glasgow Airport Link into Glasgow Flyer as these are two separate defunct bus services that used to link Glasgow airport to the city centre. The intent (as I understood it, though I !voted to delete both) was to merge Glasgow Flyer into Glasgow Airport#Bus on the grounds that it is already mentioned there, and possibly also merge Glasgow Airport Link into Glasgow Airport#Bus, though there seemed to be less consensus for this due to the current lack of mention. Perhaps you could review your close? Thanks in advance. Rosbif73 (talk) 06:24, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

@Rosbif73 Thanks for the note. I agree with you that the best proposal would be to merge both the Airport Link and the Flyer page into Glasgow Airport#Bus, but that wasn't a consensus I could close with based on the discussion (which had been relisted with zero additional input), and I couldn't close as redirect to Glasgow Airport#Bus because the subject wasn't mentioned there, whereas it was mentioned at Glasgow Flyer (which was offered as a proposed target by both redirect !voters). The option I selected best represented the consensus of participants, who uniformly wanted no standalone page but who did not give consensus support to any single path, leaving me to decide that redirection to the proposed target best represented the will of participants. However, I would expect to find no objection to a brief selective merger of the two defunct bus service pages into Glasgow Airport#Bus, and thus both pages can be redirected there as a bold post-discussion action without requiring any further consensus per WP:NOTBURO. Dclemens1971 (talk) 13:03, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

Fair enough, thanks for the clarification. Rosbif73 (talk) 13:15, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

North Africa Championship

Why did you delete this article and plenty of others articles?Help.Football.History (talk) 19:56, 29 September 2026 (UTC) Let the draft active, and let me improve the articleHelp.Football.History (talk) 19:56, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

No. You used AI to write it, and the AI you used hallucinated multiple non-existent URLs, making it eligible to be speedily deleted under WP:G15. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:58, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

I don`t use AI, let me improve the data and delete the the paragraphs that aren't right. It is an important competition and a qualifiers path to the Copa del Rey Help.Football.History (talk) 20:01, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

You have absolutely used AI, and you are unlikely to ever be blocked if you continue to falsely deny it. You should join the discussion about you at WP:AINB. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:02, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

What is the reason you deleted this article North Africa Championship? Who are you to delete and do whatever you want with articles that have references? Help.Football.History (talk) 20:10, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

I'm an English Wikipedia administrator who has been trusted by the community to delete pages under certain conditions that the community sets, which includes pages that have unambiguous signs of being composed by an LLM. You can inform yourself by reading WP:NOLLM and WP:G15 to learn more before you ask further questions. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:13, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

I will redo the article and remove the unsuitable references. When can I do this? Help.Football.History (talk) 20:16, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

You will need to start over without using LLMs. You may do this whenever you like. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:17, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

Why are you deleting all of my articles now? Help.Football.History (talk) 20:26, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

I'm not deleting them. I'm moving (some of) them to draft versions because they have problems that need to be addressed before they can be in article space. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:27, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

Where is the draft of North Africa Championship to can improve it Help.Football.History (talk) 20:28, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

It has been deleted because you used an LLM to produce it. You will have to recreate it using your own writing and research. I have been clear about this, and now your questions are becoming repetitive and disruptive. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:31, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

You said "I'm not deleting them. I'm moving (some of) them to draft versions"; but where is the draft version of North Africa Championship? You deleted it completely. Help.Football.History (talk) 20:39, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

Yes. I have explained this MANY times in this discussion. It was deleted COMPLETELY under WP:G15, which is the policy that allows pages to be speedily deleted because they had clear evidence they were generated by an LLM. You cannot get that one back. I have made myself extremely clear, and since you seem unwilling to educate yourself about the policy links I am sharing, I will no longer answer questions in this discussion. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:42, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

Retirement

I am retiring from Wikipedia. Wikipedia was built on the philosophy of curiosity leading to discovery. I believe this is why I was attracted in the first place. I'm stepping back while I still remember what the curiosity felt like. Thank you for your contributions! All messages on my talk page are welcome. CostalCal (talk) 02:53, 3 October 2026 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2026

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

Administrator changes

• Cleared as filed
• Dante Alighieri
• Doug Weller
• Gentgeen
• Vacant0

Oversight changes

• Doug Weller
• ToBeFree

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, the good article criteria have been amended to add accessibility requirements.
• Following an RfC, late signatures added to administrator recall petitions after 720 hours from opening are reverted or struck and do not count towards the threshold, even if the petition has not yet been formally closed.
• The post-May 2026 administrator elections RfCs concluded with consensus for election monitors to curate blatantly inappropriate questions after posting, and to remove or merge true duplicates, clearly marking merged questions. Calls for candidates will include advisory guidance that users with less than one year’s experience or 5,000 edits generally lack a realistic chance of success.

Technical news

• Interface administrators no longer need to specify the ResourceLoader option in the definitions for gadgets on MediaWiki:Gadgets-definition as gadgets are always loaded through ResourceLoader. (T298199)
• The list=abusefilters API module now supports formatversion=2 and includes breaking changes to its responses. In particular, the actions property is now a JSON array rather than a string, regardless of the format version. Maintainers of user scripts and other code using this module should check compatibility and update their code as needed. (T435828)

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Gun control 2 has been closed.

Obituaries

• Doug Weller passed away on 30 September 2026. Doug Weller began editing Wikipedia in 2006 and became an administrator in 2008, making nearly 275,000 edits over two decades. He served on the Arbitration Committee from 2015 through 2018 and was also a longtime CheckUser and Oversighter.

Miscellaneous

• The October 2026 administrator elections are scheduled to run from September 29 to October 19. The call for candidates ends October 5.
• Self-nominations for the electoral commission for the 2026 Arbitration Committee elections is opened and closes on 8 October.
• The Good Article Nominations backlog drive has begun and is scheduled to end on November 3.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:30, 3 October 2026 (UTC)

Omneky / Tímeácska 23

Hi! FYI, regarding Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tímeácska 23/Archive: m:Talk:Wikiproject:Antispam#Omneky. Best, — Jules* ^talk 17:54, 3 October 2026 (UTC)

NPP backlog solutions

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/2026 backlog discussion/RFC workshop. because you participated in a 2025 NPP discussion on a similar topic Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:04, 4 October 2026 (UTC)

Email

Hello, Dclemens1971. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

In solidarity, Gommeh ^{(talk 🎮 sign)} 16:26, 5 October 2026 (UTC)

Nomination of Walter Banek for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Walter Banek is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article is being discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Walter Banek until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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.

Critical Hippo (talk) 20:16, 6 October 2026 (UTC)

Nomination of Charlie Camlin for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Charlie Camlin is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article is being discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charlie Camlin until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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.

Critical Hippo (talk) 20:19, 6 October 2026 (UTC)

Nomination of William White (bishop of the Southeast) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article William White (bishop of the Southeast) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article is being discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William White (bishop of the Southeast) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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.

Critical Hippo (talk) 20:37, 6 October 2026 (UTC)

Nomination of Willians Mendez Suarez for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Willians Mendez Suarez is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article is being discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Willians Mendez Suarez until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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.

Critical Hippo (talk) 20:39, 6 October 2026 (UTC)

DYK for Gooley Club

On 7 October 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Gooley Club, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that New York state demolished a historic hunting clubhouse after acquiring it for the state's forest preserve? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Gooley Club. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (Gooley Club), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:02, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

DYK for Eraste Bigirimana

On 7 October 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Eraste Bigirimana, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that an Anglican bishop sits on the National Security Council of Burundi? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Eraste Bigirimana. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (Eraste Bigirimana), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:02, 7 October 2026 (UTC)