Latest comment: 3 months ago7 comments2 people in discussion
Hello, what shell I ask - I do not think that I know more than Wikipedia? Is it possible to skip this part? I am not so technically skilled? --Bojaneiro (talk) 19:41, 17 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
Dear editor. I do not know what is expected from me to do. What to edit. I am not so familiar technically.
Is this part necessary in order to make my bio page public? I do know a lot of topics, but I can not be sure if I can add something that is not already there on Wikipedia pages. Bojaneiro (talk) 19:58, 17 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
Please do understand, that I am not capable or skilled to do editing and go around a website. My skills are modest and very limited.
I also have a certain condition which makes it very difficult for me to understand what I am asked to do now.
I am 55 years old, and I work with really old systems. I can't understand this kind of task. Is this necessary for me to do it? Bojaneiro (talk) 20:09, 17 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 3 months ago4 comments3 people in discussion
Is it against the rules to write an article about yourself? I strongly suspect that an article I have seen was created by the person it is about. --LancsPolitics (talk) 17:36, 18 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
Whilst not strictly against the rules, it is heavily discouraged - see the guideance at WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY. Users do need to declare conflicts of interest they may have so if the creator of the article has not done that they may be breaking a rule there. CoconutOctopustalk17:53, 18 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
Dear LancsPolitics,
Thank you very much for your input, and hope to get an answer from you.on my page all the links are legit and not self promotional.Everything posted is just a pure content of already existing information published in a press (in either english or serbian) on Bojan Jovanovic and 'Bojaneiro' or 'Bokiki' work. All of the links and page sentences that make a content of that DRAFT PAGE, have been published in a recognized independent press or coming from professional sources over the years. There was no interference or any self interpretation of that contect. DRAFT page -content is meant for purely educational purposes, informing the artists about new trends in digital art. Bojaneiro (talk) 06:26, 19 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 3 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi CoconutOctopus, I'd recommend extending the block on underlying range of the TA's vandalizing at the Teahouse, since it is used as a VPN range (Datacamp), specifically by PureVPN. Cheers, kline / talk / contribs00:02, 19 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 3 months ago12 comments2 people in discussion
Hello dear editor,
On my talk page (at least I think) that I received a following message:
"User:Bojaneiro is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified: CSD U3 (inappropriate use of user pages).
I do not know the reason why, or by whom. Or how to prove it wrong or unjust. I know that I made changes, since I am really bad with technical part of uploading links generally due to my education and age. So I susspect that a wrong link to a 'dead' site was present during few hours, until I discovered it and deleted it. in the process of editing my own page. I went carrefully over every detail of my draft page and It is all legit. The purbose is enciclopedian, educative (since people should be informed about new trends in digital art world) - and not self-promotional, since I do not have a BOJANEIRO - promotional or commercial site or any info about me or selling of my work. Thank you for your answer, Bojaneiro --Bojaneiro (talk) 05:38, 19 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
From what I can see you have not recieved such a message. However, the message you did recieve about your userpage and your draft is correct. We strongly advise against writing an article about yourself on Wikipedia and this is a form of promotion. CoconutOctopustalk05:54, 19 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
Dear CoconutOctopus,
Thank you very much for your input, and hope to get more answers and help from you. On my draft page all the links are legit and not self promotional. Everything posted is just a pure content / or translation of already existing information published in a press or legitimate professional institution (either in either english or in serbian). Everithing that appears now on DRAFT PAGE / Bojan Jovanovic and 'Bojaneiro' or 'Bokiki' and it's work. All of the links and page sentences that make a content of that DRAFT PAGE, have been published in a recognized independent press or coming from professional sources over the years. There was no interference or any self interpretation of that DRAFT content, which is meant for purely educational purposes, informing the artists about new trends in digital art. Bojaneiro (talk) 06:32, 19 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
Thanks, I understand that interpretation. I am just translating and gathering the relevnt data at one place (draft page). Not writing about myself. Bojaneiro (talk) 06:44, 19 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
...it looks like a deadlock to me. I do not know if I am supposed to know a person with a Wikipedia profile to recommend or stand behind that page (Bojaneiro / Bokiki)? And please take in consideration my modest personal or institutional communication and technical skills (apart from what they already wrote about). Thank you. Bojaneiro (talk) 06:53, 19 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
I imagened it, that hopefully Wiki editors, can easily verify that all the relevant professional institutions and press, or relevant - media articles (and there many) wrote those sentences, that make that draft page. Bojaneiro (talk) 06:59, 19 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 3 months ago5 comments3 people in discussion
You’ve blocked me from every possible angle. How am I supposed to edit??? Plus, an immediate ban is a harsh decision. Why wasn’t there any discussion at all? Please review the content of the sports articles I created to see if they’re appropriate. There’s probably no violation of Wikipedia’s policies in 90% of the cases. Should I write the articles and you publish them then?)) Look, here’s an example: It’s been waiting for 3–4 days: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:2026_European_Wrestling_Championships_-_Men%27s_Greco-Roman_130_kg
I don’t think arbitrary restrictions really fit with Wikipedia’s spirit of freedom. I think the outcome matters more than how it’s done. If it doesn’t violate Wikipedia’s policies, why does it bother you? —Preceding unsigned comment added by User:Pehlivanmeydani (talk • contribs) 14:19, April 22 2026 (UTC)
I declined your unblock request as you have now 3 times made the same unblock request and been told no. If you are absolutely certain that all 3 administrators are incorrect and that you should be unblocked then you may go to WP:ANI and ask; I would advise this is a very poor idea and comes with a risk of a WP:BOOMERANG. As I said in the decline notice, you will need to show a track record of edit requests. There is nothing arbitrary about this; you were blocked for breaching the rules on AI generated content. CoconutOctopustalk14:28, 22 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
Hi @Pehlivanmeydani! To clarify, you are not blocked from "every possible angle", but only from article space. You are free to create and work on new drafts (as you've been doing), make edit requests, contribute to discussions, etc. As your draft submission was reviewed and declined once, I do believe that your sentence the outcome matters more than how it’s done rings especially true: a process that allows to check for a quality outcome, and refine your work up to that point, is ideal in the present situation. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 14:29, 22 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
It’s highly unlikely that an AI wrote all the tournament and athlete pages I’ve created. So personally, I don’t see any problem with using it after checking for repetitive patterns. If you look at the sports tournaments and athlete pages, you’ll see what I mean. I was writing about tournaments even before AI existed. It’s not acceptable to simply label everything I write as “AI” and block it entirely.
So, if I’m blocked from all sides, how am I supposed to edit and prove to you that I’m not AI?
One last thing—if you’re interested in sports, the 2026 European Wrestling Championships are ongoing. There are some missing entries there; can I write them and you publish them if possible? ))) Pehlivanmeydani (talk) 14:36, 22 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
Take a look at the European Wrestling Championships from 2021 to 2025. I wrote all of them. Are there any problematic areas from the editors’ perspective? Or regarding the wrestler pages from the recent period? I wrote 90% of them. I believe I followed the rules. And right now, the 2026 tournament is ongoing, so I can’t make any edits... Pehlivanmeydani (talk) 14:48, 22 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 3 months ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Hi CoconutOctopus! I love your username, first of all.
I've just started creating my very first article because i noticed that the company I work for (Bucked Up) does not have a wikipedia page. I also saw somewhere amongst the plethora of "first timers" articles that it might be frowned upon to create a page for which I have a personal or professional connection... is that true? --Chadman82 (talk) 17:37, 23 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
It is true - and I would really advise against trying to create an article for your company. Even though you may think you can write one neutrally, it's best to avoid it altogether. If you do still wish to do so, you will need to publically declare on your userpage that you are a paid employee of the company, and will need to create the article through the Articles for Creation process.
Make sure you read WP:FIRST for guidance on how to write an article. Your company may very well not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines - most do not, so do be aware that there's a possibility that you simply won't be able to publish it even if you do try
That said, I do still feel like Bucked Up might be a company that merits an article dedicated to it. Any chance you could look into it and give your unbiased opinion as to whether that might be the case? Or is there a process to have the community decide? And if it passes the notability test, how could I find an unbiased author who might be willing to draft a page on our behalf? Chadman82 (talk) 18:40, 23 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
You can list it at WP:Requested articles, although that project is hardly touched nowadays. The Articles for Creation process involves writing a draft and then submitting it and an experienced reviewer assesses for notability. Does the company pass WP:NCORP, or are there three high quality sources independant of the company that discuss it in depth? CoconutOctopustalk18:44, 23 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
I noticed that you mis-spelt “reliable”, that means you are not an AI, and you are not even using auto corrections. That is an amazing human buddy wow. Let us talk more about how to add this term. To be honest with you, I myself invented this term, but my blog has gone viral. ~2026-25305-12 (talk) 12:36, 25 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
This is the draft, my human friend:
A Wikipedia Term: Pandaloop
Pandaloop is a formal, standard term in chess discourse used to describe a recurring pattern observed in games between players of significantly different strength. It does not refer to a single concrete tactic, but rather to a cluster of tactical and psychological phenomena that tend to arise after the weaker player exits their memorized opening prep.
Definition
A pandaloop occurs when a weaker player successfully follows a memorized opening sequence but, upon reaching the end of that prep, begins to make a series of suboptimal moves. From that point onward, each move typically results in a further deterioration of position—often involving the incremental loss of material (e.g., one piece per move).
By the end of the middlegame, the stronger player frequently achieves a decisive advantage, commonly in the range of +15 to +25 points of material or equivalent positional dominance, or both.
Characteristics
Post-opening collapse: The phenomenon begins immediately after the weaker player leaves known or memorized opening lines.
Cascading errors: Each subsequent move tends to worsen the position, often in a compounding manner.
Apparent inevitability: While not forced in a strict theoretical sense, the sequence gives the impression of an unavoidable decline.
Large evaluation swings: Engine analysis often shows a rapid and continuous increase in advantage for the stronger side.
Psychological component: The weaker player may exhibit hesitation, confusion, or passive play, contributing to the collapse.
Relation to Other Concepts
Pandaloop is often compared to established concepts such as:
Windmill (chess tactic): A tactical sequence involving repeated checks that force the opponent into a cycle of responses, typically resulting in material gain.
Difference: In a windmill, each move is forced by check, whereas pandaloop sequences are not strictly forced.
Zugzwang: A position where any legal move worsens the player's situation.
Difference: Zugzwang positions are theoretically defined and provable, while pandaloop describes a practical pattern where moves are technically free but effectively losing.
Pandaloop is therefore criticized for being less “scientific” in nature, as it lacks a formal definition that can be rigorously proven or refuted. Instead, it reflects a practical and experiential pattern observed in real games.
Related Informal Terms
Pandagrin: A colloquial expression referring to the losing player maintaining a forced or incongruous smile during a losing position.
Pandastall: A behavior in which the losing player delays moves or hesitates to continue, often after recognizing the inevitability of defeat.
Latest comment: 3 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The administrator elections process has officially started! Interested editors are encouraged to self-nominate or arrange to be nominated by reviewing the instructions at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/May 2026/Candidates.
Here is the schedule:
April 29 – May 5: Call for candidates
May 8–12: Discussion phase
May 13–19: SecurePoll voting phase
Please note the following:
The requirements to run are identical to RFA—a prospective candidate must be extended confirmed.
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: 3 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hello mentor CoconutOctopus. Would be grateful for your guidance. I have created a page for Spinach Advertising, which has been declined for notability. The page uses 2 sources from the credible, independent publication The Australian Financial Review. Unlike a page for a similar company in the market, Nunn Media which only cites B2B trade publications. Could you shed any light on what makes Nunn Media notable but not Spinach Advertising? Any help appreciated. --Janiedone (talk) 01:28, 1 May 2026 (UTC)Reply
I would suggest, without reading the article, that Nunn Media is likely to not be notable either. There are 8 million articles on Wikipedia; unfortunately, a fair number of these are in fact not very good and many of them should probably be deleted - it is just that nobody has yet had the time to find them and decide to do so. You should read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, an essay on just this. CoconutOctopustalk17:36, 2 May 2026 (UTC)Reply
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.
I came across your comment when I was requesting permission to edit the Ganda Wikipedia using AWB.
I’ve tried searching on the Ganda Wikipedia for a page where I can request similar permissions, but I haven’t been able to find one. Could you please let me know if there is a dedicated page for such requests, or guide me on how to proceed?
On 13 May, 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: 2 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
♈ Aries — “Awaken the warrior within.”
♉ Taurus — “Ground your soul in truth.”
♊ Gemini — “Your mind holds two realities.”
♋ Cancer — “Protect your inner universe.”
♌ Leo — “Your light was never meant to hide.”
♍ Virgo — “Silence reveals divine wisdom.”
♎ Libra — “Karma restores what imbalance broke.”
♏ Scorpio — “Death is transformation, not ending.”
♐ Sagittarius — “The journey awakens the spirit.”
♑ Capricorn — “Break the chains of illusion.”
♒ Aquarius — “You were born to guide the future.”
♓ Pisces — “Your intuition speaks beyond reality.” Ekure Abednego (talk) 08:52, 10 May 2026 (UTC)Reply
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: 2 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello CoconutOctopus,
New Page Review queue November 2025 - May 2026
Backlog update
At the time of this message, there are 15,282 articles and 32,951 redirects awaiting review.
After the January–February drive the article backlog was reduced to 15,179 articles and the redirect backlog to 19,053 respectively. Great job! However, both queues are growing rapidly and any additional reviews are highly appreciated.
2024 and 2025 NPP Awards
JTtheOG was selected as the NPP reviewer of the year for both 2024 and 2025, for reviewing the most articles amongst all reviewers.
Hey man im josh and MPGuy2824 won the Redirect Ninja Master Award for 2024 and 2025 respectively, for reviewing the most redirects.
Overall in 2024, one Platinum, two Gold, eight Silver, 12 Bronze and 45 Iron Barnstars were awarded. Additionally, 66 reviewers got the NPP barnstar for doing more than 100 reviews through the year. In 2025, one Platinum, ten Silver, 13 Bronze and 38 Iron Barnstars were awarded. Additionally, 38 reviewers got the NPP barnstar for doing more than 100 reviews through the year.
The experimental two-month long backlog drive concluded with 183 reviewers patrolling over 27,761 articles and 35,309 redirects, earning over 36,836 points. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 6,484.6 points in this drive.
An attempt was made to get the New Pages Feed to sort by date marked as reviewed instead of date created. However we had to revert it due to bugs. We may try again in the future. You can subscribe to the Phabricator ticket if you're interested in following along.
Latest comment: 2 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
News and notes: Offline: Osama Khalid still in prison He has been imprisoned since 2020 for his Wikipedia edits. A fresh campaign is calling for his release.
Recent research: WikiLambda the Ultimate Does Abstract Wikipedia help fight "One ring to rule them all" solutions for knowledge access - or does it implement one itself?
Latest comment: 2 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion
You deleted this despite me having previously declined a G5. Was this an oversight, and if it wasn't could you please elaborate on why you think Lattesandtimtams's edits aren't substantive? * Pppery *in solidarity18:02, 24 May 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 2 months ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Hello there. The Ron Massey article was deleted a short while ago under G5 rationale. I was wondering if I could please request that the previously existing article could be sent to my sandbox or a draft version so that I may see what can be done with the previous page. Kind regards.Fleets (talk) 11:39, 25 May 2026 (UTC)Reply
Hello, I'm not able to provide a full copy of the article as it was deleted due to both the author being a sock but also copyright concerns. However, I can provide the references used;
Latest comment: 2 months ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Hello CoconutOctopus. Thank you for your work patrolling new pages. I am writing regarding the speedy deletion of Draft:Jeeva Joy under G11 (unambiguous advertising).
I understand the concerns raised — the previous version of the draft relied solely on self-published sources from the company's own website and contained some promotional wording. I have since made significant improvements: I removed all promotional language, restructured the article to follow an encyclopedic tone, expanded coverage of factual aspects such as content, platform availability, and events, and removed any pricing or advertising-style phrasing.
I apologise for the confusion, I had been using an AI tool to help me draft messages and edit the page, which I now understand was not appropriate. I am the actual person behind the Jeeva Joy platform and I genuinely want to learn how to write a proper Wikipedia article. Could you please advise me on what steps I should take to create an acceptable draft? and this is not for advert its for to communicate about the jeevajoy, I am happy to learn and follow Wikipedia's guidelines properly. waiting to hear from you Krrish Joy (talk) 17:20, 25 May 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 2 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hello,
I am spending time in Cyprus and wanted to add pages on museums and archaeological sites that are missing on Wikipedia. Can you tell me what specifically is so wrong that it entirely prohibited the whole article on wikipedia? I mean very specifically, not with a template. 🙏 Rudoleska (talk) 13:41, 27 May 2026 (UTC)Reply
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)
Latest comment: 1 month ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hello, thank you for helping people. First of all I would like to improve the site. But it seems like I have to become a lawyer to edit here. The people are very blunt and use tons of jargon that I have to take time to look up. Also there is a definite bias compared to the japanese wikipedia. I mean some articles seems to be straight up opinion pieces and those same articles are usually locked. Can you offer some advice not to become discouraged? --Dca128 (talk) 16:05, 4 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
Hi @Dca128! I'll admit it, Wikipedia (especially the English version) can be pretty daunting at first. We have an introduction that may be helpful, but besides that, jargon and acronyms can be searched more easily than it seems. The trick is to type WP: in the search bar before any acronym, for example WP:GNG or WP:COI, to see which page it points to. You'll quickly learn the main ones!Regarding locked articles (usually ones on politically sensitive topics, that would otherwise see repeated edit-warring), you can go to the talk page and discuss changes with other editors there. The idea is that instead of having editors make changes and get reverted by someone with the opposite point of view, they can discuss improvements there and come to a consensus! Or, if the change is straightforward enough (like correcting a grammar error), you can submit an edit request so someone who can edit the article can fix it for you! Chaotic Enby (in solidarity · talk · contribs) 21:09, 5 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 1 month ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Hi CoconutOctopus, thanks for being available as a mentor. I'm currently navigating a difficult situation. I disclosed a conflict of interest during an AfD discussion for an article I created (Sridhar Yerramreddy), which is heading toward Delete consensus. I accept the outcome. I have other COI-related drafts in mind for the future and want to make sure I'm following Wikipedia's processes properly going forward. Could you advise on what I should and shouldn't do for the next few weeks while my account is clearly in a sensitive period? --Manadhyaeta3012 (talk) 10:13, 5 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
Hi @Manadhyaeta3012! Don't worry, your account isn't in an especially sensitive period. Having articles being deleted happens to many of us, especially when we start editing, and it won't affect your standing as an editor in the future. We have a plain and simple conflict of interest guide that can give you pointers on what you should and shouldn't do, but the gist of it is that while you submit your COI-related drafts through Wikipedia:Articles for creation and explicitly declare your COI, you shouldn't run into any issues.To assess whether your articles are notable (i.e. won't be deleted during a discussion), WP:42 is the first summary you can rely on. Beyond that, you can learn to identify independent sources (this page is more technical but can also help once you feel ready) and reliable sources (here's a list of common ones) to know what may or may not count for notability. Chaotic Enby (in solidarity · talk · contribs) 21:05, 5 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 1 month ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hi there, wanting to create a wiki page for my band and just had a few questions regarding going about that!
Are there any requirements that we must meet before being able to make a public page? If so, what would those be and how would I go about getting started! I am new to Wikipedia, so any and all help is much appreciated! Thank you! --Swivelhead.band (talk) 00:36, 7 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
Hello; I would strongly advise you do not try and create an article about your band as the chances of it being successful are sadly rather low. Articles on Wikipedia must meet strict notability criteria and if your band does not meet this then any article about it will not be accepted. If you are confident the band meets this criteria you may create a draft through the Articles for Creation process, making sure that you declare your conflict of interest publically.
Latest comment: 1 month ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello! I’ve updated the information in Table D to reflect the latest available, and added two additional columns on the right hand side and wanted to populate these with additional relevant information but have been unable to do so by simply selecting the cell. --PLB2001 (talk) 01:18, 11 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 1 month ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hello, CoconutOctopus,
Please consider leaving a redirect behind whenever you move a widely viewed main spaced article, even when (or especially when) it is a bad page move or vandalism. If an editor doesn't do this, we end up with a lot of broken redirects (see User:AnomieBOT III/Broken redirects. Normally, we delete broken redirects but I think you can see some worthwhile redirects we want to keep even though they pointed to the deleted article title page.
There are two normal responses that work for those of us who check on AnomieBOT III broken redirect reports, either of which works. If there are only a few broken redirects, you can manually correct them yourself. But if I see more (say, over 5), what we do is create a temporary redirect from the "bad title", K. Annamalai (Indian politician), to the restored article title page, K. Annamalai (BJP politician). Within a day or two, Wikipedia's bots will correct the double redirect so that the valid redirects, say, Annamalai Kuppusamy, will point to the correct article title and the temporary redirect can be deleted (or kept but there is no real need for it).
I hope this is clear. The majority of our editors and admins want to correct for a bad article move immediately and don't consider the redirects. Unfortunately, our bots are effective and as soon as a bad article move is done, our bots change the standard redirects to the bad, new title so unless you opt to "keep redirect" when you move the article back, broken redirects are what you get. This is especially true for our older articles and our popular articles who have acquired a high number of redirects over the years. Let me know if you have any questions. Have a good week! LizRead!Talk!20:28, 14 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 1 month ago3 comments2 people in discussion
I am receiving ongoing, persistent harassment from a user on my talk page, despite asking them to cease posting. They have made it clear they will only stop if I stop vandalising a page⏤which I have not done (I made one simple human error)⏤and they continue to edit-war on my talk page. Is there anything you might be able to do? I cannot pursue this via WP:ANI; however, the persistent harassment from this user is nonstop and at this point all their edits consist of. Any help I could receive would be appreciative. livelikemusic(TALK!)16:51, 17 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 1 month ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Hello CoconutOctopus,
Thank you for reviewing the article.
I understand the concerns regarding verifiability and notability. Some information, including updates relating to Keynchi, had recently been added without the corresponding reliable citations, and I understand that this would make those additions unverifiable under Wikipedia’s policies.
The article had existed for over 14 years, and I believe some of the older references regarding radio also became unavailable over time. I believe reliable, independent sources can be provided to verify the information, and any material that cannot be adequately supported can be removed.
If possible, would you consider restoring the article to Draft space so that it can be revised in accordance with Wikipedia’s sourcing and notability guidelines?
Thank you for your understanding, time and consideration. ~2026-36951-01 (talk) 22:26, 27 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
Thank you very much for restoring the article to Draft space. Appreciate your prompt response and the opportunity to improve it. Will ensure it complies with Wikipedia’s sourcing and notability guidelines before submitting it through AfC. ~2026-36951-01 (talk) 22:35, 27 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
Given that my impression that I knew how to submit an article turned out to be mistaken lol, could you direct me to the best how-to page about this? Pratchettfan (talk) 15:02, 2 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
I wrote a new version of the article (which of course I hadn't kept a copy of). When I started to submit it, I happened upon this, which seems to be my original submission.
Latest comment: 1 month ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hello mentor, I currently have a draft article about a company that I have COI, it's pending for review after 2 decline from other reviewers. My question is: are there any tips, things to avoid, what are the best practices to have a speedy review and approval for this type of article? Thank you. --DatTran ACT (talk) 13:02, 4 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 30 days ago4 comments3 people in discussion
Hello, CoconutOctopus! It has been quite a long time since we have communicated, but now I have another query. Could you permanently lock my page, The Geoguide, from being edited by other users to prevent vandalism and preserve my possession? Kayden Swanson (talk) 03:04, 6 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
Talk page watcher here. I think it extremely unlikely you'll get that (we don't pre-emptively lock pages), but perhaps it would help if you explained what your 'Guide' is for. Bear in mind that articles go in article space, and are absolutely not under the sole control of the creator. And that sandboxes are a temporary workspace. They aren't intended to host material long-term, and aren't indexed by search engines etc, making them a poor place to put a 'guide', even if this wasn't ruled out by WP:NOTWEBHOST. Given that Wikipedia doesn't allow 'guide' articles and that your guide is completely unsourced, and given your wish to maintain sole control, You are almost certainly going to have to find somewhere outside of Wikipedia to host it. AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:31, 6 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
Looking into this further, I see you have now created a version of your Guide on WikiBooks. Again, I don't think they pre-emptively lock content (Like Wikipedia, they emphasise that 'anyone can edit' content), but it seems a more appropriate place for it. You'll have to ask about this there though, as I don't think CoconutOctopus is an admin on WikiBooks. AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:47, 6 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
Firstly, I'm not a checkuser, so I can't. Secondly, the checkuser team have very strict rules about when they are allowed to use the tool; there needs to be evidence of abuse. There is absolutely nothing here to suggest that the accounts are one user. CoconutOctopustalk19:47, 10 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
that is exactly why there is a likelihood. having similar interest is allowed but not when one person uses multiple accounts without declaring. isn't this a mere "investigation" and not a request for suspending them? Rajarshinandi (talk) 19:55, 10 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
It actually is. CU can only be used with strong reasoning, and there was not strong enough reasoning to justify it. This is something well above your control or mine. CoconutOctopustalk20:17, 10 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
thats why I asked you to give example of "strong" reason. Cuz clearly it is highly likely that they are sock accounts. Same pages, same time, same sources, same pov Rajarshinandi (talk) 20:24, 10 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
OK; I was likely hasty with closing. I'm still not convinced any attempts to break rules deliberately have occurred, as it is allowed to operate multiple accounts. I think ZM and SZ are the same person, but RogerYg is someone entirely unrelated. We still don't have anything that makes me happy getting a CU check done yet so I have asked them to disclose and will go from there. CoconutOctopustalk20:45, 10 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
this is good enough reason for me to believe that RogerYg is related to SZ. I saw the page history of Bhojshala, and since long they have been trying to push that it is Hindu idol. Rajarshinandi (talk) 20:53, 10 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 25 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi, CoconutOctopus. You are cordially invited to the brand new Wikipedia:Mentorship noticeboard. I get the impression sometimes that we mentors are each toiling in our own cubbyhole, quietly answering mentee questions with little to no interaction with other mentors. I think we have a lot to share and learn from each other, and I know it will make me feel better just having the opportunity to interact with you and other mentors there, and I hope it will for you, too. Looking forward to hearing your feedback. Please take the §Survey when you get there! Mathglot (talk) 03:10, 11 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 23 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion
News and notes: An exclusive club Wikipedia Co-Founder Larry Sanger gets a community ban for canvassing.
In the media: Battle for a soul – who won? Commissars, winners and losers, blocks or bans, a Wiki red card, social engineering on wikis, and Swift action!
On the bright side: Fatherhood, weather, and diplomacy Father's Day, Canada Day, and the 250th anniversary of the United States Declaration of Independence.
No; you could post a message on your talk page saying which edit it was but I strongly advise against it, as it will show anyone able to check what your IP address is. CoconutOctopustalk17:48, 13 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 19 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Hi! I noticed the message you sent me after granting me the rollback permission. First, I wanted to thank you for the opportunity to use this feature. However, I have a question regarding when it's acceptable to rollback certain types of edits. In your message, you stated that rollback should never be used to revert edits of good faith. This would exclude most edits that aren't patently unconstructive. However, WP:ROLLBACKUSE lists one acceptable use case of rollback as one "with a custom edit summary explaining the reason for reverting the changes." It goes on to state that the "Use of MediaWiki rollback with the default summary for any other purposes[...]is considered misuse of the tool[...]When in doubt, use another method of reversion, use a custom edit summary to explain your reasoning, or start a discussion on the talk page." That penultimate qualifier to use a custom edit summary, coupled with the point in WP:ROLLBACKUSE, seems to suggest that the use of rollback on good-faith edits is tolerated insofar as you leave a reason for why it was done. Could you help me clarify this? Thanks! Salmon of Knowledge (talk) 17:52, 16 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
It is advisable to avoid using the rollback tool specifically for good faith edits; if you clesrly note why you are using it then it is acceptable. I will note the notification I sent you is an automatic thing and I didn't writr the specific wording! Best of luck:) CoconutOctopustalk17:56, 16 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 17 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I am an Extended Confirmed editor with over 2 months of experience, 1,000+ edits, and a steady daily editing pace. I spend a significant amount of time on Recent Changes patrol using Twinkle, where I regularly revert blatant vandalism and issue appropriate user warnings/welcomes. I am requesting the native rollback tool to handle obvious vandalism and page-blanking more efficiently, as well as to use counter-vandalism gadgets like Huggle and Interceptor that require it. I understand the tool is strictly for clear-cut vandalism and will never use it in content disputes.
Latest comment: 17 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello CoconutOctopus:
WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive in August!
The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than a month of outstanding reviews from the current 3+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 August 2026 through 31 August 2026.
Latest comment: 6 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion
As it was known that Japan is an island and it's mountainous terrain in nature; expatiate on it does not let agriculture and absolute political system to be there(Japan), through all his regions, and how it make it lead to the rise of samurai,with their date, and how the volcanoes in particular help to Make their soul more fertile for farming, and how farming was only make only in small plains, because of unavailability of land, and it's only where there's no mountain that people stayed.for example;kanto capital of present Japan. do more explanation on this and help me do more research on this --Fatimah Titilope (talk) 15:30, 29 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 4 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hi, was scanning through ANI as is my (shameful) quiet period hobby at work and ended up coming across this comment from you on a reported user's talk page: User talk:שמי (2023)#c-CoconutOctopus-20250823120900-Zero0000-20250823120700, stating that if they violated their TBAN again you would block them. Looking at their contributions, they have made a number of edits in the topic area (Arab-Israeli Conflict), specifically around the War in Iran, in April of this year. Fairly stale but thought it was worthwhile giving you a heads-up. RicketyWitch (talk) 06:05, 31 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
Iran and the Iran war is not strictly speaking under the CTOP in question. Edits to thus topic may be under the CTOP, but it is context dependant. As this is stale I'm not going to act on this just now. CoconutOctopustalk10:55, 31 July 2026 (UTC)Reply