User talk:EvergreenFir/Archive 26

Archive 20

←

Archive 24

Archive 25

Archive 26

Stay with it

Even if the hypothetical flawless sysop made the exact perfect call in every situation they'd still be guaranteed to deal with a calvacade of complaints when emotions run high. We need more sysops involved in tense areas not less. I'm grateful your taking so much of your own precious time to help out. Keep at it, and don't let the naysayers get you down. ~2025-41540-19 (talk) 23:18, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

thank you! EvergreenFir (talk) 04:39, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

Hey, EvergreenFir. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 03:34, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

Advice?

Hi there, EvergreenFir. Could you give me some advice for Wikipedia? I want to be a good editor and contribute to the site. AllegiantAirEnjoyer (talk) 19:21, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Feeding Our Future on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (botop|talk|contribs) 20:30, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

RE: Realtrutheditor

Should we also block the base IP for all the TA socks (they are already partially)? Or maybe semi the page for a minute? - Adolphus79 (talk) 19:30, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

@Adolphus79 If it continues, maybe a semi protect. I'll check out the TAs EvergreenFir (talk) 19:31, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

I would've filed an SPI already, but not sure how to do that while following the new TAIP rules... lol - Adolphus79 (talk) 19:35, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

I think you could just report to WP:AIV in the future and say something vague like "TAIP suggests there may be connected TAs" or something. Or maybe "It might be a good idea to check the underlying IP too". That should be enough to get an admin to look and take action if it's warranted. EvergreenFir (talk) 19:36, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

@Adolphus79 a ping would help EvergreenFir (talk) 19:36, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

Requesting renewal of an IP block

Last month, you blocked contributions from this /64. Almost immediately after the block expired yesterday, the same behavior resumed on that range. The disruption is also present on another /64. I'll throw RPP a couple of the pages but figured I should ask you for a renewal before taking this over to AIV, as you're familiar with the case. Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 00:32, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

@Pbritti I took care of some of it. Thanks for reporting EvergreenFir (talk) 00:50, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

A fox for you!

Foxes are intelligent, curious, and highly adaptable creatures known for being playful yet cautious.

o7 to a true veteran!

Darer101 17:39, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

My 2 cents

why can’t you assume good faith on what I do? Closing Afd discussions per consensus certainly isn’t vandalism. So get real. All I ask is that you and your friends give up your blocking shinanigans stop assuming I’m this guy blocked 13 years ago and treat me like a human being. --BusterBoy27 18:32, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

I can't report accounts to UAA

The two accounts you just blocked with a period in their name, that were UAA violations, I couldn't report them. Here's the abuse log, do you know what's going on??

(cur | prev) . . 19:21, 27 February 2026 . . No revision . . Toast1454 (talk | contribs) [spamcheck.toolforge.org]
(cur | prev) . . 19:19, 27 February 2026 . . No revision . . LuniZunie (talk | contribs) [spamcheck.toolforge.org]
(cur | prev) . . 19:19, 27 February 2026 . . No revision . . Ow0cast (talk | contribs) [spamcheck.toolforge.org]
(cur | prev) . . 19:15, 27 February 2026 . . No revision . . LuniZunie (talk | contribs) [spamcheck.toolforge.org]
(cur | prev) . . 19:14, 27 February 2026 . . No revision . . LuniZunie (talk | contribs) [spamcheck.toolforge.org]

– LuniZunie_(talk) 19:27, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

@LuniZunie I got an error as well when I tried to report them using Twinkle. It appears that the system thinks the names are URLs and is blocking them. Here's the message I received:

Processing UAA request: Failed to save edit:
Your edit was not saved because it contains a new external link to a site registered on Wikipedia's blacklist.
To save your changes now, you must go back and remove the blocked link (shown below), and then save.
If you feel the link is needed, you can:
Request that the entire website be allowed, that is, removed from the blacklist
Request that just the specific page be allowed, without unblocking the whole website, by asking on the spam whitelist talk page.
Blacklisting indicates past problems with the link, so any requests should clearly demonstrate how inclusion would benefit Wikipedia.
The following domain is blocked from being added: spamcheck.toolforge.org .

EvergreenFir (talk) 19:30, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

WP:BEANS? Crazy to happen twice when I've never seen it happen..
Or just someone messed with the abuse filter...? – LuniZunie_(talk) 19:32, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

And yes I got the same. – LuniZunie_(talk) 19:32, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

Not sure, to be honest EvergreenFir (talk) 19:35, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

@EvergreenFir it's fixed =) – LuniZunie_(talk) 19:41, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

@LuniZunie Thank you! EvergreenFir (talk) 19:44, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2026

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

Administrator changes

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

CheckUser changes

Ks0stm

Oversight changes

Ks0stm

Guideline and policy news

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

Arbitration

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

Miscellaneous

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

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:35, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

Why I put lesbian in the profanity list

I only had put it in there because it is pejorative and the terms gay and queer were in the list. Theeeggplant (talk) 22:25, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

@Theeeggplant It can be pejorative but it's not profanity really imo. Maybe bring it up on the talk page? EvergreenFir (talk) 22:32, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

Removing my information from Europe’s Most Wanted

Hello, I noticed that both you and ConnorTT have both removed my information from a films page when I put in additional information on the reception the film had received which I don’t understand why, because the information I put in is accurate and isn’t bias. It even says so to back it up in the reception section based on the film reviews and critical consensus from Rotten Tomatoes ~2026-13232-13 (talk) 06:44, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-13232-13 it's to much detail for the lead. That info should be down in the article's section on Reception it anywhere. The lead is meant to be summary EvergreenFir (talk) 06:46, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Okay, because usually many films have more descriptions in the lead section on the type of critical reception they received but without going into detail. I see a lot of pages for films say information in the lead page such as: “It received universal acclaim for its characters and humor” and then leave it that and put in the more detailed information in the reception section. Would it be okay if I put in that same information by just saying “It received mostly positive reviews from critics, who praised its visual elements and energy.” Because with all due respect, I feel putting that isn’t much detail, it’s short and sweet. ~2026-13232-13 (talk) 06:51, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-13232-13 Feel free to re-add it if you think it's appropriate and in line with other articles. IMO it seems a bit much, but maybe my baseline is incorrect. You may want to start a discussion on the articles' talk pages as well briefly explaining it if anyone reverts it again. EvergreenFir (talk) 16:47, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Twin Peaks: Fire Walk with Me on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (botop|talk|contribs) 19:30, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Ranjeet7556

The range is corrupt. Not sure if there is a way to block without disrupting good editors (if there are any on that range). CNMall41 (talk) 05:01, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

@CNMall41 I'm not sure if they're using proxies or not, but I'm guessing they're going to continue this for a bit. If it happens more, you can report to WP:AIV EvergreenFir (talk) 05:06, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Yup. UPEs hate their income stream being disrupted. --CNMall41 (talk) 05:07, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Question

Hi. Do I have to write a small summary manually for the upcoming episodes of the television shows so I won't get reverted ever again? Let me know! ~~~~ MikuGaming1 (talk) 09:43, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

@MikuGaming1 Yes. So long as you do not copy-paste or only change a few words, it should be fine. Remember to provide a citation for your edits as well. EvergreenFir (talk) 14:54, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Shebakia on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (botop|talk|contribs) 11:31, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

RfC Closure - Inclusion of Content Ethnic Groups Section

@EvergreenFir I noticed you closed the North Africa article page as an administrator.

On the talk page, there have been a series of RfC to review proposed content modifications and proposed set of images.

I have opened my RfC for 3 weeks now, since 5th February and it will be an entire month on Thursday 5th March. There seems to be strong support for the proposed content amendment with scope for adjustments in light of a vocal minority.

Nonetheless, the last vote made was two weeks ago on 12 February and I think the RfC has reached a natural close. However, I cannot close the RfC as the proponent and need an administrator to close the RfC and formalise the consensus position.

Could you do this on our behalf ? I'm looking to de-active my account permanently after these final round of RfC so it will be appreciated if we could resolve this decisively.

Please find the RfC here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:North_Africa#Proposed_content_addition WikiUser4020 (talk) 17:05, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

@EvergreenFir ? WikiUser4020 (talk) 17:24, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

@EvergreenFir Can you not respond to a basic enquiry? WikiUser4020 (talk) 06:22, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Apologies. I've not had the time to sit down and fully look through the RFC and give it the attention it deserves. If I get time this weekend, I will do so. EvergreenFir (talk) 22:06, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

@EvergreenFir Okay, definitely would welcome your input on this. WikiUser4020 (talk) 06:12, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia style and naming request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Template talk:Interlanguage link on a "Wikipedia style and naming" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (botop|talk|contribs) 03:30, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:2026 Iran war on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (botop|talk|contribs) 19:30, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

RevDel

Hello, I noticed that you revdelled revision Special:Permalink/1342781837, but the content you removed still appears in revision Special:Permalink/1342782146. In addition, the same content also appears in the log summary at Special:Redirect/logid/178362706.

Could you please revdel those as well? Thanks for your help. 浅村しき (talk) 18:22, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

@ShuQizhe thank you for pointing those out. They should be fixed now EvergreenFir (talk) 04:09, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Hmm, everything looks fine now. Thank you for taking care of it :) 浅村しき (talk) 04:13, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Sweden44

FYI, this user that you blocked a few days ago is very clear LTA/block evasion. Already reverting my reverts back... See most recently blocked at ~2026-12600-0 and the discussion regarding that temporary account/their past LTAing at User talk:C.Fred/Archive 33#~2026-12600-0. Magitroopa (talk) 01:19, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Categories, lists, and navigation templates on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (botop|talk|contribs) 10:30, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, EvergreenFir. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 01:06, 16 March 2026 (UTC). 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.

tony 01:06, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, EvergreenFir. 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. JeffSpaceman (talk) 19:41, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Lisa del Giocondo on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (botop|talk|contribs) 01:30, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

Toast1454

Toast1454 requested an unblock review at UTRS appeal #111577. Can you please double-check to ensure you blocked the correct user? I haven't investigated very far, but a very quick check indicated there's a real chance you blocked the wrong account by mistake. I freely grant that a more detailed investigation on my part may show that I missed obvious vandalism from this account, mind you. --Yamla (talk) 17:07, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

@Yamla omg that was a big mistake. I've unblocked. I meant to get the Sugar Tax sock. EvergreenFir (talk) 17:24, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

Phew. I'm not crazy. Thanks so much, I'll close out the UTRS ticket. --Yamla (talk) 17:25, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Colour revolution on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (botop|talk|contribs) 02:30, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Human rights in Iraqi Kurdistan on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (botop|talk|contribs) 03:30, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

Legal threats

Hi EvergreenFir

Regarding your accusations that I am veering towards make legal threats, I do feel the need to address you directly to refute that. I cannot see how anything I have said regarding the law is suggesting that I may start legal proceedings against Wikipedia or an editor. That of course would be entirely against good discussion and consensus building. However WP:NLT does not stop an editor from criticising something because it is or may be illegal. Even if I am completely misguided about the law, I have gone no further that putting my opinion forward, that is that suggesting a non-sexual image of a naked child is sexualized may cause it to be sexualized in the eyes of the law. I'd rather say incorrectly that I think something is illegal than stay quiet out of fear of being wrong. --TedEdwards 23:35, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi. I would be grateful if you could acknowledge my above message? Since you said I was on the verge of breaking a policy that frequently results in editors being blocked, it would be helpful to me for you to explain why you said I was veering into legal threat territory.

I note that according to WP:ADMINACCT Administrators are expected to respond promptly and civilly to queries about their Wikipedia-related conduct and administrative actions, especially during community discussions on noticeboards or during Arbitration Committee proceedings. Thank you --TedEdwards 03:10, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

@TedEdwards Based on the lack of response on AN, it seems I was off base. It seemed to me, when reading your talk page discussion, that you were suggesting that another user was building the law and that Wikipedia was doing so as well. You said repeatedly that the image was illegal, or at least that's what I took from your comments. You had gone as far as to mention that Wikipedia is beholden to US law (which it is). I'm doing so, that sounded like a thinly veiled legal threat to me. That you doubled down on that line of argument was, at minimum, concerning enough for me to ask for the input of other administrators.

I find it perplexing that you keep arguing the same issues repeatedly but haven't suggested it entertained solutions to your concerns other than removal.Johnuniq is right that the "legality prong" of your two-prong argument isn't really relevant. What don't we see if there's some other image that could be used instead. EvergreenFir (talk) 05:08, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

I understand the impulse to ask other admins when you're unsure and it's something I've done myself in the past. But I also understand that it can be intimidating for another editor to be taken to a noticeboard, especially when they haven't really done anything wrong. It's less of a casual matter for them. I've since blocked the editor who added that image indefinitely for WP:CHILDPROTECT reasons and T&S opened an investigation a few days ago. My own two cents is that I don't see why an article about child sexuality requires an image in the first place. We might not be censored, but we're also not WP:GRATUITOUS (hence why I've removed videos of people being killed from articles in the past).

I don't think it's a problem to mention that things might be an issue in a legal sense... we do it all the time when we remove unsourced information from WP:BLPs as potentially defamatory. People make similar assessments at BLPN all the time, or when an admin is considering a diff to revdel. So "doubling down" to defend a well-reasoned argument isn't a problem to me. I'm not sure what you want from them other than to keep saying they thought removal was the right choice. What other solution would there be? Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 12:16, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

@Clovermoss As I said, I was clearly off base on this. I sincerely felt this was a veiled legal threat, but no one else seemed to this so. I thought you blocked the user as an SPA though, not for CHILDPROTECT.

I do not believe that there a "well-reasoned argument" given that, to the best of my knowledge, the addition of an non-sexual image in any context does not make "sexualized" to the point of it being child sexual abuse material. If there actually is a court case that says this, please let me know.

You make a fair point about BLPN and such, but on the other hand we do block accounts who won't stop going on about how some edit is libel and Wikipedia needs to worry about legal action. A suggestion to TedEdwards would be to seek others' input on an issue like this by bringing it to somewhere like ANI so that they can see what the consensus reality is. It would be especially important to bring this to administrators' attention if they sincerely believe there is a legal risk to the edits.

No image is an option too, and I would encourage TedEdwards in the future to clearly suggest that from the start. EvergreenFir (talk) 17:41, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

I can appreciate that your belief is sincere and I'm glad you acknowledge you were off-base (I think the latter is probably what the OP was hoping for alongside the thread being closed?). I just figured I'd try to stand up for them a little because it seems like this really matters to them, you know? They were sincere in trying to do what was best for the project as well. I think they were clear about no image being a good idea (with the added reasoning of potential legal implications... they make it clear they're not a lawyer, I'm not a lawyer, and you're probably not a lawyer either). Anyways, I'm glad my BLP comparison struck a sense of familarity. As for the block, the reason was both. There's a bit more detail than what's at the block log if you scroll down to what I said when there was an unblock request. I figured SPA was a less attention grabbing way of identifying the same problem at first. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 19:18, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Oh, also, my way of viewing NLT is the spirit behind it. I think there's a very real difference between someone saying "I think this edit may be a problem in a legal sense" (e.g. at BLPN, what the editor above seemed to be doing at the child sexuality article) vs threatening someone with legal action: "if you don't remove this information, I'll sue you". I do tend to be a bit contrary in that I don't nessecarily think the latter should result in an outright block at first but a warning about how that isn't okay and a look into if they're having an emotional reaction to something that genuinely might be problematic in a BLP. Obviously I wasn't around for whenever NLT became a thing but I've always imagined the intention was that this is basically an incivil thing to say and has a chilling effect on another editors' behaviour to act a certain way. It's a bit like the kid of someone famous pulling a "do you know who I am?" when a cop catches them speeding. The speeding would still be wrong, no matter who they are. A broader discussion about this might be useful at the NLT talk page itself. I'll probably think on it for a few days before bringing it up there, if you want to chip in when I do. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 19:32, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

EvergreenFir, regarding your suggestion I should seek others' input on an issue like this, the other editor (blocked by Clovermoss) raised it at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sexology and sexuality#Discussion at Child sexuality, only hours before you posted on WP:AN. Therefore me making the same request would not have been necessary. And I assume posting on a WikiProject of that nature would have potentially alerted editors with relevant legal know-how.

Regarding notifying specifically administrators, I did not see the advantage at the time, even though I thought there was a potential legal issue. This is because when the discussion started, I removed the photo from the article, and throughout the discussion no one attempted to re-add it. I would not have hesitated to bring admins if that wasn't the case. I note admins are not appointed for their legal knowledge, and so the value they have that ordinary editors don't is producing technical solutions, which I didn't think were necessary (I was not aware of the other editor's wider behavior until after they were blocked). But looking at what you've said, it would have likely been better had an admin been alerted earlier to ensure technical solutions can be brought in quickly if needed, and I'll bear this in mind going forward.

I am also surprised you said earlier You said repeatedly that the image was illegal, or at least that's what I took from your comments. Before you joined in and made the accusation against me, I had made the following comments in an edit summary and the discussion:

• there is nothing wrong or illegal with the photo itself (no indication that the boy was sexually abused)
• there is nothing apparently wrong with the photo taken by itself: there is no suggestion it was produced to be erotic, nor is there any indication the boy in the photo was sexually abused.
• given it is included on Wikimedia Commons, the photo itself almost certainly isn't illegal
• The image is not illegal, obscene or unethical by itself.
• Even though that the photo being discussed is legal,

If I did in fact believe the image was illegal, I would have gone over to Commons and put in a deletion request urgently. However, I knew U.S. law does not ban photos just for including a naked child and that Commons has several legal images of naked children.

To conclude, I hope we both realise we were individually trying to do the right thing. --TedEdwards 22:24, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

And yes, I know you were trying to do the right thing and appreciate that you took the time to see this resolution through. EvergreenFir (talk) 22:44, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

@TedEdwards To be more specific, you said the image in that context was illegal. I.e, the edits created an illegal situation. At least that's how I took it.

Admin are not elected based on their legal knowledge, but we are familiar with the rules and procedures of Wikipedia and could direct any concerned editors to the right place. Again, because you are saying the edit created in illegal situation, it would make sense to me that you'd bring this to the attention of administrators as a concerning behavior by another editor. Honestly, I'd encourage you to do so in the future. Regardless, that editor is blocked now.

I was wrong in my assessment of the situation and I apologize. I've closed the thread on ANI with an apology as well. EvergreenFir (talk) 22:43, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

I'd encourage that course of action as well, if you're genuinely concerned that something you're seeing has legal implications. The oversight email is pretty good at responding to questions as well. I'm glad everyone seems to be on the same page now with no unresolved feelings? At least I hope that's the case. I just wanted to reiterate that I know you had good intentions too, Evergreen. I'd rather people discuss something that rubs them the wrong way instead of ignoring it, and that seems like it was the case for both of you in opposite directions? Not sure we've interacted much on the admin side of things, but it's nice to see another plant-themed admin. :) Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 22:49, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you! And yes, I too was tickled to see another plant-themed admin. And in a similar pattern of specific & general terms too! Thank you for your mediation on this. EvergreenFir (talk) 22:53, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for your apology, EvergreenFir.

I can confirm you first sentence above is correct, regardless of the veracity of my legal opinion.

Just to end on notifying the admins, I was not concerned about the other editor at the time, since I was not aware of their wider editing pattern since I didn't think to look there in detail. Despite the fact I don't blame myself for not noticing their behavior, I can see the merits of notifying admins in situations like this to get valuable input and end any problems early on. Hopefully though, I will not encounter anything like this in future. And I concur that admins' understanding of procedures would have helped earlier on. --TedEdwards 23:00, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Donald Trump

Hi EvergreenFir; From your undo edit yesterday on the Trump page, then the conflict in the Iran War is approaching its 4th week of warfare and the economic consequences appear to be real as reported in TNYT and Wall Street Journal; how long do you suggest waiting before restoring this eventually. Over a month? Over two months? I mean some time frame would be helpful with the war apparently escalating. ErnestKrause (talk) 12:51, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

@ErnestKrause In my opinion, it would only belong in his biography if reliable sources make it clear that it was a major part of his story/history. The article Donald Trump really only should contain the most major and important things about his entire life. Things that were important to the 8 years that will be his presidencies, but not necessarily his overall life, should go in first presidency of Donald Trump and second presidency of Donald Trump. For example, the 1973 oil crisis is mentioned in Richard Nixon but that's because it was such a major issue in his presidency and, with the Watergate scandal, ruined his image. EvergreenFir (talk) 16:55, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for getting back on this; there is an interesting poll taking place started by Riposte97 towards the bottom of the Trump talk page which you might look at if time allows. Its set up as an option a, or option b, or option c discussion and some of your thoughts from above appear they might be useful there. The 2026 Iran War seems to be going into its 4th week now. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:00, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

Vandal

@EvergreenFir Regarding that vandal you just blocked: Talk page abuse, see here. ––Thundercraft5 ^{chat with me • contribs} 04:34, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

@Thundercraft5 thanks. Block updated EvergreenFir (talk) 04:37, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

sources missing links

Do we have a solution for the links that dont show up? ~2026-18222-80 (talk) 09:23, 24 March 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia proposals request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) on a "Wikipedia proposals" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (botop|talk|contribs) 22:31, 24 March 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Rihanna on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (botop|talk|contribs) 18:31, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

Washuotaku and Vshojo

Washuotaku is the only one trying to claim Vshojo still exists despite ample evidence provided that they no longer are. ~2026-15805-83 (talk) 20:50, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Please use the article's talk page to discuss this with other users. EvergreenFir (talk) 20:53, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

I did but I'm sure no matter what is said, WashuOtaku will argue to the end of time that they will still exist. This is just as bad as when MetaZoo ended. ~2026-15805-83 (talk) 20:57, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

You added a section on Talk:VShojo after I mentioned it. EvergreenFir (talk) 21:03, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Ah sorry I wasn't trying to say I did the talk page before your instruction. But looks like based on WashuOtaku, they are likely still going to deny reality, but let's see what they do. ~2026-15805-83 (talk) 21:09, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

WashuOtaku is the one that keeps vandalizing. Evidence was provided yet they keep singing the same tune. Is there some kind of guideline of when a company is deemed to no longer exist? A press release is ample along with their website no longer accessible. ~2026-14185-20 (talk) 22:10, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

You must provide a reliable source EvergreenFir (talk) 22:22, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

I did. VShojo's own statement on Twitter. ~2026-14185-20 (talk) 04:20, 26 March 2026 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) And as explained on Talk:VShojo, that's insufficient. If you don't agree, go through the rest of the dispute resolution process instead of repeatedly making the same edit. Umby 🌕🐶 (talk) 05:22, 26 March 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Goryeo on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (botop|talk|contribs) 17:32, 26 March 2026 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Original Barnstar
		Thank you for being such great admins for this site! (Talk) PHLOGISTON ENTHUSIAST 17:41, 26 March 2026 (UTC)

Forgot verb

No big deal. Most verbs unnecessary! bishzilla _ROARR!! pocket 21:57, 28 March 2026 (UTC).

@Bishzilla I agreement! EvergreenFir (talk) 22:01, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

[Bishzilla delighted with little Evergreen's Bishzillaspeak.] Soon spread all over Wikipedia! bishzilla _ROARR!! pocket 22:10, 28 March 2026 (UTC).

Bot removal

I reported a user for username. A Madanielsbot removed my report saying 4.5 hours but my report didn't pass 4.5 hours. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism&diff=prev&oldid=1345170185 Marvel Spider-Man (talk) 18:46, 24 March 2026 (UTC)

@Marvel Spider-Man I've blocked it. EvergreenFir (talk) 21:22, 24 March 2026 (UTC)

You have blocked it after I posted here. This means the Bot is malfunctioning. And this bot should be fixed. Can you look into this issue. You are administrator, you know where to complain. Marvel Spider-Man (talk) 03:44, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

@Marvel Spider-Man oh I see what you mean. I'll see what I can do EvergreenFir (talk) 04:23, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

@Marvel Spider-Man The user that runs the bot says that it was an coding error and that they believes they fixed it. Thank you for letting us know. EvergreenFir (talk) 05:02, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia proposals request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "Wikipedia proposals" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (botop|talk|contribs) 11:30, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

Email revoking

Just as an fyi, if you block this guy on an account, revoke email while you're at it. -- asilvering (talk) 17:39, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

@Asilvering will do, thanks! EvergreenFir (talk) 17:41, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (botop|talk|contribs) 19:30, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2026

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

Administrator changes

• ARandomName123

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

Checkuser changes

Giraffer

Oversight changes

Kj cheetham

Giraffer

Guideline and policy news

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

Arbitration

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

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:18, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Banksy on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (botop|talk|contribs) 17:30, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Template talk:Infobox basketball biography on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (botop|talk|contribs) 21:31, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

Here is a Barnstar and some WikiCake!

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		Your contributions are great! Great Job!

Zahrazamedahmedi has given you a WikiCake! WikiCakes promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cake, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Bon appetit!

Spread the tastiness of cakes by adding {{subst:GiveCake}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Zahrazamedahmedi (talk) 19:41, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia style and naming request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Angine de Poitrine on a "Wikipedia style and naming" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (botop|talk|contribs) 01:31, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Potential block evader.

Hello! I don't know how to file a report for sock puppetry, but I noticed that you blocked this guy indefinitely a week ago, and now he's potentially evading the block. This user, Anonymous939, made this edit to Mortal Kombat II, which is similar to Anonymous.939787's edit to the same page. I could be wrong, but I think Anonymous.939787 is block evading. HypnoBlader (talk) 02:51, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

@HypnoBlader it certainly looks that way based on the account names alone. I've blocked the new account. Thank you for letting me know EvergreenFir (talk) 04:34, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Inside CECOT on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (botop|talk|contribs) 14:30, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Talk page semi-protected

Just a heads up that I semi-protected your talk page for a week because that one guy keeps coming back. Obviously you can adjust it or take it off as you see fit. Sasquatch t|c 10:35, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

@Sasquatch thank you. I'll leave it for a couple days EvergreenFir (talk) 20:06, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:List of paradoxes on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (botop|talk|contribs) 21:31, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Zionism on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (botop|talk|contribs) 03:30, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

Pupstruction

Hello. I just want to get your take on something. In Pupstruction, there is a section titled "Controversy". One of the sources in the section is a YouTube link. Is that source reliable? ~2026-22355-84 (talk) 22:43, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

Why was my edit reverted?

My edit to the page Catch! Teenieping was reverted, due to it having a cite from the fan wiki. The fan wiki has over 2000 pages and is considered a reliable source for info about the show. Also, the ending song literally is comprised of buzzwords. Look up "Dessert Catch! Teenieping Ending Song" on the wiki and look at the lyrics or play the English dub for yourself. The lyrics are "Magical and mystical recipe Yummy treats we're making Tangy and sweet What a happy day

Hearts filled with love Let the joy be free

Sweet magic Dessert Teenieping" It is litterally comprised of basically gobbledygook. RotatingPirateShip (talk) 18:58, 24 April 2026 (UTC)

The burden is on the editor to provide a reliable source. Fandom is a user-generated content site and not considered a reliable source. EvergreenFir (talk) 19:56, 24 April 2026 (UTC)

Yes, but they remove vandalism quick, and they are a trusted source for Catch! Teenieping info. RotatingPirateShip (talk) 20:45, 24 April 2026 (UTC)

@RotatingPirateShip: pinging so user sees this reply. EvergreenFir (talk) 19:56, 24 April 2026 (UTC)

New temp, same problem

The editor behind this IP block returned with a new temporary account, ~2026-24524-05, and resumed the earlier disruption (with some added flair tossed in). I'm asking that the single underlying IP also be blocked, but I think there's no broader range in need of blocking. Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 04:28, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

@Pbritti Thanks for the alert. The issue is resolved EvergreenFir (talk) 05:12, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

Greatly appreciated, as always. Have an excellent week. Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 14:03, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

Same problem, now on 2600:1700:C3A0:6D30:0:0:0:0/64. Hope all is well. Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 16:04, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

@Pbritti Blocked. Thank you! EvergreenFir (talk) 16:07, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

New pages patrol May 2026 Backlog drive

May 2026 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
On 1 May 2026, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:23, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Canton academy

I am not trying to get tagged as a vandal. I am trying to update the schools tag lines. After reviewing wikipedias policy, as long as I am trying to have a civil discussion with the sites editors I cannot be banned or tagged as vandalism. I am not altering the schools history. I feel it's disingenuous of you to continually revert to 50 year old tag line especially of a program you have no knowledge of. What is the problem with identifying the school as " A Christian based private school in central Mississippi serving 280 students"? Let's discuss this ~2026-22904-71 (talk) 19:16, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

There's nothing wrong with it. The issue is that you're removing the part about it being founded as a segregated school. EvergreenFir (talk) 22:01, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

So If I use " A Christian based private school in Canton, Mississippi serving 280 students originally founded as a segregated school now fully integrated to match national demographics." Is that acceptable? The "Type" continues to be reverted. It hasn't been a segregation academy in 30 years. Why can that not be changed to Private or Christian? Again, I understand the need to keep the History as is. That is history. It can not be changed but the school itself has changed and the negative visual is only keeping the divide not unifying. While I have you as well, How is it that so many different editors are reverting it. I could understand 1 or 2 having feelings one way or another but there have been 15 different editors reverting to the same "OLD" information? ~2026-21861-90 (talk) 16:41, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

That sentence would seem much more acceptable to me. Use the talk page to see what others think. EvergreenFir (talk) 16:44, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Please help. I've tried to use the talk page but no one responds. My edits are just summarily reverted and I'm blocked for a period of time. How many admins must I appeal to? Is there a central figure or committee that to whom I can state my case? How do the edits attract attention from so many immediately? ~2026-21861-90 (talk) 15:13, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	For all your mopping work... It's appreciated. Keep it going! Volten001 ☎ 18:03, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Woxbridge

What is the history with this article, I see it was moved from Woxbridge(warwick, oxford, cambridge) but Talk:Woxbridge(warwick, oxford, cambridge) has existed for over 15 years and suggests a previous speedy deletion was declined. While I'm not sure the article should exist and the title (lower case and missing brackets) seems implausible but given it seems it has existed for a while should it have been speedily deleted? Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:38, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

@Crouch, Swale I'm quite confused as the page Woxbridge was created on May 1 and its sources never mentioned the term (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Undelete&action=submit). I deleted that. But it appears a Page Move Technical Request was made for a draft page and was part of a round robin swap. I've restored things for now. Thank you for alerting me to this.

My biggest concern is that the page failed WP:V. EvergreenFir (talk) 21:48, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Thanks, I see what is now at Woxbridge(warwick, oxford, cambridge) was redirected in 2011 and what is now at Woxbridge was created yesterday. Crouch, Swale (talk) 14:13, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Image for Chad (Slang)

I saw you recently edited Chad (Slang). I see how there are no images on this page to show an example of a "Chad". Can I perhaps be of assistance with finding an image to add to this page. I actually have followed and covered this subculture for some time. I currently run an off site wiki for the "Chad" internet culture and I would like to offer my knowledge to this subject. Barentz (talk) 22:19, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Block evader (again)

This user made another sock/meatpuppet Anonymous787939. He's name similar, and his edits are similar. By the way, I want to start a CheckUser the next time Anonymous.939787 makes another meat puppet, may you tell me how please? HypnoBlader (talk) 04:44, 3 May 2026 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2026

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

Administrator changes

• Deepfriedokra

• EvanProdromou
• Wouterstomp

Interface administrator changes

L235

Chaotic Enby

CheckUser changes

• TheresNoTime
• Versageek

Oversight changes

Moneytrees

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

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

Arbitration

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

Miscellaneous

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

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:29, 3 May 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Happy Science on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (botop|talk|contribs) 17:31, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:List of Korean flags on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (botop|talk|contribs) 05:31, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Disney+ Hotstar on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (botop|talk|contribs) 02:30, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

Snap

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:BlockList&wpTarget=Skibidi67416741 JBW (talk) 18:11, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

@JBW nice! EvergreenFir (talk) 18:19, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Lee Harvey Oswald on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (botop|talk|contribs) 05:30, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

New Page Patrol Newsletter - May 2026

Hello EvergreenFir,

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.

BoyTheKingCanDance, Rosiestep, SunDawn, and Vanderwaalforces were inducted into the NPP Hall of Fame for having two separate years of 2,000+ article reviews.

January–February backlog drive

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.

May backlog drive

An article-only backlog drive is currently underway. We are hoping to make a big dent in the backlog. You can read more about it or join at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Backlog drives/May 2026.

PageTriage

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.

Reminders:

• You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
• Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:37, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:List of largest church buildings on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (botop|talk|contribs) 00:30, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Evanescence on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (botop|talk|contribs) 08:30, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

Feminism!

Hey EvergreenFir! I saw your feminism userbox on your talk page and wanted to let you know that some other users and I are trying to get Wikiproject Feminism revived! And I was wondering if you would be interested in working on the revival Goetia [She/They] (talk) 20:10, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

You may be eligible to vote in the U4C election

I am contacting you because you previously voted in elections related to the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C). You may be eligible to vote in the current U4C election, which is open now and closes on 2 June 2026. You can find out more about the candidates and the election on the election page on Meta, and from there you can access the vote itself. Your participation in these elections is important to the governance of Wikimedia communities, and your time spent learning about the candidates and voting is appreciated.

-- In cooperation with the U4C, Keegan (WMF) (talk)

Keegan (WMF) (talk) 17:16, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Ayyubid dynasty on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (botop|talk|contribs) 21:31, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

Wikiproject Feminism Revive

Hello User:EvergreenFir, I wanted to notify you that there are a few editors, including myself, trying to REVIVE Wikiproject feminism. We recently sorted through the old members' list and found that you were still active! If you want to help Revive Wikiproject feminism we'd love to have you! Also if you have anyone in mind who you think would be willing to join the project please leave them an invitation on their Talk page Goetia [She/They] (talk) 18:12, 24 May 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia style and naming request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Dangrek Incident on a "Wikipedia style and naming" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (botop|talk|contribs) 17:31, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

George Floyd

I gave a valid reason. ALindgren74 (talk) 19:57, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

@ALindgren74 That does not excuse edit warring. See WP:3RRNO for the only reasons you may do more than 3 reverts per 24 hours. EvergreenFir (talk) 21:50, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

https://www.wral.com/story/fact-check-photo-doesn-t-show-woman-assaulted-by-floyd/19152282/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/national/george-floyd-america/policing/ ALindgren74 (talk) 22:27, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

random question, where in Wisconsin do you teach? I grew up there, and have family in Madison. ALindgren74 (talk) 22:29, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

@ALindgren74 Your second source explicitly says "Investigators brought photocopies of Floyd’s mug shot for a photo array to Henriquez to identify the man who put a gun to her abdomen.". Wikipedia's article doesn't say she was pregnant, only that he held a gun to her stomach. EvergreenFir (talk) 04:47, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2026

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

Administrator changes

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

• Tamzin
• TonyBallioni

• Ezhiki
• Queen of Hearts

Bureaucrat changes

• WereSpielChequers

Guideline and policy news

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

Technical news

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

Arbitration

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

Miscellaneous

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

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:14, 1 June 2026 (UTC)