User talk:ONUnicorn

Archives

1. 4/6/2006-8/18/2006 2. 8/30/2006-10/17/2006 3. 10/19/2006-11/30/2006 4. 11/11/2006-12/15/2006 (Contains Critical Mass discussion) 5. 12/18/2006-2/23/2007 6. 3/21/2007-7/10/2007 (long absence) 7. 9/29/2007-1/15/2015 (long absence) 8. 1/2015-6/29/2015 9. 7/1/2015-2/1/2016 10. 2/1/2016-1/3/2017 11. 1/11/2017-6/5/2017 (RFA) 12. 6/21/2017-7/30/2018 13. 8/1/2018-4/28/2019 14. 4/29/2019-11/1/2019 15. 11/2/2019 - 12/31/2020 16. 1/1/2021 - 5/31/2022 17. 5/30/2022 - 4/30/2023 18. 5/1/2023 - 7/14/2025 19. 7/14/2025-12/31/2025

Wikipedia ads	file info – show another – #253

Hello! Welcome to my talk page. Feel free to leave me a message by clicking the "new section" button above. I am an administrator, and I will do my best to help you. I will respond on this page to keep the discussion in one place. I archive when I think this page is getting long, or if all the discussions are old to the point of irrelevance, or after a long absence on my part. ~ ONUnicorn (Talk / Contribs)

Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2026 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor, we hope the WikiCup will give you a chance to improve your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here, and a bot will set up your submissions page within one day, ready for you to take part. Any questions on the scoring, rules or anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page.

For the 2026 WikiCup, the highest-ranking contestants will receive tournament points at the end of each round, and final rankings are decided by the number of tournament points each contestant has. This is the same scoring system that we had last year. If you're busy and can't sign up in January, don't worry: Signups are open throughout the year. To make things fairer for latecomers, the lowest-scoring contestants are no longer eliminated at the end of each round.

The first round will end on 26 February. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email), Epicgenius (talk · contribs · email), Frostly (talk · contribs · email), Guerillero (talk · contribs · email) and Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:38, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2025).

Guideline and policy news

• All general sanctions imposed by the community may now be enforced at the Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard (WP:AE) as a result of a recent RfC.
• Due to the result of a recent RFC, the administrator recall process is amended to extend the deadline for a re-request for adminship to 30 days or the next administrator election, whichever is later.
• Changes to the Access to Temporary Account IP Addresses Policy's disclosure rules include broadening the consecutive-blocks exception to cover all admin actions and removing the requirement to revision-delete permissible disclosures once they become unnecessary (instead requiring only their removal). See WP:TAIVDISCLOSE for more information.

Arbitration

• Following the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been elected to the Arbitration Committee: Aoidh, Asilvering, Girth Summit, Guerillero, HJ Mitchell, HouseBlaster, Izno, Sdrqaz, SilverLocust.
• The arbitration case Pbsouthwood has been suspended.

---

Hi there,

I'm leaving this message because you contributed to the recent RfC regarding the inclusion of airport destination lists. As promised, now that that RfC has closed, I've initiated a further discussion about the sourcing standards to be applied to these lists.

If you wish to contribute to the discussion, please do so at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Airport destination lists - sourcing requirements.

Cheers! Danners430 _{tweaks made} 15:35, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

Arbitration

• Due to the result of a recent motion, a rough consensus of administrators at the arbitration enforcement noticeboard may impose an expanded topic ban on Israel, Israelis, Jews, Judaism, Palestine, Palestinians, Islam, and/or Arabs, if an editor's Arab-Israeli conflict topic ban is determined to be insufficient to prevent disruption. At least one diff per area expanded into should be cited.

Miscellaneous

• Voting in the 2026 Steward elections started on 06 February 2026 at 14:00 (UTC) and will end on 27 February 2026 at 14:00 (UTC). The confirmation process for current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.

---

WikiProject Unreferenced articles | March 2026 Backlog Drive
There is a substantial backlog of unsourced articles on Wikipedia, and we need your help! The purpose of this drive is to add sources to these unsourced articles and make a meaningful impact. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles cited. Remember to tag your edit summary with [[WP:MAR26]], both to advertise the event and tally the points later using Edit Summary Search. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you have subscribed to the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:13, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Pir Syed Arif Ali Shah Tirmizi Al-Hussaini, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A dates error. References show this error when one of the date-containing parameters is incorrectly formatted. Please edit the article to correct the date and ensure it is formatted to follow the Wikipedia Manual of Style's guidance on dates. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 20:45, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The first round of the 2026 WikiCup ended on 26 February. As some of you may have noticed, good article nomination reviews now receive 10 points, an increase from 5 points in the previous year, as per a consensus at WT:CUP. This point increase has been retroactively applied to all good article reviews for which competitors have claimed points in this round. Peer reviews, which continue to be worth 5 points, are now listed in the same section as featured article candidate reviews, rather than with good article reviews. Everyone who competed in round 1 will advance to round 2 unless they have withdrawn or been banned. No other changes to the round-point system have been made for this year.

Round 1 was competitive. Three contestants scored more than 1,000 round points, and the top 16 contestants all scored more than 300 round points. The following competitors scored more than 800 round points:

• Bgsu98 (submissions) with 1,467 round points, largely gained from 1 featured article, 5 featured lists, 15 good articles, and 42 FAC and GAN reviews;
• Olliefant (submissions) with 1,246 round points, largely from 4 featured lists, 9 good articles, 2 featured topic articles, 4 did you know articles, and 75 FAC and GAN reviews;
• Generalissima (submissions) with 1,095 round points, largely from 3 featured articles, 6 good articles, and 5 did you know articles;
• MCE89 (submissions) with 848 round points, largely from 1 featured article, 8 good articles, 1 did you know article, and 32 FAC and GAN reviews; and
• Rollinginhisgrave (submissions) with 838 round points, largely from 1 featured article, 8 good articles, 1 did you know article, and 14 FAC, GAN, and peer reviews.

The full scores for round 1 can be seen here. During this round, contestants have claimed 7 featured articles, 16 featured lists, 2 featured-topic articles, 168 good articles, 13 good-topic articles and more than 50 Did You Know articles. In addition, competitors have worked on 14 In the News articles, and they have conducted nearly 700 reviews. The tournament points table will be updated within the next few days.

Remember that any content promoted after 26 February but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, feel free to review one of the nominations listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:57, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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!

---

Hi, how are you? Thought I'd mention that I'd just left a copyright warning at User talk:Pstdeleilesanmi, so yours might perhaps appear to be a little like Pelion upon Ossa. Regards, thanks for all your good work! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 14:48, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like yours was just a couple seconds before mine. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 14:54, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, that's how it looks to me – two minds with but a single thought ... Just wondered if you might want to remove yours so that we don't look too bitey; if not I'll happily rm mine. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:34, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ONUnicorn. Just wondering whether you were aware of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ProGet and WT:AFD#AfD Request: ProGet when you speedily deleted ProGet. The article was kept by consensus but seems to have been targeted by various unregistered accounts since then. Perhaps a second AfD would be preferrable to speedy deletion. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:52, 13 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the IP and location info for the temp accounts, it does appear that a single unregistered editor has been forum-shopping for deletion since the AfD close. If they want to start a second AfD or ask for a deletion review, I have no objection to either, but speedy is for uncontroversial deletions and there is no way to call this uncontroversial. --RL0919 (talk) 02:16, 13 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for pointing that out. I'm not sure how I missed it. I have undeleted both the article and talk page. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 03:30, 13 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking another look at this. FWIW, I only noticed this because I posted a query related to something else on WT:AFD about a week ago. Multiple unregistered accounts (no idea whether its the same person) had re-posted requests for a second AfD be started despite the intial request being declined. I combined the threads and added the article to my watchlist. I saw the tagging by an unregistered account but figured it would just get decline and left it as is. For reference, the same account also tagged Subic Broadcasting Corporation for speedy deletion per A7 on March 11, but that tag was removed. I can't say whether this other tagging is just a random coincidence or somehow related to ProGet. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:15, 13 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There is plenty of time remaining to meet the goal of 26 new articles representing each letter of the alphabet, to be made in the year 2026. Let me know if you're looking for ideas. Cheers! BD2412 T 00:35, 16 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects you have created have been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 March 17 § Devanagari + anything else until a consensus is reached. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 08:45, 17 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Is there anyway to contact you privately? Totallynotetage (talk) 22:04, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

About what? The "E-mail this user" link for me is active although I don't check the e-mail associated with it all that often but if I know to expect an e-mail I can check it. But where possible it's best to keep communication on Wikipedia. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 15:56, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Alrighty, I couldn't see the thing on da Phone. Except an e-mail coming your way :D Totallynotetage (talk) 16:59, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Totallynotetage I got your e-mail. Not sure why that couldn't have been handled on Wikipeida. I have gone ahead and restored the history of your sandbox. That way you can copy it and save it somewhere off-line. You can access it by clicking on view history on desktop, or the icon that looks like a clock with an arrow on mobile. Keep in mind that, while your user sandbox is meant to be a place to test editing functions, experiment with wikicode and formatting, and figure out how things work here, it is not meant to be a place to host fake articles or creative writing. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 18:36, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

is there anywhere I can keep it where only I can see it on wikipedia, or does it have to stay offline? Totallynotetage (talk) 19:08, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It can stay in the history of your sandbox like it is now. But everything on Wikipedia is publicly visible. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 19:22, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Could you help me on High priest? The page came up on suggested edits. Am I allowed to use the website https://www.pastorjasonelder.com/bible-facts-all/high-priests-of-israel-list-and-timeline as citation missing for: The High Priest of Israel served in the Tabernacle, then in Solomon's Temple and the Second Temple in Jerusalem. The Samaritan High Priest is the high priest of the Samaritans. NicoR8 (talk) 12:04, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I would not use that website for that purpose. It looks like the personal website of Pastor Jason Elder. If you read the about page he says that, "I first got the idea of starting a website from a conversation with my wife, . . . I realized that I was doing a lot of meaningful stuff - writing liturgies, writing notes for bible study, and writing engaging sermons - yet all of it was being used once and then living on my laptop for years, not helping anyone. I decided to freshen up the documents and share them . . ." He indicates that he does have a MDiv and has pastored churches, but he does not seem to be a scholar or theologian. His website is not peer-reviewed or fact checked. There is no indication that he is "an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications."

Pastor Elder's website falls under the self-published source section of the reliable source guideline and the self-published source section of the verifiability policy. Those two pages are important to read and understand when evaluating what sources you should and should not use for specific purposes. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 17:18, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much. I will for sure read all links. NicoR8 (talk) 17:29, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Could you also help me with Mouni Sadhu Travel section second paragraph starting with: Between 1946 and 1948. All references are self-published by this same person. I can reword or remove? NicoR8 (talk) 18:38, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The Core Contest—Wikipedia's most exciting contest—returns again this year from April 15 to May 31. The goal: to improve vital or other core articles, with a focus on those in the worst state of disrepair. Editing can be done individually, but in the past groups have also successfully competed. There is £300 of prize money divided among editors who provide the "best additive encyclopedic value". Signups are open now. Cheers from the judges, Femke, Casliber, Aza24.

If you wish to start or stop receiving news about The Core Contest, please add or remove yourself from the delivery list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:20, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ONUnicorn, I believe you recently declined the speedy deletion nomination to Nope Your Too Late I Already Died because the current version cites more and newer sources. The person who initially tagged the article for speedy deletion recently opened up an AfD discussion. I was wondering if you could provide your opinion on it? Thanks! NP2026 (talk) 02:23, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@NP2026 I have no opinion on if it should be kept or deleted. I declined the speedy because it did not meet the strict criteria for deletion under which it was nominated. The AFD is the correct next step. I do not intend to participate in the AFD. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 15:52, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks for letting me know. Just wanted to let you know in case you wanted to NP2026 (talk) 23:43, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]