This is TonySt's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 2 months

This user is a regular and doesn't mind if you template him.

This user's talk page is monitored by talk page watchers. Some of them even talk back. Their input is welcome, and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated.

I noticed your comment on the Gypsy Rose Blanchard talk page about the proposed 1q21.1 microdeletion context. I agree it’s important to be careful about medical details, but I thought it might be relevant since it has been publicly documented and discussed by reliable sources (e.g. People, 2025).

I wasn’t able to reply directly on the talk page since it’s currently semi-protected, but I wanted to reach out here instead to understand your perspective better. Would you be open to clarifying what kind of supporting context would make it appropriate for inclusion? I’m still learning the best way to structure this type of addition and would appreciate your insight.

If you’re open to it, I also have some additional context and source details I can share for review.

Thanks for your time. I just wanted to make sure I understood your perspective correctly! Mylittlepony333 (talk) 17:05, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Mylittlepony333. The reason I wasn't sure if it was appropriate is because I'm ignorant of the subject and don't know why a mention of that medical diagnosis is relevant for the article. Per WP:BLPPRIVACY, The standard for inclusion of personal information of living persons is higher than mere existence of a reliable source that could be verified. In other words: the fact that we can verify that the information is true does not mean we need to have it in the article. If there are reasons to add it to the article, then it should be done in a way that indicates to the reader why we're including the information. I can see another editor has responded on the talk page with some context. The talk page will become non-semi-protected in about 17 hours, at which point you will be able to participate in the discussion there -- I'd encourage you to wait until that time before providing additional context, as it would probably be more appropriate on the article's talk page.

Also, welcome to Wikipedia! I do have a question though -- you appear to be pretty familiar with the idea of page protection types, how to cite references, and talk pages. After reading your comment here, I was surprised to see that your only two edits to the project have been the addition of that information and this comment here. Have you, by chance, had any other usernames here before? Regardless, thank you for your contributions, and I look forward to you participating in the discussion at Talk:Gypsy-Rose Blanchard when it becomes unprotected shortly! --tony 17:30, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tony, thank you so much for your kind and detailed reply, I really appreciate the clarity.

To answer your question, no, I haven’t edited under any other usernames. I’m new to actively contributing, but I’ve been researching this particular case for quite some time and spent a lot of time reading through Wikipedia’s sourcing and BLP guidelines before attempting any edits. I wanted to make sure that anything I suggest is handled correctly and neutrally.

I completely understand the privacy and relevance concerns you raised about context, and I agree that any addition needs to clearly show why the information is encyclopedically significant. I’ll make sure that’s addressed when I outline my proposal.

I’ve already drafted a properly sourced version that I’ll add to the article’s Talk page for review once it reopens, so everyone can weigh in on the tone, placement, and context before anything is changed.

Thank you again for taking the time to guide new contributors so thoughtfully. I really value that approach. Mylittlepony333 (talk) 03:36, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tony,

Thanks again for your earlier reply and guidance. I just wanted to follow up briefly. I wasn’t aware that the talk page would remain under semi-protection for newer accounts, so I wasn’t able to reply there as planned.

I’ve since refined my proposed clarification with full sourcing and neutral context, ready to share once my account becomes autoconfirmed. However, if you’d prefer I share the draft here for review in the meantime, I’m happy to do that instead.

Given that I’m still a new user, I’m also perfectly happy to wait the few days and make the ten constructive edits needed to gain autoconfirmed status if that’s the better path for credibility and process.

Appreciate your time and patience while I find my footing. Thank you again for the helpful welcome earlier! Mylittlepony333 (talk) 04:12, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Mylittlepony333. Just a heads-up: looks like the talk page protection has now expired. Take care --tony 14:29, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah! Thank you Tony! Mylittlepony333 (talk) 00:05, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I made it clear that unless an objection for my reasons at Talk:Nationalist China was given, the reasons for moving that page to a redirect will be applied. Do not accuse people of vandalism or try to placate with the "good faith" acknowledgement. This is unacceptable. 2605:8D80:6C20:3AAA:CDA1:E542:1545:4252 (talk) 23:42, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I did not accuse you of vandalism; I challenged your BLAR of the disambiguation page, which is typically how such challenges begin. Take care --tony 23:43, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The person who reverted it, User:Arjayay, did not respond on the talk page or provide an objection, and called it vandalism. 2605:8D80:6C20:3AAA:CDA1:E542:1545:4252 (talk) 23:45, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, TonySt. This message is being sent to remind you of significant upcoming changes regarding logged-out editing.

Starting 4 November, logged-out editors will no longer have their IP address publicly displayed. Instead, they will have a temporary account (TA) associated with their edits. Users with some extended rights like administrators and CheckUsers, as well as users with the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will still be able to reveal temporary users' IP addresses and all contributions made by temporary accounts from a specific IP address or range.

How do temporary accounts work?

• When a logged-out user completes an edit or a logged action for the first time, a cookie will be set in this user's browser and a temporary account tied with this cookie will be automatically created for them. This account's name will follow the pattern: ~2025-12345-67 (a tilde, year of creation, a number split into units of 5).
• All subsequent actions by the temporary account user will be attributed to this username. The cookie will expire 90 days after its creation. As long as it exists, all edits made from this device will be attributed to this temporary account. It will be the same account even if the IP address changes, unless the user clears their cookies or uses a different device or web browser.
• A record of the IP address used at the time of each edit will be stored for 90 days after the edit. Users with the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will be able to see the underlying IP addresses.
• As a measure against vandalism, there are two limitations on the creation of temporary accounts:
  • There has to be a minimum of 10 minutes between subsequent temporary account creations from the same IP (or /64 range in case of IPv6).
  • There can be a maximum of 6 temporary accounts created from an IP (or /64 range) within a period of 24 hours.

Temporary account IP viewer user right

• Administrators may grant the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right to non-administrators who meet the criteria for granting. Importantly, an editor must make an explicit request for the permission (e.g. at WP:PERM/TAIV)—administrators are not permitted to assign the right without a request.
• Administrators will automatically be able to see temporary account IP information once they have accepted the Access to Temporary Account IP Addresses Policy via Special:Preferences or via the onboarding dialog which comes up after temporary accounts are deployed.

Impact for administrators

• It will be possible to block many abusers by just blocking their temporary accounts. A blocked person won't be able to create new temporary accounts quickly if the admin selects the autoblock option.
• It will still be possible to block an IP address or IP range.
• Temporary accounts will not be retroactively applied to contributions made before the deployment. On Special:Contributions, you will be able to see existing IP user contributions, but not new contributions made by temporary accounts on that IP address. Instead, you should use Special:IPContributions for this (see a video about IPContributions in a gallery below).

Rules about IP information disclosure

• Publicizing an IP address gained through TAIV access is generally not allowed (e.g. ~2025-12345-67 previously edited as 192.0.2.1 or ~2025-12345-67's IP address is 192.0.2.1).
• Publicly linking a TA to another TA is allowed if "reasonably believed to be necessary". (e.g. ~2025-12345-67 and ~2025-12345-68 are likely the same person, so I am counting their reverts together toward 3RR, but not Hey ~2025-12345-68, you did some good editing as ~2025-12345-67)
• See Wikipedia:Temporary account IP viewer § What can and can't be said for more detailed guidelines.

Useful tools for patrollers

• It is possible to view if a user has opted-in to view temporary account IPs via the User Info card, available in Preferences → Appearance → Advanced options → Enable the user info card
  • This feature also makes it possible for anyone to see the approximate count of temporary accounts active on the same IP address range.
• Special:IPContributions allows viewing all edits and temporary accounts connected to a specific IP address or IP range.
• Similarly, Special:GlobalContributions supports global search for a given temporary account's activity.
• The auto-reveal feature (see video below) allows users with the right permissions to automatically reveal all IP addresses for a limited time window.

Videos

• How to use Special:IPContributions
• How automatic IP reveal works
• How to use IP Info
• How to use User Info

Further information and discussion

• For more information and discussion regarding this change, please see the announcement from the Wikimedia Foundation at Wikipedia:Village pump (WMF) § Temporary accounts rollout.

Most of this message was written by Mz7 (source). Thanks, 🎃 SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 02:47, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

	The Editor's Barnstar
	Im pretty sure your talk page is rife with these, but I don't care! Have another :D Plasticwonder (talk) 17:44, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much :) tony 21:33, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, i’m ravecrowny or Gear. I was here because I accidentally caused an edit conflict on the Battle For Dream Island article because I didn’t add a reliable source to my citation (correct me if I am wrong). I was just trying to edit the article even though I had no prior knowledge of the rules and other information for editing on Wikipedia. Just letting you know that I made the accident and I didn’t mean to cause it. I ain’t no troll or anything trying to buffer with the article, just trying to make some edits. Also was asking if there was any consequences to doing that? I did it only 1 time so can you let me know? 2603:6011:7A00:C5E0:21C9:ABD4:FA2F:F3A4 (talk) 02:47, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! You're good, no worries :) Take care --tony 02:49, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Tony, I hope this is where I can reach you in response to your removing the external link I posted. SH Acoustics is a bonafide contributor to this facility as part of the Ralph Appelbaum Exhibit team. If you don't allow external links, that's fine, but why did you have to remove the text listing for SH Acoustics as well? StevieJ67 (talk) 17:29, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @StevieJ67! Thank you for reaching out. If that information can be supported by one or more secondary and independent reliable sources, then we may be able to re-add the information along with an inline citation to the source. I did a cursory search to see if I could find anything that meets the reliable source criteria but I wasn't able to find anything to support the information you added. I'm going to leave some more information on your talk page with regards to potential conflits of interest on Wikipedia, including some links that you might find helpful. Take care! --tony 17:57, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK, so in full disclosure, I am related to the company that I am trying to list on this page, but also understand that other colleagues have added their names to project pages like this only to state the fact that they are involved, not to be overly "promoting". Perhaps you can help me understand how to navigate this process better on Wikipedia, as we have a number of project (building/factility) pages that we would like to see our name receive proper credit just like all the other names here do. What sources do these other companies provide for Wikipedia, especially when the building like the Obama Center is not complete and therefore most companies involved should not be "promoting" their involvement in any heavy way on social media or elsewhere? I feel very strange asking our Client - the Obama Center - or our project partner - Ralph Appelbaum Associates - to provide the necessary proof for Wikipedia that we are indeed a key part of the Design Team . StevieJ67 (talk) 18:05, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @StevieJ67. I appreciate your transparency and I think you might have stumbled on a core misconception that a lot of businesses and organizations initially have about Wikipedia. Wikipedia is an encylopedia edited by those whose sole goal is to create and maintain an encyclopedia. If your goal is to improve the encyclopedia, that can be accomplished in a lot of different ways. If your goal is to add references to your company to different articles, that is generally considered promotion and can be seen as contrary to the purpose of the encyclopedia. If your company's association is notable enough to warrant inclusion in secondary, independent reliable sources, chances are that one of our volunteer editors will notice and add that information into the article with citations supporting the information. If they don't notice on their own and you feel it would benefit the encyclopedia to include the information, you're more than welcome to write and submit edit requests. I encourage you to check the links I left on your talk page for clear answers on how to request changes to articles that you're associated with (this guide here is great), including how to use the edit request wizard. --tony 18:48, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery 19:31, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't the point of Wikipedia to rely on community? Why you reject testimonials of thousands of people, but accept subjective and promotional articles? 2A01:E0A:CB5:A1A0:5903:EB6A:F9B4:E750 (talk) 21:21, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is, anybody can create a Reddit thread titled "Abraham Lincoln ate pickled ducklings for fun" and, if we were to treat it as any reliable source, then we would have to write something on Wikipedia that is obviously not true. While some articles from reliable sources have factual errors, those sources also bear the responsibility and have a reputation at stake, making them motivated to have accurate information. monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 21:25, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To put it differently:

If I make a post to Reddit saying "George Washington has 15 illegitimate children," and someone calls me out, then I can just create a new account.

If I make an article saying "George Washington has 15 illegitimate children" for WSJ, then I would be fired and ruin my future. monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 21:29, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So just because it comes from a company it is more reliable? The article is actually saying that we can "play for free", relying on a 2019 article on a site that doesn't even exist anymore... 2A01:E0A:CB5:A1A0:5903:EB6A:F9B4:E750 (talk) 21:46, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If the article doesn't exist anymore, then you can remove the "Play for free" statement. However, there are still rules against using forums and self-published sources. See WP:RELIABLE for the policy in question. (Exceptions do exist, but none apply here AFAIK) monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 21:59, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So i publish new infos and notify you about outdated and misleading infos and you do nothing but delete my messages? Can't you fix it yourself? If you care about truth? 2A01:E0A:CB5:A1A0:5903:EB6A:F9B4:E750 (talk) 22:14, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You need to find a reliable, independent source. If all the reliable, independent sources are false, then the article will be false. See WP:NOTRIGHT for more information. Cheers! monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 22:21, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"independent source" while half of the sources are from the publisher itself or promotional articles... This is not an encyclopedia, this is a press agency. 2A01:E0A:CB5:A1A0:5903:EB6A:F9B4:E750 (talk) 22:44, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Those promotional articles aren't considered reliable or independent sources, and the content they support can be removed if a better source can't be found. In my reply I was not commenting on Top Eleven's sources in particular, I was making a point on sources in general. Cheers! monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 23:01, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We are, talking about Top Eleven. If "Those promotional articles aren't considered reliable or independent sources" how were they accepted in the first place? 2A01:E0A:CB5:A1A0:5903:EB6A:F9B4:E750 (talk) 23:14, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, they never got accepted(They weren't accepted at all!) There is no formal process to "accept" changes to an ordinary article, e.g. Top Eleven. I and @TonySt reverted your edits using Reddit as a source because we are trying to prevent addition of improper sources. No one was there to scrutinize when the previous sources were added, so they slipped under. Those sources are also illegitimate, but for sources that have already been added, a bad source is better than no source(with 1 exception, WP:BLP).

Enjoy editing Wikipedia! monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 23:27, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Personal attack removed) 2A01:E0A:CB5:A1A0:5903:EB6A:F9B4:E750 (talk) 00:01, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Personal attack removed) ? so you are a human to write "they never got accepted(They weren't accepted at all!) ... a bad source is better than no source" 2A01:E0A:CB5:A1A0:5903:EB6A:F9B4:E750 (talk) 00:06, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Please check WP:RSREDDIT for information about why we can't use Reddit as a source (also check here for info on what self-published material we can use). tony 23:25, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"a bad source is better than no source" ... 2A01:E0A:CB5:A1A0:5903:EB6A:F9B4:E750 (talk) 02:03, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) As mentioned above, a Reddit thread or Facebook post can say anything the poster wants them to say. Would you appreciate someone saying you did something illegal? Anybody on Reddit or Facebook (or other social media) can say just that. self-published sources are not bad sources, they are not sources at all, the sole exception being if a company's facebook account posts something, in which case it ccan be used as a primary source for simple statements of fact ("X is Y") but cannot be used for qualitive statements ("X is the best Y"). Also, regarding your statement If you care about truth? - we in fact do not care about truth, we care about verifiability. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 03:08, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thanks for all you do =D And for the reverts on my talk page – LuniZunie ツ(talk) 00:09, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Any time :) tony 00:12, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think you were the person who changed it back, you were listed in the "view history" section.

The bit I changed was an inaccurate statement supported by a dead link to Fox News.

I explained this on the talk page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Islamic_State_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction

2405:6E00:630:E8C6:7990:F56D:DB0A:21F3 (talk) 03:22, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reaching out! I replied on that talk page section. You're right and I'd like to readd the reference with an archive link (we can discuss at the article talk page) :) --tony 03:32, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for finding that archive. Yes, please re-add the reference with the archive to the page. It is a lot better than I expected from Fox News + the headline.

A quote or summary of what is said by Daryl Kimball and / or Olli Heinonen in that archive might be good to add as well if you have time.

Sorry, I can't work out how to make my signature match my previous messages from earlier today. ~2025-31100-30 (talk) 15:08, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've made that change to the article :) --tony 20:12, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Nationalist China has 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/2025 November 5 § Nationalist China until a consensus is reached. ~2025-31393-75 (talk) 02:42, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's not incredible information… ~2025-31221-04 (talk) 01:15, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

you ragebaited them really well CyborgsWM (talk) 02:07, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@CyborgsWM, thanks for the thanks! tony 02:29, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tony i was maaking it about somone better SJP Efitor (talk) 01:53, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! As I mentioned on your talk page, please refrain from hijacking pages, as you did with Chris Vargas. Should you believe the subject you were writing about deserves an article, please use the Article Wizard, which has an option to create a draft version that you can then get feedback on. Please also see Wikipedia's disambiguation guideline which indicates how to handle separate subjects with similar names. Take care --tony 01:55, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you should re-instate my nice text no I think you are making a mistake I am a amateur journalist and writer for the albanian rap scene I just write the most precisely possible biography of this singer My writing was completely neutral going from the base that an artist with 40 millions views on a hiss songs without a major deal is quiet something and I was describing exactly what the singer does Sind (talk) 02:48, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Sind! Thank you for reaching out. On Wikipedia, details about people have to have reliable sources attached to them. If you have a reliable source, you can add it to the article with an inline citation. You can read more about Wikipedia's verifiability policy by clicking this link, and more about citing sources in general here at this link. Thank you for your contributions, and happy editing :) --tony 02:56, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, just wanted to ask why my edit was changed on the "sitara-e-imtiaz" page Zoltanchevy19 (talk) 06:23, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! In general, "notable people" lists and similar are only meant for people who already have articles about them. If you think this person meets our notability guidelines, please see Help:Your first article. Take care --tony 16:33, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

But the other people on that list also dont have articles about them ~2025-32335-29 (talk) 16:35, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery 20:36, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. If you received a automatic notification of an revert of your edit to this article you can ignore it. I was backing out an edit from early October and I mistakenly undid from the current version. Same overall effect (no change to your edit), but I now realize you may have been notified. Meters (talk) 22:20, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, thank you for the heads up :) --tony 22:36, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

lists of people and fictional characters do not belong on the disambiguation page, they belong on either the given name page or a separate page entirely. ~2025-32590-82 (talk) 05:40, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I saw you posted a note on the article talk page shortly after leaving this message here. Just a heads-up: unexplained content removal can be indistinguishable from vandalism, so it would be helpful if you used edit summaries in the future. Take care --tony 15:38, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i have stupid =( ~2025-31892-10 (talk) 05:42, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i are has stupid =[ ~2025-38174-90 (talk) 02:41, 4 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

hi ~2025-33361-81 (talk) 20:29, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you :) tony 03:17, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I replyed Coolguyyo (talk) 02:48, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My knowledge is correct i'm working in the race currently. ~2025-33864-03 (talk) 04:19, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @~2025-33864-03! Thank you for reaching out. We can only use information which is supported by one or more secondary and independent reliable sources in the form of inline citations. I'm going to leave some additional information on your talk page regarding conflicts of interest. Take care tony 04:25, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:47, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery 17:24, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

how are you — Preceding unsigned comment added by ~2025-34475-98 (talk) 17:37, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I'm good, thank you :) --tony 17:42, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, they are NOT "non-constructive edits," thankyouverymuch. Please see the article's Talk page to discuss the issue before blanket reverts. Thanks. ~2025-35178-83 (talk) 03:18, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! tony 03:19, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And thanks for catching that name. I thought it was French or something! lol! ~2025-35178-83 (talk) 03:24, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Any time! Not sure why the encoding on the source is the way it is, but c'est la vie ;) --tony 03:25, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery 15:54, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:49, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tony.

     There are hundreds of links detailing this trend and various links covering it. Here a few links;

- https://www.highsnobiety.com/p/quarter-zip-trend/ - https://www.newsweek.com/gen-z-quarter-zip-movement-fashion-culture-11089737

                           Thank you Tony! I hope you will approve of my changes, as I am new to editing, please add these links into the page! ~2025-36042-35 (talk) 01:35, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

https://imagecomics.com/comics/releases/youngblood-1 ~2025-36331-46 (talk) 18:20, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This might help fill in some gaps too. This is pre the Image release, where he was selling them elsewhere, as I mentioned, mainly on Whatnot, and his own website.

It was after this that the deal to release them via Image came about, and the first issue was released on November 5. The roster is as I noted, and as featured on the covers: Badrock, Diehard, Shaft, Vogue, and Chapel. Hence why I updated the current roster. I did make a mistake though. I didn't make Chapel into a link. Although this isn't that Chapel, this is his son, so I don't know how you want to deal with that. ~2025-36331-46 (talk) 18:27, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Thank you for reaching out. You don't need to prove anything to me -- you just need to prove it to future readers of the page by using inline citations which reference reliable sources. If the information can be supported by those reliable sources, please consider re-adding it using an inline citation to that source. You can click here for directions using the source editor or click here for instructions using the visual editor (I'm not sure which you're using). Take care --tony 18:32, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll just update the roster and leave the rest incomplete. I just don't have the time to learn how to add in references and such. I've re-edited it adding in things that otherwise don't require a source. I doubt anyone else cares about this to update it completely, but maybe someone will. ~2025-36631-62 (talk) 17:09, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey all, just learned about conflict of interest so I cannot edit my 1st Cousin Bessie Halls page. I dont know if anyone would think it is important but I would sure be grateful for someone to add some more pics. Also about my Grandmother Irma Beatrice who changed her name to Rosalie Sipp after marrying my grandfather Charles Walter Sipp in Kansas City Missouri. I can provide more sites for sources if anyone would be interested. Thank you. If not I understand and I do not want to create any conflicts of interest at all. Here is one source for reference. Bessie Hall Dempsey – Oz Wisdoms and Lessons GSIPP (talk) 03:58, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @GSIPP! It looks like you meant to add this onto the talk page for the article Bessie Hall Dempsey, but you instead may have accidentally added it to my personal talk page instead. If you'd like, I can copy your comment to Talk:Bessie Hall Dempsey so other interested editors can take a look. Just let me know :) --tony 04:00, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I am sorry, I appoligize. GSIPP (talk) 04:06, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@GSIPP, no need to apologise -- this place can be confusing sometimes :) I'll go ahead and copy your comments over to Talk:Bessie Hall Dempsey so other interested editors can take a look and help out. Take care! --tony 04:08, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I will work on paying more attention!! Have a great Holiday! GSIPP (talk) 04:10, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You too! --tony 04:15, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For Name change: Mark Dempsey papers - Archives West GSIPP (talk) 04:06, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It was not unsourced, but it was in Norwegian by the way. He he ~2025-36907-32 (talk) 18:47, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~2025-36993-13 (talk) 05:27, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry about that but idk how to source stuff on Wikipedia, after talking to a few people from there it seemed to have an big impact on the school so I figured it would be worth mentioning as of its influence of the school, i saw you took it down and I was wondering could you put it back up and cite it maybe? Im sorry if thats annoying I just dont know how to do anything ~2025-36996-62 (talk) 02:47, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello :) The main reason I reverted your edit is because it seemed to just be a news report, but Wikipedia is not a newspaper. I don't think the information you added belongs in the article, but if you'd like to re-add it, I'd encourage you to check out this really helpful page which describes how to cite references. I won't revert it if you add it again. Take care --tony 02:51, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Ill look at that soon! Sorry about the inconvenience! All the best :) ~2025-36996-62 (talk) 03:05, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how many people are using interceptor yet, but it's great that I can now patrol recent changes on mobile without the extreme difficulty I would otherwise face. Thanks a lot; I genuinely really appreciate it.

A suggestion if you don't mind: it would be great to have an option to warn users for not using an edit summary (with {{uw-es}}). Given that it's mobile-oriented, I think a really good way of doing this would be to replace the blank space where an edit summary should go with a button saying something like "warn for edit summary". In my experience, the majority of "false positive" edits that get flagged by ORES are there because they don't have an edsum, and I believe that sending out warnings for this would significantly improve the project. lp0 on fire () 18:28, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Lp0 on fire! Thanks for the kind words :) I'm glad you're finding it useful. I appreciate the suggestion, too, and it's something I'll seriously look at as I make additions. Something on the roadmap soon is another section within the revert menu for single-use notices, and it will probably find its way in that area first, but the layout is all very much in flux so it might make sense at some point to move it to the (blank) edit summary. Can I ask what device/browser you're using? I haven't been able to test with an iPhone yet as I don't have one :) --tony 19:27, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm using an (ancient) Android phone. I think it's a Galaxy S6 but whatever it is it's running LineageOS. Excited for the single-issue notices – they're something I find lacking in many recent changes patrol tools. Again, thanks so much for developing this; now I can procrastinate efficiently on any device! lp0 on fire () 07:25, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery 18:56, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Tony, I'm confused. I just spent hours learning how to use Wikipedia's edit function and to correctly editing my page. This is not promotion, its accuracy. There was information that was obsolete, outdated, incorrect, private, and unnecessary. It was profoundly out of date. I spent all day updating and correcting it. I do not understand how all of that work can just be deleted. I'm very new to this. I'm learning. Was that work I spent all day on today saved or is it all just gone? All of the information I added was linked to external sources, primarily academic and news media sites such as Rolling Stone, Harper's Magazine, CNN, etc. In only a few instances did I link to my site, but only because I saw that older posts that had been on Wikipedia for years were linked to my website, so I assumed that must be acceptable. I do not understand why links to prestigious and well-known media outlets, as well as links to academic sites where journalism Fellowships, Adjunct Faculty positions, etc. which I linked to should be unacceptable. I improved the wikipedia page for accuracy, timeliness, improved the links, and reflected how I am known in the popular culture. Existing entries which I deleted did not do the same. Can you please restore the work I spent all day on today? Thank you very much. MNYUHG (talk) 19:26, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MNYUHG! I see you left a similar message on your talk page, so I'll respond there to consolidate the discussion. tony 20:16, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

please can i add solarballs its so cool TheiaXProtoSolarballs (talk) 16:01, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tony, The passage added by @deepbajwareal which you have just added by reversion in the Border 2 (film) => Casting section is grammatically poorly written. The grammar needs to be corrected for that article. That is why I had removed it earlier. Robzz (talk) 16:15, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Robzz, really sorry for the template! I noticed the invisible comment you added in this diff, which looks to be an attempt at using the article itself to communicate with another specific editor. In reverting that addition it also swept up the previous edit you made where you removed some bad grammar. I was about to offer to restore your change (sans invisible-comment) but it looks like you beat me to it :) --tony 16:30, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Tony, No problem at all. Thank you so much for your reply and clarification. Appreciated. Robzz (talk) 18:22, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:47, 4 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @TonySt. Your wiki edit anniversary was 1 day ago, marking 20 years of dedicated contributions to English Wikipedia. Your passion for sharing knowledge and your remarkable contributions have not only enriched the project, but also inspired countless others to contribute. Thank you for your amazing contributions. Wishing you many more wonderful years ahead in the Wiki journey. :) -❙❚❚❙❙ GnOeee ❚❙❚❙❙ ✉ 08:25, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you :) tony 15:07, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll bet you are a Tony Stark. I just noticed your invention on Interceptor. Looks really cool! And wish to try it out someday. You seem to be wikipedia's top gun leader when patrolling rc. Great work! ‎ ‎ B⠄Jayden ^(talk) 15:34, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the kind words Jayden! I've seen your name often lately, and your help in recent changes patrolling is very much noticed and appreciated by many of us :) Take care! --tony 15:53, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Hello, I am writing to sincerely apologize for my recent edits to the Joseph Bruchec page a few weeks ago. I now understand that my changes were disruptive/incorrect, and I take full responsibility for "ruining" the article temporarily. I have since reverted my changes to restore the correct version. It was not my intention to cause harm to the encyclopedia, and I will be more careful in the future and review the core Wikipedia editing policies and manual of style to ensure my contributions are constructive. Thank you for your understanding.

Tony that apology was made by ai.

Here is my real apology. I hope you can forgive me for my actions and I expect the fullest of consquences to my actions and I admit, I was wrong. I was very DISRUPTIVE and annoying so I hope you can forgive me and I will go to church to confess my sins. 

     Love - Unemployed weirdo ~2025-38543-02 (talk) 17:55, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Canaima Linux is based on Debian Testing. ~2025-38659-64 (talk) 18:49, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Looks like it actually isn't based on Debian Testing anymore. tony 18:53, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i want to ask you if you like turtles because durtles are cool ~2025-38563-10 (talk) 18:50, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Of course :) tony 19:02, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery 17:43, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:06, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tony,

I’d appreciate your advice. Attempts to update certain biographies in accordance with the RFC appear to result in reversions or site blocks. Is it not reasonable to consult editors who are active in the topic area and have a deeper understanding of the platform? ~2025-39528-98 (talk) 01:53, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note that Zak Smith is a Contentious topic, and as part of Arbitration remedies, you must be logged-in and extended-confirmed to edit or discuss the topic of Zak Smith on any page. --pro-anti-air ––>(talk)<–– 02:09, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

that is not a requirement to make an edit request. ~2025-39528-98 (talk) 02:51, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, edit requests are exempt from this, except that yours was disruptive and controversial, so it was procedurally denied. But despite this, you kept repeating your edit request despite warning, causing you to be sanctions. --pro-anti-air ––>(talk)<–– 02:58, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@~2025-39528-98, your edit request was the opposite of uncontroversial and it was denied as such. The duplicate request was disruptive and the canvassing doubly so. Which named user account(s) have you previously used to edit on this project? I may be able to offer advice if I know who I'm talking with. tony 02:19, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Any edit on the page is seemingly controversial (including adding books to the bibliography?) and includies the current addition which was added without consensus, mind you. It was apporpriate notification given WP: Canvassing

On the user talk pages of concerned editors. Examples include:

Editors who have made substantial edits to the topic or article

Editors who have participated in previous discussions on the same topic (or closely related topics)

Editors known for expertise in the field

Editors who have asked to be kept informed

Given that, advice for updating the content to reflect recent news by editors who seem not interested in making even neutral edits, would be helpful. ~2025-39528-98 (talk) 02:50, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Tony!

I was wondering what tools/software you used to do RCP stuff as well as any advice you may have for a newer RC Patroller.

Thanks, Elijah Wilder (talk) 18:42, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Elijah Wilder! I've used a few tools in the past, like AntiVandal and lately a script I wrote. Both of those tools require that you're in the "rollbackers" group, which is something you receive after requesting it at WP:RFP/R. But a lot of the time I'm just using Twinkle, which it looks like you're familiar with. Twinkle doesn't require rollback, but is still probably more useful in general than any of the semi-automated tools like AV or Huggle or Interceptor.

Most of recent changes patrolling is based on communication, calmness, denial, and accountability -- that is: being able to talk to people who are angry, being able to walk away from a situation, being able to ignore nasty insults, and being able to accept when you are wrong.

Most of "talking to people" is, in practice, done with escalating templates that are designed to let people know why you reverted them. Vandals usually receive four of these before being reported to AIV. Beyond templates, it's a lot of overly-nicely communicating with people who reach out to you via your talk page or theirs, especially when they're mad.

I also have a rule for myself, which is I never delete things from my own talk page unless they're obvious vandalism or block evasion. If someone is trolling I usually ignore them, but otherwise I always try to answer them, especially if it seems like I've done something wrong (and when that happens I try my best to fix it).

Let me know if there's something I can help with or clarify, or if you need a hand looking at a situation :) --tony 19:44, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have rollback rights and my previous history might make it harder to get them. I think after some time on here and proving myself I will be eligible again. Elijah Wilder (talk) 03:39, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I want to say thanks on the edit you did on Ron McNeil (musician)'s page. I never knew that McNeil formed a Beatles tribute before The Fab Four. There isn't any proof or sources that McNeil had Imagine: A Tribute to the Beatles before the Fab Four. And that McNeil has never mentioned that band in any of his interviews regarding the Fab Four and his other tribute band the Monkee Men, even news articles. And I don't think there are any YouTube videos regarding it. So again, thank you. Dream7392 (talk) 05:56, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! tony 00:23, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, a user just updated McNeil's page to include a link about his first band ;) Dream7392 (talk) 00:15, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I see that you edited this page Ezhava recently kindly do refer to the recent addition to this page and the introduction of a political POV fork in the lead kindly recert the edit if needed. Miamiller777 (talk) 06:22, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tony! I was going through some of the WP:GS authorizations to see if there are any that we don't need anymore. I noticed that you are a frequent alert-giver—of the ~13 alerts since 2021, you gave out 5 of them. I still lean towards removal: it seems like most of the disruption comes from new SPAs who probably should just be indef'd. The last user enforcement action was in 2022; the rest is just protection which could occur regardless of whether or not there was a GS. But given you are handing out a bunch of alerts, I wanted to check and see your thoughts on the matter :) Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:22, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey HouseBlaster! Thanks for reaching out. I'd support a repeal of that GS. As you mentioned the disruption in that topic tends to be the type that can be taken care of via normal protection or blocks. My use of the alerts is mostly to give a heads up to any user who might wiggle themselves into the tiny space of PW-topic disruption that could only be addressed via GS, but in practice that hasn't really happened (and in retrospect I'm not sure what I was doing with the TA and IP alert!). tony 00:38, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

=]

🐟sea cat🫧 (talk) 18:01, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! :) tony 18:10, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery 19:01, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tony, my edit was snarky - but information was drawn from a quality source, cited (The Spinoff). I've removed the snark, and the perhaps excessive reproduction of verbatim falsehoods. Not trying to vandalize. Thanks. IdiotSavant42 (talk) 04:54, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @IdiotSavant42! It wasn't reverted for vandalism -- the "snark" was the reason for the NPOV revert, and I appreciate you re-adding your contribution without it. Sorry for the template, and thank you for reaching out :) --tony 05:05, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers Tony. Lesson learnt. :) IdiotSavant42 (talk) 05:13, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again! This reversion didn't come with a warning D:

This warning was marked as minor.

As a request, it would be nice if rollbacks for things like "unsourced" or "NPOV" weren't marked as minor since minor edits are usually just for reverting vandalism and tests. There is technically an exemption for any tool that uses rollback but it would be nice not to need that.

Again, thanks for making this, and happy editing :) lp0 on fire () 14:11, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That non-warning reversion is weird and concerning, I haven't run into that yet. Do you have any recollection of it showing you a notification (at the bottom, like the "editconflict" or "alreadyrolled" you sometimes see)? I'll do some troubleshooting to figure out what's going on, and I'll also make sure it throws a notification on any issues when writing to talk page.

Good catch with the "minor" thing. I'll adjust it to only mark "vandalism" reversions as minor, which seems more in line with the spirit of WP:MINOR, as you suggested.

I'm about to push a version that has some single-issue warnings in the revert menu -- it's still a work in progress as far as how those warnings are presented but hopefully they're useful. I'm planning on having that version out today, and then after that another small fix today for the minor edits and more verbose notifications. Thank you for letting me know about these, and definitely please keep letting me know if you see anything amiss or if there are any additional features you'd like to see. tony 14:37, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much! This is really an amazing tool, and I'd guess it's probably just about the only thing I do on mobile now.

As far as I remember there was no notification for that edit. I was using rather patchy Wi-Fi though, so it's plausible that it reverted, couldn't warn because the connection died, and then forgot to do it when the Wi-Fi came back on.

I suppose I'll find out soon, but I wonder whether it would be possible to issue single-issue notices (e.g. edit summaries) without reverting the edit in question. lp0 on fire () 15:52, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You should now see those single-issue templates. I'm not super happy with how it's laid out just yet, but it's there now. I've also added in some additional notifications for errors, though I suspect your inkling is right in that it was probably a network error. Network errors will still prevent warnings at this point, but now it should at least give you a heads-up when that happens. I'm still investigating the "minor" edits thing -- the fix was easy for warnings but the rollbacks being marked as minor is proving to be more difficult. tony 16:21, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here things seem to be working as intended. It threw http, so I redid it. The second time it threw alreadyrolled, but it seems that one of the two times did result in a warning. lp0 on fire () 18:42, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind; here it threw http and said it had failed to write, but warned them nonetheless. lp0 on fire () 18:52, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is it OK if I send you an email? tony 18:56, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's fine. I probably won't reply until tomorrow because email on mobile is a pain. lp0 on fire () 19:45, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Lp0 on fire, following up on this: turns out rollback actions via API are automatically marked as "minor" by the MediaWiki software, and there's unfortunately nothing I can change to alter that :( --tony 03:22, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's a shame. I think LunieZunie found a way of doing it for WikiShield (don't quote me on that) so perhaps you (or I) could ask how they did it? lp0 on fire () 10:12, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a list of recent Wikishield rollbacks -- they're marked minor. tony 16:18, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh well. Sorry to bother you (: lp0 on fire () 16:23, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not at all -- the original issue you were talking about was the warnings being issued as "minor", which is now fixed thanks to you mentioning it :) tony 16:26, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

puto americano demierda la reconchadetumadre ~2025-41295-99 (talk) 16:58, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

vale :) tony 17:06, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery 21:43, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you had thought I'd totally forgotten about trying to use CVPI, shame on you! I always keep my word : ) The moment to test out the tool has come. It looks awesome! I think I nailed in the first two edits with it. The rest of the time till now, I've just been skipping through a pile of edits to catch the rhythm (you know what I'm saying?). Sadly, a glitch happens to me whereby the feed completely stops updating and displays the message "Waiting for next change...", even after 20 minutes of waiting, which looks really awkward. I solved this by restarting the browser and re entering CVPI, but this solution doesn't seem right, because it keeps on happening again. I also disabled all browser extensions. You enter CVPI and enjoy the feed for about 5 minutes, then it stops updating. I suppose the tool was created to favor mobile smartphones? I'm using the latest version of Chrome, 143.0.7499.148, on Windows 11. Oh yeah and another teaser! I noticed the message you added to the loading page of CVPI, it ends with "...st computer, or are the world's fastest reader." LOL! To tell you the truth, it displayed for like 3 seconds on my screen. I only read from the middle to the last parts of the message as normally as I do before it disappeared, and I was like "What the heck man?? He actually planned this!!!!", Hah! Cool! Happy holiday! ‎ ‎ B⠄Jayden ^(talk) 00:06, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @B.Jayden! Thank you for reaching out about this. That "Waiting..." thing is super weird behavior. I use the tool in Chrome with a Windows 11 machine and a MacOS machine, and I regularly use it for pretty long periods (usually more than 15 minutes and sometimes upwards of an hour). Can I ask what ORES setting you're using? I'd expect it to hang indefinitely if it's a very high setting (like 1.00), but if it's a lower setting (like the default 0.15) then it shouldn't hang unless there's significant network issues. Also, it sounds like you ARE a pretty fast reader :) --tony 02:50, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh heck yeah, my high school teacher also said the same thing about my reading skills. That was looong ago. Yeah! ORES! I haven't tripped that up yet, but still at the default 0.15 you've set, I still don't receive any feed updates after 5 to 10 minutes, so had to use twinkle to run today. I'll try to shift the ORES volume to 0.00 and see if I can live for at least more than 30 minutes, but will not revert. My network's always above 5 bars, so I doubt it could be the issue. Yeah, I'll check back with ya later. It's kinda sad things didn't work out the first time as expected. If it fails again, I'll try restarting Windows or just use a different browser and see.‎ ‎ B⠄Jayden ^(talk) 03:34, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CVPI is awesome! I was going to make a new section, but since there's already one with this title, I'll ask here: what does CVPI stand for? lp0 on fire () 21:43, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CVPI stands for "Counter-Vandalism Patrol Interceptor"‎ ‎ B⠄Jayden ^(talk) 22:46, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I thought it might be something like that (: lp0 on fire () 22:55, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

B.Jayden is right, but it's also a backronym intended to match the initialism for this CVPI :) tony 23:22, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ooh, fun! lp0 on fire () 23:35, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tony. Update, I think I'll have to stop using CVPI for the moment, still no luck. The maximum alive time until the recent feed stopped updating was about 15 minutes (an improvement to when I first ran it at least) but then froze on the waiting notice again. Same thing happened with different browsers like Edge, Firefox, etc. Maybe I'll try again in a few months when you've patched some updates to it? And Chrome will be far more better than it is now. Thanks for all your work. ‎ ‎ B⠄Jayden ^(talk) 22:09, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @B.Jayden, I just pushed an update a few minutes ago, if you could let me know if that fixes your issue I'd appreciate it. I just pushed a version that fixes a bug related to how the ORES scores are fetched, and I'm thinking it might help you. You may (or may not!) need to clear your cache for the script to update on your machine. Take care --tony 23:14, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh! Hol' up then. I'm gonna check...‎ ‎ B⠄Jayden ^(talk) 23:23, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, unlucky! Sad news, there is a new faulty behavior with CVPI. This time when I click on "Next" to view the next edit. The new edit appears about 10-15 seconds after the waiting notice in the center. This also happens when there are current edits left available to see (by the visible number showing on "Next"). Also tested with other browsers and juggled the ORES volume back and forth. Even at 0.00 which is wicked fast!! Going to the next edit takes time to load up. I Even tried switching between 7 different MiFi connections to confirm this, and my PC speed is totally exceptional. It's a gaming setup. Don't stress yourself too much on this man, you did just fine. I obviously won't forget to try this out again soon. Thanks.‎ ‎ B⠄Jayden ^(talk) 02:59, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's not unusual to wait that long between edits being shown, but it's very strange that it still says there's edits waiting for you (with the number next to "next") even when it's waiting. If you see any notifications pop up or additional feedback from the tool that you find relevant, please let me know :) --tony 03:18, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

		The Recent Changes Barnstar
		Thank you for keeping a watchful eye on recent changes MossOnALogTalk 23:00, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! :) --tony 23:24, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		You have been making Wikipedia way better by reverting vandalism. I really appreciate that you revert it and never stop. Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

Dylan Hackworth1 (talk) 02:56, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hell yeah! I second this! What a loyal soldier.‎ ‎ B⠄Jayden ^(talk) 03:02, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both! :) tony 03:19, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Tonyst, I suppose you are in control of what changes are allowed on the article you may have written. And in response to your response of the changes I made to the header Hebrew Bible in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_Babylon I now respond to your message here:

Hello, I'm TonySt. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Fall of Babylon, but you didn't provide a reliable source. On Wikipedia, it's important that article content be verifiable. If you'd like to resubmit your change with a citation, your edit is archived in the page history. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. tony 05:25, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

I have supplied the Scriptures as reliable source, just as the header of the article presupposes the reader interprets it as. Which the original author or multiple authors of the article under the header have done as well, but I have corrected the errors. What do you mean with not having supplied a reliable source? Kind regards, Ruben ~2025-43059-40 (talk) 05:32, 26 December 2025 (UTC) ~2025-43059-40 (talk) 05:43, 26 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and thank you for lending your time to help improve Wikipedia! If you are interested in continuing to edit, I suggest you make an account to gain a bunch of privileges. Happy editing! – LuniZunie_(talk) 05:17, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @LuniZunie, I might have found a bug in WS ;) --tony 05:29, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I think you did.... doing some testing on a dev version currently that probably caused it =) – LuniZunie_(talk) 05:58, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Found it... was a single variable being used in the wrong place. Thanks for the heads up =D – LuniZunie_(talk) 06:00, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The battle is called Battle off Ulsan. There have been several battles on land at Ulsan. In particular, it was a notable time during the Imjin War, in the development of Korea. The Russ-Japanese War happened centuries later. Korean martial arts and Gakgung both refer to the Imjin War's Battle of Ulsan, not the Russo-Japanese War -- ~2025-41582-72 (talk) 04:23, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @~2025-41582-72, thank you for reaching out and for the information. Just a heads-up -- it's probably a good idea to use an edit summary with that information, since otherwise other editors might think it's an introduction of a typo instead of the correction you're describing. Thank you for your contributions :) --tony 04:27, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Failed to write to User talk:Lukehass: http. Please report this"

Maybe it tried to verify that it had written, but couldn't tell because someone else had already sent another warning? lp0 on fire () 12:40, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reporting this! "http" error means it received an error code from the server (like a 404 or 503). I was seeing a bunch of these last night and yesterday, and when it happened I clicked a few diff links and one of them opened to a server error instead of the diff link. It looks like the Wikimedia servers have been having issues over the last day or so. I'll adjust that message so it isn't lying about the warning not being left. I also need to change how those errors are reported in general because when the servers start having issues it can sometimes spit out a TON of errors when it really only needs one. Again, thanks for letting me know, it's only possible to fix these issues because you report them :) tony 16:47, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! happy to help :) lp0 on fire () 17:01, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]