Welcome!
Hi Aneirinn! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.
As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:
Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.
If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:
If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:
Happy editing! Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 06:41, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
DYK for Walker Keith Baylor
On 18 March 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Walker Keith Baylor, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Walker Keith Baylor, a strong believer in phrenology and physiognomy, determined the fitness of political candidates by measuring their faces and heads with a tape measure? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Walker Keith Baylor. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Walker Keith Baylor), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
—Ganesha811 (talk) 00:02, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
DYK for David Gillespie (surveyor)
On 15 September 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article David Gillespie (surveyor), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that David Gillespie became the chief surveyor of the United States boundary commission after the first surveyor was considered to be "insufferably arrogant"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/David B. Gillespie. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, David Gillespie (surveyor)), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
—Kusma (talk) 00:02, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
- What to do when the sources are so confused? See my change where I fixed a word in a quote, because a number of other sources had 'persevere'. Then checking further, I saw your cite (as transcribed, would love to see) really did have 'preserve'. Then I found other sources had either of those, or even worse, 'presevere'! I reverted my change, as you quoted your source correctly, but I have grave doubts about most of these sources. Shenme (talk) 01:13, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
DYK for George K. Teulon
On 3 January 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article George K. Teulon, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that according to George K. Teulon all of the presidents and vice-presidents of the Republic of Texas, and four-fifths of its government officials, were freemasons? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/George K. Teulon. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, George K. Teulon), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
DYK for Moneka, Kansas
On 10 February 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Moneka, Kansas, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that most or all of the inhabitants of Moneka, Kansas, were abolitionists? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Moneka, Kansas. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Moneka, Kansas), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
DYK for Paris, Linn County, Kansas
On 13 February 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Paris, Linn County, Kansas, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Paris was the first county seat of Linn County, Kansas, but hardly a ruin is left to tell where it once was? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Paris, Linn County, Kansas. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Paris, Linn County, Kansas), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
A barnstar for you!
 |
The Original Barnstar |
| Thanks for your hard work improving so many articles to DYKs. Magnolia677 (talk) 22:34, 14 February 2025 (UTC) |
DYK for William Bartram (Pennsylvania politician)
On 24 February 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article William Bartram (Pennsylvania politician), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that William Bartram was both the father of William Bartram and the grandfather of William Bartram? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/William Bartram (Pennsylvania politician). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, William Bartram (Pennsylvania politician)), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
—Ganesha811 (talk) 00:03, 24 February 2025 (UTC)
DYK for William Bartram (North Carolina politician)
On 24 February 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article William Bartram (North Carolina politician), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that William Bartram was both the father of William Bartram and the grandfather of William Bartram? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/William Bartram (Pennsylvania politician). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, William Bartram (North Carolina politician)), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
—Ganesha811 (talk) 00:04, 24 February 2025 (UTC)
Note on your use of WP:A7
Thank you for your work patrolling articles and identifying candidates for improvement. I wanted to let you know that I declined your WP:A7 nomination of Mount Sinai South Nassau as the article contained references which discuss the subject, which means A7 doesn't apply. It is possible the subject of the article is not notable, but you should first attempt to improve the article before bringing it through the standard deletion process at WP:AFD. Thanks again for your contributions to the site! ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 17:30, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
June 2025
Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to Sarah McBride. Thank you. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:50, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- What was poorly referenced? That article from the student newspaper of American University is not a poor reference. Aneirinn (talk) 18:55, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- The edit violated MOS:DEADNAME meamemg (talk) 18:57, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- I did not know that existed. I was under the impression that its inclusion would be an improvement to the article as they are an elected official and were the president of the student government at the university. I am a fan of onomatology. I will never return it to the article. Aneirinn (talk) 19:19, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- @Meamemg: How specifically did it violate MOS:DEADNAME? Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 19:55, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- I can answer that Magnolia677: the edit included her deadname. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:08, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- There's a long discussion of this on the talk page. Talk:Sarah_McBride#Birth_name_concerns meamemg (talk) 20:19, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Sounds good. I know it can get tedious, but one good idea is to at least glance at an article's talk page before editing, especially if it has a protection/warning banner at the top of the edit page. That way you can pretty easily see what is controversial with respect to that article. Happy Editing! meamemg (talk) 20:43, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- @Meamemg: How specifically did it violate MOS:DEADNAME? Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 19:55, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- I did not know that existed. I was under the impression that its inclusion would be an improvement to the article as they are an elected official and were the president of the student government at the university. I am a fan of onomatology. I will never return it to the article. Aneirinn (talk) 19:19, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- The edit violated MOS:DEADNAME meamemg (talk) 18:57, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
Please stop. If you continue to make edits with misleading or inaccurate edit summaries, even if unintentional, you may be blocked from editing. All of your edit summaries are simply "ce". Ce means Copy editing, which means fixing errors in grammar, syntax, etc. Making substantive edits, such as you did here, here, and absolutely here are not copy edits. Please use appropriate edit summaries. Thank you. --PerpetuityGrat (talk) 15:00, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
- This was also inappropriately done here, here, and here. Some of your edits are small clarifications (not copy edits either, so stop calling them copy edits), but many of your larger edits are not copy edits. Adding sections and sentences regarding the article subject is not considered copy editing by anyone. Please clarify in your edit summaries what you are doing properly please. Thank you. -PerpetuityGrat (talk) 15:05, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
Proper nouns in the English language
@Aneirinn: please note that the Republican Party (United States) and Democratic Party (United States) and any other organized political party are proper nouns. Proper nouns have capitalized letters. Are you familiar with proper nouns? If not, I would recommend reading about proper nouns instead of making incorrect edits as you have done here, here, here, here, here, and here. Perhaps you are unaware, but in standard American and British English, the first letter of each word of a proper noun are capitalized. Thank you for your future adherence to correct punctuation and spelling. --PerpetuityGrat (talk) 16:52, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- The 13th edition of The Chicago Manual of Style does not agree with this. Aneirinn (talk) 17:57, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- @Aneirinn: please show me. --PerpetuityGrat (talk) 18:30, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- I see the confusion for someone who may not be a native English speaker. It appears that "party" was lowercased per the 13th edition, though that was published thirty-five years ago and five new editions have been published since. Modern practice capitalizes "party" in the case of the Democratic Party or Republican Party; even the titles of those articles are capitalized. I cannot find the exact section within the 18th edition because there is no freely accessible version on the Internet. If you wish to dispute common English norms, please also see Joe Biden, Donald Trump, and a plethora of electoral, governmental, and political articles on Wikipedia. I cannot speak to why this changed over time, though it is apparent that since 1989, capitalization norms have. --PerpetuityGrat (talk) 18:54, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
Speedy deletion declined: John M. Drew
Hello Aneirinn. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of John M. Drew, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Being an elected politician is a credible assertion of importance. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 03:55, 2 July 2025 (UTC)
- Being an elected county level politician is not an assertion of importance. See the guideline for politicians. Aneirinn (talk) 04:00, 2 July 2025 (UTC)
Thomas Ruffin Gray
I wanted to touch base because you have been really territorial about Thomas Ruffin Gray. I am not sure what this issue is; I worked on the article before you and am simply continuing efforts to support the subject's notability and expand its article's content. To me, it seems like you have nitpicked every change I make, from changing correctly spelled out numbers to numeric format to the extreme of removing sourced content cited to a leading Turner scholar. You have even removed needed citations that I have identified and added, for no reason that I can fathom. Most of the time, you have not followed the practice of explaining why you are making these changes, incorrectly calling the removal of sentence or sources copy edits. I am contacting you here because this is approximating the official definition of an edit war--removing sourced content three times without discussing on the talk page. I realize I have strongly advocated for either sourcing or removing content; but that is not controversial based on Wikipedia's guidelines and does not need discussion. To keep this from further escalating, my suggestion is for us both to walk away and leave as is for at least several days. After that, any outstanding or pending issues can be posted to the talkpage; if a resolution cannot be reached via a talkpage discussion, we can ask for a third opinion. Does this sound reasonable to you? Rublamb (talk) 06:16, 4 July 2025 (UTC)
DYK for James Bunbury White
On 18 July 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article James Bunbury White, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the memorial for James Bunbury White, the founder of Whiteville, North Carolina, was knocked down in a car crash 200 years after his death? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/James Bunbury White. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, James Bunbury White), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
"Caerussalem" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect Caerussalem 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 4 § Caerussalem until a consensus is reached. Zzz plant (talk) 01:56, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
ArbCom 2025 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2025 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:00, 18 November 2025 (UTC)
Declined speedy deletion: Coastal Christian School (Maine)
Hi there! I wanted to let you know I declined your G11 speedy deletion nomination of Coastal Christian School (Maine) because it was not unambiguously promotional, though I have deleted overtly promotional sections. Additionally, I doubt it meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines, so you could look into that and nominate for deletion at AfD. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 01:18, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
Careful
Although I'll grant that the "Escape from Scorpion Island" pages are a bloated mess, and unsourced, I don't see them as being in any way promotional.
If you tag content for deletion based on an inaccurate reason, people will seize on that inaccuracy and claim that it is a reason that the article should not be deleted.
Please be more careful in future. Thank you. DS (talk) 04:46, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
Warning!!
Please stop editing Rossa’s page or trying to delete valid information about her. Please be more careful in the future. Thank you. Michael Tianbi Chen (talk) 08:44, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- May you please be specific about this allegedly "valid information"? Does this include the large amount of unsourced lists you are continuing to return to the article? Aneirinn (talk) 08:50, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- I have cited all valid sources in detail. you can check it. u adding so many miss information. Michael Tianbi Chen (talk) 09:08, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
Unexplained revert
 | This discussion has been disrupted by block evasion, ban evasion, or sockpuppetry from the following user:
Comments from this user should be excluded from assessments of consensus. |
Hey, I've just seen a revert of yours here. You haven't explained it, so please do, per WP:REVEXP. BlookyNapsta (talk) 07:04, 18 December 2025 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for December 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Rossa (singer), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Platinum Collection. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 07:53, 19 December 2025 (UTC)
Holiday wishes and a happy new year!
 |
Infinite Possibilities |
| Is this real life? Yes! Is this going to be forever? No! Elvis is getting ready to leave the building and 2026 is about to be born, kicking and screaming. They say nothing gold can stay, but I say, don't listen to them, stay golden all the same. Here's to a new year of infinite diversity and beautiful combinations! Viriditas (talk) 21:52, 23 December 2025 (UTC) |
I have sent you a note about a page you started
Hi Aneirinn. Thank you for your work on Kicoughtan. Another editor, KyleSirTalksAlot, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:
Not mentioned as an alternative spelling in the article
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|KyleSirTalksAlot}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
KyleSirTalksAlot (talk) 01:40, 4 January 2026 (UTC)
I have sent you a note about a page you started
Hi Aneirinn. Thank you for your work on Kiccotan. Another editor, KyleSirTalksAlot, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:
Not mentioned as an alternative spelling in the article
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|KyleSirTalksAlot}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
KyleSirTalksAlot (talk) 01:41, 4 January 2026 (UTC)
"Kicoughtan" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect Kicoughtan 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/2026 January 4 § Kicoughtan until a consensus is reached. Casablanca 🪨(T) 20:53, 4 January 2026 (UTC)
Disruptive edit-warring on infobox image at Nicolás Maduro
Mind explaining why you're changing the image without proper explanation? Freedoxm (talk · contribs) 04:37, 11 January 2026 (UTC)
January 2026
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:22, 11 January 2026 (UTC)Contentious topics alert - BLP & American politics
You have recently made edits related to living or recently deceased subjects of biographical content on Wikipedia articles. This is a standard message to inform you that living or recently deceased subjects of biographical content on Wikipedia articles is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. The contentious topics procedure also applies to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:26, 11 January 2026 (UTC)
Reno Soccer Stadium
Hello,
I strongly disagree with your placing an AfD for the Reno Soccer Stadium. Look at these examples:
- New Kansas City Royals Stadium
- New Chicago Fire Stadium
- Future New England Revolution Stadium
- New Commanders Stadium
- Chicago Bears Stadium
- New Broncos Stadium
- New Chiefs Stadium
- Oklahoma City Stadium
- New Oklahoma City Arena
- New South Philadelphia Arena
- New Ottawa Arena
Tell me what is the difference between these and Reno Soccer Stadium?? They all follow the same pattern and prose as Reno. All of these won't even be completed before Reno. Should you put an Wikipedia:Articles for deletion on this, then put it on the Talk page and let the community decide just as there was one for Reno Pro Soccer. If you delete Reno, then these others have to be deleted as well, so Good Luck with that.. Roberto221 (talk) 09:38, 17 January 2026 (UTC)
WP:DRAFTNO
Hi. You may wish to review WP:DRAFTNO. If a title has been PRODed and then de-PRODed, immediately WP:DRAFTIFYing the title is not normally considered a reasonable next step. Especially, per the DRAFTNO explanation, where the title "was created more than 90 days ago"
and/or "Another editor has asserted that the page belongs in mainspace"
(which, effectively, is what a dePROD amounts to...). Guliolopez (talk) 19:34, 17 January 2026 (UTC)
Slow down with AfDs.
Hello. Don't nominate such a large number of articles at once, it becomes pretty hard for the community to evaluate them. Svartner (talk) 04:29, 21 January 2026 (UTC)
WP:BURDEN / WP:DILIGENCE
Hi. Me again. I would strongly suggest that you consider whether your recent PROD, DRAFTIFY and AFD activities are in keeping with the related guidelines. I suggest this as, from what I can tell, in terms of your recent:
- WP:PRODs, you didn't consider alternatives to deletion before undertaking a large volume of PRODs. As would be expected by WP:PRODNOM (I say this as, having actually now thought about it, you've proposed redirection for several titles previously just summarily PROD'ed),
- WP:DRAFTIFYs, you didn't always consider the age of the titles and indications from other editors that they belonged in the mainspace before DRAFTIFYing. As expected by WP:DRAFTNO (I say this as, for the same title given in the example above, you DRAFTIFIED it, despite the fact that it existed for well over 5 years and though another editor had indicated that it likely belonged in the mainspace, and
- WP:ATDs, you don't appear to have done sufficient searches for available sources. As expected by WP:BEFORE. (I say this as, frankly and while nominators aren't expected to find every possible source, it seems that you didn't check the interwikis for Eric Van Beuren. As, otherwise, you'd have noted that, in addition his sporting activities, Van Beuren is a reasonably well-known filmmaker. And you'd have mentioned that in your nom...)
I am 110% certain that you have acted in good faith in all of your recent actions. But, frankly, I'm not sure you've fully considered the burden that you are shifting to the rest of the community. It isn't just isn't reasonable to open a large volume of AFDs. Without undertaking WP:BEFORE. And just expecting others to do the due-diligence. Per WP:DILIGENCE, that is the nominators responsibility.
Long-story-short: Please consider (re)reviewing the guidelines on the PROD, DRAFTIFY and AFD procedures - and consider whether you're actually following them fully. Certainly before undertaking dozens of such actions. As, otherwise, you're just creating work and noise for everyone else... Guliolopez (talk) 00:58, 26 January 2026 (UTC)
- Hi @Aneirinn. While it is great that you have self-closed the AfD for Eric Van Beuren, I wonder if you should consider doing the same for some of the other AfDs that you've opened. At least until you've undertaken your own WP:BEFORE. You can always reopen the AfDs once you've actually done the expected prep-work. Rather than, as above, expecting dozens of other editors/AfD contribitors to do it for you. (Which, as noted, isn't fair. And isn't how AfD is supposed to work....) Guliolopez (talk) 02:29, 26 January 2026 (UTC)
- Hi @Aneirinn. I'm a little disappointed that, even after the above, you went ahead and opened another AfD without (from what I can tell) undertaking much in the way of a WP:BEFORE. While you are under no obligation to listen or respond to me, before opening an AfD, you are expected to undertake WP:BEFORE. If you continue to ignore this expectation, and shift the burden of AfD due-diligence to other editors (where others spend more time addressing these gaps and/or highlighting the related guidelines than might be reasonable) then the community is likely to take steps to address that imbalance. FYI. Guliolopez (talk) 03:26, 26 January 2026 (UTC)