User talk:Sdkb

This is Sdkb's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

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

Archives (index): 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13Auto-archiving period: 3 months

Read wp:3rr , note that September 11 attacks is under 1RR. Slatersteven (talk) 16:52, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks — it looks like BretHarteChitown was given a contentious topics notice in January, so they should (theoretically) be aware. Cheers, Sdkb ^talk 17:08, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You have also now been told, so do not revert again. Slatersteven (talk) 17:12, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly don't plan to. Cheers, Sdkb ^talk 17:14, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Five years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:39, 18 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you today for your contributions to Bridge, - a broad topic, in team work! My father loved bridges, and I wrote a few articles with that in mind (Empress Elisabeth Bridge, adding to Chain bridge and Müngsten Bridge, the latter for childhood memory), and also thinking of bridges between people. - I brought two bios to the same page, Christian Schwarz-Schilling and Bill Ramsey whose regular Swingtime I used to hear in the car driving to choir rehearsals. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:16, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2026 March 22 § Category:Pages with editnotices on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 20:14, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello I just want to ask how to add a citation --Yiotro1 (talk) 01:59, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Yiotro1! There are instructions at Help:REFSTART. Cheers, Sdkb ^talk 02:50, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sdkb. With this edit: [1] you appear to have added a +1 to a personal comment about me which paints me as "quite conservative and not open to changes" based on me wanting to give a longer discussion to a change on a protected template after 2 days discussion and three participants. Per Wikipedia:Comment on content, not on the contributor, the comment is not adding to the discussion, it is simply a derogatory and inaccurate personal comment done either through resentment that I wanted the discussion opened up, or as an attempt to negate my arguments. We do guide against such comments on WP:ADHOMINEM. I have pointed this out twice: User_talk:MSGJ#Just_a_heads_up. Can you confirm that you did intend to join in such behaviour, or that you intended to +1 some other comment, and it ended under that comment by mistake. SilkTork (talk) 02:15, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @SilkTork! I might have phrased the comment differently had I written it in my own words, but the tendency @MSGJ was commenting on, of editors resisting design changes because the status quo has a comforting familiarity, is absolutely something I've observed as well, and is something that has been well-documented by design researchers. I saw it at the WikiProject Banner shell redesign discussion MSGJ linked, and it's something I've observed in myself from time to time — for instance, in retrospect, I think I was not supportive enough of the switch to Vector 2022. I gave a +1 to his comment for that reason. Sdkb ^talk 04:16, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for responding Sdkb. I have felt that we have had good discussions over the years - sometimes I have supported your proposals, and sometimes I have queried them and in discussion a positive way forward has been found. I am somewhat disappointed that you have viewed me as being someone "quite conservative and not open to changes". Changes occur all the time on Wikipedia. And when changes occur which have good rationale and consensus I get behind them, even if I disagreed with them in the first place. I do believe I have a good record of listening to argument, and changing my views if the argument is well founded. When a change occurs which I am not aware of, and I'm not in agreement with, I may check the discussion which led to the change. If the discussion is sound and has consensus, I accept and move on. In this case I felt there was local rather than wide consensus - three individuals who had agreed with each other, and had not considered there might be an alternative view, had discussed the matter for two days only when MSGJ actioned it. Because this is a significant template, it is protected from changes to ensure there is consensus for the change. I felt it warranted wider discussion before being actioned. What happened was part of the familiar WP:BRD cycle. I can quite accept MSGJ or yourself posting a personal comment or a complaint on my talkpage. What I feel is not appropriate, and runs counter to guidelines such as Wikipedia:Avoid personal remarks and policies such as Wikipedia:No personal attacks, is making ad hominem remarks in a RfC which dismiss or discredit the person rather than deal with the issue under discussion. SilkTork (talk) 11:47, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I likewise feel that we have had good discussions over the years, and overall I have a lot of respect for your contributions to the project!

I see that Martin has offered to remove the comment. I have no problem with that, so I have gone ahead and done so. I hope that moves us toward a place in which we're able to think about status quo bias more broadly as something we can all be susceptible to, rather than anyone feeling personally attacked. Cheers, Sdkb ^talk 14:41, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I've just seen what you have done (I was pinged to the page to make a comment). Thankyou. I had walked away from the situation as I realised I was responding poorly. I should either have removed the comment immediately, or just ignored it. Leaving it there and then needling people about it was really the worse response! Thanks again, and apologies for my above whinging! SilkTork (talk) 07:22, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

Administrator changes

• ARandomName123

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

Checkuser changes

Giraffer

Oversight changes

Kj cheetham

Giraffer

Guideline and policy news

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

Arbitration

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

How do I create a Wikipedia entry? --Parkourverify (talk) 02:54, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Parkourverify, see Help:Your first article. Cheers, Sdkb ^talk 04:45, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I'm extremely new to wiki editing, and I was wondering about translating articles into a language I'm not fully fluent in myself. It's a language within the 10,000+ article range (Gàidhlig), and I was wondering if it would still be fine to attempt translating and adding some articles, even though I have no way of being 100% sure if everything is correct. --Feraltasty (talk) 17:50, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Feraltasty! Each language edition of Wikipedia is run by its own community, so I would ask at that Wikipedia about whether they would welcome such translation efforts or not. (Related: Scots Wikipedia § Controversy) Cheers, Sdkb ^talk 03:04, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I was just wondering how you have so many edits. I find nearly 85,000 edits to be very impressive, and I was wondering how you have edited so many pages. --Dr John Pork IV (talk) 17:55, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Dr John Pork IV! I've accumulated them over time :) Roughly a third were made using (semi-)automated tools — think fixing the same typo in hundreds of different articles, spending only a few seconds on each one to verify that it is indeed a typo there — but the rest were all just edits where I clicked the edit button on an article or talk page like this one! Cheers, Sdkb ^talk 03:08, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and well done! Dr John Pork IV (talk) 16:40, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

How do I make a citation? --Sjkolv1 (talk) 11:00, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Sjkolv1! See Help:Referencing for beginners. Sdkb ^talk 13:50, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sdkb!

I was wondering if there was a way to upload images onto Wikipedia without them having to be for commercial use? I've been reading into the official Wikipedia pages about image use, but I'm new to this, so it's a little confusing... I appreciate your help and your time! Thank you so much.

Best, Grace --Xiaog527 (talk) 18:55, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Grace! Wikipedia allows for fair use of some images (like movie posters) that could never be freely licensed, but for the most part, it only accepts freely licensed images.

If you're considering donating some photos you've taken but are wary of the commercial use element, this page may provide some answers. Cheers, Sdkb ^talk 19:27, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I'm new to editing, the page said to ask u if I have any questions.

I'm intending to start a new page for an activist named Jessica Pin. She works in women's healthcare rights, and is directly responsible for significant reforms to 14 medical textbooks, and reforms to the cirtificaiton process for a medical baord. She's published in medical journals, and has been featured in media like the daily show and the new york times.

She should count as a 'notable' figure enough to justify an article right? I have no connection to her whatsoever btw. --Xander j c (talk) 11:04, 28 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Xander j c! Thanks for reaching out and for being interested in contributing! Creating a new article is one of the harder tasks for newcomers, but it is doable with the right sourcing. Could you share links to three of the media sources in which she has been featured? Ones focusing on her as an individual (e.g. including elements of her biography) are going to be much stronger than just ones where she is cited as an expert. Cheers, Sdkb ^talk 23:05, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:24, 29 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

Administrator changes

• Deepfriedokra

• EvanProdromou
• Wouterstomp

Interface administrator changes

L235

Chaotic Enby

CheckUser changes

• TheresNoTime
• Versageek

Oversight changes

Moneytrees

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

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

Arbitration

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

Miscellaneous

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

Template:Editnotices/Page/Forest has been listed for discussion, which may result in the template being merged or deleted by consensus. You are invited to comment on the proposed action at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 22:26, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Sdkb,

Backlog update

At the time of this message, there are 15,282 articles and 32,951 redirects awaiting review.

After the January–February drive the article backlog was reduced to 15,179 articles and the redirect backlog to 19,053 respectively. Great job! However, both queues are growing rapidly and any additional reviews are highly appreciated.

2024 and 2025 NPP Awards

JTtheOG was selected as the NPP reviewer of the year for both 2024 and 2025, for reviewing the most articles amongst all reviewers.

Hey man im josh and MPGuy2824 won the Redirect Ninja Master Award for 2024 and 2025 respectively, for reviewing the most redirects.

Overall in 2024, one Platinum, two Gold, eight Silver, 12 Bronze and 45 Iron Barnstars were awarded. Additionally, 66 reviewers got the NPP barnstar for doing more than 100 reviews through the year. In 2025, one Platinum, ten Silver, 13 Bronze and 38 Iron Barnstars were awarded. Additionally, 38 reviewers got the NPP barnstar for doing more than 100 reviews through the year.

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

January–February backlog drive

The experimental two-month long backlog drive concluded with 183 reviewers patrolling over 27,761 articles and 35,309 redirects, earning over 36,836 points. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 6,484.6 points in this drive.

May backlog drive

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

PageTriage

An attempt was made to get the New Pages Feed to sort by date marked as reviewed instead of date created. However we had to revert it due to bugs. We may try again in the future. You can subscribe to the Phabricator ticket if you're interested in following along.

Reminders:

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

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:38, 14 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I wonder, how do you find your sources for editing because it is HARD for me.That is my only question. --Davad1337 (talk) 03:12, 20 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Davad1337! It really depends on the circumstance, so it's a bit hard to answer generically. The finding sources page may be of help. Cheers, Sdkb ^talk 03:41, 20 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, i just made my user safety log --JOHN PA9212D is good (talk) 06:33, 21 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again User:Sdkb!

I have another question for you. So I've successfully had a request accepted on a page but then another editor (much later) rejected the change because the source they found conflicted/said something different than the source I referenced.

The source I used was from Al Jazeera. The source the opposing editor used was from CNN.

So my question is if there's some sort of rank or hierarchy in terms of which source to trust over another that I was not aware of? I looked at the reliable sources page WP:RSP and both organizations are listed as reputable.

Or does the acceptance (or rejection) of a request come down to the judgment of whichever editor looks at it?

Thank you so much! --Tetrameles (talk) 03:56, 22 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Tetrameles! Ah, conflicting sources... As a general principle, we try to follow what sources say, but that quickly gets tricky when the sources disagree. There is no formal hierarchy of overall-reliable sources beyond what you found at RSP, although informally if it comes down to, say, JAMA vs. CNN most editors will go with JAMA. In a situation like this, I'd open a talk page discussion, ping the editors who have been involved so far, and make a case for what you think the article should say. Are there other sources beyond the two that could add weight to one side or the other? Does the reporting from one seem more reliable than the other (e.g. due to having an on-location reporter)? Those are the sorts of factors that could sway consensus. Good luck! Cheers, Sdkb ^talk 04:31, 22 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ooh - I see the logic now! Thank you for explaining. I'll see what I can do :) Tetrameles (talk) 09:47, 25 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I want to create a page for my sister's birthday about her life - she was once a national examination toppoer, youngest ACCA graduate and youngest Manager in Mazars --VikasSajanani (talk) 20:29, 24 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @VikasSajanani! I would unfortunately have to recommend against trying this. Many of the same considerations that make it a bad idea to write about yourself also make it a bad idea to write about a close relative, as you still have a major conflict of interest. There is no guarantee the article will be accepted rather than nominated for deletion, at watch point it wouldn't be a very nice birthday present. Sdkb ^talk 21:55, 24 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

Administrator changes

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

• Tamzin
• TonyBallioni

• Ezhiki
• Queen of Hearts

Bureaucrat changes

• WereSpielChequers

Guideline and policy news

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

Technical news

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

Arbitration

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

Miscellaneous

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

Help:Buying Wikipedia, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Help:Buying Wikipedia and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Help:Buying Wikipedia during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Choucas 🐦‍⬛ 14:14, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear, contrary to what the automatic Twinkle message is saying, it is a discussion about moving it and its subpages out of the Help namespace, not deleting it. Choucas 🐦‍⬛ 14:22, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up! (That bug should be reported to Twinkle...) Sdkb ^talk 14:24, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Mark Gayn in 1978.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:40, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed the misguided editing that removed the image. Sdkb ^talk 16:49, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! If I may ask,how can I improve my edits? --Superkatttttt11 (talk) 15:46, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Superkatttttt11! Thanks for checking in and for your contributions! For edits like this one, I'd recommend including a citation whenever you change or add new information. See Help:REFSTART for instruction on how to add one. Cheers, Sdkb ^talk 16:59, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I am trying to publish an article on an Architect from Brazil who was very iconic. How do i know if it has been published or submited correctly? --Karukarasik (talk) 10:17, 18 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]