ENSIKLOPEDIA

Kembali ke Ensiklopedia Arsip Wikipedia Indonesia

User:Alalch E.

User talk:Alalch E.

This user has created a global account. Alalch E.'s main account is on Meta.

This user has changed the username of this account. It used to be Twsabin.

This user previously used another account: Alalch Emis.

This user has new page reviewer rights on the English Wikipedia. (verify)

This user contributes using Notepad++.

Welcome to my talk page!

I like to keep things compact, and don't have any great ideas for my user page yet, so my signature directs here.

I was a long-time reader and lurker (since 2003). I appreciate the Five pillars and the idea of open knowledge, and want to give something back; this is why I began editing in 2021. I'd like to receive your feedback on anything I've done. Expect a reply! 🙂

By the way:

I prefer to keep discussions unfragmented. If you start a new talk topic here, I will respond on this same page, as an effort to keep the entire conversation in one place. By the same token, if I leave a comment on your talk page, please respond to it there, using the ping template like this: {{ping|Alalch E.}}. If you want to initiate a conversation with me anywhere else, simply ping me there—no need to notify me here.
If a discussion here is about a specific article, I may move the discussion to that article's talk page. Were one to disagree I would tell them to treat it as my removing comments on my talk page and my quoting them on the target page. The Moved discussion to/from templates are useful here.

Archives

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 30.5 days are automatically archived 2 or more at a time by ClueBot III if there are more than 10.

New pages patrol January–February 2026 Backlog drive

January–February 2026 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol

New Pages Patrol is hosting a one-time, two-month experimental backlog drive aimed at reducing the backlog. This will be a combo drive: both articles and redirects will earn points.

The drive will run from 1 January to 28 February 2026.
The drive is divided into two phases. Participants may take part in either phase or across both phases, depending on availability.
Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled during the drive.
Two-month drive-exclusive barnstars will be awarded to eligible participants.
Each article review earns 1 point, while each redirect review earns 0.2 points.
Streak awards will be granted based on consistently meeting weekly point thresholds.
Barnstars will also be awarded for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive.
Interested in participating? Sign up here.

You are receiving this message because you are a New Pages Patrol reviewer. To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself from here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:21, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

December 2025

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war, according to the reverts you've made to Wikipedia:Administrator recall. This means that you are repeatedly reverting content back to how you think it should be, despite knowing that other editors disagree. Once it is known that there is a disagreement, users are expected to collaborate with others, avoid editing disruptively, and try to reach a consensus – rather than repeatedly reverting the changes made by other users.

Important points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive behavior – regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not engage in edit warring – even if you believe that you are right.

You need to discuss the disagreement on the article's talk page and work towards a revision that represents consensus among everyone involved. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution if discussions reach an impasse. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to engage in edit warring, you may be blocked from editing. Consider yourself {{trout}}ed - you've been around long enough to know better than to edit-war. I'm not mad, I'm just dissapointed. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 04:24, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

Noted. I apologize. —Alalch E. 16:53, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Alalch E.!

Happy New Year!

Alalch E.,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Volten001 ^☎ 06:43, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Volten001 ^☎ 06:43, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you! Same to you 🙂 —Alalch E. 14:57, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks! (Iluziya7 (talk) 14:59, 2 January 2026 (UTC))

@Alalch E. Most welcome Volten001 ^☎ 02:25, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

@Alalch E., @Volten001 Thank you for your answer! Happy New Year 2026! (Iluziya7 (talk) 15:00, 2 January 2026 (UTC))

Response to "Supposedly missing information" in the talk page of "Thai Boon Roong Twin Tower World Trade Center"

Hello. I have looked at some of the sources that you have linked, but only from the first part of your message (those included before the second part of your message, which starts with "And let's not forget other videos ..."). I have not looked at any of the sources from the second part of your message (the facebook posts and the youtube videos). I will not look at them.

Taking only the sources from the first part of your message: What information is contained in them that is not contained in the article Thai Boon Roong Twin Tower World Trade Center? —Alalch E. 17:33, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Too much to say because of how many things there is to note, so i asked a user named Mwen Sé Kéyòl Translator-a to help with it, wait for a while before they appear ~2025-43053-85 (talk) 16:15, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

No problem! —Alalch E. 16:34, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks, maybe you should ask them instead of us waiting here for them to appear ~2025-43053-85 (talk) 17:13, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

You're welcome. I will not ask them and will wait instead. —Alalch E. 17:15, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Well, i already asked them, but why not you ask them? I do understand your point though. ~2025-43053-85 (talk) 17:25, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

They haven't responded, maybe you should respond to them ~2025-43053-85 (talk) 17:41, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Might I suggest waiting for the weekend? I have added it to my "todo" list but I might not get to it for some weeks to be honest. Komonzia (talk) 17:59, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Maybe while we would still wait for them, how about you too will work together with the Thai Boon Roong Twin Tower World Trade Center, Komonzia? ~2025-43053-85 (talk) 18:25, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Is there a reason for the hurry? Komonzia (talk) 18:34, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Well, it's not meant to be a hurry, i just asked if you can work together on Thai Boon Roong Twin Tower World Trade Center? ~2025-43053-85 (talk) 18:51, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Having read the room, Alalch seems happier for someone else to work on it instead. I can't commit to do anything in particular on Wikipedia, though. I also cannot read Chinese (but know machine-translators well enough to determine when a translated claim is reliable or not). Komonzia (talk) 18:55, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Well, maybe you should ask any editor you know of to work together on Thai Boon Roong Twin Tower World Trade Center. ~2025-43053-85 (talk) 20:20, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

You've asked someone on WP:TEAHOUSE and I'm not sure they've seen your message, and you've not waited very long nor pinged them on that page (see HELP:PING). I don't commit to doing anything at all on Wikipedia ever.

The "you've not waited very long" (I hinted at that when I suggested waiting until the weekend to see if they respond) and your expectation that someone commits to this specific change highlights that you may be unaware that most people who edit Wikipedia are volunteers with jobs and sometimes families.

Saying that, I've put some of the sources (the reliable looking ones -- see WP:RS for what we think is a reliable source) through translators and don't find that much missing from the article - mainly what was missing is the four separate commercial towers (now added) and the proposed functions (hotels / shopping / residential and by what ratios). I've found some of the same information in existing sources in the article, though.

The Baidu Baike articles also don't have that much missing information. See here: and

You can expect Wikipedia articles to have missing claims if no reliable sources could be found to back them up (but also on lower traffic articles like those of buildings people have maybe lost interest in). Komonzia (talk) 20:26, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Sidenote: I am not suggesting that you stop highlighting problems of missing information, but there is an overtone of an expectation of quick action from your side which I am trying to set your expectations about. You could consider many requests 'picked up' once you see it actually fulfilled, because committal is problematic.

But your requests may be easier to handle if you are more specific about what information you expected to see that you do not see in the article (you were asked but you just said "too much to say"). Komonzia (talk) 20:35, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Well, if you looked at every link i put, then you would've found more information, such as a khmer youtube news video article featuring a early unique different glass design and a different name, but still on the same location, in the first half of the 2010s or mid 2010s, i know that not every link can definetly be used as a reliable source, but COULD be used as a reliable source, note the COULD highlighted in my sentence, as the "reliable source" can be interpretated as broadly as possible, also, the reason why i said "too much to say" is that there really is too much to say, because it would have took me a bit too long to write it, and it would have been a bit too much for me, hence the reason why i said "too much to say", also, i wrote a message on the user's talk page. ~2025-43053-85 (talk) 21:30, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Yes, I have seen some of the churned press releases in Chinese and English form from the developers & construction company. Unfortunately, there is a preference for secondary sources over primary ones. Komonzia (talk) 21:32, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

I mean, secondary sources are allowed in Wikipedia, and so are tertiary sources, so why not use not just primary sources, but also secondary sources and tertiary sources? If the Wikipedia's definition of "reliable source" is interpreted as broadly as possible, then most links (as in more than 50%), if not all i put there are allowed. Also why we shoundl't put sources that have the same information? Other wikipedia articles, even well-written ones such as "Donald Trump", "United States" and FA-grade articles like "Cleopatra" also do it, so why not put more sources in this article? It makes it have more sources, meaning there are more news articles that talked about it and therefore will make it more better and trustworthy because there are many news articles that talked about it (i don't know what word to describe it, so i'm using "trustworthy", even though it isn't the correct word i want to say). ~2025-43053-85 (talk) 21:58, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

You can read more about that on WP:PRIMARY and WP:PRSOURCE. I also find that quite often if a secondary/etc reliable source hasn't said it, it isn't worth saying in Wikipedia. Some of the videos that have the glass design also look more like the Naga 3 proposals, and some of them seem to be amateur animations by someone who might as well have been me, sitting on the opposite side of the planet from Cambodia and not speaking a lick of Khmer. So please forgive the average WP editor for not wanting to sift through 86 links 37 of which are social media (and a great deal of the rest are churned press releases). Komonzia (talk) 22:06, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Is there a rule that if a secondary/reliable sources hasn't said it, then it isn't worth saying in Wikipedia? Well, no, this isn't a rule in Wikipedia and putting secondary sources and reliable sources with the same information is being done in many, if not lots of articles, inlcuding well-written ones such as "Donald Trump", "United States", and "Cleopatra", Also considering how many links i put there, we need to tell someone else about it rather than yourself because of how many links there are, which ones do you know of so that they can work on Thai Boon Roong Twin Tower World Trade Center? Also i found these two recent videos on YouTube that have additional new information/activity https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67CB1VKkuSc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZ2N9dQUZzU the second video has AI-generated images, as is unfortunaly the case in many, if not lots of thai youtube videos, but it does have real information, so it isn't some dumb AI slop but rather a unfortunate case of AI-generated images being used there, oh yeah it originally had different names along with different designs and one had a taller height of 615 meters, i wonder if they changed the name and the design and it coundl't be found online because we don't know the new name and searching up Thai Boon Roong Twin Tower World Trade Center woundl't bring up the new name and design? ~2025-43053-85 (talk) 12:47, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

In this reply of mine in this thread: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Alalch_E.#c-Alalch_E.-20260111173300-~2025-43053-85-20260111161400

I said:

Hello. I have looked at some of the sources that you have linked, but only from the first part of your message (those included before the second part of your message, which starts with "And let's not forget other videos ..."). I have not looked at any of the sources from the second part of your message (the facebook posts and the youtube videos). I will not look at them.
Taking only the sources from the first part of your message: What information is contained in them that is not contained in the article Thai Boon Roong Twin Tower World Trade Center?

Specifically, I asked:

What information is contained in them that is not contained in the article Thai Boon Roong Twin Tower World Trade Center?

"them" refers to the sources from the first part of your message (those included before the second part of your message, which starts with "And let's not forget other videos ...").

You replied:

Too much to say because of how many things there is to note, so i asked a user named Mwen Sé Kéyòl Translator-a to help with it, wait for a while before they appear

However, this ostensible user did not reply.

Therefore, it appears that I will not be told what information is contained in those sources that is not contained in the article. In other words, my question will not be answered.

Because my question will not be answered, I will continue to lack knowledge of what information is contained in those sources that is not contained in the article, and without this information I will not do anything. —Alalch E. 17:27, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

@Alalch E. The only missing parts I've found so far relate to "statistics" of the proposed building, see the article's actual talk page for where I mention that. The current sources would already support the information if it was added to the article.

I am not sure the article should waffle about it though, especially since by all accounts except for the people whose reputations depend on it, there is no activity at the empty lot. But if it was added, I would not object. Komonzia (talk) 17:44, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for your work on the article. —Alalch E. 18:41, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Then, let Komonzia do it. ~2025-43053-85 (talk) 18:40, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Sure, no problem. —Alalch E. 18:41, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

@~2025-43053-85 Ignoring the fact that these aren't reliable sources, this youtube video is remixed footage (low-information footage) from older videos you have already posted: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67CB1VKkuSc -- to put it plainly, perhaps you should go contribute it to Baidu Baike (and not on Wikipedia) if you think it's an acceptable source there? Komonzia (talk) 17:32, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Baidu Baike is only in Chinese, and i would need to create a account on Baidu Baike, and i want to improve and expand the English Wikipedia article about it so that the non-chinese can learn about it on Wikipedia. ~2025-43053-85 (talk) 18:43, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

They can learn already, there's already an article. —Alalch E. 18:44, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Actually there are 2 articles about it in Baidu Baike with different names about this skyscraper for some reason, i guess one decided to create a article, while another also created a article, not knowing there already is one. ~2025-43053-85 (talk) 18:57, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

That isn't important. What's important is that Wikipedia has an article about this topic, and people who understand English (Chinese or not) can read it to learn about the topic. —Alalch E. 19:00, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Also, it originally had multiple different names along with multiple different designs and one had a taller height of 615 meters until it became Thai Boon Roong Twin Tower World Trade Center, i wonder if they changed the name and the design from Thai Boon Roong Twin Tower World Trade Center into something different and it coundl't be found online because we don't know the new name and searching up Thai Boon Roong Twin Tower World Trade Center woundl't bring up the new name and design? ~2025-43053-85 (talk) 18:53, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Such details do not matter that much. When it's built, we will know how tall it is. —Alalch E. 18:56, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Actually they might have changed the height too, i mean Cambodian and Chinese projects, even the biggest megaprojects, tend to be kind of mysterious with the information and the amount of information both outside and even inside Cambodia and China, probably because of the different culture surrounding the information and the amount of public information needed. ~2025-43053-85 (talk) 19:00, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

You mean, some person first said "the skyscraper is going to be tall X meters", and then, afterwards, that same person or some other person said "the skyscraper is going to be tall Y meters", then, afterwards, that same person or some other person said "the skyscraper is going to be tall Z meters", etc. These things are unnoteworthy and not relevant for our encyclopedia. That is not "changing height", such highly unstable claims about future objects or events are why this website has the following policy: WP:CRYSTAL —Alalch E. 19:07, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Actually it wasn't because of this, but because they've actually changed the height, name, and the design over the years, seemingly unannounced that they've changed the name, until it became Thai Boon Roong Twin Tower World Trade Center, i wonder if they've changed the name, height, and the design, and they've seemingly didn't announced it for whatever reason, and it coundl't be found online because we don't know the new name and searching up Thai Boon Roong Twin Tower World Trade Center woundl't bring up the new name and design? ~2025-43053-85 (talk) 19:11, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

If you've ever been familiar with Cambodian and Chinese projects, then you would've known that stuff like this happens in Cambodian and Chinese projects. ~2025-43053-85 (talk) 19:12, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

It happens all around the world. It is not that specific to Cambodia or China. By the way, if you can find a reliable source discussing the project under a significantly different name, I would like to add that to the article. The article already lists two alternative English names: Thai Boon Roong Twin Trade Center and Thai Boon Roong Twin Towers. —Alalch E. 19:20, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

It isn't just a different name, but a different name alongside a different design and height. ~2025-43053-85 (talk) 21:39, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Also, by the way, something to note is that some, if not many chinese websites do put random letters in the web domain and chinese websites with random letters existed before AI-generated websites were a thing. ~2025-43053-85 (talk) 19:02, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Like random latin letters, not random chinese characters. ~2025-43053-85 (talk) 19:03, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Also, in the Techo International Airport in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, There is information in the russian wikipedia article that isn't in the english wikipedia article, In the "Criticism" section of the russian wikipedia article, there is information that isn't in the english wikipedia article, here's the following text: "The seizure of land for the construction of the airport was associated with numerous scandals due to discrepancies in the field of land rights. Land conflicts have been going on in this territory since the 1990s, with the involvement of local residents, local oligarchs (whose prominent representative is considered to be the landowner Oknha Seang Chanheng), officials who issued fake ownership documents to Japanese, Chinese, Thai businessmen, and large financial conglomerates. Since 2018, there have been regular clashes with the police. In one of the clashes, about a hundred villagers fought against four times the number of policemen. As a result of the battle with the use of tear gas and other weapons, more than 10 policemen were injured. The number of surviving protesters is unknown, but 30 of them were arrested. Protesters repeatedly tried to block the roads, defended their plots with a human chain. As a result of the conflicts, thousands of local residents were deprived of the opportunity to engage in agriculture, compensation payments were reduced several times on the way to the recipients. The disadvantage of the airport is that the only form of public transport is the single bus route, which often stands idle for long periods of time in traffic jams during rush hours." There are 6 sources, some of them are already in english wikipedia article, i haven't looked properly at sources so i don't know how many of them are in english wikipedia but it definetly isn't all or most of them. ~2025-43053-85 (talk) 19:08, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Should we create articles about Thai Boon Roong Group, Sun Kian Ip Group, Wuchang Shipbuilding Industry Group, and Sino Great Wall International Engineering? There are already articles about Teng Bunma, one of the founders of Thai Boon Roong Group, and Ng Lap Seng, chairman of Sun Kian Ip Group, so why not these too? Also, how about also creating a article about Meng Retthy, he was well known as one of the “four tigers” of the Cambodian economy after the fall of the Khmer Rouge, between the 1980s-2000s. ~2025-43053-85 (talk) 19:33, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

I remember these topics from when I researched the topic of the Thai Boon Roong Twin Tower World Trade Center. I had an impression that most of these entities are certainly important and it would be a good thing if Wikipedia could include an article about each. However, it would only be a good thing conditionally: If it can be done in a way that is consistent with Wikipedia's core content policies and an additional important policy: wp:What Wikipedia is not. If it cannot be done consistent with said policies, the articles will probably be deleted. The standard methodology of determining whether it is possible to publish an article on Wikipedia so that it does not get deleted because it violates the aforementioned policies is confusingly called "notability". There is a guideline about it at wp:Notability (from that guideline: Editors apply notability standards to all subjects to determine whether the English language Wikipedia should have a separate, stand-alone article on that subject. The primary purpose of these standards is to ensure that editors create articles that comply with major content policies.). That is a general guideline about the core concept of notability. An especially relevant subject-specific notability guideline is: wp:Notability (organizations and companies). This guideline is very strict. According to it, it is very unlikely, close to 0%, that we could create articles about these companies such that they would not be deleted. —Alalch E. 19:51, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Sure it is close to being considered unlikely, but not very unlikely like close to 0%, the reason is because of Khmer and Chinese news articles, web pages and other stuff that would have made it possible to create a wikipedia article about it. ~2025-43053-85 (talk) 20:08, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

No, it's close to 0%, you should just believe me. You do not understand how high the standard is for companies. You need to read the entire page wp:Notability (organizations and companies). —Alalch E. 20:10, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Considering it's not zero, it is still possible, perhaps maybe instead of a article about a company it could be the chairmans/founders of the companies. ~2025-43053-85 (talk) 21:38, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

It is much easier for people to pass the notability threshold than companies. —Alalch E. 00:25, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Gosh I really did miss a lot, I doubt I would’ve worked on it though, Cambodian buildings isn’t my style. Mwen Sé Kéyòl Translator-a (talk) 10:30, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

How about creating a english wikipedia article about a Xiamen-Kinmen bridge that is currently under construction by China? https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%8E%A6%E9%87%91%E8%B7%A8%E6%B5%B7%E5%A4%A7%E6%A1%A5 https://baike.baidu.com/item/%E5%8E%A6%E9%87%91%E5%A4%A7%E6%A1%A5/64196573 ~2025-43053-85 (talk) 19:45, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

That would be cool, although perhaps not in a while because the original user (the TA) is now blocked. Mwen Sé Kéyòl Translator-a (talk) 10:31, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Infobox image at Luigi Mangione

Twice now you have attempted to place File:Luigi Mangione perp walk.gif into the infobox at Luigi Mangione. This, despite the inline comment which you removed that says "DO NOT PLACE AN IMAGE HERE WITHOUT CONSENSUS ON THE TALK PAGE. See Talk:Luigi_Mangione#Infobox_image.". I fail to understand how you could interpret that as it being ok to add an image to the infobox without consensus on the talk page. Since you have not participated on the talk page as yet, you are perhaps unaware there has been a highly disruptive edit war on this article regarding such an image. One person was already temporarily blocked from editing the article due to continuing the edit war. If you restore any image to the infobox again without gaining consensus on the talk page do so, I will block you from the article. Edit warring about this will not be accepted. If I have been unclear here, then by all means ask questions. Continuing as you have in placing an image in the infobox will result in a block. Please choose wisely. Thank you, --Hammersoft (talk) 13:55, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. The hidden text is WP:BADHIDDENTEXT. I don't care about such hidden text on a principle basis. But I am not ignoring the talk page.

There's no particular controversy on the talk page about repurposing that gif that is already in the article as the lead image. Usually, the only image of the subject in an article is the lead image. I'll recheck to see if I have missed something. I disagree with your approach here based on my current awareness of the situation, but that's ok. I won't repeat that edit. —Alalch E. 20:16, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

I'm sorry you disagree with the approach. However, yet another edit war over the infobox image was forming, and you were a participant. I took the lightest approach here in handling this. Given the rampant dispute over this, some administrators would have already partially blocked you from the page. There has been a large edit war on this article over the infobox image. That edit war is not going to continue. You can either choose to not add an image to the infobox again, do so with consensus from the talk page, or do so without consensus on the talk page. In the latter case, you will be blocked from the page. The edit warring disruptions on the page must end. See Talk:Luigi_Mangione#Infobox_image for more information. Thank you, --Hammersoft (talk) 21:57, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for StoneToss

StoneToss has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Historyexpert2 (talk) 03:08, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

Time sink - Large language models

Not sure I have ever seen process misunderstanding of this nature. Not sure what their end goal is anyways. Moving on for that pointless time sink...I was wondering if WP:Artificial intelligence and Wikipedia:Artificial intelligence resources should be merged .....with a page made for historical info? Moxy🍁 09:02, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

I’m for it. One is an information page and the other is a very nice Wikipedia directory. I think that any kind of vertical and table-format list content that is more of navigational and record-keeping nature should be on one page, and any ready-for-consumption prose content should be on the other page. In addition, I think that the information page should discuss four main topics: (1) use of AI on the project as a form of automation, not for generative tasks (the topic of the article Artificial intelligence in Wikimedia projects); (2) use of AI to generate text (topic of the information page Wikipedia:Large language models); (3) use of AI to generate images (topic already covered at Wikipedia:Artificial intelligence, and should be covered as a prose overview mentioning all policies and guidelines directly about this in running prose); (4) concise narrative about all the Wikimedia goings on regarding AI, including the rejected idea to put AI summaries into articles, any strategies, important statements, Wikipedia being used to train AI, and such. Not necessarily in that order.

So I’d support merging WP:LLMS into WP:AI under the l2 heading “Machine-generated text” or similar. In addition to moving out the aforementioned list content into the directory, including history of discussions. This has implications for the Policy tab at WP:AICLEAN, so I’m also pinging @Chaotic Enby (in addition to you. @Moxy). This message may read a little weird because I’m in transit and just typing it out on a phone. —Alalch E. 15:51, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi! While I'm not the owner of the AI Cleanup project, I am very happy to be pinged for feedback. WP:LLMS, as a page, is more specialized and more detailed, while the main WP:AI page serves as more of a directory/historical summary, which in my mind overlaps more with Wikipedia:Artificial intelligence resources. A single page with all the information runs the risk of being too sprawling, and keeping a main hub linking to specific detailed pages could be helpful, although WP:AI should definitely have a high-level summary of each (which will help it be more of a homepage than a near-copy of WP:AIDIR). This is already the case to some extent with the "Applications" section, although it should probably be split into the various uses you outlined, each connected to the relevant policies, guidelines, and documentation. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 17:10, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

I actually pinged you because we both edited that list of policies content at wp:AI. Thanks for the quick reply. What do you think about moving the big table to the directory, removing What is Wikipedia’s AI policy content, and having the wproject policy page excerpt the corresponding sections of the directory? —Alalch E. 17:15, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

That sounds pretty good, although I do feel like having at least a one-line summary of the policy (in what you're planning for the "use of AI to generate text" section) is ideal for people skimming through. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 18:12, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Mašina

I see that you created Radar (news magazine). Do you think User:Vacant0/Mašina is ready for mainspace? I did not find more content about them in reliable sources so I'd appreciate your help. Cheers, Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 10:44, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

New pages patrol May 2026 Backlog drive

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

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

New Page Patrol Newsletter - May 2026

Hello Alalch E.,

Backlog update

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

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

2024 and 2025 NPP Awards

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

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

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

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

January–February backlog drive

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

May backlog drive

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

PageTriage

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

Reminders:

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

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