Jump to content

User:Xymmax

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


I first registered this account - my first - April 20, 2007. Since then, I've gotten involved pretty deeply in AfD work. I see it as a chance to triage articles that are flawed, but may yet have potential. If you need access to a Wikipedia article that has been deleted, ask me. If it's not a copyright violation, libel, or personal information, and has not been deleted as a suspected biographies of living persons violation, I will userfy the article for you.

Note that using the text to recreate any deleted article may automatically qualify them for speedy deletion, and copies of previously deleted content that are being used solely for long-term archival purposes may be subject to deletion because Wikipedia is not a free web host. We have a list of alternative sites which may be used to host your content. I maintain a sock account AVPW primarily for use on public networks. In the event of a compromised account, I specifically request any administrator to honor a request from AVPW to block this account, and absolve you in advance of any repercussions.

To do list:


Add'l links

CAVEAT: all the |show= parameters have been set to 7 days.


Immediate requestsEntries
Candidates for speedy deletion as attack pages0
Wikipedians looking for help0
Requests for unblock103
Wikipedia semi-protected edit requests46
Wikipedia template-protected edit requests4
Wikipedia fully protected edit requests1
Wikipedia conflict of interest edit requests1541
Candidates for speedy deletion as copyright violations0
Candidates for speedy deletion65
Open sockpuppet investigations243
Click here to locate other admin backlogs

AB = Administrative Backlogs

[edit]

Administrative backlog

[edit]

AIV= Administrator intervention against vandalism

Administrator intervention against vandalism

Reports

[edit]


User-reported

[edit]


CSD= Candidates for speedy deletion ; PROD= Proposed deletions

Candidates for speedy deletionEntries
User requested11
Empty articles0
Nonsense pages1
Spam pages5
Importance or significance not asserted1
Other candidates49

The following articles have been proposed for deletion for around 7 days:
( source / chronological order / expired )

UAA= Usernames for administrator attention ; RFPP= Requests for page protection

Usernames for administrator attention


User-reported

[edit]
Requests for page protection


Current requests for increase in protection level

[edit]
Request addition of protection to a page, or increasing the current protection level
Place requests for protection increases at the BOTTOM of this section. If you cannot find your request, check the archive of requests or the page history. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.

Reason: Should not be generally editable. Have been mistakenly edited by students who are completing their peer review. Johnj1995 (talk) 01:50, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed protection: Persistent vandalism by anonymous editors opposing the Iranian government, and violation of Wiki policies by newly registered people. Pachu Kannan (talk) 04:10, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing. -Lemonaka 08:29, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Returned after two weeks of protection. Entranced98 (talk) 08:50, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Protect for at least a month as it is dominating the box office. Kailash29792 (talk) 09:10, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent addition of unsourced or poorly sourced content – Persistent self-promotional and unsourced additions of content. Previously semi-protected for the same reason. ElENdElA (talk) 10:55, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Pending changes–protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 16:46, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Reason: Recently expired protection brought in IP users removing content / adding uncited material. Vixissimi📨 13:26, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Someone removing unsourced material is not a reason for locking an article down ~2026-57873-06 (talk) 13:45, 10 November 2026 (UTC)
Lead paragraphs are the summary of the whole page and don’t contain citations, please see MOS: LEAD for reference. Citations are in the body instead (in this case, Style of Play and Reception sections). Vixissimi📨 13:57, 10 November 2026 (UTC)
Already protected by administrator Ser!. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 16:56, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Reason: The page contains information about a major telecommunications company. I request indefinite (lifetime) protection to prevent persistent vandalism and unauthorized edits and to maintain the accuracy of its content. Antoniya-26 (talk) 13:47, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 16:50, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Reason: Requested at WP:RFPP ~2026-59630-20 (talk) 14:39, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Declined – No rationale provided. Favonian (talk) 16:41, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent addition of unsourced or poorly sourced content – TAs persistently adding unsourced date of birth. DonIago (talk) 14:39, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

  • Automated comment: One or more pages in this request appear to already be protected. Please confirm.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 17:01, 10 November 2026 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:02, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Please apply some longterm semi-protection: sets of TAs are duking it out, and one of them, an IP hopper, is making personal insults as well. Drmies (talk) 14:53, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. If they continue dishing out personal insults, need to deal with that particular IP in some other way. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:14, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent addition of unsourced or poorly sourced content – Temporary account returned right after the previous protection expired, doing the same thing. Iamcarbonmatter ♥ xoxo ✦ 15:18, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Reason: TAs and new accounts making implausible changes to this BLP. • a frantic turtle 🐢 16:08, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Current requests for reduction in protection level

[edit]
Request removal of protection from a page, or reducing the current protection level

Current requests for edits to a protected page

[edit]
Request a specific edit be made to a protected page


I would like to suggest the removal of motive and general mentions of politics in the article until anything in unambiguously confirmed by the government/police/anyone. Right now, the uncertainty of the situation is just causing conflicts and division in the polish public sphere and internet. The mentioning of (currently unconfirmed) far-right associations by the Interior Minister (also embroiled in a decades-long political conflict in Poland, where polarisation is at an all-time high) has only caused people symphathetic to right-wing causes to clap back and call the shooter a leftist, referring to for example his alleged support of LGBTQ causes. Such politicisation of this tragedy can only lead to more subjects becoming embroiled in it and potentially harmful associations (LGBT support = far-left shooter = LGBT people are far-left extremists that are a danger to our society). All articles by entities that claim to be focused on providing knowledge should, in my opinion, refrain from any political declarations before anything is known, not to mention that the situation happened so recently that any investigation into it is basically in an embryonic and chaotic stage, with additional pressure from the public of all political sides or convictions. I therefore think that mentioning this until any confirmation is made is just putting fuel on the fire of an already very volatile and heated political debate, and should be removed in order to keep the article as truthful and unharmful as possible. A mention of possible political causes with links to articles by news outlets detailing this would make sense, but declaring far-right associations not only in the infobox but also in almost every paragraph of the article doesn't make sense to me and seems to be doing more harm than good, which can even be seen on the article's talk page. BBBEEIJING (talk) 16:57, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Handled requests

[edit]
A historical archive of previous protection requests can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Archive.
Protected edit requests

1 protected edit request
Page Tagged since Protection level Last protection log entry
User:ClueBot III/Detailed Indices/Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RRArchive140 (request) 2026-11-10 10:51 Fully protected (log) Modified by Tiptoety on 2014-09-09: "Persistent sock-puppetry"
Updated as needed. Last updated: 10:53, 10 November 2026 (UTC)
4 template-protected edit requests
Page Tagged since Protection level Last protection log entry
Template:Infobox football biography (request) 2026-09-23 18:48 Template-protected (log) Protected by Mike V on 2014-03-01: "Highly visible page: restoring protection"
Template:Infobox military installation (request) 2026-10-11 21:22 Template-protected (log) Modified by Mark Arsten on 2013-10-18: "Allowing Protected Template editors"
Template:Infobox AFL biography (request) 2026-10-28 23:07 Template-protected (log) Modified by Samsara on 2017-01-14: "Highly visible template: via RfPP (almost 13k transclusions now)"
Template:Cite certification (request) 2026-11-06 22:28 Template-protected (log) Modified by Primefac on 2020-08-29: "High-risk template"
Updated as needed. Last updated: 15:59, 10 November 2026 (UTC)


RFA= Requests for adminship

RfA candidateSONS%Ending (UTC)Time leftDups?Report
Lynch44 125 0 0 100 22:46, 13 November 2026 3 days, 5 hoursno report
RfB candidateSONS%Ending (UTC)Time leftDups?Report

Last updated by cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online at 16:46, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

RFP= Requests for permissions

Autopatrolled

[edit]

I have been editing since May last year and have created more than 25 articles. Two of them are rated B‑class, and most of the others are C‑class or Start‑class. Two of my articles, Presley Gerber and Killing of Sonia Exelby, were nominated for deletion because of differing views on their notability, but both were kept. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ItsShandog (talk • contribs) 11:59, 22 October 2026 (UTC)

Hi @ItsShandog, could you explain how you created Brendan MegrawBrendan Megraw in Diff/1290863082? Why did you use the {{navbox}} template in Diff/1290872406 and how did you produce that in such a short amount of time? Why did you remove the {{ai-generated}} tag (added in Diff/1348062842), along with utm_source=chatgpt.com parameters, in Diff/1348070103 and then restore the original redirect in Diff/1379884757 a couple of months later? ‑‑gurkubondinn 14:59, 24 October 2026 (UTC)
That would have been around the time I was new to Wikipedia from what I can recall, and looking at it now, it was days after I joined when I would have used ChatGPT. That was before I knew much about AI or about Wikipedia. I stopped using it a long time ago, as I saw how unreliable it was even before the ban on Wikipedia. I cannot explain the navbox, as I have no idea what that is. I would assume it was something to do with ChatGPT at that time. In regard to restoring it to a redirect, that was more to do with the fact that I was editing the disappeared page that covers all those people, and the page more or less repeats the same thing. It does not have any more information than the disappeared page. It was not anything to do with my old edits, as I did not even notice the ChatGPT bit on it. I forgot about that edit, as it was over a year ago. If I had remembered, I would have gone back and fixed all of that, but it is better as a redirect anyway. ItsShandog (talk) 15:17, 24 October 2026 (UTC)
The reason for the removal of the AI part was that this was at the point when I did not use it anymore, but I had not fixed the page at that stage, so I should not have removed it. That was my own fault. There were so many pages I would have edited when I was new that I could not remember them all, but any I come across now I try to fix. I probably removed the ChatGPT part because I would have assumed that was what the template was referring to. That would have been me trying to fix the page, but to be honest I did not know the ins and outs of AI until recently, or all the different ways it is incorrect. Even back in April I just assumed a page was tagged with that because it had old links from ChatGPT and that type of thing. It is only when I have started to read the AI signs page on Wikipedia that I have learned about all the different things it does. If I had known that in April, I would have done a lot of copyediting and fixing of that page. ItsShandog (talk) 15:21, 24 October 2026 (UTC)


Confirmed

[edit]

I request early confirmed status for this account. I have been contributing biographical articles on the Portuguese Wikipedia and have prepared Draft:Lorena Betts in English with citations to English-language reporting and official sources. I encountered the account permission restriction when trying to move the draft to the article title Lorena Betts and connect it with pt:Lorena Betts. I understand that confirmed status does not constitute approval of the draft or exemption from content policies, and that the usual route to autoconfirmation is four days since the first edit and ten edits on English Wikipedia. If early confirmation is not appropriate, I would appreciate guidance on the appropriate draft-review or move-request route. Ludsonaiello (talk) 16:16, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

 Not done I've submitted the draft for review via WP:AFC instead. * Pppery * it has begun... 03:08, 8 November 2026 (UTC)


Page mover

[edit]

Reason for requesting page mover rights is mainly to help close requested moves. I have closed over 100 RMs (44 moved, 32 not moved) and carried out around 25 moves myself using Move+. Many closures also needed a swap or a move over a redirect with history, which I couldn't do, so I had to list them at WP:RM/TR and wait. With page mover, I could do round-robin swaps and handle the follow-up cleanup myself. If admins think it's too soon, I'm happy to check back later. NomanPK44 (talk) 09:26, 8 November 2026 (UTC)

Automated comment This user was granted temporary page mover rights by Dekimasu (expires 09:29, 8 December 2026 (UTC)). — MusikBot talk 09:30, 8 November 2026 (UTC)
 Done Approved for a one-month trial. Best, Dekimasuよ! 09:31, 8 November 2026 (UTC)


Pending changes reviewer

[edit]

Hello, Fellow Wikipedians!

After viewing Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, I decided to request for this permission!

When the backlog is high, I will use this user permission to clear the backlog!

Happy editing and best wishes, Zahrazamedahmedi 💬My Talk Page💬 🫗My Mistakes🫗 11:17, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

Comment: She has 3,810+ edits but no extended confirmed editor... ☯️🐉🐼 Unsurprising 🐼🐉☯️: nice to meet you! 📝 👥 15:20, 7 November 2026 (UTC)
 Not done I'm concerned by several recent and valid concerns about incorrect reverts on your user talk page. I think some more experience is needed with regards to knowing when to revert an edit, and distinguishing vandalism from good-faith edits, before you're ready for this permission. DanCherek (talk) 15:50, 7 November 2026 (UTC)
@DanCherek No problem!
I'll have to try again another time. Zahrazamedahmedi 💬My Talk Page💬 🫗My Mistakes🫗 05:14, 8 November 2026 (UTC)

Hello,

I am requesting this because I want to expand my reviewing and anti-vandalism toolset and have more opportunities to do anti-vandalism work. While I am relatively new, I have experience, as you can see on the Simple English Wikipedia. I understand vandalism, BLP, and copyright policies, and I have read the review guidelines. Again, while I am relatively new, I think this would help me achieve my anti-vandalism goal, and I hope you can at least suggest how to get this permission.

Thank you, ExplorerofUniverse ExplorerofUniverse (talk) 03:09, 7 November 2026 (UTC)

Automated comment This user has 80 edits in the mainspace. — MusikBot talk 03:10, 7 November 2026 (UTC)
This has changed, and I have prior experience. ExplorerofUniverse (talk) 06:48, 7 November 2026 (UTC)
Yeah, I can see by your extended confirmed status. You have 111 mainspace edits as of this comment. ;D ☯️🐉🐼 Unsurprising 🐼🐉☯️: nice to meet you! 📝 👥 15:19, 7 November 2026 (UTC)
Thank you! ExplorerofUniverse (talk) 16:39, 7 November 2026 (UTC)
My pleasure! ;D ☯️🐉🐼 Unsurprising 🐼🐉☯️: nice to meet you! 📝 👥 17:28, 7 November 2026 (UTC)

I would like to help clear the pending changes backlog from time to time. I meet all of the requirements and I have read the guideline on reviewing. a wondrous raven (talk) 05:30, 10 November 2026 (UTC)


Rollback

[edit]

I would like to request rollback rights. I do a lot of recent changes patrolling, and I think the rollback function and the tools that require the right would prove very helpful to me while patrolling. A while ago, I requested the rights and then realized I did not have 200 mainspace edits, so I withdrew my request. However, I should now have over 200 edits in the mainspace, and would appreciate if I could be granted the right. Thanks! Bucket of Bubbles (talk) 23:44, 21 October 2026 (UTC)

Automated comment This user has had 1 request for rollback declined or withdrawn in the past 90 days (). — MusikBot talk 01:40, 24 October 2026 (UTC)
 Not done you need more experience before being given this permission. Dr vulpes (Talk) 09:39, 8 November 2026 (UTC)

After a very long time since I last made a rollback request, I've been racking up more main space edits and have been doing patrol in general. I'm requesting the right so I can use more powerful tools like huggle, as well as make my existing use of Twinkle faster. TheClocksAlwaysTurn (The Clockworks) (contribs)(rights) 21:38, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

Comment: I see no problem with this looks like he has enough expirience. ExplorerofUniverse (talk) 19:07, 7 November 2026 (UTC)
 Done ASUKITE 16:04, 8 November 2026 (UTC)

Footer

[edit]

Policies and links

Today's afd

Citation_templates

Edit counter and analysis

This user is a member of the

Association of Wikipedians Who Dislike Making Broad Judgments About the Worthiness of a General Category of Article, and Who Are in Favor of the Deletion of Some Particularly Bad Articles, but That Doesn't Mean They Are Deletionists

AWWDMBJAWGCAWAIFDSPBATDMTAD
AWWDMBJAWGCAWAIFDSPBATDMTAD

Est omnino difficile iudicare inclusionis meritum cuiusdam rei in encyclopædia cum ratio sciendi quid populi referat incerta sit, sed nihilominus aliquid encyclopædiam dedecet

It is generally difficult to judge the worthiness of a particular topic for inclusion in an encyclopedia considering that there is no certain way to know what interests people, but some topics nevertheless are not fit for an encyclopedia.

This motto reflects the desire of these Wikipedians to be reluctant, but not entirely unwilling, to remove articles from Wikipedia.

Committed identity: 5e0a9af339f30221a08fa86264cf1a81e3637ef17bd7ba87260c63b0fea3cdb0b55f545f061dd97184aa4061626c8c41b7237f4b18ccfdd096bff83e92ce9fc5 is a SHA-512 commitment to this user's real-life identity.

I copied this source code from someone's user page I liked. I did not save the name. Thank you, whomever you are.