User talk:ElijahPepe

September 2025

Hello, I'm Zackmann08. Thank you for your recent contributions to Kash Patel. When you were adding content to the page, you added duplicate arguments to a template which can cause issues with how the template is rendered. In the future, please use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find these errors as they will display in yellow at the top of the page. Thanks. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 22:43, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I just wanted to request that you archive your user talk page. While it may not be bothersome to you, many editors have slow connections, and having a very large talk page can hamper communication. If you need help, just check out the guide over at Help:Archiving a talk page. Thanks! Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 22:43, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:RuneScape: Dragonwilds

Hello, ElijahPepe. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:RuneScape: Dragonwilds, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 22:06, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi ElijahPepe. Thank you for your work on Maggie Cleary. Another editor, MPGuy2824, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

not mentioned in target page

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|MPGuy2824}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

-MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:13, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:2025 United States military plan leak

Hello, ElijahPepe. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:2025 United States military plan leak, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 23:06, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please use Sfn appropriately

{{Sfn}} is meant to be used for referencing books where many references are needed for different page numbers. Please do not use them when individual articles are being cited, such as in 2025 United States potential federal government shutdown. Sfn causes significant usability problems for both editors and readers, as its is not compatible with Visual Editor, and it forces readers to click through instead of mouse-over to see the full reference. It should only be used in the narrow circumstances where these usability problems are outweighed by other considerations. Antony–22 (^talk⁄_contribs) 20:38, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am also strongly to the creation of an article for potential events, however likely they may be. Potential is the point of draft space. Esolo5002 (talk) 21:15, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Kash Patel is under review

Your good article nomination of the article Kash Patel is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Czarking0 -- Czarking0 (talk) 04:08, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Whitney Hermandorfer

Hello, ElijahPepe. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Whitney Hermandorfer, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 05:06, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Howard Lutnick is under review

Your good article nomination of the article Howard Lutnick is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of TonyTheTiger -- TonyTheTiger (talk) 17:09, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:TikTok America

Hello, ElijahPepe. This message concerns the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "TikTok America".

Drafts that go unedited for six months are eligible for deletion, in accordance with our draftspace policy, and this one has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission, and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you read this, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the draft so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! DreamRimmer bot II (talk) 20:27, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Russell Vought 2025 Pic

Hello I took time uploading this picture of Russell Vought It's his Offical Goverment Pic the American Flag is behind him the other one is only a chopped pic. The one I uploaded is a good pic. Unless if you want to use his 2017 Pic again?. Do you have something aguest the American Flag?BobPunk1997 (talk) BobPunk1997 (talk) 17:52, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@BobPunk1997: I don't know what a "chopped pic" is. The foremost issue is quality. The image you are uploading, image A, is 559 by 559; the image I am providing, image B, is 745 by 981. Image A has visual artifacting and pixelation that is not ideal if you zoom into the image. To answer your other question, I don't have "something aguest the American Flag". I am simply looking for the most high quality photograph, and the one that the CFPB has on its website is not usable. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 18:13, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Joseph Nocella Jr.

Hello, ElijahPepe. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Joseph Nocella Jr., a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 20:08, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Howard Lutnick is on hold

Your good article nomination of the article Howard Lutnick has been placed on hold, as the article needs some changes. See the review page for more information. If these are addressed within 7 days, the nomination will pass; otherwise, it may fail. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of TonyTheTiger -- TonyTheTiger (talk) 07:45, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Howard Lutnick has passed

Your good article nomination of the article Howard Lutnick has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of TonyTheTiger -- TonyTheTiger (talk) 03:01, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:2025 global trade war

Hello, ElijahPepe. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "2025 global trade war".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:33, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Τense

Greetings. I reverted one verb of this edit in the article on Lindsey Halligan, on account of MOS:TENSE, which dictates the use of present tense in our work. Take care. -The Gnome (talk) 12:22, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@The Gnome: "has served" is a perfectly fine way to word a position sentence, evidenced by its prevalence in featured and good articles, and I would argue that it is improper to use "serves". The present tense, as invoked by "serves as", suggests current and ongoing action. The present perfect tense, or "has served as", focuses on the past and may or may not be relevant at the current time. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 14:21, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Precisely as you also say, the present perfect tense does not inform the reader of the current time, which is a significant omission for an online source of information, and particularly an online encyclopaedia. If anything, it is misleading since is confuses the information imparted with that of the past tense. The use of present perfect is perfect, pun intended, for appointments, e.g. "Lindsey Halligan, in time XYZ, has assumed the position of, etc."

As to invoking good or featured articles, well, they can be guilty of fuzzy notation, too, especially if, as you also say, it's a casually deployed term. A clearly clearer approach would be to turn passive, e.g. "LH has been serving since XYZ." -The Gnome (talk) 03:40, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lindsey Halligan

Looks like TruthSeeker0101 readded the court documents at Special:Diff/1316099022. Not sure where you want to take this from here, just thought I'd let you know. Gommeh 📖 🎮 17:19, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Mary Anne Carter

Hello, ElijahPepe. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Mary Anne Carter, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 09:07, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Page mover granted

Hello, ElijahPepe. Your account has been granted the "extendedmover" user right, either following a request for it or demonstrating familiarity with working with article names and moving pages. You are now able to rename pages without leaving behind a redirect and move subpages when moving the parent page(s).

Please take a moment to review Wikipedia:Page mover for more information on this user right, especially the criteria for moving pages without leaving a redirect. Please remember to follow post-move cleanup procedures and make link corrections where necessary, including broken double-redirects when suppressredirect is used. This can be done using Special:WhatLinksHere. It is also very important that no one else be allowed to access your account, so you should consider taking a few moments to secure your password. As with all user rights, be aware that if abused, or used in controversial ways without consensus, your page mover status can be revoked.

Useful links:

Wikipedia:Requested moves
Category:Requested moves, for article renaming requests awaiting action.

If you do not want the page mover right anymore, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Thank you, and happy editing! Toadspike [Talk] 22:06, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you intend to be active in handling technical move requests, you may find User:Toadspike/How to RMTR helpful. Even if not, two of the three userscripts linked at the bottom may still be of use. Toadspike [Talk] 22:07, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Kash Patel has failed

Your good article nomination of the article Kash Patel has failed. See the review page for more information. If or when the reviewer's feedback has been addressed, you may nominate the article again. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Czarking0 -- Czarking0 (talk) 05:01, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Kash Patel has failed

Your good article nomination of the article Kash Patel has failed. See the review page for more information. If or when the reviewer's feedback has been addressed, you may nominate the article again. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of David Eppstein -- David Eppstein (talk) 06:08, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Trump Tower Belgrade is under review

Your good article nomination of the article Trump Tower Belgrade is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of ZKang123 -- ZKang123 (talk) 01:06, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Education in the second Trump administration

Hello, ElijahPepe. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Education in the second Trump administration".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:30, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Early life and education of Donald Trump is under review

Your good article nomination of the article Early life and education of Donald Trump is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of SusanLesch -- SusanLesch (talk) 14:46, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Harvard University in the second Trump administration

Hello, ElijahPepe. This message concerns the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Harvard University in the second Trump administration".

Drafts that go unedited for six months are eligible for deletion, in accordance with our draftspace policy, and this one has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission, and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you read this, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the draft so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! DreamRimmer bot II (talk) 17:25, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Susan Stamberg

On 18 October 2025, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Susan Stamberg, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. PFHLai (talk) 10:12, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi ElijahPepe. Thank you for your work on Mark Savaya. Another editor, Mariamnei, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Mariamnei}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Mariamnei (talk) 09:02, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Pete Hegseth is under review

Your good article nomination of the article Pete Hegseth is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Jcgaylor -- Jcgaylor (talk) 16:08, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Pete Hegseth has failed

Your good article nomination of the article Pete Hegseth has failed. See the review page for more information. If or when the reviewer's feedback has been addressed, you may nominate the article again. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Jcgaylor -- Jcgaylor (talk) 18:06, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:RuneScape: Dragonwilds

Hello, ElijahPepe. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "RuneScape: Dragonwilds".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:39, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Trump Tower Belgrade has failed

Your good article nomination of the article Trump Tower Belgrade has failed. See the review page for more information. If or when the reviewer's feedback has been addressed, you may nominate the article again. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of ZKang123 -- ZKang123 (talk) 02:01, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:2025 United States Department of Justice purges

Hello, ElijahPepe. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:2025 United States Department of Justice purges, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 20:08, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:American Federation of Government Employees v. Office of Personnel Management

Hello, ElijahPepe. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:American Federation of Government Employees v. Office of Personnel Management, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 20:08, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Stephen Miller is under review

Your good article nomination of the article Stephen Miller is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of SusanLesch -- SusanLesch (talk) 20:27, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Bernie Navarro

Hello, ElijahPepe. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Bernie Navarro, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 01:06, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Gavin Wax

Hello ElijahPepe,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Gavin Wax for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly indicate why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Bpuddin (talk) 23:03, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Ben Franklin Fellowship

Hello, ElijahPepe. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Ben Franklin Fellowship, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 01:06, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

For what it is worth, I wanted to appologize for this. I genuinely did not realize that I had done that previously on your page and had it reverted. I certainly didn't mean to do it a second time. Not making excuses... Just being honest. I have updated my script to make sure it isn't possible for me to make that mistake again.

Also, FWIW, saw on your user page you are experiencing a lot of stress right now... Just wanted to say I hope things get better for ya. Happy editing. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 07:44, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Early life and education of Donald Trump has passed

Your good article nomination of the article Early life and education of Donald Trump has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of SusanLesch -- SusanLesch (talk) 17:04, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:NPR v. Trump

Hello, ElijahPepe. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:NPR v. Trump, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 14:06, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:2025 United States military plan leak

Hello, ElijahPepe. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "2025 United States military plan leak".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:46, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi ElijahPepe. Thank you for your work on Gregory Bovino. Another editor, Aesurias, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Great article; no notes -- thank you for contributing to Wikipedia!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Aesurias}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Aesurias (talk) 01:29, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Whitney Hermandorfer

Hello, ElijahPepe. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Whitney Hermandorfer".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:39, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Joseph Nocella Jr.

Hello, ElijahPepe. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Joseph Nocella Jr.".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:32, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your revert of further info links within the Lindsey Halligan bio

Hi ElijaPepe. Can you revisit your Linsey Halligan https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lindsey_Halligan&diff=1320858414&oldid=1320674741 of Nov 7th where you state "Not much there that specifically pertains to Halligan".

Halligan is the lead prosecutor on both cases. That makes these links very important for an understanding of Halligan's career and bio.

Furthermore, Halligan is making major legal mistakes on both cases. On Nov 5th a federal judge accused Halligan of taking an "indict first, investigate second" approach. Halligan is also accused of misconduct and serious procedural irregularities during the grand-jury proceedings leading to the indictement. These serious episodes of legal misconduct may eventually be summarized in her biography, but they currently are only described in the two prosecution articles.

The rationale that "Not much there that specifically pertains to Halligan" is not correct. MarsTrombone (talk) 08:01, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

{{Further}} says that the template should be used at the top of the section when the topic is covered more broadly by another section or article. Neither of those articles are the topic of that section and neither were at the top of the section. Nothing requires those links. Anything that could pertains to Halligan should be on that article. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 14:08, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So there should be a section within the Halligan bio named "Prosecution of Comey", which describes her actions. Then at the top of that section the Further link to the actual prosecution should exist.

Is that what you are suggesting? MarsTrombone (talk) 15:39, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I originally had those sections split out. Here's a compromise. I'll return those sections to the way they were—wasn't a fan of having a non-descriptive section header to begin with—and if you want, you can add that template. Two additional details to add. The first is that you should probably contain them in the same template. The second is that {{Seealso}} is likely the appropriate template, not {{Further}}. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 21:36, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The compromise sounds reasonable. I'll follow-up in a week or so, after you've made your changes. MarsTrombone (talk) 23:39, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about 2025 Donald Trump visit to the Middle East

Hello, ElijahPepe

I edit here too, under the username I2Overcome and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I've asked for a discussion about the redirect 2025 Donald Trump visit to the Middle East, created by you. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 9 § 2025 Donald Trump visit to the Middle East.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|I2Overcome}}. And don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

I₂Overcome ^talk 20:21, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Charles Ezell

Hello, ElijahPepe. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Charles Ezell, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 22:08, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi ElijahPepe. Thank you for your work on Watson v. Republican National Committee. Another editor, MPGuy2824, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

not yet mentioned in the target page

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|MPGuy2824}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

-MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:25, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Mary Anne Carter

Hello, ElijahPepe. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Mary Anne Carter".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:22, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Stephen Miller has passed

Your good article nomination of the article Stephen Miller has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of SusanLesch -- SusanLesch (talk) 16:04, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please adjust your citation style

ElijahPepe, as mentioned in a recent GA review, you have a habit of citing ordinary news articles as if they were multi-page journal articles or books. This is not beneficial for readers or necessary for editors. Your talk page (not going back into the archives) has four editors remarking how difficult it is to work with: [1],[2],[3], and this note from me. Readers shouldn't be forced to look at an sfn and deduce the source is a step away. The preponderance of Wikipedia editors conform to one style of direct citation by URL (not by sfn). URLs were a grand invention. Thank you for your consideration. -SusanLesch (talk) 18:00, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Sorry I don't mean to suggest Wikipedia dictates a certain citation style. Of course it doesn't per WP:CITESTYLE. But I think you'll find mainly that editors split per WP:CITEX between using citation templates and freehand typing. Hope this helps. -SusanLesch (talk) 20:19, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A consistent citation style is required for FA, and it makes it much easier to take an article to FAC if I need to add a book later and all of the citations are in the same format. Per WP:CITEVARYES, bare URLs should be avoided and I will always use a citation template. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 21:37, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Consistent citation style" doesn't mean that you use the same template for different types of sources. See Wikipedia:Citing_sources#Examples. See also the Featured Article on The Beatles which cites books (sfn) as well as newspaper and magazine articles (<ref></ref>), with the appropriate templates. That setup doesn't prevent later adding of additional cites. Space4TCatHerder 🖖 22:28, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That article passed FAC sixteen years ago. The expectation is that the same template is used. This setup doesn't prevent adding other citations later. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 22:40, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The approach used at The Beatles is still acceptable at FAC today. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:17, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

the expectation is that the same template is used - no it's not? the expectation at FAC is that the appropriate templates are used for each type of source and that those are consistent with each other and the overall citation style is harmonious. ... sawyer * any/all * talk 10:34, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that, too, e.g., at N7478D, and once someone has set up the references, other editors follow suit until someone changes the format of all of them. When a reference (e.g., this one^[1]) is to be used multiple times, add a name to it like this^[2]. For the second and further citations of this source, use the abbreviated form ^[2]. Space4TCatHerder 🖖 21:25, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Haberman, Maggie (May 11, 2025). "Trump Is to Accept a Luxury 747 From Qatar for Use as Air Force One". The New York Times. Retrieved May 11, 2025.
^ ^a ^b Haberman, Maggie (May 11, 2025). "Trump Is to Accept a Luxury 747 From Qatar for Use as Air Force One". The New York Times. Retrieved May 11, 2025.

Good grief, Space4Time3Continuum2x, that's an impressive job you did at N7478D. That's not a theoretical example, it's a royal pain.

ElijahPepe, I for one am happy to hear you like citation templates. I truly wish Wikipedia mandated their use. But that's not what we're talking about. Do you understand what Space4T did there? -SusanLesch (talk) 23:17, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for your troubles. Now seven editors have united on the point. Likely you will understand after you feel better. -SusanLesch (talk) 15:22, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Add my voice to those objecting to the excessive use of sfn, which I encountered today on the Lindsey Halligan article (and is being discussed there). Funcrunch (talk) 22:26, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@ElijahPepe: After long, fruitful discussion, we've made a lot of progress. Thanks to ElijahPepe and ~2025-36687-44, the original citation scheme has been restored to Gary Shapley, EJ Antoni, Lindsey Halligan, Stephen Miller, Sean Duffy and Susie Wiles. Plus somebody switched Early life and education of Donald Trump. Remaining on my list are Dan Caine, Pete Hegseth, Howard Lutnick, and Kash Patel. At a few days apiece, I don't mind this task at all but wouldn't refuse your help. (I think you changed a whole article in one edit.) Do you have any draft articles in your pipeline that will switch over any others? Or are we really nearing the end? Best wishes for your project. -SusanLesch (talk) 23:36, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What remains is Kevin Hassett, Marco Rubio, Ronald D. Johnson, Russell Vought, Steve Witkoff, Tax returns of Donald Trump, and Warren Stephens. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 16:37, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at some of those people's biographies and found normal citations. Can you please avoid changing their citation scheme when you install your drafts in the future? Changing them without consensus could be considered disruptive editing and it entails unnecessary work to revert. -SusanLesch (talk) 17:16, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ticked off that you didn't do this work yourself, ElijahPepe. I offered to help you and got left holding the bag. Also please watch where you're going with your personal drafts: You claimed an article I put up for peer review, Russell Vought in your pipeline. As a side effect of righting this ship, now I am given as #1 in authorship for Susie Wiles, where I wrote absolutely nothing. Also true for Kash Patel, where I wrote nothing. -SusanLesch (talk) 16:38, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't do the work because I'm not working on these drafts presently. I didn't "claim" any articles, either; I was working on Vought as far back as June. Authorship is completely irrelevant here. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 16:44, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An FYI on this topic: A basic citation template I like to use. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 03:36, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:50, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:2025 United States Department of Justice purges

Hello, ElijahPepe. This message concerns the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "2025 United States Department of Justice purges".

Drafts that go unedited for six months are eligible for deletion, in accordance with our draftspace policy, and this one has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission, and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you read this, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the draft so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! DreamRimmer bot II (talk) 20:26, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:American Federation of Government Employees v. Office of Personnel Management

Hello, ElijahPepe. This message concerns the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "American Federation of Government Employees v. Office of Personnel Management".

Drafts that go unedited for six months are eligible for deletion, in accordance with our draftspace policy, and this one has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission, and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you read this, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the draft so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! DreamRimmer bot II (talk) 20:26, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Washington, D.C., shooting

I've turned this article into a redirect because we already have the article 2025 Washington, D.C. National Guard shooting. Opm581^{(talk | he/him)} 00:22, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Versant Media

Hello, ElijahPepe. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Versant Media, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 22:07, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Gary Shapley is under review

Your good article nomination of the article Gary Shapley is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of LivelyRatification -- LivelyRatification (talk) 23:43, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Gary Shapley is on hold

Your good article nomination of the article Gary Shapley has been placed on hold, as the article needs some changes. See the review page for more information. If these are addressed within 7 days, the nomination will pass; otherwise, it may fail. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of LivelyRatification -- LivelyRatification (talk) 01:23, 4 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just letting you know also that while my review is a bit lengthy, I hope it is helpful in your efforts to improve the Gary Shapley article. Let me know if anything is unclear or confusing (this is only my second GA review, so I may have made some errors or phrased things in an odd manner). My timezone is UTC+11, so I may take a bit to reply, but I am happy to address any concerns or queries you might have. --LivelyRatification (talk) 01:26, 4 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Gary Shapley has passed

Your good article nomination of the article Gary Shapley has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of LivelyRatification -- LivelyRatification (talk) 01:03, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary account IP viewer granted

Hello, ElijahPepe. Per your request, your account has been granted temporary-account-viewer rights. You are now able to reveal the IP addresses of individuals using temporary accounts that are not visible to the general public. This is very sensitive information that is only to be used to aid in anti-abuse workflows. Please take a moment to review Wikipedia:Temporary account IP viewer for more information on this user right. It is important to remember:

You must not share IP address data with someone who does not have the same access permissions unless disclosure is permissible as per guidelines listed at Foundation:Policy:Wikimedia Access to Temporary Account IP Addresses Policy.
Access must not be used for political control, to apply pressure on editors, or as a threat against another editor in a content dispute. There must be a valid reason to investigate a temporary user. Note that using multiple temporary accounts is not forbidden, so long as they are not used in violation of policies (for example, block or ban evasion).

It is also important to note that the following actions are logged for others to see:

When a user accepts the preference that enables or disables IP reveal for their account.
Revealing an IP address of a temporary account.
Listing the temporary accounts that are associated with one or more IP addresses (using the CIDR notation format).

Remember, even if a user is violating policy, avoid revealing personal information if possible. Use temporary account usernames rather than disclosing IP addresses directly, or give information such as same network/not same network or similar. If you do not want the user right anymore then please ask me or another administrator and it will be removed for you. You may also voluntarily give up access at any time by visiting Special:Preferences. Happy editing! – robertsky (talk) 04:32, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi ElijahPepe. Thank you for your work on United States Tech Force. Another editor, Casablanca Rock, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Hi! Thanks for creating this redirect. I know that this is the result of very recent news, but is there any chance that a mention of this can be added to Kupor's page for the time being.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Casablanca Rock}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Casablanca 🪨^(T) 20:02, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Rob Reiner

On 16 December 2025, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Rob Reiner, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:12, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Rob Reiner Comment

On 17 December 2025, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Rob Reiner, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Guz13 (talk) 04:52, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Trump

Hi ElijahPepe; I'm not sure that you will be around for the holidays. I've started a new discussion about trimming and condensing the Trump article further on the Talk page there if you have time to take a look. ErnestKrause (talk) 05:11, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination: Lamarr Wilson

Hi Elijahpepe, thanks for the feedback on my DYK nomination.

I have added ALT1 (regarding Wilson's review of the "spill-proof" mug) to address your concerns about the original hook not being interesting enough. I believe this is the tone you were looking for.

Could you take a look when you have a moment? Thanks! TheArchitectOfYe (talk) 23:52, 26 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kash Patel

Hello, I wanted to discuss some of your recent editing on Kash Patel. I did the GAR. I want to take a moment to recognize that you have put a lot of work into the article which is valuable to the community. I personally learned a lot from your article and the many excellent sources you have used.

I know you want this to be seen as a good article and are willing to put in the work to make it so. However, in this instance I want to urge you to slow down a bit and listen more the to the community. Your recent comment on removing the nuetrality tag talked about not receiving good review during GAR. I am sorry you feel that way and am certainly willing to reflect on what I can do better during GAR. In that particular GAR I felt like you began to disengage after my extensive feedback. In multiple locations you have stated you were not satisfied with the GAR, but I did not see you take the issue up with me directly. Though maybe I just missed that in which case I apologize. I want to give you this opportunity to take the issue up with me directly if you so choose.

Regarding how you should treat the article going forward, I think you should not disregard my GAR feedback just because you are dissatisfied with the review. As David Eppstein pointed out there are several areas for improvement with this article. Immediately putting up a new GAR without attempting to address the issues from the first, then responding to the QAF with immediately opening a PR which was closed by Z1720 due to itself being a policy violation, and following up by edit warring over the neutrality tag boarders on disruptive editing. Czarking0 (talk) 20:07, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you believe the tag should stay, you need to provide reasons for it. Pointing to a page that says nothing about current neutrality issues is not enough. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 21:51, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of 2025 United States strikes in Nigeria

A tag has been placed on 2025 United States strikes in Nigeria requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

AI written

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Yusuf Michael (talk) 10:34, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An AfD tag has not been placed at the article, and it should not be done. Fix the article. It obviously passes WP:GNG, so follow WP:PRESERVE and fix it. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 18:14, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Russell Vought

Greetings. My request for a peer review went nowhere and I closed that request yesterday. I've been adding a few things before moving to GAN. I expect to expand a bit more based on your draft. If you can find the time, your contributions would be welcome. -SusanLesch (talk) 15:38, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I can add it to the list. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 15:49, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Perhaps you can cite his second marriage to Michelle Martin. (You found it in some Politico newsletter.) -SusanLesch (talk) 19:27, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Are you looking for me to finish the rewrite? elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 19:35, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not exactly, I was asking that you provide a citation that can be dereferenced instead of an edit summary. The marriage was not a secret (Mr. Vought's X feed says Michelle Vought is his wife) but the media seems to have been silent. I'm traveling tomorrow so won't be editing for a day or two. -SusanLesch (talk) 23:41, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here is that citation. If you're rewriting the whole thing yourself, I'll stay out of it. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 01:02, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was hoping you would contribute as you've already done a draft. No need for me to reconstruct all that. Thank you for the citation. I couldn't find it anywhere. -SusanLesch (talk) 03:31, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps I worded this wrong. I'd be willing to help, but I don't want to write a dual-article. It tends to lead to conflicts. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 05:17, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm done with Russell Vought for now. Apparently collaboration isn't your strong suit, so you finish this. I came across this C-class article in November, brought it up to B-class and put it up for peer review, in preparation for a GAN. You wrote a draft in June and told me about it when I asked two weeks ago. -SusanLesch (talk) 16:06, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My remaining two bits are done. It's all yours. What, by the way, is a "dual-article"? -SusanLesch (talk) 17:28, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What I'm looking to avoid is writing an article at the same time as someone else. There are usually conflicts there. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 17:36, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fine. Apparently you are the source of dual articles not me. It's my understanding you are the editor who made drafts in their userspace that doubled up articles that are already in mainspace. Anyway, I marked every mainspace article for which you declared a draft with this HTML note under References:  -SusanLesch (talk) 13:59, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Pete Hegseth has failed

Your good article nomination of the article Pete Hegseth has failed. See the review page for more information. If or when the reviewer's feedback has been addressed, you may nominate the article again. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Czarking0 -- Czarking0 (talk) 16:46, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Charles T. Moran is under review

Your good article nomination of the article Charles T. Moran is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Czarking0 -- Czarking0 (talk) 17:04, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Brilyn Hollyhand is under review

Your good article nomination of the article Brilyn Hollyhand is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of CookieMonster755 -- CookieMonster755 (talk) 12:04, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Versant Media

Hello, ElijahPepe. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Versant Media".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:27, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Early life and education of Donald Trump

On 1 January 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Early life and education of Donald Trump, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a young Donald Trump was sent to military school after his father found that he had been purchasing smoke bombs and switchblades in Manhattan? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Early life and education of Donald Trump. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Early life and education of Donald Trump), 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 nominate it.

—Ganesha811 (talk) 00:03, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Brilyn Hollyhand is on hold

Your good article nomination of the article Brilyn Hollyhand has been placed on hold, as the article needs some changes. See the review page for more information. If these are addressed within 7 days, the nomination will pass; otherwise, it may fail. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of CookieMonster755 -- CookieMonster755 (talk) 17:23, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Brilyn Hollyhand has passed

Your good article nomination of the article Brilyn Hollyhand has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of CookieMonster755 -- CookieMonster755 (talk) 19:44, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

congratulations on your recently promoted GA article. cookiemonster755 ^(talk) 00:29, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi ElijahPepe. Thank you for your work on George Tidmarsh. Another editor, Klbrain, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for this helpful biography for a sometime controversial business leader and scientist. There are enough independent sources to support notability.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Klbrain}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Klbrain (talk) 10:24, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Charles T. Moran has failed

Your good article nomination of the article Charles T. Moran has failed. See the review page for more information. If or when the reviewer's feedback has been addressed, you may nominate the article again. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Czarking0 -- Czarking0 (talk) 16:42, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi ElijahPepe. Thank you for your work on Matt Brasseaux. Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thank you for creating this article! Your efforts and work were greatly appreciated! Have a blessed weekend!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ Contact me! 23:43, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi ElijahPepe. Thank you for your work on Proposed leveraged buyout of Electronic Arts. Another editor, 11WB, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

This is a well sourced article, however some of the text might have been generated using an LLM. This is not allowed per WP:NEWLLM. If an LLM has been used, I would advise rewriting those sections.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|11WB}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

11WB (talk) 02:51, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @ElijahPepe. I'm responding to this diff. Whilst the text was not generated by LLM, it has been detected as being refined by AI. Words such as "consortium" are seldom used. Just to be sure, I will courtesy ping @Gnomingstuff, who volunteers at WP:AIC. They are far more qualified at detecting LLM text than me. 11WB (talk) 05:17, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@GS doesn't like being pinged, so I will also ping @Athanelar in case they don't respond. 11WB (talk) 05:19, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I do not use AI tools at all, including and especially on Wikipedia. I can tell you why I specifically chose that term (from an off-site resource you may be aware of already): For the record, "group" sounded strange. I had seen a few sources use "consortium". It wasn't a large group of investors, nor were they loosely associated, nor was the association in equal proportion. Google specifically says that a consortium is "an association, typically of several business companies"; I'm not sure it's that specific, given the Wikipedia page's broad definition, but that tracks with what I wrote. Electronic Arts used the word "consortium" in its press release, as did a few other sources, though I believe it was the BBC that I remember the most and what likely drove me to use that word. I'm willing to explain any word or phrase in that article, as I said. I searched up the most common AI words and "consortium" isn't any of them, so I'm not sure where you got the impression that it is indicative of AI use. The writing style in that article is closest to one I'm working on right now, a rewrite of Russell Vought, so you can see the edit history there. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 05:42, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

At least two of the detectors I ran the article text through showed that it had been refined by AI. Whether or not this is the case, is not something I can definitively say for certain. I applied the banner to let other editors know that it is a possibility. Depending on what AIC find, the banner may be readded. It isn't to insult the work or time you've put into the article, it is simply to follow existing guidelines that discourage LLM use. 11WB (talk) 05:50, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I've always used GPTZero, and that returned "99% Human". I really don't know where this is coming from, because it isn't any different than the other articles I have written. I said I was willing to explain any words or phrases that you might have seen as AI, and I'm met with nothing in return. Let me be clear, again: I have never, ever, used AI in any article on Wikipedia. Not to write articles, not to find sources, not to "refine text". You can see my GAs here. Absolutely nothing has changed about my writing style. It is didactic, and probably more so on this article, but certainly not AI-generated. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 06:08, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Per Wikipedia:Large language models § Identifying LLM-generated text: Do not solely rely on artificial intelligence content detection tools (such as GPTZero) to evaluate whether text is LLM-generated, as these tools are unreliable due to their high error rates. jlwoodwa (talk) 06:09, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The user draft you linked returned with a 14% chance of having been refined by an LLM, on two separate detectors. @Jlwoodwa is correct that these detectors shouldn't be the only thing that is relied upon for finding LLM text, this is why I pinged somebody more experienced than me from the AIC project. 11WB (talk) 06:12, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Just going to add that I was wrong this time. I apologise, @ElijahPepe. If any AIC editors do see this, please disregard my pings. 11WB (talk) 06:30, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm here anyway, so I will just add that I agree that the text is not AI-generated. Athanelar (talk) 09:06, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi -- since I'm also here anyway, I also don't see any immediately obvious indications that it's AI. I think this might be a rare actual case of someone's natural writing style just happening to resemble AI; their FBI investigation into Donald Trump's handling of government documents draft from August 2022 also comes back "AI-generated" on GPTZero, even though it obviously isn't because it's too early for that. Gnomingstuff (talk) 00:16, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Nicole McGraw

Hello, ElijahPepe. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Nicole McGraw, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 11:09, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:State of New York v. Trump

Hello, ElijahPepe. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:State of New York v. Trump, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 11:09, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Upcoming expiry of your extendedmover right

Hi, this is an automated reminder as part of Global reminder bot to let you know that your permission "extendedmover" (Page movers) will expire on 00:00, 13 January 2026 (UTC). For most rights, you will need to renew at WP:PERM, unless you have been told otherwise when your right was approved. To opt out of user right expiry notifications, add yourself to m:Global reminder bot/Exclusion. Leaderbot (talk) 19:41, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi ElijahPepe. Thank you for your work on TrumpRx. Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thank you for creating the article! Your contributions to Wikipedia is greatly appreciated! Have a good day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ Contact me! 13:28, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Michael Reagan

On 8 January 2026, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Michael Reagan, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. —Bagumba (talk) 07:31, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:2025 recession

Hello, ElijahPepe. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:2025 recession, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 04:07, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Aldrich Ames

On 9 January 2026, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Aldrich Ames, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Spencer^T•C 20:13, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Scott Kupor

Hello! Your submission of Scott Kupor at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:45, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Federal takeover of the Metropolitan Police Department

Hello, ElijahPepe. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Federal takeover of the Metropolitan Police Department, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 06:09, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Page mover granted

Hello, ElijahPepe. Your account has been granted the "extendedmover" user right, either following a request for it or demonstrating familiarity with working with article names and moving pages. You are now able to rename pages without leaving behind a redirect and move subpages when moving the parent page(s).

Please take a moment to review Wikipedia:Page mover for more information on this user right, especially the criteria for moving pages without leaving a redirect. Please remember to follow post-move cleanup procedures and make link corrections where necessary, including broken double-redirects when suppressredirect is used. This can be done using Special:WhatLinksHere. It is also very important that no one else be allowed to access your account, so you should consider taking a few moments to secure your password. As with all user rights, be aware that if abused, or used in controversial ways without consensus, your page mover status can be revoked.

Useful links:

Wikipedia:Requested moves
Category:Requested moves, for article renaming requests awaiting action.

If you do not want the page mover right anymore, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Thank you, and happy editing! – robertsky (talk) 12:37, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

2025–26 United States measles outbreak

Hi ElijahPepe, I started a discussion at Talk:2025–26_United_States_measles_outbreak#Move_back_to_original_title? that I would appreciate you responding to! Briefly the current title and Measles resurgence in the United States have confusing overlap, so I believe returning the first article to its original name makes the most sense. satkara❈talk 20:31, 24 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thanks for staring the page Killing of Alex Pretti that has become a full-blown article so quickly. It already has almost 300,000 views. --David Tornheim (talk) 10:27, 25 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Listing for discussion of Template:Protests against COVID-19 lockdowns in China map

Template:Protests against COVID-19 lockdowns in China map 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. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:37, 25 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Replacing Pages with Your Drafts

Hello,

I just saw that you replaced Stephen Miller's and Sergio Gor's pages with your drafts.

This is, to put it simply, uncool.

Not only this destroys work from others, it makes Who Wrote That? unusable. Besides, it imposes your favorite citation format, one that is of no relevance to the kind of pages you edit.

Please desist. Selbstporträt (talk) 15:03, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrites are completely acceptable. WP:TNT has many of the arguments I would share here. The citation issue should no longer be present. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 16:44, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Neither of these pages were hopelessly irreparable, in fact you took back most of their content. But now you have taken ownership of these pages. This is unacceptable behavior. Selbstporträt (talk) 17:41, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I don't care about ownership. I never boasted about being the primary author of either article; in fact, there have been many changes to Miller's article since the rewrite. Nor does it matter. If this is unacceptable behavior, go ahead and take this to WP:ANI. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 17:51, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Again you don't seem to have read the very first sentence of the tag you cite. Start at "Before posting:".

Ownership isn't about you bragging (why should anyone care anyway), but about tools such as Who Wrote That? and Xtools. See for yourself:

https://xtools.wmcloud.org/authorship/en.wikipedia.org/Stephen%20Miller/

When you move a page, you erase its history.

So how am I supposed to bring diffs to ANI if they're gone? Selbstporträt (talk) 19:40, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this is down to a misunderstanding. I am not deleting revisions or moving pages around; impossible for me to do in the first case and rarely in the second, and always that has been moving articles from draftspace into mainspace where the mainspace page is a redirect. You can still look at the history of Miller's article. Here is the diff in which I copy and pasted my personal changes into Miller's article. The amount of content in that diff alone likely surpassed the original, so it would not be realistic to assume that the authorship is still going to be the same, nor will it. If I change 80% of an article, Xtools is going to say that I changed 80% of an article. That's not an important statistic, it just reflects the article as it currently is. In order to take articles to good article or featured article, the nominator needs to be one of the primary authors. That's going to happen. It doesn't mean that I'm disrespecting your work—I do go back and check the original article to see any sources I might have missed—or anything of that sort. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 19:49, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. Here's how you can reproduce what I am seeing:

1. Install Who Wrote That?

2. Click on a word you wrote; you should see:

"ElijahPepe (talk | contribs) added this on 20 August 2025 2:55 AM.

Merge draft at User:ElijahPepe/Stephen Miller (advisor). The content from the pre-draft article should be intact, if rewritten. The exception is the Media appearances section, which was not particularly relevant to his biography. Still working on this.-11,921

They have written 33.2% of the page."

3. If you click on the date you get this diff:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=1306882316

You should see a complete rewrite, which means that Who Wrote That? does not work anymore for the words that come from the draft.

This is the rewrite problem.

4. Also note that your rewrite has introduced a citation format that wasn't on the page, like "Sfn|Hayasaki|2003" and "Sfn|Ioffe|2016".

This is the citation problem.

Since you haven't created the page, I'm not sure what authorizes you to impose your idiosyncratic citation practice on that page.

Is that clearer?

The only reason I can find to use the Sfn format is if you really need many quotes for the same source. But now all we got is about 50 calls to Guerrero's book. Citing one book that way only weakens support. And it'd be hard to have enough books to justify some kind of hybrid citation system. This is an entry that is mainly supported by web pages. Selbstporträt (talk) 20:17, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have used Who Wrote That on my own articles. Seems to work fine for me. It shows the words I added and the words I didn't. If the tool doesn't work right or doesn't show something you expected, that is an issue for whoever made the extension, not me. The citation format was resolved and there is an ongoing process to convert some of the formats in the past. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 20:24, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the citation issue is resolved at all.

To remove 11,921 words on the page in one go to introduce it is not OK.

As long as we understand one another, my job here is done. Selbstporträt (talk) 20:33, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It is resolved. If you want to talk about the use of shortened footnotes for books, which is practically necessary, address it on the talk page, not here.

We're not talking about 11,921 words, we're talking about 11,921 characters. Most of that is references: a single citation is about 600 words, and some of the references that used to be there were converted to citations to Guerrero's book. The page size script has the diff before my rewrite at 5494 words, compared to the rewrite, which was 5757 words. I would estimate possibly twenty to twenty-five references duplicated what was in Guerrero's book, which comes out to about 12,000 to 15,000 characters. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 21:41, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that your edit "only" added 200 words reinforces my point: by copying the rewrite in your own space and then porting it back, the editorship is lost. Who Wrote That loses all trace of it.

Books don't require the "Sfn" template: see WP:CITESHORT, CITESTYLE and:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Sfn#Other_author%E2%80%93date_citation_templates

See also WP:WHENINROME, especially "templates should not be added without consensus to an article that already uses a consistent referencing style", and WP:CITEVARNO in extenso.

Furthermore, there are issues with the actual citations, for instance:

- The Works cited section does not list most of the citations (as if news pieces were not work!);

- Chapters are wrongly cited: it should be ABC, 1234, in DEF etc (only one line);

- Most of the references are from books by journalists: it makes little sense to distinguish pieces investigations published in magazines from interviews published in books; the best case is when we have a topic where monographies and newsies collide;

- There is only one book that justifies adding footnotes, and all we got is a page number; why not use the opportunity to give quotes?

The main problem shortened footnotes solves is making multiple references easier. For the kind of page you are working on, having to use one references 20 times is a weakness, not a strength. One easy way to bypass it would be to use Guerrero's sources themselves, which should be news pieces for the most part.

There are pages for which "sfn" makes sense. This may not be one of them; Gor's page, definitely not. As long as you won't use the "ref" tag systematically for such page, editors will be scratching their heads.

I did not come here to escalate things upstairs, but to save time. I already spent a few days correcting the Musk-Trump page you created. We share many interests. It'd be nice if we could agree on how to proceed. Selbstporträt (talk) 01:19, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That is how the tool works, yes. Why would it say that someone else wrote a sentence I wrote?

The citation issue was already discussed here. I'm not using shortened footnotes for any citations except for books for any rewrites going forward. It is acceptable for an article to have shortened footnotes for books and regular references for articles. Early life and education of Donald Trump just became a featured article yesterday. Quotes are not necessary, either. The other points you mention are lost on me. Citation style is not strictly enforced on Wikipedia. If that is your only point, then there isn't anything to discuss.

If you're looking for an off-ramp: WP:BRD applies. You are free to revert any of my rewrites if that is the issue. I do try to keep most, if not all, of the content from before the draft. It sounds as though your issue is with Who Wrote That; I don't have a solution for that. Talk to the extension developers. Likewise, if you're talking about the citation issues at Miller's article, bring it up on that talk page. I didn't redo the references on that article. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 01:28, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If you look closely at the diff I cited, you should see that you rewrote sentences others wrote before you. Had you made the same edit in the page itself, I believe WWT would have spotted it. To see an example, just use WWT on the actual page: edits on snippets preserve whatever lie outside them.

Now, I see that Susan already told you the same thing I did:

(1) "Can you please avoid changing their citation scheme when you install your drafts in the future? Changing them without consensus could be considered disruptive editing and it entails unnecessary work to revert."

(2) "Also please watch where you're going with your personal drafts".

She was displeased that you didn't offer to correct the citations yourself, which is more than understandable. Now I feel I need to do the same, as 20 cites to a book few can access isn't enough.

Further, Space4T suggested:

"When a reference (e.g., this one[1]) is to be used multiple times, add a name to it like this[2]. For the second and further citations of this source, use the abbreviated form [2]."

This could work for books too!

But fine. Let's end it there. I will try to find a citation scheme that will help everyone.

Thank you for your tireless efforts to provide light on all these luminaries! Selbstporträt (talk) 02:50, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the club

		The Featured Article Medal
		By the authority vested in me by myself it gives me great pleasure to present you with this special, very exclusive award created just for we few, we happy few, this band of brothers, who have shed sweat, tears and probably blood, in order to be able to proudly claim "I too have taken an article to Featured status". Gog the Mild (talk) 21:52, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Government shutdown article notability

I moved the page for the government shutdown into the mainspace because I believe that it meets notability guidelines and should have an article. I invite you to nominate the article for deletion if you think that it does not and should be deleted or redirected. It is necessary to have a discussion about this instead of just moving it to draft space even though it is already ready to be published, which gets us nowhere. I am sorry for undoing your actions but we need to have an AfD discussion instead of just redirecting or moving the page. Thanks Cyrobyte (talk) 05:07, 31 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Karoline Leavitt is under review

Your good article nomination of the article Karoline Leavitt is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Vigilantcosmicpenguin -- Vigilantcosmicpenguin (talk) 05:02, 1 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Updating citation style for Gregory Bovino

Hi ElijahPepe, just wanted to let you know that I changed the citation format on Gregory Bovino from shortened footnotes to in-line references. I figured it was easier, especially on mobile/tablets, to go to the cited page. Balon Greyjoy (talk) 15:51, 1 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of T. Elliot Gaiser is on hold

Your good article nomination of the article T. Elliot Gaiser has been placed on hold, as the article needs some changes. See the review page for more information. If these are addressed within 7 days, the nomination will pass; otherwise, it may fail. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Czarking0 -- Czarking0 (talk) 06:23, 2 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of T. Elliot Gaiser has passed

Your good article nomination of the article T. Elliot Gaiser has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Czarking0 -- Czarking0 (talk) 19:01, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Canada–United States trade war

Hello, ElijahPepe. This message concerns the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Canada–United States trade war".

Drafts that go unedited for six months are eligible for deletion, in accordance with our draftspace policy, and this one has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission, and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you read this, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the draft so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! DreamRimmer bot II (talk) 11:26, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Nicole McGraw

Hello, ElijahPepe. This message concerns the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Nicole McGraw".

Drafts that go unedited for six months are eligible for deletion, in accordance with our draftspace policy, and this one has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission, and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you read this, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the draft so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! DreamRimmer bot II (talk) 11:26, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:State of New York v. Trump

Hello, ElijahPepe. This message concerns the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "State of New York v. Trump".

Drafts that go unedited for six months are eligible for deletion, in accordance with our draftspace policy, and this one has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission, and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you read this, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the draft so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! DreamRimmer bot II (talk) 11:26, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip (disambiguation) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip (disambiguation) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip (disambiguation) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

— An anonymous username, not my real name 03:22, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:2025 recession

Hello, ElijahPepe. This message concerns the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "2025 recession".

Drafts that go unedited for six months are eligible for deletion, in accordance with our draftspace policy, and this one has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission, and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you read this, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the draft so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! DreamRimmer bot II (talk) 04:23, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Page move of "Clinton plan intelligence" conspiracy theory

I have no objection to your move. I had titled it that way because those words are a unique phrase/unit coined by Durham. In doing so, he went further than the Russians who created this disinformation. He really carried water for them.

You may find this analysis interesting. Marcy Wheeler is an experienced subject-matter expert:

"And Durham made this report the cornerstone of his investigation by fabricating a claim that even the Russians didn’t make about Hillary: that she wanted to promote a false narrative about Trump, rather than demonstrate all the true and damning Russian ties Trump had that Fusion had already fed to Franklin Foer by early July 2016." - John Durham’s Disinformation Problem (italics original)

I doubt that the rename will create any problems. The body can still place those words in quotes, so search engines will still find it. Carry on the good work. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 23:19, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps Clinton plan intelligence would work better? I had actually thought of the use of quotations at Pizzagate conspiracy theory; Pizzagate isn't an official term either. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 23:36, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It's simpler to just call it what RS call it, rather than have to add "conspiracy theory" Clinton plan intelligence (conspiracy theory). That's too complicated and unnecessary. We usually deal with conspiracy theories by labeling them right in the title in one way or another, especially false ones.

This is an example of Durham going too far in his mission of whitewashing/sanewashing Trump of any connection to Russian election interference. He not only totally failed, he had to reaffirm the findings made by many other official investigations. Even the Russians didn't say "false". Durham added that. Hillary and the rest of the world didn't need to resort to making any false allegations as there was plenty of evidence of illicit and deceptive connections and contacts between Trump's campaign and Russians, plus his own statements and actions, and much more found later. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 00:13, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Federal takeover of the Metropolitan Police Department

Hello, ElijahPepe. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Federal takeover of the Metropolitan Police Department".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:29, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Karoline Leavitt has passed

Your good article nomination of the article Karoline Leavitt has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Vigilantcosmicpenguin -- Vigilantcosmicpenguin (talk) 19:33, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Source removal not included in edit summary related to WP:RSP

Hi ElijahPepe, I have question here: [4].

Why did you remove Politico.com from this article along with two other sources related to Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources, but failed to mention the removal of this reliable source within your edit summary?

Per WP:RSP, "Politico is considered generally reliable for American politics." Thanks, -- Ooligan (talk) 22:24, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The source was duplicated. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 22:36, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Barron Trump

Hi! I'm Robloxguest3. Your good article nomination of Barron Trump is now under review. If it passes, I will notify you. Before nominating, remember to make sure there aren't any listed issues! Cheers! Robloxguest3 (talk) 17:31, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Barron Trump is under review

Your good article nomination of the article Barron Trump is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Robloxguest3 -- Robloxguest3 (talk) 17:37, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Barron Trump has passed

Your good article nomination of the article Barron Trump has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Robloxguest3 -- Robloxguest3 (talk) 18:34, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A gold bar for you!

	A 24k Gold Bar
	Congrats! Robloxguest3 (talk) 18:57, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:2026 Republican National Convention

Hello, ElijahPepe. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:2026 Republican National Convention, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 20:08, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Bushido (upcoming film)

Hello, ElijahPepe. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Bushido (upcoming film), a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 22:08, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Alex Pfeiffer (political advisor) is under review

Your good article nomination of the article Alex Pfeiffer (political advisor) is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of RandFreeman -- RandFreeman (talk) 18:09, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Barron Trump is under review

Your good article nomination of the article Barron Trump is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of FloblinTheGoblin -- FloblinTheGoblin (talk) 23:08, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Barron Trump has passed

Your good article nomination of the article Barron Trump has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of [[User:|User:]] -- [[User:|User:]] ([[User talk:|talk]]) 01:33, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Alex Pfeiffer (political advisor) is on hold

Your good article nomination of the article Alex Pfeiffer (political advisor) has been placed on hold, as the article needs some changes. See the review page for more information. If these are addressed within 7 days, the nomination will pass; otherwise, it may fail. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of RandFreeman -- RandFreeman (talk) 05:01, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Bill Pulte is under review

Your good article nomination of the article Bill Pulte is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Robloxguest3 -- Robloxguest3 (talk) 23:32, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Joe Kent is under review

Your good article nomination of the article Joe Kent is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Kwkintegrator -- Kwkintegrator (talk) 01:32, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Four Award

		Four Award
		Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Early life and education of Donald Trump. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:04, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Scott Kupor

On 25 February 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Scott Kupor, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Scott Kupor had not heard of the United States Office of Personnel Management until he was suggested to lead it? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Scott Kupor. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Scott Kupor), 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 nominate it.

HurricaneZeta^C 12:02, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Alex Pfeiffer (political advisor) has passed

Your good article nomination of the article Alex Pfeiffer (political advisor) has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Please also consider reviewing somebody else's nomination to help keep the backlog down. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of RandFreeman -- RandFreeman (talk) 02:01, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Barron Trump is under review

Your good article nomination of the article Barron Trump is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7ten days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Mdm.Bla -- Mdm.Bla (talk) 22:31, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Joe Kent has passed

Your good article nomination of the article Joe Kent has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Please also consider reviewing somebody else's nomination to help keep the backlog down. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Kwkintegrator -- Kwkintegrator (talk) 17:32, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:2025 United States constitutional crisis

Hello, ElijahPepe. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:2025 United States constitutional crisis, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 04:08, 3 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Sean Parnell (Pennsylvania politician)

Hello, ElijahPepe. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Sean Parnell (Pennsylvania politician), a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 04:08, 5 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A Barnstar for you!

		The Original Barnstar
		For your work on Kristi Noem. Bearian (talk) 22:29, 5 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Barron Trump is on hold

Your good article nomination of the article Barron Trump has been placed on hold, as the article needs some changes. See the review page for more information. If these are addressed within 7 days, the nomination will pass; otherwise, it may fail. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Mdm.Bla -- Mdm.Bla (talk) 05:00, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Aaron Siri

Hello, ElijahPepe. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Aaron Siri".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:07, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Anthropic–United States Department of Defense dispute

Hello, ElijahPepe,

Thank you for creating Anthropic–United States Department of Defense dispute.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Please add proper categories in the article.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Agent VII}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Agent 007 (talk) 18:06, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Reddit API controversy for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Reddit API controversy is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reddit API controversy until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

1keyhole (talk) 09:29, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Barron Trump has passed

Your good article nomination of the article Barron Trump has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Please also consider reviewing somebody else's nomination to help keep the backlog down. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Mdm.Bla -- Mdm.Bla (talk) 16:31, 15 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Why so quick to downplay Brendan Carr’s threat to revoke broadcaster's licenses?

It’s not like we haven’t seen him do this kind of thing before.Dewey, Cheatham, & Howe (talk) 13:45, 16 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not downplaying it at all. I don't believe it should be in the lede yet. It is very difficult to write a summary of someone's tenure when it is still occurring. Carr is obviously no different, given the range of comments he makes on the media. Until something of substance occurs, it isn't worth mentioning a singular remark. Trump's lede doesn't mention any of the various statements he's made in the past on social media, but rather his actions. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 16:29, 16 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:2026 Republican National Convention

Hello, ElijahPepe. This message concerns the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "2026 Republican National Convention".

Drafts that go unedited for six months are eligible for deletion, in accordance with our draftspace policy, and this one has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission, and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you read this, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the draft so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! DreamRimmer bot II (talk) 19:26, 16 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Bushido (upcoming film)

Hello, ElijahPepe. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Bushido".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:41, 16 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits on Joe Kent's article

Just want to notify you that I removed the "associations" language in the Joe Kent leas. Users (including myself) opposed its addition and the onus is on its inclusion. An ongoing discussion is on the page as we speak.

My opinion is "no". We had a similar situation occur on Graham Platner's page, from the tattoos to association allegations, and the clear consensus was to only list it briefly in the body. Additionally, Kent has been criticized by Groypers and Proud Boys, and many of the claims are sourced directly from the previously mentioned themselves, neither of which could be considered infallible. News agencies were not able to verify rhe claims.

Let's work it out on there, thank you. Jollyrime (talk) 21:59, 17 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I'm aware, the only discussion has been with another user who asked for it to be added. I agreed because much of the content in that campaign section concerns the allegations. Whether they're true or not—I don't really know myself, and I leave my opinions off Wikipedia—it damaged his campaign. It would be amiss to omit it. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 22:05, 17 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The "far-right" talk page subsection is what I was referring to. I brought up Platner because a Wikipedia administrator a few months ago told me that accusations like this should be left out on politician's pages. Not sure if that was accurate. Jollyrime (talk) 22:23, 17 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

An administrator's role is to handle vandalism and arbitrate disputes. I'm not going to discuss Platner since it's a separate article. It is possible to cover accusations, but they must be well-sourced and exact. In order words, written properly. As far as I know, I have done that, and I did it with the express purpose of talking about controversies that faced his campaign. I am not trying to insinuate that he is a white nationalist, only that he was accused of associating with them and that negatively affected his campaign. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 22:36, 17 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Joe Kent GA status

Hello,

This has been quite the month for the Joe Kent article. Wanted to know whether you still feel the GA status is warranted or if the flurry of recent activity might mean a reconsideration might be warranted. I haven't had a chance to re deep-dive since his resignation, but this is obviously a bit of a different article than when I reviewed it recently, and it also is no longer stable. My instinct is to just let it sit, but would appreciate your opinion. Kwkintegrator (talk) 15:27, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The letter of the law is that instability would cause a review to be failed, but the article hasn't fundamentally changed. A few rewrites of the lede, some minor changes everywhere else, and a new section with two paragraphs is not substantial. Most of the editing has subsided since the resignation, so in my estimation, it isn't an issue. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 15:35, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good, that makes sense. Kwkintegrator (talk) 17:46, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling

Hello, ElijahPepe. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:43, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Jordan Wiggins

Hello, ElijahPepe. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Jordan Wiggins, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 21:06, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:2025 United States nuclear tests

Hello, ElijahPepe. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:2025 United States nuclear tests, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 03:06, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:2025 United States constitutional crisis

Hello, ElijahPepe. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "2025 United States constitutional crisis".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:12, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Sean Parnell (Pennsylvania politician)

Hello, ElijahPepe. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Sean Parnell".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:25, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Haberman, Maggie (May 11, 2025). "Trump Is to Accept a Luxury 747 From Qatar for Use as Air Force One". The New York Times. Retrieved May 11, 2025.

[accept-2] Haberman, Maggie (May 11, 2025). "Trump Is to Accept a Luxury 747 From Qatar for Use as Air Force One". The New York Times. Retrieved May 11, 2025.

[1]

[2]