User talk:Nighfidelity

Gidi Dar review

Heya! I was wondering if you could tell me what you saw in Gidi Dar that made you accept it - if you have time and can remember what it was of course! Looking through the sources, there doesn't seem like there's enough that's about Dar and independent of him, and a lot of the statements about his works aren't verified by the sources they're cited to. It seems like I must be missing something that you spotted, and I'd love a pointer on what it was if you're willing. Meadowlark (talk) 02:17, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

I accepted it because in my opinion, he passed criteria 3 of WP:NCREATIVE, authoring notable films. Nighfidelity (talk) 02:37, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

That's fair! I might do some maintenance tagging and see if other people have better luck finding sources than me (my source-fu is pretty weak, comparatively). Thanks for the quick answer! Meadowlark (talk) 02:49, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

Your Articles for Creation review on Rochester Public Library

Hello Nighfidelity. This is a reminder that your Articles for Creation review on Rochester Public Library is still marked as ongoing for over forty-eight hours. After seventy-two hours, Rochester Public Library will be returned to the review queue so that other reviewers may review the draft.

If you wish to continue reviewing the draft but need more time before the bot returns it to the review queue, you can place {{bots|deny=TenshiBot}} on the draft so you can continue your review. Also, if you do not want to receive these notifications, you can place the same template on your talk page. TenshiBot (talk) 09:39, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

Please formally clean up, thanks...

Rochester Public Library ~2026-21099-87 (talk) 15:39, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

Your Articles for Creation review on Walter H. Bourque Jr.

Hello Nighfidelity. This is a reminder that your Articles for Creation review on Walter H. Bourque Jr. is still marked as ongoing for over forty-eight hours. After seventy-two hours, Walter H. Bourque Jr. will be returned to the review queue so that other reviewers may review the draft.

AfC notification: Draft:1989 Guatemalan coup attempt has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:1989 Guatemalan coup attempt. Thanks! – LuniZunie_(talk) 13:27, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: 1989 Guatemalan coup attempt has been accepted

1989 Guatemalan coup attempt, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been accepted!

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

See the quality assessment scheme to find out how to improve the article.

Future articles

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without submitting a draft for review. However, you may continue submitting drafts to Articles for creation if you prefer.

Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

Next steps

Find other Wikipedia articles related to your topic and add links pointing to the new article. This helps readers find it.
Group the article with similar subjects by adding relevant categories.
You may consider nominating a fact from the article within the next 7 days to appear on the Main Page's Did you know section.
Wikipedia is a work in progress. You can continue to expand and improve the new article.
The new article will become eligible to be indexed on search engines once patrolled or after 90 days; search engines may take time to reflect this.
For friendly peer support regarding editing, sourcing, or policies, visit the Teahouse, a question and answer hub for new editors.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

– LuniZunie_(talk) 13:30, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Your Articles for Creation review on Megan Skiendiel

Hello Nighfidelity. This is a reminder that your Articles for Creation review on Megan Skiendiel is still marked as ongoing for over forty-eight hours. After seventy-two hours, Megan Skiendiel will be returned to the review queue so that other reviewers may review the draft.

Misclasification of draft as AI?

I'm trying to understand why you declined Draft:Indigo (bus service) for being LLM generated? When I reviewed and declined it previously, nothing about it stood out as AI to me. I've also just put it through GPTZero and it came back as 100% human generated MangoMan11 (talk) 02:06, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

I not sure why I did. Nighfidelity (talk) 02:10, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

Looking at the draft, it's currently, in my opinion, notable, so I'll accept it. Nighfidelity (talk) 02:11, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

Question on draft feedback and notability criteria

Hi Nighfidelity,

Thank you for reviewing the draft for Kevin J. Bozic. I really appreciate the feedback.

I wanted to ask for a bit more clarity on the notability criteria. I understand that the main issue is the lack of strong independent sources, and I’m currently working on adding more third-party coverage from healthcare publications.

Would in-depth articles from outlets like Becker’s or similar industry publications be considered sufficient if they discuss his work in detail?

Also, is there anything specific you would recommend prioritizing to better meet the academic notability standard?

Thanks again for your time and guidance. Ketakib (talk) 15:41, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

As long as the articles don't consist of mostly quotes from him (this Becker's article is an example). Currently, the draft consists of 15 references, the first two are from the colleges he graduated from, the third, forth, and fifteenth are articles he co-authored, the fifth, ninth, tenth, eleventh, and thirteenth are just press releases, and finally, the sixth, seventh, and twelfth are from databases. Nighfidelity (talk) 15:47, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi Nighfidelity,

Thank you again for your earlier feedback on the Kevin J. Bozic draft. I’ve since revised the source list and found several stronger independent references, including older coverage from major national publications.

Before resubmitting, I wanted to ask whether you think older mainstream media articles (2000s) are still appropriate for establishing notability. I also wanted to ask whether you have any recommendations regarding the body/content of the article itself beyond sourcing. For example, should the article be shortened, simplified, or restructured in any way to better align with Wikipedia standards?

I appreciate the guidance.

Ketaki Bakre Ketakib (talk) 19:02, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

Draft submission declined: Petrus Buwalda

Dear Nighfidelity,

Thank you for going through my Wikipedia submission on Petrus Buwalda. This is my first submission, and I have a question concerning your feedback, specifically which sections require (better) references. I have attempted to include all the references I have already found, and try to not repeat where it isn't necessary and for which parts already reference to other pages. Would you be able to give me a breadkdown of the sections that require references that are not already included in the article?

Your feedback seems to be similar to the initial feedback I received from another user, and so I would like to request some more specific information.

Many thanks in advance, and I look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards,

DiplomatPurSang DiplomatPurSang (talk) 11:47, 25 April 2026 (UTC)

The first and third paragraphs of the diplomatic career section, the first and second paragraphs of the Refuseniks section, and the sentence in the persoanl life section on his brother need sources. Nighfidelity (talk) 13:51, 25 April 2026 (UTC)

New pages patrol May 2026 Backlog drive

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

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

Disambiguation link notification for May 2

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Not Without Laughter, links pointing to the disambiguation pages EBSCO and The Walls of Jericho were added.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Article support

Hi @Nighfidelity I'm hoping you can please provide further feedback on my article for creation: Draft:Ryan Stokes that you have previously reviewed. It has undergone further significant changes, however it's still waiting review from February. Please can you let me know if you have any tips? Thank you. Wikifanap07 (talk) 00:18, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Floyd L. Carlisle

Hello! Your submission of Floyd L. Carlisle 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! Morogris (✉ • ✎) 00:50, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Your Articles for Creation review on Apoy sa Dugo

Hello Nighfidelity. This is a reminder that your Articles for Creation review on Apoy sa Dugo is still marked as ongoing for over forty-eight hours. After seventy-two hours, Apoy sa Dugo will be returned to the review queue so that other reviewers may review the draft.

Concern regarding Draft:Urban Diteman

Hello, Nighfidelity. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Urban Diteman, 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, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

New Page Patrol Newsletter - May 2026

Hello Nighfidelity,

Backlog update

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

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

2024 and 2025 NPP Awards

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

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

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

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

January–February backlog drive

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

May backlog drive

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

PageTriage

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

Reminders:

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

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

Your submission at Articles for creation: 1 Picasso for 100 Euros has been accepted

1 Picasso for 100 Euros, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been accepted!

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

See the quality assessment scheme to find out how to improve the article.

Future articles

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without submitting a draft for review. However, you may continue submitting drafts to Articles for creation if you prefer.

Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

Next steps

Find other Wikipedia articles related to your topic and add links pointing to the new article. This helps readers find it.
Group the article with similar subjects by adding relevant categories.
You may consider nominating a fact from the article within the next 7 days to appear on the Main Page's Did you know section.
Wikipedia is a work in progress. You can continue to expand and improve the new article.
The new article will become eligible to be indexed on search engines once patrolled or after 90 days; search engines may take time to reflect this.
For friendly peer support regarding editing, sourcing, or policies, visit the Teahouse, a question and answer hub for new editors.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Hoary (talk) 23:41, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

Not only have you "made at least 10 edits over more than four days", you're a reviewer of new pages. I think you're competent to create new articles, skipping the (horribly overloaded) "Articles for Creation" stage. That said, thank you for 1 Picasso for 100 Euros ... but NB it's just one link away from "orphan" status. -- Hoary (talk) 23:59, 15 May 2026 (UTC) --- PS That one link is from the article Péri Cochin, which I have trivially improved today but which remains terrible. If you happen to have some spare time and energy..... Hoary (talk) 05:41, 16 May 2026 (UTC)

Your Articles for Creation review on Apoy sa Dugo

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Digital Delusion (June 3)

Draft declined

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Your draft submission to Articles for creation has been reviewed but not accepted at this time.

Feedback

The reviewer, Stuartyeates, left the following feedback:

Please fact check this, it appears to be internally inconsistent.

Next steps

Edit Draft:The Digital Delusion to address the points above, making sure to publish any changes.
When you are ready to resubmit your draft for review, click the Resubmit button.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it may be deleted.

Need help?

For an overview of our policies and guidelines see Everything you need to know.
You can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page.

Scam warning

If anyone asks you for money or payment to publish, protect, or restore a Wikipedia article or draft, it is a scam. Learn about scams on Wikipedia.

Stuartyeates (talk) 09:22, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

What do you mean by that? Are you referring to the reception section? Nighfidelity (talk) 11:08, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

Hello, Nighfidelity! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Stuartyeates (talk) 09:22, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Digital Delusion has been accepted

The Digital Delusion, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been accepted!

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

See the quality assessment scheme to find out how to improve the article.

Future articles

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without submitting a draft for review. However, you may continue submitting drafts to Articles for creation if you prefer.

Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

Next steps

Find other Wikipedia articles related to your topic and add links pointing to the new article. This helps readers find it.
Group the article with similar subjects by adding relevant categories.
You may consider nominating a fact from the article within the next 7 days to appear on the Main Page's Did you know section.
Wikipedia is a work in progress. You can continue to expand and improve the new article.
The new article will become eligible to be indexed on search engines once patrolled or after 90 days; search engines may take time to reflect this.
For friendly peer support regarding editing, sourcing, or policies, visit the Teahouse, a question and answer hub for new editors.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

ChrysGalley (talk) 20:51, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mickey Unrapped has been accepted

Mickey Unrapped, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been accepted!

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

See the quality assessment scheme to find out how to improve the article.

Future articles

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without submitting a draft for review. However, you may continue submitting drafts to Articles for creation if you prefer.

Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

Next steps

Find other Wikipedia articles related to your topic and add links pointing to the new article. This helps readers find it.
Group the article with similar subjects by adding relevant categories.
You may consider nominating a fact from the article within the next 7 days to appear on the Main Page's Did you know section.
Wikipedia is a work in progress. You can continue to expand and improve the new article.
The new article will become eligible to be indexed on search engines once patrolled or after 90 days; search engines may take time to reflect this.
For friendly peer support regarding editing, sourcing, or policies, visit the Teahouse, a question and answer hub for new editors.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

phuzion (talk) 01:42, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

New message from Narutolovehinata5

Hello, Nighfidelity. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:Did you know.
Message added 23:27, 7 June 2026 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:27, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Samuel E. Sheppard

Hello, Nighfidelity. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Samuel E. Sheppard, 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) 13:08, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

WP:Before

Hello. There are two recent discussions concerning a merge and a deletion that you have nominated. In both instances participating editors have found sources that support the article's notability. It is laudable that you have interest in the outcome of articles on Wikipedia. However, for merge discussions and deletion discussions, the nominator is supposed to have a done at least a cursory search for sources before nominating that action be taken on any given article. I am guessing you can see the benefit of having found sources on a subject before nominating it for action. So, please see WP:DILIGENCE and WP:CONRED regarding this matter. Thanks. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 13:53, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

Ok. Nighfidelity (talk) 13:56, 25 June 2026 (UTC)