Epstein Files Full PDF

This user is aware of the designation of the following as contentious topics: gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them pseudoscience and fringe science the Arab–Israeli conflict post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people They should not be given alerts for those areas.

Archives

November 2023–January 2024, January 2024–May 2024, May 2024–October 2024, October 2024–December 2024, January 2025–March 2025, March 2025–May 2025, May 2025–July 2025, July 2025–September 2025, September 2025–November 2025, November 2025–February 2026

Hi! I wanted to nominate the article on Denali as a TFA for 7 June (anniversary of first ascent) but the "why" seems to be missing. Is this normal? I thought I got the HTML right, but it doesn't seem to appear. --Gnosifer (talk) 19:48, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gnosifer, the correct place to nominate "Today's featured article" is Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests. However, there is a specific meaning of "featured article" on Wikipedia, and Denali does not meet those criteria right now. Maybe if you want to work on it a lot, it could get to that point. Or maybe you could nominate it to appear in the On This Day section? -- Reconrabbit 20:21, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

where can I find the "featured article" criteria? Gnosifer (talk) 00:37, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

nevermind, I found the page. Out of curiosity, what are your criticisms of the present article so that I know what I could work on? Gnosifer (talk) 00:49, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe a bit much, but for keeping good faith Ajron Bach (talk) 15:34, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

3yrras computer experience --Nishajyotishi (talk) 07:29, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have just a couple of fusses re: your DYK submission. If you can fix those, we'll be good. DS (talk) 14:09, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I'm a beginner when it comes to editing Wikipedia and I recently got really into the topic of Soviet space dogs. I would like to add information to the article and change some sections. My plan is to add a table with all documented flights that aren't mentioned already with dates, dog names, outcomes etc. I also want to remove some unsourced individual sections with some routine dog flights (I'd like for the individual sections to be left for more notable flights or flights with interesting stories) and merge them into my table with updated information (different names, dates) according to my source. Should I add this table in "batches" or is it better to add it all at once? I'm estimating it to be around 30-35 entries. Also, should I delete the sections and add the updated versions to the table in one edit? Thank you in advance for your help! --Vicccqh7 (talk) 18:48, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I forgot to ask - is it okay to use only one source for the changes I described? It's a published book specifically on the topic of Soviet space dogs. I think it should be okay since I'm mostly gonna put raw data like dates, names, rocket types, and some notes about the flights themselves if it's mentioned, but I wanted to ask for advice anyway Vicccqh7 (talk) 19:04, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, what's the book you're using? I'd say your best bet is to mark the page numbers where you got the information when you add footnotes. If you're deleting sections and adding new ones, maybe work on a sandbox first (copying the current version of the article to a temporary page and making the changes there before implementing them on the "live" version)? Then make your changes, and if there is discussion about it you can point to the sandbox page and work on consensus there? I am not familiar with this subject at all and I see you have already started in your sandbox (but you can make subpages if you like as well) so good work there. Wishing you the best... -- Reconrabbit 19:26, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! The book I'm using is Soviet Space Dogs by Olesya Turkina from 2014. I'm planning this way ahead because first I need to get and read the book... but I'm very excited and want to do it properly so I'm gathering information in advance. I will take your advice and copy the article into my sandbox. Do you think its okay to do the changes at once or add them in batches? Like adding 5 entries at a time over several days in the table etc.? Vicccqh7 (talk) 19:59, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You could add them all at once. That would actually be preferable to adding them one at a time to the table. This looks like a great book, I might make an article about it (a short one since i haven't read it). -- Reconrabbit 20:40, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oh that would be awesome! I've heard great things about this book and I've read some snippets. Once I read it I'd love to contribute to the article if you write one! Thank you for the advice as well, I really appreciate it. Vicccqh7 (talk) 20:55, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There's Soviet Space Dogs (book). I just used the bare minimum description and reception. It's obviously notable and the author has good credentials so you should find no trouble using it as a source. -- Reconrabbit 21:30, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't expect you to do it so soon, I just read it and it looks great, however I have one issue regarding the dates - you wrote the dates as 1951 to 1956, but the last dogs flown to space were Veterok and Ugolyok in 1966 and there were many in between. Maybe you got the dates mixed up? Vicccqh7 (talk) 21:52, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It may be possible that the book description provided by ISU library is incorrect; I was going by that information. I'll remove that date range, other sources don't corroborate it. -- Reconrabbit 20:33, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense. Thank you once again for the advice and creating the page! Vicccqh7 (talk) 20:39, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello how do I publish? --Chicario Gambino (talk) 00:16, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't look like you have published anything yet. If you are editing a page you will see a blue "Publish" button that saves your changes. I have added some useful information to your talk page. See also Help:How to edit for some more specific information. Is there something specific you want to do? -- Reconrabbit 00:50, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: PastorDrIsaiahkeneze's mentor Liance is away.

Why did someone who claim to be an activist suddenly flag a well known business mogul a fraudster, and the platform obliged it --PastorDrIsaiahkeneze (talk) 19:26, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I have no idea what you are referring to. What business mogul? What platform? If you are referring to a specific Wikipedia page, your questions about content written there would be better placed on the associated talk page where more familiar editors would be able to provide a response. -- Reconrabbit 16:29, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your good article nomination of the article Woolly hare 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 FunkMonk -- FunkMonk (talk) 11:35, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your good article nomination of the article Desert hare 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 Bgsu98 -- Bgsu98 (talk) 04:01, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your good article nomination of the article Sumatran striped rabbit 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 Bgsu98 -- Bgsu98 (talk) 04:04, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I've just submitted my first edits, they were to: https://teknopedia.ac.id/wiki/As_d%27Or

It seemed fairly simple because I was able to use the existing formatting. I wondered if you had any feedback, recommendations, comments on how I should document such changes.

Also what the guidance is for when to create a red link vs leaving something as black, the existing page didn't seem consistent. --RodsaGrant (talk) 12:06, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like you have made useful edits to this article. There is no need for further documentation than what you have done in the edit summary. Regarding red links, there are a lot of them in this article, but the way you have used them is appropriate. Items that are presumed notable should be provided with a link in the first time they appear in an article, generally... I would think many of these games would qualify and have independent coverage in news articles, games publications, etc. if this is a prestigious award. Maybe the creators and publishers would be less covered in the media, and less likely to have an article created successfully.

The purpose of a red link is to encourage the creation of an article about that subject, and most cases there are sources but nobody has bothered to do the work. Consider for example the many hundreds of species of bamboo that nobody has written about for Wikipedia. -- Reconrabbit 15:18, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Got it, thank you, that was helpful! RodsaGrant (talk) 15:15, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

What is a mentor? --FilipJk1 (talk) 12:54, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A mentor is someone who is available to answer questions about Wikipedia from new users. Is there anything I can help with (as a mentor you have been assigned to)? -- Reconrabbit 15:08, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Should I write my own articles, or keep editing at the beginning? ~2026-12987-11 (talk) 15:18, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Writing new articles is very hard. You have to forget everything you know and only write about what other people have written, reported, shown on video or radio. There is a task center that has some easy places to start. -- Reconrabbit 15:22, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

So I need to collate every source I know about that's relevant? In the English language, because the article exists in Polish, not English? FilipJk1 (talk) 17:21, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sources in other languages are acceptable. WP:NONENG <- this is a page that explains the policy. For example, here is an article translated from Russian with all Russian sources: A Sorcerer Comes to a Peasant Wedding -- Reconrabbit 17:57, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have ideas as to what to write about, or I can keep editing. What should I do? FilipJk1 (talk) 15:20, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The first round of the 2026 WikiCup ended on 26 February. As some of you may have noticed, good article nomination reviews now receive 10 points, an increase from 5 points in the previous year, as per a consensus at WT:CUP. This point increase has been retroactively applied to all good article reviews for which competitors have claimed points in this round. Peer reviews, which continue to be worth 5 points, are now listed in the same section as featured article candidate reviews, rather than with good article reviews. Everyone who competed in round 1 will advance to round 2 unless they have withdrawn or been banned. No other changes to the round-point system have been made for this year.

Round 1 was competitive. Three contestants scored more than 1,000 round points, and the top 16 contestants all scored more than 300 round points. The following competitors scored more than 800 round points:

• Bgsu98 (submissions) with 1,467 round points, largely gained from 1 featured article, 5 featured lists, 15 good articles, and 42 FAC and GAN reviews;
• Olliefant (submissions) with 1,246 round points, largely from 4 featured lists, 9 good articles, 2 featured topic articles, 4 did you know articles, and 75 FAC and GAN reviews;
• Generalissima (submissions) with 1,095 round points, largely from 3 featured articles, 6 good articles, and 5 did you know articles;
• MCE89 (submissions) with 848 round points, largely from 1 featured article, 8 good articles, 1 did you know article, and 32 FAC and GAN reviews; and
• Rollinginhisgrave (submissions) with 838 round points, largely from 1 featured article, 8 good articles, 1 did you know article, and 14 FAC, GAN, and peer reviews.

The full scores for round 1 can be seen here. During this round, contestants have claimed 7 featured articles, 16 featured lists, 2 featured-topic articles, 168 good articles, 13 good-topic articles and more than 50 Did You Know articles. In addition, competitors have worked on 14 In the News articles, and they have conducted nearly 700 reviews. The tournament points table will be updated within the next few days.

Remember that any content promoted after 26 February but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, feel free to review one of the nominations listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:57, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

Thanks for this helpful article on a chemical compound now used as a herbicide; May 2025 award of a generic name gave it additional coverage and 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) 16:27, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Misi pa mentor, mohon bimbingannya. --Jankirk (talk) 07:04, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I can not help you, since I do not know how to read or write bahasa Indonesia. Try Halaman Utama dalam bahasa Indonesia? -- Reconrabbit 13:26, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oh sorry, I thought you were Indonesian since you were appointed as my mentor. Jankirk (talk) 19:21, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, assignment is random. There is a list of mentors if you want to find another one but I do not think language is listed. -- Reconrabbit 01:12, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello how can i write my own article on Wikipedia am not seeing any option to create an article? --Shapenews (talk) 14:04, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. Your account is too new to create articles. You should spend some time learning how to edit before trying to create a new article - it is a difficult task that requires research and experience with the tools of Wikipedia. If you are determined to do this, some helpful information is here: Help:Your first article. I also added links to your talk page. -- Reconrabbit 14:24, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]