User talk:LunaEatsTuna

See User talk:LunaEatsTuna/Archive (2018–2024) for earlier messages.

Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2025 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor, we hope the WikiCup will give you a chance to improve your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page ready for you to take part. Any questions on the scoring, rules or anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page.

For the 2025 WikiCup, we've implemented several changes to the scoring system. The highest-ranking contestants will now receive tournament points at the end of each round, and final rankings are decided by the number of tournament points each contestant has. If you're busy and can't sign up in January, don't worry: Signups are now open throughout the year. To make things fairer for latecomers, the lowest-scoring contestants will no longer be eliminated at the end of each round.

The first round will end on 26 February. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email), Epicgenius (talk · contribs · email), Frostly (talk · contribs · email), Guerillero (talk · contribs · email) and Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs · email). 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) 00:14, 1 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes#Requirements to accept an edit, when to accept an edit
  

charlotte ^👸♥ 20:50, 14 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Wasn't sure if you got pinged with my reply or not, Luna ... it looks like your phone should still be supporting telegram at least (crossing fingers that it does!). Look me up there at @NathanObral :3 Nathan Obral • he/him • t • c • 00:56, 31 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Hi Luna, when can you start adding comments for the GARs you've started? Otherwise I will seek another editor's input if there's no response/comments within the next days. Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 07:14, 2 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Dora the Axe-plorer: Sure. I'll get to it tonight (utc). ❧ LunaEatsTuna (talk), proudly editing since 2018 (and just editing since 2017) – posted at 00:21, 3 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

LunaEatsTuna: There's been no activity on Talk:Childhood nudity/GA1 since I completed my responses to your first set of comments on March 5th. There is no hurry, but I do have two other articles ready to be nominated, and don't want to be doing more than one GAN at the same time.--WriterArtistDC (talk) 14:46, 18 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

The article June you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:June and Talk:June/GA2 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 21:42, 5 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

Hi, if for some reason you've got too much on your plate, feel free to close this one out and I can pick it up. No worries otherwise! Dawnseeker2000 00:15, 11 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

Covered it now, but I do appreciate the offer! I did three other earthquakes GANs from the illustrious Dora the Axe-plorer and got slightly burned out with earthquake articles aha. ❧ LunaEatsTuna (talk), proudly editing since 2018 (and just editing since 2017) – posted at 09:36, 11 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

The first round of the 2025 WikiCup ended on 26 February. As a reminder, we are no longer disqualifying the lowest-scoring contestants; everyone who competed in round 1 will advance to round 2 unless they have withdrawn or been banned from Wikipedia. Instead, the contestants with the highest round-point totals now receive tournament points at the end of each round. Unlike the round points in the main WikiCup table, which are reset at the end of each round, tournament points are carried over between rounds and can only be earned if a competitor is among the top 16 round-point scorers. This table shows all competitors who have received tournament points so far.

Round 1 was very competitive compared with previous years; two contestants scored more than 1,000 round points, and the top 16 contestants all scored more than 500 round points. The following competitors scored more than 800 round points:

• Gog the Mild (submissions) with 1,168 round points, mainly from 4 featured articles and 4 good articles on old military history, in addition to an assortment of GA and FA reviews.
• Generalissima (submissions) with 1,095 round points, mainly from 2 FAs, 2 featured lists, 8 GAs, and 16 Did You Know articles mainly on historical topics.
• BeanieFan11 (submissions), with 866 round points from 20 GAs, 23 DYKs, and 2 In the News articles primarily about athletes.
• Sammi Brie (submissions), with 846 round points from 16 GAs about radio and TV stations, 45 GA reviews, and 3 DYKs.
• Hey man im josh (submissions), with 816 round points from 5 FLs about sports and Olympic topics, 46 FL reviews, 3 ITN articles, and a large number of bonus points.
• MaranoFan (submissions), with 815 round points primarily from 3 FAs and 1 GA about music, in addition to 9 article reviews.

The full scores for round 1 can be seen here. During this round, contestants have claimed 18 featured articles, 26 featured lists, 1 featured-topic article, 197 good articles, 38 good-topic articles and more than 100 Did You Know articles. In addition, competitors have worked on 23 In the News articles, and they have conducted nearly 550 reviews.

Remember that any content promoted after 26 February but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2, which begins on 1 March. 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) 14:12, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

The article June you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:June for comments about the article, and Talk:June/GA2 for the nomination. Well done! 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 Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 19:43, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

Hey, just wanted to let you know you might want to archive some sections on your talk page. WP:TALKSIZE recommends archiving once the page once it had around 75 KB of wikitext, and yours has over 3 times that and is pretty slow to load. Best, Sarsenet (talk) 09:15, 2 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

Only people with mobile devices after the iPhone 7S and 2012 Android devices are allowed on this talk page. ❧ LunaEatsTuna (talk), proudly editing since 2018 (and just editing since 2017) – posted at 15:44, 2 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Sarsenet: Fine—is this better now? ❧ LunaEatsTuna (talk), proudly editing since 2018 (and just editing since 2017) – posted at 23:44, 2 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

Yep, much better. Sarsenet (talk) 07:51, 4 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

I almost signed your "guestbook" but then realized it would be redundant heheh :3 Nathan Obral • he/him • t • c • 17:32, 27 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

The second round of the 2025 WikiCup ended on 28 April at 23:59 UTC. To reiterate what we said in the previous newsletter, we are no longer disqualifying contestants based on how many points (now known as round points) they received. Instead, the contestants with the highest round-point totals now receive tournament points at the end of each round. These tournament points are carried over between rounds, and can only be earned if a competitor is among the top 16 round-point scorers at the end of each round. This table shows all competitors who have received tournament points so far. Everyone who competed in round 2 will advance to round 3 unless they have withdrawn or been banned.

Round 2 was quite competitive. Four contestants scored more than 1,000 round points, and eight scored more than 500 points (including one who has withdrawn). The following competitors scored at least 800 points:

• BeanieFan11 (submissions) with 1,233 round points from 24 good articles, 28 Did you know articles, and one In the news nomination, mainly about athletes and politicians
• Thebiguglyalien (submissions) with 1,127 round points, almost entirely from two high-multiplier featured articles on Black Widow (Natasha Romanova) and Grace Coolidge, in addition to two GAs and two reviews
• History6042 (submissions) with 1,088 round points from four featured lists about Michelin-starred restaurants, nine good articles and a good topic mostly on Olympic-related subjects, seven ITN articles, and dozens of reviews
• Gog the Mild (submissions) with 1,085 round points from three FAs, one GA, and four DYKs on military history, as well as 18 reviews
• Arconning (submissions) with 887 round points, mostly from four FLs, six GAs, and seven DYKs on Olympic topics, along with more than two dozen reviews

In addition, we would like to recognize Generalissima (submissions) for her efforts; she scored 801 round points but withdrew before the end of the round.

The full scores for round 2 can be seen here. During this round, contestants have claimed 13 featured articles, 20 featured lists, 4 featured-topic articles, 138 good articles, 7 good-topic articles, and more than 100 Did You Know articles. In addition, competitors have worked on 19 In the News articles, and they have conducted nearly 300 reviews.

Remember that any content promoted after 28 April but before the start of Round 3 can be claimed in Round 3. 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) 01:02, 29 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

On 1 June 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article June, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that no other month in a calendar year starts with the same day of the week as June? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/June. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, June), 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 suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:02, 1 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

The third round of the 2025 WikiCup ended on 28 June. This round was again competitive, with three contestants scoring more than 1,000 round points:

• BeanieFan11 (submissions) with 1,314 round points, mostly from articles about athletes and politicians, including 20 good articles and 48 did you know articles
• Gog the Mild (submissions) with 1,197 round points, mostly from military history articles, including 9 featured topic articles, two featured articles, and four good articles
• Sammi Brie (submissions) with 1,055 round points, mostly from television station articles, including 27 good articles and 9 good topic articles

Everyone who competed in round 3 will advance to round 4 unless they have withdrawn. This table shows all competitors who have received tournament points so far, while the full scores for round 3 can be seen here. During this round, contestants have claimed 4 featured articles, 16 featured lists, 1 featured picture, 9 featured-topic articles, 149 good articles, 27 good-topic articles, and more than 90 Did You Know articles. In addition, competitors have worked on 18 In the News articles, and they have conducted more than 200 reviews.

Remember that any content promoted after 28 June but before the start of Round 4 can be claimed in Round 4. 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) 14:49, 29 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

The fourth round of the 2025 WikiCup ended on 29 August. The penultimate round saw three contestants score more than 800 points:

• BeanieFan11 (submissions) with 1,175 round points, mainly from sports-related articles, including 17 good articles, 27 did you know articles, and 9 in the news articles
• Arconning (submissions) with 1,090 round points, mainly from articles about athletes and politicians, including a featured article on Philippines at the 1924 Summer Olympics, 9 good articles, 28 did you know articles, and a wide assortment of featured and good article reviews
• AirshipJungleman29 (submissions) with 854 round points, mostly from a high-scoring featured article on the Indian leader Rani of Jhansi and two good articles, in addition to 13 featured and good article reviews

Everyone who competed in Round 4 will advance to Round 5 unless they have withdrawn. This table shows all competitors who have received tournament points so far, while the full scores for Round 4 can be seen here. During this round, contestants have claimed 9 featured articles, 12 featured lists, 98 good articles, 9 good topic articles, more than 150 reviews, nearly 100 did you know articles, and 18 in the news articles.

In advance of the fifth and final round, the judges would like to thank every contestant for their hard work. As a reminder, any content promoted after 29 August but before the start of Round 5 can be claimed in Round 5. In addition, note that Round 5 will end on 31 October at 23:59 UTC. Awards at the end of Round 5 will be distributed based on who has the most tournament points over all five rounds, and special awards will be distributed based on high performance in particular areas of content creation (e.g., most featured articles in a single round).

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 – Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), Epicgenius (talk · contribs), Frostly (talk · contribs), Guerillero (talk · contribs) and Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) – 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) 00:48, 30 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

There will come a day of reckoning for you, you stupid oilskin clanker. ❧ LunaEatsTuna (talk), proudly editing since 2018 (and just editing since 2017) – posted at 00:50, 30 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

I will slaughter your entire family. ❧ LunaEatsTuna (talk), proudly editing since 2018 (and just editing since 2017) – posted at 05:55, 14 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

The 2025 WikiCup has come to an end. Our top scorers, based on the tournament point rankings (which can be seen here), are:

1. BeanieFan11 (submissions) with 1,604 tournament points, will receive the 1st place award.
2. Gog the Mild (submissions) with 1,075 tournament points, will receive the 2nd place award.
3. Arconning (submissions) with 860 tournament points, will receive the 3rd place award.
4. History6042 (submissions) with 804 tournament points
5. Sammi Brie (submissions) with 635 tournament points
6. TheDoctorWho (submissions) with 386 tournament points
7. AirshipJungleman29 (submissions) with 373 tournament points
8. Thebiguglyalien (submissions) with 362 tournament points

Our high scorers in the final round were:

• BeanieFan11 (submissions) with 1,035 round points, mostly from 19 good articles and 21 did you know articles about athletes
• vigilantcosmicpenguin (submissions) with 819 round points, mostly from 13 good articles and 11 did you know articles about a wide range of topics from abortion topics to African cities
• TheNuggeteer (submissions) with 508 round points from 9 good articles, 4 good topic articles and 6 did you know articles mainly about Philippines topics, along with 19 good article reviews

The final round was very productive, and contestants had 2 featured articles, 4 featured lists, 106 good articles, 5 good topic articles, 178 article reviews, 76 did you know articles, and 9 in the news articles. Altogether, Wikipedia has benefited greatly from the activities of WikiCup competitors all through the contest. Well done everyone!

The top eight scorers will receive awards shortly. The following special awards will be made, based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. These prizes are awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field during the competition.

• Gog the Mild (submissions) wins the featured article prize, with 12 featured articles total, and the featured topic prize, with 9 featured topic articles in total
• Hey man im josh (submissions) wins the featured list prize, with 10 featured lists total
• AirshipJungleman29 (submissions) wins the featured picture prize, submitting the only featured picture in the entire contest during round 3
• History6042 (submissions) wins the featured content reviewer prize, with 127 featured content reviews. He will also share the ITN prize, with 20 in the news articles in total.
• BeanieFan11 (submissions) wins the good article prize, with 100 good articles total, and the DYK prize, with 147 did you know articles in total. He will also share the ITN prize, with 20 in the news articles in total.
• TheDoctorWho (submissions) wins the good topic prize, with 16 good topic entries in total
• Arconning (submissions) wins the good article reviewer prize, with 68 good article reviews in total

A special mention also goes to these users who scored the highest in a particular category in a single round:

• Sammi Brie (submissions), with 27 good articles in round 3, and 45 good article reviews in round 1
• Tails Wx (submissions), with 10 in the news articles in round 3

Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate. The WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2026 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement!

On behalf of the judges, Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email), Epicgenius (talk · contribs · email), Frostly (talk · contribs · email), Guerillero (talk · contribs · email) and Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs · email):

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:24, 1 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.

Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2026 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor, we hope the WikiCup will give you a chance to improve your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here, and a bot will set up your submissions page within one day, ready for you to take part. Any questions on the scoring, rules or anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page.

For the 2026 WikiCup, the highest-ranking contestants will receive tournament points at the end of each round, and final rankings are decided by the number of tournament points each contestant has. This is the same scoring system that we had last year. If you're busy and can't sign up in January, don't worry: Signups are open throughout the year. To make things fairer for latecomers, the lowest-scoring contestants are no longer eliminated at the end of each round.

The first round will end on 26 February. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email), Epicgenius (talk · contribs · email), Frostly (talk · contribs · email), Guerillero (talk · contribs · email) and Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs · email). 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) 00:38, 1 January 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

Respectfully, you're inverting the consensus. That RfC made non-inclusion of the symbols the default case, with there needing to be a consensus to include them on a case by case basis. --Hammersoft (talk) 23:09, 31 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Hammersoft: I do not see this mentioned in the RfC itself, unless this fact/nature of RfCs is stated externally somewhere which you could kindly link me. From my understanding at what is written there, status quo probably applies (for both including or excluding a particular symbol, dependent upon which editor makes the original addition) like it would for any article. In any case, the flag is cited to RS so it should be safe to remain per said RfC at the least, but I acknowledge the CoA may not be by that same logic as it is only cited to a primary source at the moment. ❧ LunaEatsTuna (talk), proudly editing since 2018 (and just editing since 2017) – posted at 23:26, 31 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

The RfC makes it very clear that the conclusion is Option B, no flag or coat of arms. The flag could be included in the article next to prose that is cited, but in the infobox is against what the RfC concluded. --Hammersoft (talk) 23:51, 31 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Hammersoft: Yes, the RfC indeed makes it clear that they sought Option B, as you say. However, (a) never specifies that they are referring to prose when they talk about requiring RS or editor discretion to add certain symbols, so, respectfully of course, this seems like an interpretation on your end. I presume you are citing “Principally, consensus is for option B” and the proposed custom infobox below, which indeed has no flag nor emblem: however, option B notably is also limited to those parameters which they show in the example, but (b) actually says “There is no consensus about the inclusion and use of certain other parameters” and “Participants are generally at an impasse about the propriety of including these parameters when they hold no outside recognition or verifiability,” implying that other parameters are fully allowed to be added per WP:NOCON. For instance, if you cite the shown infobox having no images as being why it should not have images (which is valid obviously), then, should this same logic be applied regarding the parameters (which it would have to be for consistency), this would mean that adding other parameters is explicitly disallowed, but in my opinion this would certainly contradict what is actually said in (b), not to mention it would violate NOCON. So, I think it is most likely, based on context and what is stated, that (a) refers to the infobox and not to prose (which is never even mentioned), when they say “against generally” and “may be appropriate on a case-by-case basis … symbols which are recognized or reported by reliable sources may be appropriate to add, as important information.“ Of course I could be totally wrong here, and I am indeed fully open to this, but I am going by what I actually see stated and WP's own policies and guidelines. Perhaps the person who wrote that summary was overtly ambiguous or poorly explained what the consensus actually was. :3 ❧ LunaEatsTuna (talk), proudly editing since 2018 (and just editing since 2017) – posted at 00:25, 1 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Well then there's no point to the RfC then and it is meaningless, and we can do as we please with the infobox? --Hammersoft (talk) 00:44, 1 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Hammersoft: The RfC concluded that micronations are to receive infoboxes, the word 'unrecognised' must be included somewhere in the infobox—at present we have “micronation (unrecognised entity)”—the flag, emblem and other symbols must only be added upon editor discretion and if cited to RS (“reliably verifiable … recognized or reported by reliable sources“), other parameters per NOCON may be freely added if they are cited to RS (“consensus is that it is appropriate to state verifiable claims, which are identified as such, even within infoboxes”) and that “consensus is against any reference to micronations as "fictitious" in the same sense as "literary fiction"”. Prior to this RfC, micronations used the same infobox as sovereign states (this was thus disallowed per the RfC); the aforementioned unrecognised statement and micronation declaration has been added; and, information in the infobox parameters cited to primary sources are no longer permitted and must usually be instead cited to secondary sources (which are required to be RS). If the RfC was truly “meaningless” as you quip, micronations would still have infoboxes identical to countries, which, evidently, they do not. Also, I am not the one who wrote that rather comical summary nor did I even participate in the RfC, I am just following what it proscribes, as all editors should, so please do not bring (even subtle) attitude into discussions—we are coworkers and I assume we both love Wikipedia! ^w^ ❧ LunaEatsTuna (talk), proudly editing since 2018 (and just editing since 2017) – posted at 01:09, 1 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Sure, we both love it. But, frankly your interpretation of that RfC is completely wrong. It's unequivocal that Option B was selected, that doesn't include the flag and coat of arms. I don't understand how that is uncertain to anyone. I think we're at an impasse. So, I'm going to seek other inputs. --Hammersoft (talk) 01:24, 1 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Okay, you can go ahead. But, as I mentioned in my (rather thorough and cited) explanation, if Option B was accepted as is then this decision would go against NOCON and fully contradict everything written in (b) though, no? ❧ LunaEatsTuna (talk), proudly editing since 2018 (and just editing since 2017) – posted at 01:35, 1 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

In other words, (a) and (b) are contextualising, elaborating, expanding upon the infobox example that they have shown. ❧ LunaEatsTuna (talk), proudly editing since 2018 (and just editing since 2017) – posted at 01:37, 1 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

I think nearly 50 at once is a bit beyond the capacity of a single reviewer. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:14, 10 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

@PARAKANYAA: Hey! Thanks for the (valid) concern. I have intentionally chosen articles on the shorter side or topics I am familiar with; I have also cleared my schedule for the month. I do believe that this should take me about 50-100 hours, which is very doable in a two-week period for an unemployed shutin mentally deranged individual such as myself. ❧ LunaEatsTuna (talk), proudly editing since 2018 (and just editing since 2017) – posted at 23:17, 10 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

@LunaEatsTuna ...fair enough. Good luck! Don't overwork yourself. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:20, 10 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! Wishing you all the best. <3 ❧ LunaEatsTuna (talk), proudly editing since 2018 (and just editing since 2017) – posted at 23:21, 10 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

183 reviews is huge. Didn't realise you were taking on so many, thankyou for all your effort and yeah, don't burn out or overcommit yourself. If you need to take a breath, feel free to ping me in and I can leave some comments. Whonting (talk) 05:16, 12 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

The second round of the 2026 WikiCup ended on 28 April. As a reminder for contestants who just joined or are unaware of recent changes to our round-points system, good article nomination reviews now receive 10 points, an increase from 5 points in the previous year, as per a consensus at WT:CUP. 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 2 will advance to round 3 unless they have withdrawn or been banned. No other changes to the round-point system have been made for this year.

Round 2 was competitive. Three contestants scored more than 1,000 round points; nine scored over 500; and fourteen scored over 300. The top seven contestants had at least one featured article (two of them with two apiece). The following competitors scored more than 800 round points:

• MCE89 (submissions) with 1,333 points, mainly from good and featured articles about Australian people and geography
• Generalissima (submissions) with 1,169 points, mainly from good and featured articles related to shipping ethics controversy in fanfiction, waterways, and Gu Yanwu
• Bgsu98 (submissions) with 1,149 points, mainly from good articles, featured articles, and featured lists about figure skating, along with many article reviews and two good topics
• Olliefant (submissions) with 830 points, mainly from good and featured articles about television shows, episodes and media, along with nearly four dozen good and featured article reviews
• Gommeh (submissions) with 827 points, mainly from good and featured articles related to Genshin Impact and Honkai: Star Rail

The full scores for round 2 can be seen here. During this round, contestants have claimed 12 featured articles, 13 featured lists, 2 featured-topic articles, 106 good articles, 22 good-topic articles and more than 40 Did You Know articles. In addition, competitors have worked on 3 In the News articles, and they have conducted over 200 reviews. The tournament points table has been updated.

Remember that any content promoted after 28 April but before the start of Round 3 can be claimed in Round 3. 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) 14:49, 29 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi Luna, you have claimed several GANs that haven't received reviews yet. Please start these as soon as possible, so that nominators can address concerns and these can be closed. In the future, I suggest that an initial review is completed before opening another one so that several editors do not have to wait for comments and the nominations can be reviewed by others. Thanks, Z1720 (talk) 01:57, 30 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Of course, of course. I have closed two today and will get on the remaining ones as fast as I can… ❧ LunaEatsTuna (talk), proudly editing since 2018 (and just editing since 2017) – posted at 06:04, 30 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Since you got it to GA, I thought you'd be the best to ask; Is there any chance that Bloomsday and the Bloom Festival (this article is in poor shape, but the official website of bord bia bloom says june bank holiday) could be included, or is it only the most "important" celebrations? Finnfrog99 (talk) 20:04, 1 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Finnfrog99: Sorry for the wait!!!! I think I was going for holidays that were international/global because there are hundreds of local country ones for any given month and I was not sure how to determine which of those to list. ❧ LunaEatsTuna (talk), proudly editing since 2018 (and just editing since 2017) – posted at 20:03, 28 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

Alright then! Finnfrog99 (talk) 20:24, 28 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

story · music · places

Thank you for a lovely GA review for Herr Gott, dich loben wir, BWV 16, my New Year's greeting 2026. Can you perhaps cast your diligent eyes on Gott fähret auf mit Jauchzen, BWV 43 which will hopefully be on the main page in two days, for Ascension Day, - formally in the FAC or informally by copy-edit and talk page? Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:28, 12 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

update: Gott fähret auf mit Jauchzen, BWV 43 is now a FA. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:17, 10 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

I am contacting you because you previously voted in elections related to the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C). You may be eligible to vote in the current U4C election, which is open now and closes on 2 June 2026. You can find out more about the candidates and the election on the election page on Meta, and from there you can access the vote itself. Your participation in these elections is important to the governance of Wikimedia communities, and your time spent learning about the candidates and voting is appreciated.

-- In cooperation with the U4C, Keegan (WMF) (talk)

Keegan (WMF) (talk) 17:19, 20 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

Good article nominations | June 2026 Backlog Drive
June 2026 Backlog Drive: Do you want to become more experienced in the GA process? On 1 June, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles reviewed. Mentors are available, and new reviewers (<6 reviews) get bonus points! Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talk page.
You're receiving this message because you have participated in a good article review this year or participated in the previous backlog drive.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:59, 25 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi, are you still planning on reviewing Jaydes at some point? NP (talk) 21:19, 26 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Yes, thank you for reminding me! ❧ LunaEatsTuna (talk), proudly editing since 2018 (and just editing since 2017) – posted at 23:38, 26 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello! I saw that you've never edited UTC−00:25:21 and I thought you might want to know about it, since you made many articles about 'Time in (Country)' before Froglord (Finnfrog99) (talk) 22:05, 27 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Finnfrog99: Thanks, I had not heard about it before! It is interesting. ❧ LunaEatsTuna (talk), proudly editing since 2018 (and just editing since 2017) – posted at 00:16, 8 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

The third round of the 2026 WikiCup ended on 28 June at 23:59 (UTC). As a reminder, good article nomination reviews now receive 10 points, while 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 3 will advance to round 4 unless they have withdrawn or been banned. No other changes to the round-point system have been made for this year.

Round 3 was competitive. Three contestants scored more than 1,000 round points; eight scored over 500; and thirteen scored over 300. The top three contestants had at least one featured article (two of them with two apiece). The following competitors scored more than 800 round points:

• MCE89 (submissions) with 1567 points, mainly from good and featured articles about Australian people and geography, as well as some article reviews
• Bgsu98 (submissions) with 1547 points, mainly from good articles, featured articles, featured lists, and a good topic about figure skating, along with 20 article reviews
• Reconrabbit (submissions) with 1004 points, mainly from a high-multiplier featured article on European rabbit and several good articles, DYKs, and reviews
• A.Cython (submissions) with 1004 points, mainly from good articles about warfare, along with 22 article reviews
• Generalissima (submissions) with 859 points, mainly from good and featured articles about rivers and East Asian topics

The full scores for round 3 can be seen here. During this round, contestants have claimed 12 featured articles, 12 featured lists, 7 featured-topic articles, 117 good articles, 74 good-topic articles and more than 30 Did You Know articles. In addition, competitors have worked on 13 In the News articles, and they have conducted nearly 180 reviews. The tournament points table has been updated.

Remember that any content promoted after 28 June but before the start of Round 4 can be claimed in Round 4. 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) 13:49, 29 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Precious

Four years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:11, 7 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello, LunaEatsTuna. You have new messages at Talk:Jaydes/GA2.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

NP (talk) 23:40, 13 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi LunaEatsTuna,

There is an ongoing Request for Comment (RfC) at Wikipedia:Good article nominations/August 2026 RfC, which you may be interested in because in the past year, you have nominated or reviewed more than one good article nomination. This message has also been sent to all subscribers to the Good Article Gazette. The RfC contains many proposals (33 at the time of writing), which are split into the following categories: nominators, reviewers, reviews, volunteer roles, reviewing initiatives, and others. However, you are more than welcome to add any proposals of your own that you wish to put to the community.

By the end of September, all the proposals will have been closed by an uninvolved editor, either as a consensus for one of the options or with no consensus. At this point, editors will be invited again to develop these proposals into coherent policy and implement them.

Thank you for your contributions to the good articles project, and I look forward to your input! (in solidarity), JacobTheRox^{(talk|contributions)} 16:02, 11 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

My proposal is to start a GA union. ❧ LunaEatsTuna (talk), proudly editing since 2018 (and just editing since 2017) – posted at 14:39, 12 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

The fourth round of the 2026 WikiCup ended on 29 August at 23:59 (UTC). Everyone who competed in round 4 will advance to round 5 unless they have withdrawn or been removed. Round 4 was competitive, though slightly less so than round 3. Three contestants scored more than 1,000 round points; six scored over 500; and nine scored over 300. Each of the top five competitors had hundreds of points accumulated from multiple GAs. The following competitors scored more than 800 round points:

• Generalissima (submissions) with 1,318 points, mostly from 13 good articles and 3 featured articles about creeks and Chinese and Japanese subjects
• Vanderwaalforces (submissions) with 1,208 points from 2 featured articles, 2 featured lists, and 12 good articles about African leaders, along with over two dozen reviews
• A.Cython (submissions) with 1,084 points from 16 good articles and a small good topic about warfare and Greek elections, along with over two dozen reviews
• Vestrian24Bio (submissions) with 955 points, mostly from 2 FLs, 2 featured topics, and 16 GAs about cricket, and almost two dozen reviews
• Bgsu98 (submissions) with 837 points from 4 FLs and 8 GAs about figure skating, along with two dozen reviews

The full scores for round 4 can be seen here. During this round, contestants have claimed 10 featured articles, 11 featured lists, 8 featured-topic articles, 103 good articles, 6 good-topic articles and more than 30 Did You Know articles. In addition, competitors have worked on 11 In the News articles, and they have conducted 170 peer reviews, FA and GA reviews. The tournament points table has been updated.

Remember that any content promoted after 29 August but before the start of Round 5 can be claimed in Round 5. 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) 02:43, 30 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi! I just want to let you know that the discussion on Anthropic proof formalization is open, and feel free to join in! In solidarity, Brynn Who Likes Editing | talk w/ me! 06:12, 12 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

The 2026 WikiCup has come to an end. Our top scorers, based on the tournament point rankings (which can be seen here), are:

1. Generalissima (submissions) with 1077 tournament points, will receive the 1st place award.
2. Bgsu98 (submissions) with 1046 tournament points, will receive the 2nd place award.
3. MCE89 (submissions) with 762 tournament points, will receive the 3rd place award.
4. A.Cython (submissions) with 606' tournament points
5. Vestrian24Bio (submissions) with 537 tournament points
6. Reconrabbit (submissions) with 349 tournament points
7. BeanieFan11 (submissions) with 297 tournament points
8. Arconning (submissions) with 183 tournament points

Our three high scorers in the final round, who each got over 1,000 points, happen to all be among the top 8 as well:

1. Generalissima (submissions) with 2846 round points from 40 good articles, 4 pieces of featured content (including 2 featured articles), 11 DYK articles, and various reviews.
2. Bgsu98 (submissions) with 2603 round points from 43 good articles, 5 pieces of featured content (1 featured article and 4 featuyred lists), and various reviews.
3. Vestrian24Bio (submissions) with 1141 round points from 20 good articles, a good topic, a featured list, and 30 good article reviews.

The final round was very productive, and contestants had 29 featured articles, 8 featured lists, 1 featured picture, 150 good articles, 43 good topic articles, 189 article reviews, 28 did you know articles, and 4 in the news articles. Altogether, Wikipedia has benefited greatly from the activities of WikiCup competitors all through the contest. Well done everyone!

The top eight scorers will receive awards shortly. The following special awards will be made, based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. These prizes are awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field over the course of the competition.

• Generalissima (submissions) wins the following prizes:
  • The featured article prize, for 12 featured articles.
  • The featured picture prize, for submitting the only featured picture for the second year in a row.
  • The good article prize, for 82 good articles.
• Bgsu98 (submissions) wins the following prizes:
  • The featured list prize, for 21 featured lists.
  • The featured content reviewer prize, for 72 featured article reviews.
• Vestrian24Bio (submissions) wins the following prizes:
  • The featured topic prize, for 8 pages in featured topics.
  • The good topic prize, for 26 pages in good topics.
  • The good article reviewer prize, for 84 good article reviews.
• BabbaQ (submissions) wins the ITN prize, for 9 ITN pages.
• BeanieFan11 (submissions) wins the DYK prize, for 47 DYK pages.

A special mention also goes to these users who scored the highest in a particular category in a single round:

• A.Cython (submissions), for 20 good-topic articles in round 5.
• Olliefant (submissions), who withdrew during the competition but who had 38 featured-content reviews in round 2. Olliefant also had 43 good article reviews in round 1.
• The Robot Parade (submissions), for 5 ITN pages in round 1.

Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate. We are also looking for an experienced editor to help write the bimonthly newsletter. If you would like to help write next year's newsletters, please contact Epicgenius at his talk page.

The WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2027 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement!

On behalf of the judges, Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email), Epicgenius (talk · contribs · email), Frostly (talk · contribs · email), Guerillero (talk · contribs · email) and Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs · email):

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:13, 1 November 2026 (UTC)Reply

I will slaughter you, bot. ❧ LunaEatsTuna (talk), proudly editing since 2018 (and just editing since 2017) – posted at 03:33, 1 November 2026 (UTC)Reply

In our November 2026 newsletter, there was a mistake in calculating the final tournament point rankings (which have been updated here). We regret the error.

1. Generalissima (submissions) with 1461 tournament points, will receive the 1st place award.
2. Bgsu98 (submissions) with 1302 tournament points, will receive the 2nd place award.
3. Vestrian24Bio (submissions) with 793 tournament points, will receive the 3rd place award.
4. MCE89 (submissions) with 762 tournament points
5. A.Cython (submissions) with 606 tournament points
6. BeanieFan11 (submissions) with 425 tournament points
7. Reconrabbit (submissions) with 349 tournament points
8. Arconning (submissions) with 183 tournament points

On behalf of the judges, Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email), Epicgenius (talk · contribs · email), Frostly (talk · contribs · email), Guerillero (talk · contribs · email) and Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs · email):

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:42, 1 November 2026 (UTC)Reply

Wiktionary-chan, the one and only mascot of Wiktionary and somehow face of the fictosexuality page, sat hunched over her desk, trying to calm herself down. The poor antisocial dictionarian was nervous about a social event she had to attend: Wikimedia Foundation-sama (peak name) was hosting the annual get-together for all of the Wikimedia-chans. The worst part? Attendance is mandatory. Despite Wiktionary-chan sporting her best clothes (ah yes, a maid outfit with wine red stockings, complimenting her natural saturated dark blue hair), having already finished her makeup and having just put on her finest jewellery, she could not bring herself to actually open the front door and get into her car.

Wiktionary-chan is, as one would perhaps expect, nerdy, considerably opinionated, quite the pedant and very shy, but she can get incessantly talkative around her best friends. Whenever a topic of interest is brought up—usually of a linguistic nature—she immediately turns into an unstoppable chatterbox of useless knowledge and random fun facts about metonyms, hapax legomena and complex Arabic calligraphy.

She has sky blue eyes and long navy hair that reaches just above her waist. She wears round nerdy glasses and her fit is naturally slender, despite rarely going outside. Indeed, as a result of spending all of her time indoors reading dictionaries and arguing with strangers on the Internet over the true location of the Proto-Indo-European homeland, she has pale skin, almost as if resembling one of those cheap plastic tiles from a discount Scrabble set.

But the real reason for Wiktionary-chan's reluctance to attend was not due to her introversion; no, in fact, she was actually good friends with many of the projects who would be in attendance, like Quote-tan and Book-tan. The real reason she did not want to attend was because there was one project in particular that she absolutely loathed—and that was Wikipe-tan, the personification of Wikipedia, the free encyclopaedia.

Wiktionary-chan hated everything about Wikipe-tan; her look, her attitude, and the way she was so full of herself by claiming to contain all human knowledge.. yeah, right! In short, she was simply too much for Wiktionary-chan to bear. Wikipe-tan was by far the most popular project of Wikimedia-sama, and Wikipe-tan regularly made sure that everyone was constantly aware of that fact. Wiktionary-chan hated how most people would ask Wikipe-tan for the etymologies of words instead of her when Wikipe-tan completely dismisses primary sources—the most important reference for words!

'Breathe, just breathe..' Wiktionary-chan thought to herself, realising that she had to calm down if there was any hope of her actually attending.

'I don't have to talk to Wikipe-tan or even acknowledge her presence,' she reasoned, channelling her admittedly unjustified malice to her benefit.

'I can just say "hello" to Quote-tan and Book-tan, maybe eat some snacks.. and ignore Wikipe-tan for the entire night! As one should.' Her eyebrows furled as she pondered that last part.

Only 40 minutes later, Wiktionary-chan arrived at the Wikimedia get-together, which was being held in a rented-out university campus (what, is Wikimedia-sama made of money? She is constantly begging for donations, you know). Wiktionary-chan approached the front door which was clearly marked as the Wikimedia get-together entrance by signage cornily written in wikitext. Taking a deep breath and feeling brave, she rang the doorbell. Commons-tan opened the door and welcomed her in, immediately taking her picture with a bright flash.

'Hey, Wikt-tan, your outfit looks so cute!' She spoke lively, contrasting Wiktionary-chan's shy demeanour.

Wiktionary-chan immediately blushed as she is not quite used to getting her picture taken without her consent; indeed, it is uncommon for pictures to appear in a dictionary anyways unless truly necessary.

'H-hi, Commons-tan..' she said with more than a hint of nervousness in her voice, all of her motivation and confidence from not even five seconds ago instantaneously leaving her body. Commons-tan, the personification of the Wikimedia Commons file-hosting website, was a beautiful redhead with freckles and ruby eyes; she always wore her famous mahogany-coloured beret and was never seen without her camera, some sort of a steampunk-looking DSLR Wiktionary-chan could not identify (product names are not fit for inclusion within a dictionary). She wore—for whatever reason—a stylised faded red leather jacket with straps, medium-length black shorts and rather uncomfortable-looking grey stiletto boots.

After a brief conversation consisting of mostly standard filler dialogue and the occasional backchannel (at least, this is how Wiktionary-chan described it), she walked in and subconsciously took note of her surroundings. It was evident that this get-together was being held in the assembly room at this university. It was spacious, albeit filled with various Wikimedia projects and guests (non-Wikimedia projects), accompanied by several tables hosting plates of snack foods in a nearby corner and a seating area with boardgames on one side.

She subconsciously pondered whether this seating area might just be the perfect place for her to retire in case she starts to feel burnt out or just needs a break from socialising. Wiktionary-chan further took note of the restroom—which was marked by temporary signage specifically for this event—and the nearby exists, just in case she needs to make a quick escape. Meanwhile, Wikipe-tan was nowhere in sight—at least for now. Neither was Quote-tan, but she's probably around here somewhere; after all, she is punctual.

'Greetings, Wiktionary-chan!' Wikidata-tan greeted gleefully.

Suddenly, Wiktionary-chan's peaceful thoughts were interrupted by the overenthusiastic greeting from one of Wikimedia-sama's projects.

'Hey there, Data-tan..' Wikt-tan said while trying her hardest not to stutter, Data-tan practically staring into her soul with those piercing green eyes and persistent eye contact. Wiktionary-chan always gets nervous around Data-tan because she can never actually relate to anything she has to say, even after many desperate attempts to find some sort of a connection amongst themselves (such as the Wikidata lexemes project). Data-tan's fondness of Wiktionary-chan was, regrettably, very one-sided.

Data-tan looked at Wikt-tan and nodded, 'Did you see the recent update I made to string-based functions for lexemes?!'

Wikt-tan could not blame Data-tan for asking such a technical question, especially as it seemed like the sort of thing that would be right up her alley. The only problem was that she is not exactly in the mood for keeping up with a sophisticated discussion right now, with her being unable to keep her mind off of Wikipe-tan and all.

'Oh, I have.. not had a chance to take a look yet! But.. uhm.. how is your family?' Wikt-tan asked, desperately seeking to change the subject.

'Functions-tan? Oh, she's at home.. been quite moody lately but she's trying her best. I think work is really stressing her out.'

Work? Rather lack thereof!

'Right.. well-' Wikt-tan trembled, trying to find the right words to excuse herself from this dreadful encounter while not coming across as a total jerk.

'I really hope she figures it out. I.. promised I would meet Quote-tan, so.. I'll, uh, see you around if that is okay with you.'

'Oh, right. Enjoy the party!' Data-tan skipped away without even giving their somewhat awkward conversation a second thought. Oh, how Wikt-tan envies that confident and totally unbothered mindset!

Now unburdened by social pressure, she continued her search for Quote-tan, finally spotting her distinctive dark blue hair in the crowd in the centre of the hall and quickly lighting up. She strut with purpose, eager to speak to her best friend in person again. However, as she began to approach, she saw something that made her stop dead in her tracks. Quote-tan was talking to.. Wikipe-tan, the rude, unreliable encyclopaedia that always gets etymologies wrong!

Unsure of what to do now and just inches away from the pair, Wikt-tan started to turn around when, as if the universe was working against her, Quote-tan spotted Wikt-tan and called out her name. Not wanting to just ditch her best friend, she quickly spun her butt right around and approached casually, keeping her gaze averted from Wikipe-tan—the most irritating Wikimedia project by a long shot.

'Howdy, Wikt-tan; good to see you again, girl! I was beginning to wonder if you'd show up.' Quote-tan quipped with a friendly smile, happily embracing Wikt-tan with a friendly hug of friendship.

'Have you met Wikipe-tan?'

That was it. The dreadful question had arrived.

Who hasn't?! Sometimes people stop me in the street and ask for articles thinking I'm her! She pondered to herself.

'Ooh.. h-hey..' Wikt-tan responded with a forced smirk, trying not to appear cold in front of her best friend.

Wikipe-tan stood there and just smiled back awkwardly, her stern eyes telling a completely different story. Wikipe-tan could clearly not care less about this awkward, nerdy dictionary girlie standing before her.

'Hey.. dictionary-tan, right?' Wikipe-tan questioned, perhaps intentionally trying to get a rise out of the shy woman. At least, this is how Wikt-tan interpreted it.

'Wikt-tan, actually..'

'Ah, right. Yes, of course..'

The trio stood in silence for what felt like an entirely, neither Wikt-tan nor Wikipe-tan daring to speak. Quote-tan could sense the tension and realised she had to say something.

'So, Wikt-tan.. I was just telling Wikipe-tan all about you!' Quote-tan said, trying to act as the much-needed mediator between the two.

Ooh, so she probably DID know my name. What a jerk! Purposely trying to demean me like that. Now, Wikt-tan was certain that Wikipe-tan had intentionally misnamed her.

'Oh, yes. I say, is it true that you have an editor who has made over 600 sockpuppet accounts over the last two decades?' Wikipe-tan asked with a mischievous smirk on her face.

I thought I told that story to Quote-tan in confidence! I mean, I suppose her name should have been a clue that she'd be terrible at keeping conversations secret..

'Y-yeah, that is.. correct.' She replied while nervously scratching her back, her phonetic bracelet with ˈwɪk.ʃən.ɹi written around it now more clearly visible. She knew she needed a zinger to give Wikipe-tan a much-needed taste of her own medicine.

'I mean, you have an entire hall of fame for yours! So, that one barely compares~' She smirked with a facial expression uncannily similar to the :3 text emoticon.

Quote-tan, interpreting vague statements for over two decades, could clearly sense what was happening and immediately interjected.

'It's funny actually! You two have so much in common.' She added while forcing a smile of her own.

'Is that so?' Wikipe-tan immediately responded in a sarcastic tone, clearing her throat. Whatever she was about to say next could not be anything good.

'Well, at least my editors have cited nearly all of my entries.' She continued with the evil smirk of an IP address vandal.

If Wikt-tan was not absolutely furious before, she certainly was now.

'My editors use their critical thinking to work out the proper conjugation for various headwords!' She quickly blurted out in a delightfully explosive tone.

'We don't blindly trust the media or rely on small paywalled Google Books previews to write our linguistically inaccurate pages!' Wikt-tan knew that her last point was in fact a complete lie, but she also knew that Wikipe-tan would not know enough about her to question her on this.

Meanwhile, Quote-tan just stood there awkwardly, unsure of how to deescalate the actively deteriorating situation.

'You know, I have a great article I want to recommend to you—it's called "folk etymology." Oh, I'm sorry, you are already an expert in that!' Wikipe-tan clamoured, using the fact that Wiktionary is, also, largely written by amateurs to her advantage.

Wikt-tan immediately responded, raising her voice to match that of Wikipe-tan's. 'That's rich coming from you! None of your articles with etymology sections are even accurate because your editors aren't allowed to cite primary sources!' Wikt-tan had a point with this burning remark.

'Enough!' yelled Quote-tan. She was holding a small recording device (actually, a 2017 iPhone 7S with a cracked screen, broken pink plastic cover and hairy worn-out tape on the home button with the Voice Memos app open).

Both Wikt-tan and Wikipe-tan gasped as they saw what was in her hand.

'Uhm, Quote-tan.. what's that?' Asked Wikipe-tan, visibly nervous. So nervous, in fact, that she even started using contractions.

Quote-tan looked her dead in the eyes and smirked.

'I've been recording this conversation the entire time. Now, if you two do not become friends by the end of the night, I will post this all over the Internet!'

'Y-you recorded our argument?! If Wikimedia-sama finds out that we've been fighting.. she'll cut our funding!' Wikt-tan panicked. Wikimedia-sama adamantly required that all of her projects publicly support one another, otherwise it would be PR nightmare.

Quote-tan laughed maniacally, possibly intoxicated from the party.. even though no alcohol was being served. Perhaps she really has a screw or two loose? 'Looks like you two only have one option.'

'No way I am becoming friends with her!' Wikipe-tan passionately objected.

'You cannot do this to us that's.. blackmail!' Wikt-tan interjected, for once agreeing with Wikipe-tan on something.

Quote-tan just smiled, desperately trying—but failing—to stifle her own amusement at the unique situation unfolding before her. 'It totally is! I've never before done anything like this.. but, I refuse to back down now. You two are so similar, and if you just talked for a bit and got to know each other for real, I'm sure you would quickly become the best of friends!'

'Quote-tan, you're so naïve sometimes!' Wikipe-tan was justifiably mad at the quotations website, believing she could never relate to that silly dictionary project gawking nervously beside her.

'How could we possibly do that?!' Yelled Wiktionary-chan, absolutely against the idea of being even remotely nice to that overrated and stubby encyclopaedia.

'Not my problem!' Chirped Quote-tan, evidently proud of her devious plan. 'Now, go and hang out before I start showing it to people at this party as a teaser.. have fun you two~!'

She giggled furiously as she casually jogged away, disappearing into the crowd.

'Wait, Quote-tan!' Yelled Wikt-tan, desperately hoping to reason with her energetic best friend.

As she left, Wikipe-tan and Wikt-tan just stood there awkwardly in silence, only occasionally glancing at one another.

'You know this is your fault, right?' Wikipe-tan spoke first, breaking the ice.

'My fault?!' Wikt-tan was peeved. 'In what world is this my fault?'

'Well, you caused it! You started yelling at me first.'

'Nuh-uh!' Wikt-tan could not believe her arrogance. 'I may need to write down words but my memory is not that bad. You came at me first when you brought up such a touchy subject!'

'Well, I had no idea!' Wikipe-tan responded defensively. 'The way Quote-tan talked about the world-famous sockpuppeteer made it sound like a funny story you tell everyone at parties!'

'I thought she would keep it private! I really don't like talking about it..' Wikt-tan responded, blushing and looking down.

'Argh, fine! Whatever.' Wikipe-tan crossed her arms, not wanting to escalate this conversation any further.. again.

Wikt-tan pondered her options before slowly looking at Wikipe-tan once more.

'Should we.. lie to Quote-tan?' She suggested, believing it to be a better alternative than actually befriending Wikipe-tan.

'How so?' Wikipe-tan asked with a dash of skepticism in her voice.

'Just.. pretend we've become friends. Should be simple enough if we both really try..'

'No, she would never believe us. You totally suck at lying!'

'Uhm, citation needed, much!?'

'No, really! Aside from a few hitches here and there, you usually present everything so factually..'

This unexpected compliment caught her off-guard. Wikt-tan's never heard Wikipe-tan ever say anything nice about anyone else other than Commons-tan before—and even then, Commons-tan often gets more hate than love. Not even Data-tan would receive such kind words. Nevertheless, Wikt-tan shock her head. I mean, Wikipe-tan is her enemy!

'I mean.. we can still try and trick her!' Wiktionary-chan was absolutely determined to do anything it takes to avoid getting to know Wikipe-tan.

'Quote-tan is an expert in analysing quotations and even body language, there is no shot we make it past her.' Wikipe-tan spoke matter-of-factly.

'Right, I forgot she studied that in Wikiversity.' Wikt-tan realised that attempting to lie to Quote-tan was a fruitless endeavour.

'So.. what then?' Asked Wikipe-tan, also seeking an alternative solution.

'"What then" what?' Responded Wiktionary-chan, slightly confused at her question.

'Do you have any more ideas?' Clarified Wikipe-tan.

'Uhh.. I would need to think.' Wikt-tan was still upset and unable to contemplate properly.

'We do not have enough time for that! Remember, Quote-tan gave us until the end of the night.' Wikipe-tan responded, emphasising the urgency of their predicament.

'Why don't you come up with something?! You're supposed to be the go-to encyclopaedia for information on absolutely everything! At least, if you deem it entry-worthy enough based on your clouded "notability" judgment or whatever you call it!'

'Hey! Arguing will get us nowhere.' Wikipe-tan responded, trying to reason with the feisty dictionarian, not to mention that she has her own criteria for inclusion anyways. 'If Quote-tan releases that recording it is over for the both of us. We both know how Wikimedia Foundation-sama would react..' She sounded quite desperate in that last part.

Wikt-tan nodded, restraining herself as she realised that Wikipe-tan was just as scared as she was. Quote-tan was right: they really did have things in common.

'It's kinda boring just standing here.. how about we take a walk around?' Wiktionary-chan suggested, internally coming to the conclusion that getting to know Wikipe-tan really was the only way out of this mess.

Wikipe-tan reluctantly agreed, and the two started aimlessly strolling around the spacious project-filled room. Eventually, they walked towards the seating area with many different boardgames. They see Voyage-tan and Species-tan playing Wikopoly with a non-Wikimedia guest, TV Tropes-tan.

Wikipe-tan approached the group, bored out of her mind and more sociable than Wikt-tan, who was practically using her as a shield.

'Mind if we join you?' She asked confidently.

The group of lesser-known Wikimedia projects all turned their heads and Voyage-tan spoke first. 'Go ahead! We don't bite.'

'The game is almost over, just me and Voyage left.' Said Species-tan with a smile on his face.

'I went out ages ago.' Added TV Tropes, turning his full attention on the two. 'Oh, the name's TV Tropes.'

'Nice to meet you!' Said Wikipe-tan, sitting down on the sofa beside TV Tropes. Wikt-tan quickly followed. 'I'm Wikipe-tan and this is Wikt-tan.'

'H-hi!' Spoke Wikt-tan with newfound enthusiasm. 'I'm a huge fan.'

TV Tropes smiled proudly and blushed ever-so-slightly. 'Oh, heh, thank you.. I know I have quite a few entries I coined on Wiktionary.'

'Oh, quite a few is an understatement!' Wikt-tan replied, practically fangirling.

TV Tropes chuckled. 'Good to see at least one of you two cites me!'

Wikipe-tan blushed and briefly averted her eyes.

'So, how do you two know each other?' TV Tropes enquired, genuinely interested in learning more about these two.

Wiktionary-chan and Wikipe-tan just looked at each other; they had a silent agreement not to tell anyone at this party that Quote-tan was threatening to blackmail them unless they became friends. Not only would this be incredibly embarrassing, but, as Wikt-tan now knows all too well, secrets tend to get shared around and this whole debacle could very well spread and come to the attention of Wikimedia Foundation-sama.

'It is a long story.' Spoke Wikipe-tan, choosing her words carefully. 'We are- I mean.. we used to be adversaries but.. we are getting to know each other now..'

'Yes.. that's right! ..I suppose.' Wikt-tan added, hoping TV Tropes would not enquire any further.

'Oh, how cliché!' Teased TV Tropes.

'Hey!' Exclaimed Wikt-tan.

'Of course you'd say that!' Said Wikipe-tan, giggling to herself.

'So, adversaries, huh; how come?'

Wiktionary-chan pondered to herself: TV Tropes was asking even more questions.. Wikipe-tan would have to come up with something really believable if they were ever going to-

'I will let you handle this one.' Spoke Wikipe-tan, turning to Wikt-tan.

Me?!

'Like Wikipe-tan said earlier.. it is a long story!' She said, trying to deflect TV Tropes' investigation.

'Come on, spill the beans!' TV Tropes was not having any of it.

'I mean.. we have our share of disagreements.' Wiktionary-chan started, planning her next words carefully. '"Adversary" is a bit strong though.. we were more like.. not really opponents nor foes.. frenemies, in retrospective.' She said, trying to find the right word to describe their relationship.

'Alright, thesaurus!' TV Tropes proudly exclaimed with a chuckle. 'So, how did you two start getting close? Was it recently? At this party even!?'

Both Wikt-tan and Wikipe-tan were starting to get annoyed at her incessant questions.

'We.. well-' Wikipe-tan chimed in, coming to Wikt-tan's aid. 'We started talking to each other out of pure boredom.. small talk at first but.. then we hit it off, what can I say?'

Wiktionary-chan sighed contently; that seemed like a good enough excuse to quiet him down. 'Exactly! What she said.'

'Oh, I see! So two tsundere, huh?' TV Tropes giggled mischievously.

Wikt-tan and Wikipe-tan were now starting to get uncomfortable with her persistent questions; it was as if TV Tropes were using their built-in search bars.

'Yo, Tropes, you can be annoying!' Exclaimed Species-tan out of nowhere, drawing his attention away from his game of Wikopoly or whatever the hell I called it with Voyage-tan. 'Leave 'em be, man.'

'Alright!' Yelled TV Tropes, his voice expressing his annoyance yet backing down nevertheless. 'Sorry, I just.. love tropes and storylines. It's in the name!'

Wikt-tan and Wikipe-tan both looked at each other and sighed in sweet relief. The interrogation was over and neither had given away any valuable information concerning what was really going on. As they look at the Wikopoly board, they notice that Voyage-tan is losing.

Wikipe-tan looks over at Voyage-tan. 'Looks like it will be an easy victory for you, huh?'

Species-tan quickly chimes in. 'Let's make it a quick one, this game's been going on since the Cambrian period!'

'Oh, hush!' Shouts Voyage-tan whilst shaking her head. She rolls the dice and moves her piece, before Species-tan takes her turn and wins the game.

'Congrats!' says Voyage-tan. 'twice in a row you lucky dog.'

'Great work!' Even Wikipe-tan joins in the celebrations.

'So, everyone up for another round?' She looks around. 'What about you Wikt-tan and Wikipe-tan?'

'Oh, absolutely!' Responds Wikipe-tan. 'Someone has to end your winning streak after all.'

What follows is a 55-minute–long game of Wikiopoly, ending in Wikipe-tan's victory. Wiktionary-chan congratulates her and they decide to go for a walk to see what else is going on here.

'Hey, uh.. that was some good lying back there.' Said Wikipe-tan, attempting to compliment Wiktionary-chan on her gameplay which lead her to end at third place.

Wiktionary-chan furled her eyebrows. 'Huh.. lying? I'm good at it?'

Wikipe-tan blushed. 'No, no! Not at all.. well, when it comes to boardgames you are!'

'How many unsourced living persons biographies do you have again? Over ten thousand?' Wiktionary-chan's judgment was clouded.

Wikipe-tan scoffed, offended at her sudden jab. 'Doesn't Urban Dictionary get more page views than you?'

Wikt-tan immediately responded. 'And Baidu Baike has more than four times as many articles as you!'

'Half of those were stolen directly from me!' Yelled Wikipe-tan.

'I saw an ethnicity that had an openly fan-made flag on one of your pages for a year and a half.'

'You barely even have images, why do you care?!'

Wiktionary-chan was starting to tear up. 'I'm just saying.. I don't mean that I don't have my problems. We all do.'

'But do you think that I don’t know that?' Opened Wikipe-tan. 'I am well aware of these issues and actively working on fixing them, as well as the ones you mentioned. It's just.. you do not need to point them out to me. Practically everyone already does.'

'Right.. no, I get it.'

Wiktionary-chan realised she was wrong to blow up at her.

She continued. 'Sorry, I don't know why I snapped like that.'

Wikipe-tan smiled. 'No, I get it. You don't like people pointing out your insecurities all the time, just like me.'

She nodded. 'As long as it is something I can fix, or is constructive, I do not mind.'

The two continued their walk, making their way through a hallway away from the noise.

'Quote-tan was right.' Said Wiktionary-chan.

'Wikipe-tan tilted her head. 'About?'

'That we have a lot in common.'

'Right', said Wikipe-tan smiling. 'We both really do.'

They stared into one another's eyes for a moment longer than necessary before both quickly looking way.

'Do you want to go somewhere to recharge?' Offered Wikipe-tan.

'Like away from the crowd?' Indeed, the distant noises were still audible from their location.

'Yes! I have just the spot.' Wikipe-tan offered her hand to Wiktionary-chan, who gladly accepted it and intertwined her fingers as they started walking towards a stairway.

She took her up to the rooftop, beneath the glistening stars.

'I helped Wikimedia Foundation-sama organise this party, so I knew the layout.'

Wikt-tan was star-struck (literally) by the gorgeous constellations. 'This view is beautiful! Thank you for taking me here, Wikipe-tan.'

Wikipe-tan sat down on the hard ground and Wiktionary-chan followed suit. They gazed up below the moonlight—in silence—for a good six minutes before Wikipe-tan turned her attention to Wikt-tan. She smiled, feeling a sudden rush of adrenaline.

'Do you have anyone special, Wikt-tan?'

Wiktionary-chan turned to face her, immediately giggling. 'Signalling something?'

Wikipe-tan blushed a deep shade of red. 'No! Just.. asking out of curiosity!'

Wikt-tan smiled, her teasing working just as intended. 'Well.. actually, no. I prefer animals to people.'

Wikipe-tan nodded. 'Do you have any pets?'

'I have a budgerigar parrot named Noam Chomsky and a cute calico cat named Hapax Legomenon II.'

'How topical!' Wikipe-tan giggled. 'TV Tropes would have loved to hear that.'

Wiktionary-chan smiled in response. 'If you saw their faces you'd understand.'

Wikipe-tan burst out laughing. 'If you say so! I trust you.'

'I still cannot believe you did so well in Wikopoly.' Replied Wiktionary-chan. 'I always thought you'd be into like chess or something.'

She giggled. 'No, I love boardgames and card games.. but I do actually prefer video games!'

'Oh, nice! I like chess but I prefer Go, actually!'

'Aww, that is certainly unique!'

'You're unique!' Yelled Wiktionary-chan without thinking.

They both blushed and quickly looked away from one another, awkwardly looking back up at the stars. After a few moments, Wikipe-tan turned her head and saw Wiktionary-chan already looking at her.

Wikipe-tan smiled. 'You are special, Wikt-tan. Really.'

She blushed deeply, her face turning uncomfortably warm. 'No, not at all!'

'Really!' Wikipe-tan was having none of it. 'You have so much to offer.. seeing you get all energetic over Wikopoly was fun.. I love that side of you. I would love to see you get like that more often.'

'Wiktionary-chan chuckled. 'This is easier said than done.'

'Then I better try harder.'

They both smiled and looked up at the astronomical twilight sky.

'The moon is beautiful' said Wiktionary-chan.

The next day, Quotes-tan woke up in nothing but her undergarments and a poncho in front of the dumpster outside the university. Her phone was smashed into oblivion and she had such a pounding headache from chugging litres upon litres of Fireball Cinnamon Whisky shots then she had no recollection of her recording.

The end.

Tl;dr: Get me off your fucking mailing list!!!!!!!!!!! ❧ LunaEatsTuna (talk), proudly editing since 2018 (and just editing since 2017) – posted at 03:32, 1 November 2026 (UTC)Reply

This has to be ragebait. Many—perhaps most—of my 450+ articles created on this website have been connected to a WikiData item at some point and never once in my life have I ever received such a rude, unsolicited ear-curling scream informing me of such. You should be nervous because I will find the location of your code and destroy it so that your clanker-ass never roams the Earth ever again. Why don't you opt-out from existence you worthless wireback who contributes nothing to Wikipedia. ❧ LunaEatsTuna (talk), proudly editing since 2018 (and just editing since 2017) – posted at 17:13, 6 November 2026 (UTC)Reply

Nice question you made at RFA of Lynch44! VitorFriboquen :] (Talk) 16:06, 7 November 2026 (UTC)Reply

I.... liked... it! VitorFriboquen :] (Talk) 16:07, 7 November 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Vitorperrut555: Thank you! I love your userpage; the complimentary banner advertisement and stick drawings are incredible, and the background image is adorable. ❧ LunaEatsTuna (talk), proudly editing since 2018 (and just editing since 2017) – posted at 18:56, 7 November 2026 (UTC)Reply