Jump to content

MediaWiki talk:Titleblacklist

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Welcome to the title blacklist noticeboard
    Shortcut
    The following instructions were copied from mw:Extension:Title Blacklist.

    The disallowed titles list is maintained as a system message MediaWiki:Titleblacklist.

    This page consists of regular expressions, each on a separate line. For example: 

    Foo <autoconfirmed|noedit|errmsg=blacklisted-testpage> 
Bar #No one should create article about it

    There is no need to use "^" at the beginning and "$" at the end; these are added automatically.

    Each entry may also contain optional attributes, enclosed in <> and divided by |

    • autoconfirmed — only non-autoconfirmed users are unable to create/upload/move such pages
    • noedit — users are also unable to edit this page
    • casesensitive — don't ignore case when checking title for being disallowed
    • errmsg — the name of the message that should be displayed instead of standard

    When the action is blocked, one of the following messages is displayed together with the filter row (as $1): titleblacklist-forbidden-edit, titleblacklist-forbidden-move, titleblacklist-forbidden-new-account or titleblacklist-forbidden-upload. Generic filenames have their own custom error message, MediaWiki:Titleblacklist-custom-imagename.

    There is also MediaWiki:Titlewhitelist and a global title blacklist.

    Only administrators, page movers and template editors can override this list on all actions. When they override this list when creating or editing a page, MediaWiki:Titleblacklist-warning is displayed. Account creators can override this list on account creations only.

    The disallowed usernames list is handled at meta:Title blacklist by adding entries with the <newaccountonly> parameter.

    Edit request 9 September 2025

    [edit]

    Description of suggested change: Hello. I can't create the page "Tɕʼ" because it's on the blacklist. Please remove it from the blacklist. I think the thing that is blacklisted is the symbol ɕ, and it's weird an IPA symbol and other symbols in the entry ".*[ℂ℃℄ɕƌʥℇ℈℉ℊℋℌℍℎℏℐ‼ℑℒℕ℗℘ℙℚℛℜℝ℞℟℣ℤℨ℩ℬℭ℮ℯℰℱℲℳℴℹ℺⅁⅂⅃⅄ⅅⅆⅇⅈⅉⅎ].* <casesensitive> # Select Unicode Letterlike Symbols (excluding Kelvin, Angstrom and Ohm signs, see talk)" are on the blacklist.

    Diff:

    −
    .*[ℂ℃℄ɕƌʥℇ℈℉ℊℋℌℍℎℏℐ‼ℑℒℕ℗℘ℙℚℛℜℝ℞℟℣ℤℨ℩ℬℭ℮ℯℰℱℲℳℴℹ℺⅁⅂⅃⅄ⅅⅆⅇⅈⅉⅎ].* <casesensitive> # Select Unicode [[Letterlike Symbols]] (excluding Kelvin, Angstrom and Ohm signs, see talk)
    		+

    BodhiHarp 20:11, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    @BodhiHarp Is there a reason why you can't just ask a administrator (like me to create the page for you?) I see this as a one-off exception and not a reason to remove the rule from the titleblacklist ? Sohom (talk) 00:04, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    See this and search for "unilateral". BodhiHarp 01:02, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I've created it. —Cryptic 01:42, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Protected edit request on 9 October 2025

    [edit]

    Add the words "Holocaust", "Nazi" and "Hitler" to the title blacklist. I'm surprised HoIocaust (a misspelling) is on the list but not the correctly spelled word. Make both case insensitive.

    It is a sensitive subject and I have a feeling many vandals will try to make pages with either word in the title as a joke, and I don't like that. DetectiveClarinet15 (talk) 04:07, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Not done, no proof this is necessary and would likely prevent creation of proper articles. CoconutOctopus talk 14:33, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah. There's almost 9000 existing mainspace pages matching this pattern, including bunches of false positives particularly for "nazi" ("Internazionale", "Ashkenazi", and "Nazim" repeatedly jumped out at me while the results were scrolling by). Blacklisting would interfere with talk page creation and archiving, nominations for deletion, peer and good article reviews, you name it for all of these. About 8000 deleted titles too, granted, with more than their share of G5s among the deletion reasons; but comparatively few saltings (about 50). —Cryptic 15:01, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Why do we blacklist characters

    [edit]

    Why do we blacklist characters? - BᴏᴅʜıHᴀᴙᴩ (talk, contributions) 05:33, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    We blacklist titles that have a history of being disruptive here on our English language project. — xaosflux Talk 09:41, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Mis-using certain characters can be used to obfuscate names in unhelpful ways. Others may be used abusively, such as the swastika character, or have no reasonable purpose for ever including in a user or page name, or may be used to disrupt page layout at a technical level. Note that in the rare cases one of these characters does need to be used (as see above) an administrator can override the blacklist. — The Anome (talk) 09:53, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Delist BFDI (and unsalt)

    [edit]
    DELISTED
    BFDI unsalted and removed from title blacklist. Article is now live at Battle for Dream Island. (non-admin closure) SuperPianoMan9167 (talk) 18:07, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

    Publication of a new source has caused the topic of Battle for Dream Island to cross the notability threshold.

    Work on the BFDI draft by experienced editors has led to the creation of content which shows that a policy-compliant encyclopedia article is possible. As an NPP who reviews AfC submissions, I consider the draft as passing my review.


    Two requests, based on the above:

    1. To administrators processing the titleblacklist: Please remove Battle for Dream Island-related rules.
    2. (Separately, to keep this concentrated) To the salting admin User:Ritchie333: Please unsalt Battle for Dream Island.

    —Alalch E. 09:56, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Just for the record, I only salted the article because I found a consensus to do so at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle for Dream Island as an uninvolved admin; furthermore the consensus to salt was endorsed at deletion review here. (I have no interest in Battle for Dream Island and I'm not even sure what it is) Consequently I am happy to unsalt if consensus has been found that the topic is now notable (ie: nobody's going to want to AfD it again). Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:03, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks. Then, a deletion review should be started. I might start one later. —Alalch E. 10:10, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Deletion review is the correct option here. Per WP:SALT "Editors wishing to re-create a salted title with appropriate content should either contact an administrator (preferably the protecting administrator), file a request for reduction in protection level, or use the deletion review process. To make a convincing case for re-creation, it is helpful to show a draft version of the intended article when filing a request.". To be clear, if consensus at such a review is found to be "allow recreation" or something similar, then any administrator is free to unsalt the title without needing to consult me. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:17, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I've been monitoring this (I'm the admin who recreated the draft). I still think we need a consensus on one source before this is mainspaced, but if that is passed then I'm OK to do the necessary un-salting etc. to achieve this. I don't think a DRV is necessary because ultimately we are not recreating the article originally deleted, and if the second source we are looking at passes the discussion at RSN because in that case we would have two instances of IRS SIGCOV, and thus a reasonably-arguable WP:GNG pass. Whether or not anyone's going to try to AFD it at that point is impossible to say - someone tried to MFD the draft shortly after creation but was prevented from doing so by the title-block - but there wouldnt be a very strong chance of a successful AFD against it. FOARP (talk) 10:37, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Ritchie333: Above, FOARP, who is an administrator, has announced that he will create the article through your creation protection, based on a supposedly pending conclusion about a source at RSN. Namely, it is supposed that editors at RSN should decide whether a source that is obviously a reliable source (and no one has said that it is not) contains significant coverage, which immediately predicates the determination of notability. But RSN is not a notability forum, it is concerned with reliability of sources, not whether they confer notability, and there shouldn't have been such an RSN filing absent a concrete worry that a source is not reliable for a certain claim — there is no such worry. I think it's great that FOARP apparently wants to create the article, but this RSN business is just an excess of process and will not give any special authority to FOARP to create the article through your protection over any other editor. He would be following his editorial judgement ultimately, just like I am following my editorial judgement in wanting to create the article.
    Do you have any comment on this disagreement between FOARP and me about starting a deletion review? —Alalch E. 12:57, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I think an RSN discussion is a low-drama way of short-cutting the inevitable litigation which is going to happen over this source. It's also a perfectly good place to get feedback on how people would characterise a source, including whether or not they think it's notability-sustaining. There are concrete reasons why this might be seen as not IRS SIGCOV, including it being something that some people would describe as a blog, and it potentially being something that some people would describe as an interview. So let's get feedback on that from people who aren't involved closely with the issue (EDIT: indeed, we're already getting that feedback).
    Let me also say that jumping around and trying to force the process like this is why this article got blocked in the first place. Let's take the time to get this right. FOARP (talk) 13:39, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    DRV (not necessarly now) seems to be part of doing it right like Ritchie333 said. Skipping it and going straight to mainspace with this mega-salted thing seems likely to increase drama. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:50, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Exactly this. Since the article's notability has been so fought-over in the past few years to the point it generated an essay, we need to make sure a consensus to reverse that is watertight and looked at by as many people as possible. Otherwise I can predict an ANI thread complaining about "unilateral overriding" of something. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:41, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    RSN is not a good place and nothing will happen there, and DRV is a good place and is a low-drama forum. The salting admin said "go to DRV", citing a policy saying "go to DRV". You are wrong to characterize anything I have done as "forcing the process". Instead, the RSN idea is an unnecessary procedural improvisation and an excess of process. At DRV, there is a widely accepted view that DRV is not necessary when the salting admin can be asked to unsalt, removing the need to involve other editors. That request can be granted or declined. Here, it was declined, which is just fine. That is a best practice and not forcing the process. I asked Ritchie, he wouldn't unsalt—escalate to DRV. That is the process. —Alalch E. 13:52, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Btw, if a DRV is started, please note at Draft talk:Battle for Dream Island that it's going on. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:02, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    OK, well, good luck with that. FOARP (talk) 14:07, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Now at DRV: Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2025 October 25#Battle for Dream Island. ObserveOwl (talk) 13:51, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    DRV closed as recreation allowed. Can an admin now remove it from the blacklist? (Also maybe other related terms like ".*object.*show.*" should be removed so that redirects can be created.) ObserveOwl (talk) 15:32, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
     Done by Toadspike in Special:Diff/1319897249. SuperPianoMan9167 (talk) 16:55, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

    ʖ works?

    [edit]

    Why can you create pages with this character despite being on the title blacklist? I tested it and it works. Non-admins, test combinations like ʖ̼ or ʖʼ and it will work, though ʖɕ for example won't work because ɕ in on the titleblacklist. - BᴏᴅʜıHᴀᴙᴩ (talk, contributions) 20:42, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    The only entry where this character (explicitly) appears is marked <moveonly>, so you can create titles containing it but not move other pages to titles containing it. —Cryptic 20:54, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    ɕ

    [edit]

    Can someone show me examples of abuse from this character that is on the titleblacklist. - BᴏᴅʜıHᴀᴙᴩ (talk, contributions) 21:57, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    There aren't any non-revdeleted/oversighted pages that abused this character in their title, either currently-existing or -deleted. However, in most such cases, I would expect most such abuses to be revdeleted or oversighted, and the only practical way to find them can't see through that. There are numerous other similar characters in the same rule that have been abused in this way; about the tamest they get is User:R℮dwolf24.
    Even lacking such specific examples, though, I'd rather not unblacklist this. If there are other redirects you want created that contain this character like tɕʼtɕʼ, I'm willing to do that, or you can ask at WP:AFC/R. —Cryptic 23:16, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Pyccᴋᴎᴎ̆

    [edit]

    What about creating this? It's a Latin approximation for Русский, a Russian word. - BᴏᴅʜıHᴀᴙᴩ (talk, contributions) 04:47, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    No, neither are Russian words. Русский is, and it already exists. —Cryptic 05:35, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I accidentally misspelled Русский with a Greek kappa. - BᴏᴅʜıHᴀᴙᴩ (talk, contributions) 05:56, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Protected edit request on 25 November 2025

    [edit]

    Per Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Joey Primiani (courtesy ping Salvio giuliano as closer), please add 

    .*\bj.*\bprimiani.*      # Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Joey Primiani

    to the "# Spam or salt evasion titles" section. Hits are at quarry:query/99297. I am involved. —Cryptic 11:40, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done I actually was close to adding that rule sua sponte after having seem your nomination at the MfD (but I happened to check the edit request queue before I noticed the discussion was closed). * Pppery * it has begun... 16:55, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Very short draft names

    [edit]

    Should we preemptively exclude very short, all-ASCII draft titles like Draft:/, Draft:17, Draft:A, and Draft:Bob? These are often used for nonsense and test pages, and are unlikely to be used for constructive drafts on topics that aren't covered yet. (Non-ASCII titles are plausible targets for articles about individual characters.) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:58, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Hits at quarry:query/99987, and there's indeed been more than this pattern's fair share of deletions. I took a look at a sample of the existing, non-redirect drafts in there - the first 18 of them, up to the end of the A's, out of 83 total - and fully two thirds of them were legitimate attempts at drafts of subjects that would reasonably have these titles. None were close to being acceptable, mind you, and most would have to be disambiguated before being moved into mainspace. I checked an even smaller sample of existing redirects (Draft:25KDraft:25K, Draft:4GRDraft:4GR, Draft:6B2Draft:6B2); all three had been drafts started at those titles, with those titles being not-unreasonable choices, and then accepted and moved into mainspace; albeit with the latter two being renamed afterwards. Blacklisting's likely to do more harm than good here. —Cryptic 05:56, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    What about draft titles with 2 characters or less? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:59, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Looked at samples of existing titles, six non-redirs and six redirs (like you could've done yourself), arbitrarily starting at 'O' for each. Of the non-redirs, one was nonsense, one blank, and the other four legitimate drafts; two of those four were properly titled (one would need disambiguation if mainspaced, the other has an existing article), and the other two were the subject's initials. Of the redirs, one was initials again, and redirected to a duplicate draft at the proper title by someone else; one was a properly-named draft moved into mainspace with disambiguation added (and then the draft title retargeted to the mainspace disambig); one's a legitimate draft-to-draft shortcut; two are entirely useless redirects to their mainspace titles, created like that rather than moved; and one was a legitimate accepted draft started with a nonsensical title. That last one, Draft:SV, I'd rate as worth a thousand deletions of nonsense pages. —Cryptic 06:26, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Edit request 5 January 2026

    [edit]

    Description of suggested change: On the Polish Wikipedia, the User: namespace is actually Wikipedysta:, not Używacz:. Używacz is an archaic Polish word for "someone who uses", not the modern word for "computer system user", which would be Użytkownik, which the Polish Wikipedia also doesn't use.

    Diff:

    −
    Używacz
    		+

    Kreuner (talk) 11:51, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    After finding multiple other errors I decided to regenerate this list.This should include the 342 active Wikipedias, except User
    (사용자|Agar-aramat|Amseqdac|Användare|Asmras|A‌̱tyunta̱m|avan a kipakamanguanguaq|Bantfu|Benotzer|Benutser|Benutzer|Bikarhêner|Brëkòwnik|Brūcend|Bruger|Brukar|Brúkari|Bruker|Choyoołʼįįhí|cinzyuwaw|Cleachdaiche|Dalībnieks|Defnyddiwr|Devnydhyer|Dulooi|Dwumadini|Dwumadzinyi|Empduuy|Énéagwu|Ezaloci|Faidatema|Favesik|Foydalanuvchi|Geavaheaddji|Geban|Gebroeker|Gebruiker|Gebruker|Gumagamit|Gumaramit|Ilungu|Implijer|Iōng-chiá|İstifadəçi|Itilizatè|Itilizatò|jan|Jëfandikukat|Jeno|Ka notcitatc|Karber|Kasutaja|Kävutai|Ka'yataayakalü|Käyttäi|Käyttäjä|Kevttee|Kisadi|Korisnik|Kullanıcı|Lankide|Lītuotuojs|Masyin|Mea hoʻohana|Meidogger|Metmaacher|Middawaida|Midemakay|misaungayay|Modirisi|Moomomoguno|Mošomi|Mpikambana|Mtumiaji|Muna'sesetbi|Naraguna|Naudotojas|Nauduotuos|Notandi|Nutza|Ŋun su|Ojiarụ|Okoədə|Oníṣe|Òsikwaan̄|Outelizador(a)|Pagguna|Pamakai|Pamakay|Pamake|Pamaké|Pangangghuy|Pangguno|Paragamit|Paydalanıwshı|Pemaké|Penggena|Pengguna|Përdoruesi|pilno|Pruukja|Puruhára|Qullanıcı|Redaktor|Ruraq|sadasya|Sang Anganggé|Sangoguna|Sipanghasea|Suradnik|Szerkesztő|Tagagamit|Ta ohu'uwo|Thành viên|Tlatequitiltilīlli|Toma daana|Tuntuna|Tʋmtʋm|Tʋmtʋmda|Uiser|Ulanyjy|Umsebenzisi|Umukoresha|Uporabnik|Ureuëng Ngui|Usador|Úsáideoir|Usator|Usor|Usuari|Usuario|Usuário(a)|Usuariu|Usuàriu|Utensa|Utent|Utente|Utenti|Utilisader|Utilisateur|Utilisator|Utilizaire|Utilizator|Uwukoresha|Uza-na'in|Uzanto|Uzeu|Używacz|Wikipedista|Wikipedysta|Wikizantɔ|Wužiwar|Wužywaŕ|Ymmydeyr|Yusa|Yuuser|Yuza|Zinzantọ|Χρήστες|Χρήστης|Ажыглакчы|Алахәыла|Архайæг|Викиавтор|Гьуртту хьума|ГӀахьалчи|Декъашхо|Демнч|Доакъашхо|Колдонуучу|Корбар|Корисник|Користувач|Кулланучы|Къошулуучу|Кыттааччы|Қатысушы|Ҡатнашыусы|Пайдаланыше|Польꙃєватєл҄ь|Потребител|Пырысь|Сирӹшӹ|Теиця|Тиись|Туружаачы|Удзельнік|Уртах|Участник|Хаснователь|Хоснователь|Хутшăнакан|Хэрэглэгч|Хэрэглэгшэ|ЦӀыхухэт|მომხმარებელი|Մասնակից|באַניצער|משתמש|ئىشلەتكۈچى|ایشلدن|بەکارھێنەر|خدايمي|رُکُن|صارف|کاربر|کارگير|کارن|کارور|مستخدم|واپرائيندڙ|ورتنوالا|ورتݨ آلا|ܡܦܠܚܢܐ|މެމްބަރު|ߟߊߓߊ߯ߙߟߊ|ⴰⵏⵙⵙⵎⵔⵙ|መትነፈዓይ|ተጠቃሚ|አባል|अवयव|छ्येलेमि|प्रयोगकर्ता|यूजर|वापरपी|सदस्य|सदस्यः|আতাকুরা|ব্যবহারকারী|সদস্য|ਵਰਤੋਂਕਾਰ|સભ્ય|ବ୍ୟବହାରକାରୀ|பயனர்|వాడుకరి|ಬಳಕೆದಾರೆ|ಸದಸ್ಯ|ഉപയോക്താവ്|පරිශීලක|ꯁꯤꯖꯤꯟꯅꯔꯤꯕ|ꠛꠦꠛꠀꠞꠈꠣꠞ꠆ꠞꠣ|ผู้ใช้|ຜູ້ໃຊ້|ကေားသုင်ꩻသား|ညးလွပ်|ၽူႈၸႂ်ႉတိုဝ်း|အသုံးပြုလူ|အသုံးပြုသူ|អ្នកប្រើប្រាស់|ᥚᥧᥱ ᥕᥧᥒᥱ ᥖᥪᥰ|ᱵᱮᱵᱷᱟᱨᱤᱭᱟᱹ|𐌽𐌹𐌿𐍄𐌰𐌽𐌳𐍃|使用者|利用者|用戶|用户):.* Kreuner (talk) 13:05, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I didn't realize that Używacz is in fact Silesian. Still, this change will add Wikipedysta. Kreuner (talk) 18:49, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
     Done * Pppery * it has begun... 00:27, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Wikipedysta was already blacklisted, with the subpattern "Wikiped[iy]sta". From manual inspection, looks like we just unblacklisted Atuisoq, Benotser, Druvadur, Odwumanyɛni, Outelizador(a) (though we now disallow Outelizadora, with a redundant group around the a), Panganggo, Usuário(a) (while, again, disallowing Usuárioa with the final a grouped), کاریار, Ọbanife, and 𐌽𐌹𐌿𐍄𐌰𐌽𐌳𐍃. Any idea what projects those used to be for? And are for, at least for Outelizador(a) and Usuário(a)? —Cryptic 00:54, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Fixed the cases where gendered user namespaces resulted in redundant brackets to do the right thing. Looks like 𐌽𐌹𐌿𐍄𐌰𐌽𐌳𐍃 is in fact still there. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:24, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Benotser might be an artifact of the combination of Benotzer, Benutser, and Benutzer into Ben[ou]t[sz]er. Not sure what I was trying to paste for 𐌽𐌹𐌿𐍄𐌰𐌽𐌳𐍃, but it would've been the last that I checked, so maybe I tried to search for "𐌽𐌹𐌿𐍄𐌰𐌽𐌳𐍃)". —Cryptic 01:38, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Does it make any sense to retain Druvadur, Panganggo, and Ọbanife? They're still active namespace aliases in those Wikipedias. Plenty of other aliases too, for that matter. —Cryptic 01:55, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't think so. Since a page will never actually display as "Druvadur:Example" - lmo:Druvadur:Example redirects to lmo:Utent:Example. * Pppery * it has begun... 02:03, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Protected edit request on 9 January 2026

    [edit]
    Draft:Move\/.*

    Preemptive action as the space recommended for WP:ROUNDROBIN swaps. In particular, User:Ahecht/Scripts/pageswap uses such titles as intermediates. May require a custom editnotice. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 08:01, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Actually, I'll need to double-think about which tags to add to it. Probably, nothing is fine. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 08:04, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    What do you expect this to accomplish? Have people actually been manually creating "Draft:Move/XX" titles? This wouldn't do anything about incomplete round robins by page movers, which is the more common problem, since they have tboverride. * Pppery * it has begun... 20:40, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Edit request 6 February 2026 regarding Kuppusamy Annamalai

    [edit]

    I want to move Draft:Kuppusamy Annamalai to Kuppusamy Annamalai because I have accepted the AfC draft but I am being blocked by the title blacklist. Please see my comment here and my discussion with the closer of Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2026 January 18#K. Annamalai (I.P.S).


    Diff:

    −
    (?!(wikipedia( talk)?:|talk:)).*(annamalai.*(\bk\b|kuppu)|(\bk\b|kuppu).*annamalai).* # Special:Permalink/1189541550#K. Annamalai et al, Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2023 November 2#Annamalai Kuppusamy, quarry:query/78646
    		+

    Cunard (talk) 09:49, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    It looks like Spartaz has already moved the page overriding the title blacklist entry. I'd prefer not to remove the entry entirely until Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kuppusamy Annamalai closes. * Pppery * it has begun... 20:57, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    The AfD has closed. TryKid [dubious – discuss] 07:22, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
     Done * Pppery * it has begun... 07:33, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard § Request to create page "Womontown (Kansas City, Missouri)"

    [edit]

     You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard § Request to create page "Womontown (Kansas City, Missouri)". --Ahecht (TALK
    PAGE    )     20:26, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    User 0

    [edit]
    Category:User .*-0

    A type of useless user category that has been consistently and frequently deleted at CfD. While level-0 userboxes are acceptable, it is unhelpful to categorize users by the languages they don't speak.

    Let's put an end to this. Quarry results at https://quarry.wmcloud.org/query/102221. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 08:51, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Support adding this but consider myself too involved to do so. * Pppery * it has begun... 18:56, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
     Done Sohom (talk) 17:36, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_talk:Titleblacklist&oldid=1339880232"