Proclamation Trust

Hi Buster—perhaps it was an oversight, but A7 speedy deletion of Proclamation Trust was contested on the article’s talk page. (I was not the page creator.) There are adequate sources for an article and I believe the organisation’s significance was asserted. The best path forward is for the nominator to bring it to AfD. Would you mind reverting your A7 deletion since it was properly contested? Thanks. Dclemens1971 (talk) 18:00, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

Sorry I missed that; restored as requested. BusterD (talk) 20:04, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

Thanks! Dclemens1971 (talk) 22:33, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2026

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2026).

Administrator changes

• Chipmunkdavis
• TechnoSquirrel69

• Mlaffs
• SpuriousQ
• Lectonar
• Dennis Brown
• Hog Farm

CheckUser changes

• Giraffer
• TonyBallioni

• Dbeef
• EdJohnston

Oversight changes

• Giraffer
• TonyBallioni

L235

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment asks whether the criteria for autoconfirmed and extended confirmed should be modified.
• A request for comment proposes an addendum for the Real name section of the Username policy.

Technical news

• The special page Special:RangeCalculator has been created for any users to use to find an IP range. (phab:T268429)
• The "indefinitely" button in Special:Block for temporary accounts can be replaced with a preferred block duration stated on MediaWiki:ipb-indefinite-expiry-temporary-account. (phab:T427125)

Arbitration

• Following a series of motions, changes to the contentious topics procedure to restructure awareness have been implemented.
• The arbitration case Michael Jackson has been closed.

Miscellaneous

• The 2026 Developing Countries WikiContest will run from 1 July to 30 September. Sign up now!
• 10 candidates have been appointed to the U4C.

Proclamation Trust

I think that if you remove a speedy delete tag from an article you should give a rationale in the edit summary. There is nothing either in the article or its sources almost all self published, a red light if ever I saw one) to suggest notability, neither does a search throw up anything substantial. I've AfD'd it, fyi.TheLongTone (talk) 14:28, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

...Apologies; I missed the stuff contigent on the article's deletion & recreation. But I do not think that the list on the talk page is in any way convincing.TheLongTone (talk) 14:32, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Five years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:37, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

G11 speedy deletion: Readmio

Hello BusterD,

I am writing regarding the speedy deletion of Readmio under CSD G11.

Before the deletion, I had cleaned up the article and posted a contest explanation. I believed, and still believe, that the cleaned version was not unambiguously promotional and did not require a fundamental rewrite to become encyclopedic. It was written in neutral, factual third-person prose and contained sourced, salvageable content about the company’s founding, launch history, product technology, funding history, expansion history, and awards. It did not contain calls to action, sales language, first-person or second-person marketing copy, pricing/contact solicitation, or brochure-style claims.

I understand that the article may still have had some issues, and I was willing to keep improving it. However, I did not receive any explanation or feedback identifying which specific parts were considered to meet CSD G11. The speedy deletion tag said that I could contest the nomination and provide an explanation, which I did, but the page was deleted without any response to that explanation as far as I can see.

Could you please clarify which parts of the cleaned version were considered problematic (unambiguously promotional), and why the issues were considered serious enough for speedy deletion rather than being handled through another process that would have allowed further cleanup, reworking, or discussion?

If possible, I would also appreciate restoration to draftspace or my userspace so that I can continue improving the article in line with Wikipedia’s standards. I would be grateful for guidance on what changes would be needed before the article could be considered suitable for mainspace again. My aim is not to create promotional content, but to prepare a neutral, proper encyclopedic article. Could you please help me with that?

Thank you. --Horasb (talk) 07:33, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

I have restored the page and moved it to draftspace. I decline to help you further. Wikipedia does not exist merely to list all educational software applications. As an unpaid volunteer under the community's ever-watching eye, I don't feel obligated to assist a paid editor who has made no good faith preparation for their employment. Good luck. BusterD (talk) 17:11, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

Hello BusterD,

I understand and respect your decision not to assist further with the draft. I am not asking you to review or improve it. I would only appreciate clarification about the original G11 deletion so that I can understand the issue.

After revising the article, I did not identify any promotional wording or content in it. Could you please clarify the specific problems that led to the speedy deletion under CSD G11?

Thank you. --Horasb (talk) 10:48, 17 July 2026 (UTC)

Wishing to try again re: Bill Pollock page

Hello, this was my first attempt at posting on Wikipedia.

I'd like to try again from scratch.

Is there anything special I should do to re-submit on the same topic? Writer654 (talk) 13:04, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

This article's subject appears to be a successful business owner. Good for him. He has paid somebody to write about his life, providing the writer the sorts of clippings he'd like to see included in an en.wiki article about himself. This sample of chosen compliments looks great on Who's Who, Business Wire, or LinkedIn. I'm not seeing anything (or finding anything) which meets our standard of WP:ANYBIO, WP:NOTABILITY, WP:NCORP, or WP:Biographies of living persons. There are (and have been) billions of worthy human beings like your employer. Few of them qualify for an encyclopedia article. See Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. BusterD (talk) 17:56, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll look into this and if I find anything else to add that meets your standards then I'll revisit the issue.

That's it for now, cheers. Writer654 (talk) 18:15, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

Also, thanks again for the speed and clarity of your response. It was very helpful to me. (I'm sure being editor can be a thankless job). Writer654 (talk) 15:26, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

Request to restore Revelator Limited to draft space

Hello BusterD,

I saw that “Revelator Limited” was deleted on 6 July 2026 under CSD G11 as unambiguous advertising or promotion. I understand the concern and I do not intend to recreate the page directly in mainspace. Could you please restore the deleted content to Draft Limited or to my userspace so that it can be rewritten in a neutral encyclopedic style and submitted through Articles for Creation? There appears to be independent coverage that may support notability, including TechCrunch coverage of Revelator’s Series A funding, Music Business Worldwide coverage of its funding and Warner Music Group acquisition, Digital Music News coverage of the WMG/Revelator deal, and CTech/Calcalist coverage of the acquisition. I will remove promotional language, avoid product-catalogue wording, rely on independent secondary sources, and disclose any conflict of interest if applicable. Thank you Tecnoprima (talk) 12:53, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

Hello Buster, can you respond to this? Jay 09:27, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

Now at DRV: see Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2026 July 10. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 18:45, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Happy adminship anniversary! Hi BusterD! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of your successful request for adminship. Enjoy this special day! DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 23:24, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Happy adminship anniversary! Hi BusterD! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of your successful request for adminship. Enjoy this special day! ☘︎☘︎☘︎ALEXHammeke (talk

☘︎☘︎☘︎ALEXHammeke (talk | guestbook | sandbox) 06:03, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

Deletion review: Revelator Limited

Deletion review for Revelator Limited

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Revelator Limited. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Tecnoprima (talk) 06:23, 11 July 2026 (UTC) Tecnoprima (talk) 06:23, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 July 2026

Request regarding Draft:BK8 protection

Hello BusterD,

I hope you're doing well.

I'm reaching out regarding the creation protection on Draft:BK8.

I understand from the protection log that the draft was protected due to repeated recreation attempts, and I appreciate the need to prevent promotional or abandoned drafts.

Since the earlier drafts, we have prepared a substantially revised version written in a neutral, encyclopedic tone with independent secondary sources. Before attempting any submission, I wanted to ask whether you would be willing to review the proposed draft, or alternatively advise on the appropriate route for requesting that the creation protection be reconsidered.

I would appreciate any guidance you can provide.

Thank you for your time. Nugsicorn (talk) 14:32, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

Restored as requested. BusterD (talk) 21:38, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

Category:Hand to hand tactics has been nominated for merging

Category:Hand to hand tactics has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:17, 17 July 2026 (UTC)

Articles for Creation backlog drive

Hello BusterD:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive in August!
The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than a month of outstanding reviews from the current 3+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 August 2026 through 31 August 2026.

You may find Category:AfC pending submissions by age or other categories and sorting helpful.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 5000 pages, so start reviewing drafts. We're looking forward to your help! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

• If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page.

Hello

are you an admin? --Hylie H (talk) 20:28, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

Deletion of Just setting up my twttr

Hi! I was looking at the CSD database report, and noticed that this redirect was neither recently created (dating from 2021) nor implausible (being the text of the very first tweet, mentioned in the target article). Was the R3 deletion a mistake? Thanks a lot! Chaotic Enby (in solidarity · talk · contribs) 22:58, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

D'oh! Didn't actually know this detail! Restored with apologies. I'm just totally not down with all you crazy young cats and your fancy swinging lingo. BusterD (talk) 23:15, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 243, July 2026

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 looks at works on the US and Australian militaries Review essay: Nick-D on South African military museums Timeline: This month in military history

Happy First Edit Day!

Happy First Edit Day! Hi BusterD! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of the day you made your first edit and became a Wikipedian! DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 01:13, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

Happy WikiBirthday!

Happy First Edit Day!

Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, ☘︎☘︎☘︎ALEXHammeke (talk | guestbook | sandbox) 18:15, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

Categorization of AE protection actions needed (26 July 2026)

Hello BusterD,

I'm a bot that helps log arbitration enforcement (AE) protection actions on behalf of the Arbitration Committee. As a result of a September 2025 motion by the Arbitration Committee, administrators are no longer required to manually log AE protection actions. Instead, this bot is responsible for logging AE protections to the AE protection log.

While logging AE protections, this bot detected that you recently took the following page protection actions. These action(s) seemed to be AE actions based on the edit summaries, but the bot wasn't able to tell which arbitration case they related to:

• 14:44, 26 July 2026 (UTC) (List of serving generals of the Bangladesh Army)

If these were AE actions, please take a moment to log the appropriate topic code at the AE protection log. If they were not, feel free to remove the actions from the AE protection log, and optionally let the bot operator know about the false positives.

Going forward, in order to help this bot categorize AE actions, please include a link to the contentious topic under which the action was taken in the protection edit summary (for example, [[WP:CT/BLP]] or [[Wikipedia:Contentious topics/Biographies of Living Persons]]).

If you have any questions, please feel free to reach out to the bot operator or to the arbitration clerks at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard.

Thank you! ClerkBot (talk) 23:59, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

Deletion review for KreekCraft (YouTuber)

Crystalite13 has asked for a deletion review of KreekCraft (YouTuber). Because you speedily deleted the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. —Cryptic 05:59, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

Deletion Review for The Raymond Corporation

Hello Bobby,

I hope you don't mind the question.

I am an employee of Carolina Handling, which is a Raymond Solutions and Support Center. I am not employed by The Raymond Corporation or Toyota Industries. I understand that this creates a potential conflict of interest, so I wanted to be transparent about that connection.

I reviewed your comments on Draft:The Raymond Corporation and have been trying to better understand the remaining concerns. My understanding is that the primary issue was the promotional tone rather than a determination that the subject itself lacks notability.

I have attempted to remove marketing language, reduce product and service descriptions, and rely more heavily on independent sources such as DC Velocity, IndustryWeek, Material Handling & Logistics, and other third-party publications.

Would you be willing to point me toward the specific areas that still read as promotional or that you believe would prevent the draft from meeting Wikipedia's standards? I am happy to focus on improving those issues and to provide verifiable facts and sources rather than promotional content.

Thank you for your time and for any guidance you can provide. AnnaCHL (talk) 18:50, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

Noting that I've blocked this account as the sock of MarketingCHL. Girth Summit _(blether) 21:37, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

The Signpost: 2 August 2026

Surfshark VPN page deletion

Hi BusterD, i'm writing about the deletion of Surfshark VPN under G11.

i understand why the previous version may have been seen as promotional, but i don't think that's something that can't be fixed. the VPN service topic itself seems notable enough for an article, and it feels like the issue is more with how it was written than whether it should exist at all.

would you consider restoring it to draft instead? that would give community a chance to remove the promotional language or do better with the sourcing and rewrite it before it's ever considered for mainspace again.

if there were specific parts that made you feel it met G11, i'd be interested to know what they were

thanks for your time. --~~~~ MagnusBaldur (talk) 11:53, 4 August 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for mentioning this. In my haste I made a mistake in deleting this page as G11. On re-reading, the article seems very much in line with other Tesonet based VPN services articles. I've restored it and I apologize for my error. On the other hand, are you using Large language models to edit Wikipedia? Your above request tests as 100% AI. BusterD (talk) 12:30, 4 August 2026 (UTC)

thanks for taking my request into account. was the page restored to draft - can not find it?

and no. i only checked the grammar of my request. MagnusBaldur (talk) 20:29, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

Draft:Koin (framework) — deletion (G11/G15

Hi BusterD,

I'm Olwethu and I was hoping to discuss with you the deletion of Draft:Koin (framework) on 9 June 2026 under G11/G15. I'm a consultant for Kotzilla, the company that looks after the Koin open-source project, so I want to be upfront about that connection.

I also want to be upfront about something more directly relevant to the G15 tag: the draft was written with AI assistance, and I see now that I hadn't fully appreciated how far that falls outside what's allowed until after the deletion, so I put my hands up.

So, I'm in the process of revising and would like to resubmit. But, before I do that, I'd like to understand what specifically triggered the tags so I can actually fix the underlying issues:

• For G11: which parts read as promotional, and was it more the tone or the choice of sources? Should I maybe talk more about its history? I have looked at other examples in our field and not too sure how to undo this (I do work in marketing so I accept that this must be the case, that it's too promotional)
• For G15: were there particular passages that stood out as unreviewed AI output, or citations that were not good enough?

Going forward I'll write the actual content myself from verified sources, using AI for copyediting of my own text . If you still have a copy of the deleted draft, that would help me see exactly where it went wrong.

I'll aso do a proper COI disclosure.

Thanks so much

Olwethu Ollis512 (talk) 09:18, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

I choose not to help a computer. If you want help from another wikipedian, you should learn how to make the request without the use of AI. BusterD (talk) 09:27, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

Thanks @BusterD

I have to admit I'm a bit stuck here.

I would like to resubmit an acceptable page if possible. Before I do that I'd like to better understand the objections. I do use AI for copy editing so my text reads more professional, if you will. In fact, this is one of the the queries I have with the G15 tag. If this is not possible at all, then yes, I need to come up with a new plan.

Thanks again for your time

Olwethu Ollis512 (talk) 08:37, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

I agree we are at an impasse. Using AI to write here has backfired and further use will inevitably quick fail your drafts. You wish to write about your product, and I cannot stop you from creating a new draft from scratch. Base that draft on what reliable others have said about the product. Your employer wishes a specific sort of outcome which seems quite unlikely, based on my reasonable search for such sources. It's a niche subject matter. Not all software products are notable. Wikipedia is simply not the Yellow pages, and your employer cannot merely purchase an advertisement here. BusterD (talk) 09:42, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

Hey @BusterD

Thank you again for this response. I find it to be super reasonable & helpful.

What I'm hearing from it is (AI use aside-but duly noted) our software product may not be notable enough to warrant a wikipedia page.

I'm going to take and step back and reassess. It is true that ours is indeed a very niche subject matter.

Thanks again,

Olwethu Ollis512 (talk) 10:08, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

Requesting review of speedy deletions of the Casely and Dreame articles

Hi there BusterD, did you actually have a check/read through the Casely (company) and Dreame Technology articles before accepting the speedy deletion requests? The SD tags were placed by a temporary account acting in bad faith which has actually been blocked for it now. Some other well-established and not-vandalism articles they tried to CSD tag in bad faith are Andrew Repko and Rain (platform), in addition to vandalising others (e.g. diff). The Casely and Dreame articles seemed to be in good shape and not meeting any of the SD criteria the last time I saw them. — AP 499D25 (talk) 09:27, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for asking. I've restored both. I got in a hurry while deleting a big batch and I missed my due diligence on these. BusterD (talk) 10:09, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

The (now blocked) TA applied a bunch of speedy tags which I've reverted. TAs applying mass speedy tags is a new phenomenon to me. Very much appreciate your pointing this out. BusterD (talk) 10:33, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

Thanks! And honestly, I can't quite recall the last time I saw a vandal / disruptive editor SD-tagging pages en masse either. Though I had a look at that latest ~2026-42424-42 TA that you blocked, and it seemed to be a different person to the TA on the Casely and Dreame articles according to technical data from TAIV. — AP 499D25 (talk) 12:20, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

Behaviorally... BusterD (talk) 12:32, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

Request for Restoration of Deleted “Rashtrakuta–Chola Wars” Draft

I would like to request the restoration of the deleted article “Rashtrakuta–Chola Wars.” The draft contained information on the military conflicts between the Rashtrakuta and Chola dynasties, supported by historical and scholarly sources. I intend to continue improving the article and address any issues that led to its deletion, while ensuring that the content is properly sourced, neutral, and compliant with Wikipedia’s policies and guidelines. I also plan to wait until my account meets the required eligibility criteria, including being more than 30 days old and having 500+ edits, before resubmitting the article through the appropriate process. If possible, I would appreciate access to the previous version so that I can recover and improve the sourced material rather than recreate the work from the beginning. Vasilystepanov (talk) 10:46, 8 August 2026 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2026

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2026).

Administrator changes

• MCE89
• Staraction

• Danaman5

CheckUser changes

• dbeef

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, the 30-day requirement for extended-confirmed status now begins after an account's first edit instead of its registration (T431060).

Technical news

• Inactive editors can now be removed as mentors at Special:CommunityConfiguration/Mentorship automatically.
• The Suggested Edits' Revise Tone feature is now enabled. It encourages editors to identify and revise non-neutral language in articles.

Miscellaneous

• The Unreferenced articles August 2026 backlog drive is underway. Help to add references to 47,000 articles.
• The Articles for creation August 2026 backlog drive is under way. Help to review 4,500+ drafts.

Request for Restoration of Deleted draft “Duty to render assistance"

Hi Buster

I am a political scientist doing research on the field of maritime security. I had a couple of issues with the references in the article but this is mainly due to formatting. All the listed literature is peer-reviewed quality sources that I have thoroughly read before adding. Did you read my contestation to the speedy deletion? I am saddened to have lost all this progress and I would like to ask you if you could revoke the speedy deletion.

Best, Acornwoodpecker Acornwoodpecker (talk) 07:48, 12 August 2026 (UTC)

Do you deny you used a large language model to create the page? I will help humans, but won't help AIs. BusterD (talk) 09:23, 12 August 2026 (UTC)

Yes, I absolutely deny it. I know that Wikipedia has a clear-cut no AI-usage policy and I adhere to it 100%

I read the source in question thoroughly and wrote about its contents using my own words. Acornwoodpecker (talk) 09:27, 12 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi again BusterD

Will you help me restore my work?

Best Acornwoodpecker (talk) 12:09, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

Done. I'm sorry my temporary deletion has delayed your work. We see a staggering amount of LLM-created content these days. Good luck with your draft. This is not a freshly discovered subject. I'd guess Lloyd's (for example) has done considerable record-keeping. For background this is a 2020 Oxford faculty blogpost, but by Erik Røsæg, a subject matter expert. There must be many sources out there. Look for independence. BusterD (talk) 12:35, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

User talk:Tongyin2020

I think you may have deleted the user talk page by accident? Please consider restoring it 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 11:15, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

I've developed a bad habit. I'll work on it. Thanks for the note. Always glad to help you. BusterD (talk) 11:34, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

Nice username!

Hey, I like your username very much. Also, thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. You really mean a lot. I'm sure it needs you. SlapstickHumor360! (talk) 10:04, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

Kamil Ugurbil

Dear BusterD,

I am writing to express my serious concern and disappointment regarding the deletion of an article I created about a researcher. The reason given for the deletion that the subject was considered “not notable.” However, i find this decision quite surprising and believe that the subject’s significance may not have beenassessed.

The researcher has more than 113,000 citations and an h-index of 157, along with numeros academic awards, fellowships, and other significant achievements. Their work and name are also mentioned extensively across other Wikipedia articles. Given this level of academic recognition, it is genuinely difficult for me to understand how the subject could be considered insufficiently notable.

A quick search through reliable academic and institutional sources would clearly demonstrate the significance and prominence of this researcher. For this reason, I respectfully ask that the deletion decision be reconsidered.

I spent several consecutive hours researching and writing this article, carefully gathering and adding sources and references. Unfortunately, I do not have a copy of the content I created or the collection of sources I used. Reconstructing the article and locating all of those references again would therefore be extremely difficult and time-consuming.

I would sincerely appreciate it if the article could be restored, so that I can review it,, and make any necessary changes to ensure that it fully complies with Wikipedia’s policies and notability guidelines.

I hope you will reconsider the deletion in light of the researcher’s substantial academic impact and the available independent sources documenting their work.

Thank you for taking the time to review my request.

Sincerely, Rohbin (talk) 13:03, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

10 That Changed America copyvio

i was more thinking that the list was a copyvio based on Wikipedia:Copyright in lists than any copy report. I asked at the TEAHOUSE but I didn't get a reply so I thought I'd just do a copyvio report. Given this new lens, do you still believe it's not a copyvio? 781h (talk) 18:50, 16 August 2026 (UTC)

Speedy deletion: Esau Williams

HI BusterD,

The page I set up for Esau Williams the BBC journalist was summarily deleted without offering the opportunity to present a case or respond to any concerns. I know you said you've re-read the article and that there are in fact substantive changes to previous versions, but that independent sources were an issue. Could the page be restored to a draft such that I could add new sources that I have found and re-submit in draft this time around? Thanks! JM04093 (talk) 23:53, 16 August 2026 (UTC)

Speedy deletion: Hyperlinear group

Hi @BusterD, could you restore the Hyperlinear group to a draft so I can continue work? I don't have a copy saved.

See also: User talk:Gurkubondinn#LLM deletions January2May (talk) 10:37, 17 August 2026 (UTC)

See No LLMs. Create a fresh draft, because I'm not restoring the contaminated one. BusterD (talk) 09:37, 18 August 2026 (UTC)

Request regarding deleted Draft: Sofia Glavopoulou

Hello, BusterD. My name is Sofia Glavopoulou and I saw that my draft is deleted. The first drift I did it with AI assistance and then I realised that if I do this Wikipedia will delete my draft. After that I deleted everything and I write by my one again my biography. The important thing is that I have independent and reliable sources from national Bulgaria Radio, newspaper Maritsa, the Bulgarian New Agency and so many interviews and articles about my carrier. Also my photographer, Zara Ruseva, send yesterday an email to Wikipedia Commons confirming the permission for the photograph and it’s use under the require licence. I don’t want to circumvent the deletion. I simply want to ask whether I am allowed to creat a new draft from scratch using my own writing, or whether you would prefer to restore the draft to user space or draft space so that I can rework it properly. I would also appreciate it if you could tell me what I did wrong, so I can avoid making the same mistakes!!

Thank you very much for your time and help.

Have a nice day. Sofia Glavopoulou Fiaso1 (talk) 07:46, 18 August 2026 (UTC)

You used AI to create an autobiography? Our policy is no LLMs. That's two strikes already. If you wish to write about yourself, you'll need to write a draft from scratch, the last draft being contaminated by AI usage. BusterD (talk) 09:34, 18 August 2026 (UTC)

Request regarding deleted Draft: Sofia Glavopoulou

I just wanted to clarify one point. My intention in using AI was mainly to help me with English, since English is not my first language, and to correct grammar and phrasing. I now understand that in the first draft I relied on AI more than Wikipedia’s policy allows.

I am not trying to use AI to create a new article for me. For the new draft, I will write the content myself from scratch, using the reliable sources I have collected. If I need help with English, I will make sure that any assistance is limited to basic proofreading and does not rewrite the article for me.

Thank you for explaining the policy to me. Fiaso1 (talk) 09:58, 18 August 2026 (UTC)

You're welcome. BusterD (talk) 10:00, 18 August 2026 (UTC)

IdeaForge Technology

I'm requesting restoration of IdeaForge Technology, which was deleted as G4 today. The original article was deleted over a year ago, and the version I created was not a recreation of that content. It was substantially rebuilt from scratch with independent sourcing to directly address the notability concerns from the original deletion. I had no opportunity to respond to or contest the G4 nomination before deletion occurred. I'd also mention that the editor who originally nominated the article for deletion has since been blocked.

I think this version deserves a fair look rather than an automatic G4 closure. Could you restore the article so it can go through a proper AfD process if there are remaining notability concerns? Thirdwave09 (talk) 14:41, 19 August 2026 (UTC)

Deletion of ArcaOS

Hello BusterD. On 16 August you deleted ArcaOS under G11. I'd like to ask you to reconsider, or alternatively to restore the article to draft space so it can be improved.

A few points I hope you'll weigh:

• G11 threshold. G11 applies to pages that are exclusively promotional and would need a fundamental rewrite. This article existed since 2017 as a fairly conventional description of a commercial operating system — history, release table, hardware support. If promotional wording crept in through later edits, reverting or copyediting seems like the proportionate remedy per WP:ATD rather than deleting the article and its history outright.
• No paid editing. I have been one of the article's main contributors for years — as the deleted history will show, a large share of its recent revisions are mine, going back to at least 2020. I have no connection to Arca Noae and have never been paid to edit; this is longstanding hobbyist interest in OS/2.
• Significance of the topic. OS/2 is a famous operating system, and ArcaOS is the notable example of it being continued by third parties after IBM discontinued it. We cover the earlier OS/2 derivative eComStation for the same reason; ArcaOS is its direct successor and at least as significant.
• Sourcing. I'm aware the article leaned on primary sources (it was tagged for this), and I'm happy to do that cleanup myself — along with removing anything that reads as promotional — if you restore it to mainspace with tags, or to draftspace.

Could you let me know what in particular read as promotional, so I can address it? Thanks. Vt320 (talk) 19:15, 19 August 2026 (UTC)

Follow up

You had clearly warned Vasilystepanov about the ECP requirement and how he should avoid editing about caste and military related to India. He has been brought to ANI and the thread has gone too long already. Your intervention is needed there. Thanks. Orientls (talk) 12:52, 22 August 2026 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 244, August 2026

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7, Pickersgill-Cunliffe, Nick-D and Simon Harley look at six works Timeline: This month in military history

The Signpost: 24 August 2026

"Translation isn't copyvio"

What do you mean? A straight translation of a copyrighted text is a very obvious copyvio (the text is just taken straight from Google translate). I hope you don't regularly reject copyvio tags for this reason. Fram (talk) 09:18, 24 August 2026 (UTC)

It's the first time it's come up for me (in 20 years). Not trying to be argumentative. Thanks. I'll do my reading. BusterD (talk) 09:20, 24 August 2026 (UTC)

Well, you could have asked without removing the tag as incorrect then. Fram (talk) 09:22, 24 August 2026 (UTC)

And you can still revdel the copyvio, if you think the current close paraphrasing is sufficient. Fram (talk) 09:36, 24 August 2026 (UTC)

Restoration request: Knack RCM

Hi BusterD,

I noticed the page Knack RCM was deleted under Criterion A7. However, the deletion tag was actively contested prior to removal. The company underwent a high-profile majority acquisition by The Carlyle Group in May 2026 and holds coverage in financial/healthcare trade media (The Economic Times, Becker's Hospital Review), meeting the basic assertion of significance under WP:A7.

Could you please restore the deleted text to my draft space at `Draft:Knack RCM` (or `User:Mafidon/Knack RCM`)? I am preparing the complete, multi-section buildout with secondary sourcing and paid editing disclosures before re-submitting through AfC. Thanks! Mafidon (talk) 09:25, 24 August 2026 (UTC)

Deletion review for ArcaOS

An editor has asked for a deletion review of ArcaOS. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Vt320 (talk) 13:38, 24 August 2026 (UTC)

New pages patrol September 2026 Backlog drive

September 2026 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
On 1 September 2026, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin at a particularly important time for NPP. The backlog has now passed 30,000 unreviewed articles, a level that has been described in current NPP discussions as exceptionally high and potentially difficult to overcome through normal reviewing alone. Backlog drives are one of the few measures that have historically produced a noticeable reduction in the backlog, so the participation of as many active patrollers as possible will matter this month. If you can review during September, please make articles your priority. Every article that is reviewed is a meaningful reduction in the backlog. With the queue at its current size, even a relatively small increase in the number of articles each patroller reviews can add up to a substantial difference over the course of the month. This is a hybrid drive, so redirect reviewing is still included. Redirects can be a useful way for newer patrollers to get comfortable with NPP and can help people build up to reviewing articles. However, the main goal of this drive is to tackle the article backlog, and experienced patrollers are particularly encouraged to spend as much of their available reviewing time on articles as they can. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Each article review will earn 1 point, while each redirect review will earn 0.2 points. Streak awards will be given out based on consistently hitting point thresholds for each week of the drive. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. If you have been thinking about doing more NPP, this is an especially good month to jump in. Whether you can review a few pages or hundreds, every review helps. And if you are already an active patroller, please consider whether you can put in some additional time during September to help bring the backlog back under control. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:50, 24 August 2026 (UTC)

Implausible redirect

Hi, Buster D -- I just noticed the recent deletion of Kakao page, which I'm assuming redirected to Kakao Page. Just wondering, did you mean to delete this as R3? It's got a decent number of incoming links as it's just a simple alternative capitalization) GreenLipstickLesbian💌🧸 05:34, 25 August 2026 (UTC)