Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, VanFinda! I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

If you have questions, just use this link to ask for help; a volunteer will visit you here shortly!

Need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! radioactOlive_(she/it)(talk) 03:43, 23 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

Tried replying direct on your comment, but clearly I'm a fool and don't know how to follow instructions. Pasting below:

Thank you for the comment as regards my edit on the touch typing page. I have since created this account. I have observed this variant consistently - streamers, gamers typing, my own keyboard wear pattern - but there's no formal publication on this that I can find (hence my self-added [citations needed] tag). I understand reddit and gameFAQ threads are not citable sources - how would you recommend going about finding or creating something that meets the standards? BramSolder (talk) 16:12, 9 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

I would search to see if there are reliable news sources or other forms of independent media that have covered the topic; see Reliable Sources for further information on the types of sources that are acceptable and how to find them.

If there are no such available sources, then the information is not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia - it must have been reported on by reliable secondary sources as indicated above in order to meet the verifiability policy. vanfinda (talk) 18:07, 9 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi VanFinda. After reviewing your request, I have enabled rollback on your account. Please keep the following things in mind while using rollback:

• Being granted rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle or Ultraviolet. It just adds a [rollback] button next to a page's latest live revision. It does not grant you any additional "status" on Wikipedia, nor does it change how Wikipedia policies apply to you.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear and unambiguous cases of vandalism only. Never use rollback to revert good faith edits. For more information about when rollback is appropriate, see Wikipedia:Rollback § When to use rollback.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war, and it should never be used in a content-related dispute to restore the page to your preferred revision. If rollback is abused or used for this purpose or any other inappropriate purpose, the permission will be revoked.
• Use common sense. If you're not sure about something, ask!

I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, and feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into trouble or have any questions about appropriate use of rollback. If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin) and Wikipedia:Rollback. Good luck and thanks! * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:34, 11 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

How do I know what user is being referred to as a vandal? Personally, I’ve never done anything they I thought would be inappropriate. Also, I am a very respectful person and I try to be professional, therefore I would not be “prissy,” etc. Also I only recently became aware that people can message me and so I wasn’t ignoring any communication. Thank you for your help. Jnneedles (talk) 09:34, 8 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

There is vandalism going on by User:~2026-29138-86 (check their contributions). This user's edits are too quick for me to revert, so could you give this vandal at least another warning or a block? Thank you, KPOfficial26 (talk) 10:28, 15 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

I've had a look through their contributions and reverted any remaining vandalism (most of it has already been reverted and it looks like they have paused/stopped making edits). I cannot give them a block because I am not an administrator, but if the vandalism continues then further warnings and/or reporting to WP:AIV are good options. vanfinda (talk) 10:36, 15 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello VanFinda, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of User:Ehsanahmedn, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Ca ^{talk to me!} 03:09, 2 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the feedback! I interpreted that a collection of links with no further content would fall under the "unambiguously promotional" criterion, but I see that was incorrect.

I will keep this in mind when tagging any further pages. vanfinda (talk) 22:07, 2 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Do not use a vandalism template on my talkpage. I am earnestly trying to do the best I can to improve an article making shady assertions in the name of "Christianity" that are unfamiliar theology to the BIBLE, in other words "unbiblical" theology, and you react by slamming a boilerplate vandalism template on me. Don't do it again. ATO Chief Diplomat (talk) 21:57, 6 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

If you wish to change the content of an article, please cite a reliable source or discuss the changes to be made on the talk page so a consensus can be reached.

Introducing commentary that asserts that the content of the article is not valid in the main article space is not permitted, please use the talk page for commentary. vanfinda (talk) 22:01, 6 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Okay, I see already that you are going to be stubborn and not pay attention to the actual problem here in an attempt to be prissy, and snidely talk to me like a vandal when I am earnestly trying to fix the situation. Your "assistance" to me is not appreciated. ATO Chief Diplomat (talk) 22:15, 6 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

see Wikipedia:Notability (numbers) properties of numbers that lack wikipedia pages are considered uninteresting. numbers without any in teresting properties are considered uninteresting. what do i need to do for youto undo these reverts. Riverskip (talk) 01:20, 26 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Replied on user talk page vanfinda (talk) 01:23, 26 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

this is the lower requirement for a property to be mentioned on a list article. the lack of a wikipedia page for a property almost always makes a property not worth mentioning. Also information i removed is either uncited, and likely original research, or only cited on OEIS. While OEIS is consindered reliable, it has very low standards for admission, so most OEIS articles that do not have more references to serious mathematical work are not considered relevant.

Wikipedia:WikiProject Numbers/Guidelines

mentions the lack of a wikipedia article meaning a property is likely unimportant about a number and OEIS not demonstrating the worthiness of a number to be mentioned.

Riverskip (talk) 01:31, 26 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

i am manually reverting back my edits that are clearly within policy. Riverskip (talk) 01:40, 26 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for telling me about the edits I made to those articles. Editing is really complicated nowadays. SH360! Must edit! Must report! 21:24, 14 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

I have add links of sources regarding the mass estimates of megistotherium ~2026-44589-43 (talk) 04:55, 15 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Reddit is not a reliable source. Mr Fink (talk) 06:17, 15 August 2026 (UTC)Reply