Delcoan

October 2025 Barnstar

		The Current Events Barnstar
		Your work at 2025 Virginia redistricting was sorely needed! Enjoy this barnstar as a reflection of your work. JuxtaposedJacob (talk) | :) | he/him | 00:33, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! @JuxtaposedJacob Thefinals626472 (talk) 00:43, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

Nomination of Ermold v. Davis for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ermold v. Davis is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ermold v. Davis until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

lethargilistic (talk) 08:43, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Thefinals626472. Thank you for your work on 1924 Nevada State Question 2. Another editor, Mariamnei, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thank you for your work on this article. Please add secondary sources. Thanks and have a wonderful day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Mariamnei}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Mariamnei (talk) 12:58, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! Thefinals626472 (talk) 17:39, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

ArbCom 2025 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2025 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:52, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

:)

I'm unsure if I am meant to reply at the GA nom talk page, so I'll leave this here and can move it over if needed.

Thank you so much for the review and the detailed advice, especially the mentions of individual citation numbers, which was very helpful when I was making changes. I have rectified all the issues mentioned & taken your advice by:

• replacing sources when needed to match quotes (I believe I copy and pasted the wrong link when writing about ACLU)
• rewriting a number of sentences that were too similar to the phrasing used in the sources
• adding an Analysis of Results section with an additional comparison map between Trump's 2024 performance and the results
• adding an Aftermath/Reactions section
• significantly expanding the Election Logistics section and the Chester County provisional ballots section

Do I need to resubmit the article for GA or will you just re-review in due time? Best, aesurias (talk) 08:09, 27 November 2025 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Obergefell v. Hodges, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Georgia. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 07:55, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Thefinals626472. Thank you for your work on 2025 Georgia State House District 121 special election. Another editor, Guessitsavis, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Deriving notability from WP:NPOL and WP:EFFECT.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Guessitsavis}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Signed, Guessitsavis (she/they) ^Talk 13:03, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Peter Arnett

On 23 December 2025, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Peter Arnett, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Schwede66 22:31, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

New message from Narutolovehinata5

Hello, Delcoan. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:Did you know.
Message added 01:24, 31 December 2025 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:24, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Nomination of 2026 United States strikes in Syria for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2026 United States strikes in Syria is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2026 United States strikes in Syria until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Thanks, Glasspalace (talk • contribs) 04:10, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

DYK for 2004 Alabama Amendment 2

On 19 January 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 2004 Alabama Amendment 2, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a 2004 ballot measure to repeal Jim Crow laws in Alabama failed after opponents claimed that taxes would spike? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/2004 Alabama Amendment 2. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, 2004 Alabama Amendment 2), 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 nominate it.

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:02, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

DYK for 1876 Connecticut Question 6

On 19 January 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 1876 Connecticut Question 6, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that more than 90 percent of Connecticut voters in 1876 agreed to repeal the requirement of being white to vote? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/1876 Connecticut Question 6. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, 1876 Connecticut Question 6), 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 nominate it.

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:03, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

Good Article Review

@Delcoan, I know you said you were going to review my article, Hotel Zone, but I responded to your corrections, and whenever you get a chance, I was wondering if you could review the article again. DCAllStar (talk) 01:43, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

Hey! Of course- I will do another source spot check tomorrow morning. Delcoan (talk) 02:59, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you so much, I don't mean to seem upset. DCAllStar (talk) 03:06, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

No, don’t feel guilty at all! I apologize for not getting to this sooner. Delcoan (talk) 03:06, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 1998 South Carolina Amendment 4, a link pointing to the disambiguation page was Robert Ford. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 07:54, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of 2021 Pennsylvania Amendment 3 is under review

Your good article nomination of the article 2021 Pennsylvania Amendment 3 is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Olliefant -- Olliefant (talk) 20:43, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

DYK for 2025 Texas Proposition 15

On 24 January 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 2025 Texas Proposition 15, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that more than 30 percent of Texas voters opposed a 2025 constitutional amendment stating that "parents are the primary decision makers for their children"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/2025 Texas Proposition 15. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, 2025 Texas Proposition 15), 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 nominate it.

♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:03, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

DYK for 2010 Arizona Proposition 112

On 27 January 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 2010 Arizona Proposition 112, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Arizona voters rejected a 2010 ballot measure by just 194 votes out of more than 1.5 million cast? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/2010 Arizona Proposition 112. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, 2010 Arizona Proposition 112), 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 nominate it.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:03, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of 2021 Pennsylvania Amendment 3 has passed

Your good article nomination of the article 2021 Pennsylvania Amendment 3 has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Olliefant -- Olliefant (talk) 02:24, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

DYK for 1908 California Amendment 14

On 29 January 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 1908 California Amendment 14, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that California voters approved a 1908 constitutional amendment by just two votes out of more than 185,000 cast? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/1908 California Amendment 14. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, 1908 California Amendment 14), 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 nominate it.

Z1720 (talk) 00:03, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

2026 Virginia Right to Reproductive Freedom Amendment

Just letting you know that your page, 2026 Virginia Right to Reproductive Freedom Amendment, has been selected by a student editor for a course. Please keep an eye on any additions to the page and be super mindful that they are not aware of Wikipedia's rules or manual of style (I have already had to revert a large edit to the lede paragraph).

Have a good day! aesurias (ping me in your reply, or I won't see it) (talk) 23:29, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

@Aesurias: Thank you for letting me know. Delcoan (talk) 01:16, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

There is now, incredibly, a second student editor working on it. aesurias (ping me in your reply, or I won't see it) (talk) 04:09, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

@Aesurias: Wow! Guess it’s a popular article, lol.

Anyway, thanks for reverting those edits again. I’ll try to keep an eye on it as well. Delcoan (talk) 04:12, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

SC DYK

Have you considered "that a 1998 referendum to repeal South Carolina's unenforceable interracial marriage ban was opposed by 38% of voters?" for this? I think it flows much better than "38% opposition". "by almost 40% of voters?" may also work if it isn't too lengthy. aesurias (ping me in your reply, or I won't see it) (talk) 10:54, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

@Aesurias: Oh, yeah, that actually makes more sense. I’ll propose that in the nomination. Delcoan (talk) 04:13, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

DYK nomination of 1918 Massachusetts Question 1

Hello! Your submission of 1918 Massachusetts Question 1 at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:01, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Delegates of the 1972 Montana Constitutional Convention.jpeg

Thank you for uploading File:Delegates of the 1972 Montana Constitutional Convention.jpeg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 02:27, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

DYK for 2026 Virginia Repeal Same-Sex Marriage Ban Amendment

On 19 February 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 2026 Virginia Repeal Same-Sex Marriage Ban Amendment, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Virginia voters are scheduled to decide in 2026 whether to formally legalize same-sex marriage? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/2026 Virginia Repeal Same-Sex Marriage Ban Amendment. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, 2026 Virginia Repeal Same-Sex Marriage Ban Amendment), 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 nominate it.

HurricaneZeta^C 01:31, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Delegates of the 1972 Montana Constitutional Convention.jpeg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Delegates of the 1972 Montana Constitutional Convention.jpeg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:20, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of 1987 Mississippi Amendment 3 is under review

Your good article nomination of the article 1987 Mississippi Amendment 3 is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Jordano53 -- Jordano53 (talk) 06:08, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of 1987 Mississippi Amendment 3 is on hold

Your good article nomination of the article 1987 Mississippi Amendment 3 has been placed on hold, as the article needs some changes. See the review page for more information. If these are addressed within 7 days, the nomination will pass; otherwise, it may fail. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Jordano53 -- Jordano53 (talk) 07:04, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

February 2026

Hello, I'm Zackmann08. Thank you for your recent contributions to Template:1998 United States elections. When you were adding content to the page, you added duplicate arguments to a template which can cause issues with how the template is rendered. In the future, please use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find these errors as they will display in yellow at the top of the page. Thanks. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 03:34, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for fixing that; I apologize. Delcoan (talk) 04:10, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

If I had a nickel for every time I've made that mistake I could retire and edit full time! No worries. Just a friendly reminder. Keep up the good work! Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 04:13, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of 1987 Mississippi Amendment 3 has passed

Your good article nomination of the article 1987 Mississippi Amendment 3 has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Please also consider reviewing somebody else's nomination to help keep the backlog down. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Jordano53 -- Jordano53 (talk) 17:00, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted

Hi Delcoan, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the new page reviewer user right to your account. This means you now have access to the page curation tools and can start patrolling pages from the new pages feed. If you asked for this at requests for permissions, please check back there to see if your access is time-limited or if there are other comments.

This is a good time to re-acquaint yourself with the guidance at Wikipedia:New pages patrol. Before you get started, please take the time to:

• Add Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers to your watchlist to follow NPP-related discussions
• If you use Twinkle, configure it to log your CSDs and PRODs
• If you can read any languages other than English, add yourself to the list of reviewers with language proficiencies

You can find a list of other useful links and tools for patrollers at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Resources. If you are ever unsure what to do, ask your fellow patrollers or just leave the page for someone else to review – you're not alone! Sohom (talk) 04:36, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

DYK for 1998 South Carolina Amendment 4

On 3 March 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 1998 South Carolina Amendment 4, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a 1998 referendum to repeal South Carolina's unenforceable interracial marriage ban was opposed by more than 38 percent of voters? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/1998 South Carolina Amendment 4 (2nd nomination). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, 1998 South Carolina Amendment 4), 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 nominate it.

HurricaneZeta^C 00:03, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

In this edit you used the word "rationed". I think you wanted to use the word "reasoned"? Shenme (talk) 05:15, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Yes. Fixed. Delcoan (talk) 12:14, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 10

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2005 Texas Proposition 2, a link pointing to the disambiguation page Orlando Garcia was added.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:00, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

DYK for 2021 Pennsylvania Amendment 3

On 13 March 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 2021 Pennsylvania Amendment 3, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that more than a quarter of Pennsylvania voters opposed a 2021 constitutional amendment to prohibit racial and ethnic discrimination? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/2021 Pennsylvania Amendment 3. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, 2021 Pennsylvania Amendment 3), 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 nominate it.

Epicgenius (talk) 12:03, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of 1976 Missouri Amendment 5 is under review

Your good article nomination of the article 1976 Missouri Amendment 5 is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of TheNuggeteer -- TheNuggeteer (talk) 13:00, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

DYK for 1987 Mississippi Amendment 3

On 19 March 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 1987 Mississippi Amendment 3, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a 1987 referendum to repeal Mississippi's unenforceable interracial marriage ban was opposed by more than 48 percent of voters? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/1987 Mississippi Amendment 3. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, 1987 Mississippi Amendment 3), 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 nominate it.

HurricaneZeta^C 00:02, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of 1976 Missouri Amendment 5 has passed

Your good article nomination of the article 1976 Missouri Amendment 5 has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Please also consider reviewing somebody else's nomination to help keep the backlog down. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of TheNuggeteer -- TheNuggeteer (talk) 04:30, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Hello Delcoan! The thread you created at the Teahouse, Roll call table error for dark mode, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please . See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by KiranBOT, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=KiranBOT}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). —KiranBOT (talk) 03:04, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

DYK for 1972 Montana Constitutional Convention

On 28 March 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 1972 Montana Constitutional Convention, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Montana voters in 1972 chose to keep the death penalty, allow for gambling to be legalized, have a bicameral legislature, and ratify a new constitution? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/1972 Montana Constitutional Convention. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, 1972 Montana Constitutional Convention), 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 nominate it.

~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:03, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Hello Delcoan! The thread you created at the Teahouse, Error when referendum infobox is placed at bottom of page, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please . See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by KiranBOT, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=KiranBOT}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). —KiranBOT (talk) 03:04, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Promotion of 1987 Mississippi ballot measures

Congratulations, Delcoan! The list you nominated, 1987 Mississippi ballot measures, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best lists on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list. Keep up the great work! Cheers, PresN (talk) via FACBot (talk) 11:25, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Hello Delcoan! The thread you created at the Teahouse, Text not showing in collapse template, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please . See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by KiranBOT, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=KiranBOT}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). —KiranBOT (talk) 03:03, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Unofficial manual of style for Wikipedia articles on referendums

@Aesurias, Yoblyblob, Elli, Zantastik, Gazamp, and Nahida: Hello! I have pinged you all because I have seen that you consistently write articles on referendums, and felt you might enjoy discussing this topic; if you know of someone who writes about them a lot too who was not pinged, please feel free to do so, as I could not think of many people.

I would like to propose that we come up with an unofficial manual of style for referendum articles, because a lot of the time, things vary heavily, or just slightly, from article to article, which simply creates unnecessary differences. The goal of the unofficial manual would be to try and mitigate these differences. Some common differences I see include:

• Very beginning of articles: some start off with the entire name, (e.g. 1967 Pennsylvania Amendment 1-A), others list the state name and amendment number followed by the year (e.g. 2006 South Carolina Amendment 1), others list just the amendment number (e.g. 2012 Wyoming Amendment A) while others include alternate names for the amendment (e.g. 2002 Massachusetts Question 2).

• Short descriptions: some describe the amendment itself, (e.g. 1987 Mississippi Amendment 3), others also describe the amendment but do so in a different tense (e.g. 1998 South Carolina Amendment 4), while others describe what is being amended (e.g. 2024 Colorado Amendment 80)

• Percentage in keys: some use one percentage symbol per number interval (e.g. 2004 Alabama Amendment 2), while others use two (e.g. 1972 Denver Winter Olympics referendum)

• Order in keys: some list percentages going from high to low (e.g. 1998 Alaska Measure 2), while others list percentages going from low to high (e.g. 2024 Arizona Proposition 139)

• Key shape: some are vertical (e.g. 2020 Utah Constitutional Amendment A) while others are horizontal (e.g. 2023 Ohio Issue 2)

• Key color boxes: some include grey boxes around the colors (e.g. 2024 Ohio Issue 1), others use black (e.g. 1918 Massachusetts Question 1), while others do not use any boxes (I can't find an example right now but I have definitely seen it before).

• Above 90%: For colors above 90%, some articles say "90–100%" (e.g. 2021 Pennsylvania Amendment 3) while others say "<90%" (e.g. 2025 Texas Proposition 15)

• Tie color: the vast majority use white, though I have seen ones that use different colors, such as pink (2022 Montana Legislative Referendum 131)

Delcoan (talk) 22:59, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Agree with standardization for all of these points, though I don't have strong opinions on most of them. I do think key shape should be vertical, and that the exact tie color should be      #EBEEED (from Wikipedia:WikiProject Elections and Referendums/USA legend colors#Proposal support levels). Elli (talk | contribs) 23:04, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Also if we want to actually firm up consensus, we should have the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Elections and Referendums (but probably fine to brainstorm here first). Elli (talk | contribs) 23:05, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

I agree. Key shape 100% vertical.

Re: the name in the lede, I think that 2012 Wyoming Amendment A is preferable because often the end of the sentence reads something along the lines of "...that appeared on the 8 November, 2012, ballot in the state of Wyoming", making the full title redundant.

For example with 2016 Colorado Amendment 69, I wrote:

Amendment 69 was an initiated constitutional amendment that appeared on the November 8, 2016, ballot in the state of Colorado.

Adding "2016 Colorado [Amendment 69]" to the start of that sentence is not necessary when the year and state are given immediately after. aesurias (ping me in your reply, or I won't see it) (talk) 02:10, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Also, order of keys should be low to high. aesurias (ping me in your reply, or I won't see it) (talk) 02:11, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Agree with Elli about the discussion place, I only really have thoughts about a few of these points though.

For the names, I think standardization by state should be what is needed, using the state title if applicable (I know Alabama just lists Amendment x for all theirs). Whether it is amendment/initiative/proposition, I think it is fine to differentiate if the state officially refers to it as such.

The one percentage in keys looks best to me, but no preference how it is ordered.

Vertical keys probably look better, but again no strong opinion.

And then not really a preference on anything else. Thanks for starting this discussion though! Standardization helps a lot Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 23:12, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

@Aesurias, Yoblyblob, and Elli: Okay, so it seems we all agree that:

• The key should be vertical
• The tie color should be white
• One percentage symbol for key

With the rest, there are either disagreements or not sufficient input.

Would it make the most sense to now add this to the elections and referendums Wikiproject asking for others input, or should we add it proposing the above three to get consensus? Delcoan (talk) 17:28, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

DYK for 1976 Missouri Amendment 5

On 17 April 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 1976 Missouri Amendment 5, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Missouri did not repeal its school segregation laws until 22 years after Brown v. Board of Education? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/1976 Missouri Amendment 5. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, 1976 Missouri Amendment 5), 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 nominate it.

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:02, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

newspapers.com links

Would you be willing to clip the articles you cite going forwards, and use that as the link? This makes the articles accessible to people who don't have a newspapers.com subscription. I've done this change at 1976 Missouri Amendment 5 if you want an example. Thanks! Elli (talk | contribs) 21:21, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

Yes, absolutely. This is also a great idea because 1.) It directly shows what is referenced, and 2.) It isn't paywalled. Delcoan (talk) 21:23, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

Awesome, thank you :) Elli (talk | contribs) 21:27, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

TFL notification

Hi, Delcoan. I'm just posting to let you know that 1987 Mississippi ballot measures – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list for May 18. The TFL blurb can be seen here.

At the TFL submissions page, you suggested running this article on November 3, 2027. That is a long time in the future, as you noted, but my greater concern for that date was that there is a semi-official moratorium on running election-related articles close to the date of an election. The example that sticks out in my mind is us receiving some comments on Main Page talk after running this article on the eve of the 2024 U.S. elections, even though I made every attempt to make the blurb as neutral as possible. Given that the Mississippi governor election is scheduled for November 2 and this TFL would run on that night in the state, I don't think it's worth the controversy it might cause. Better to run it now and have the attention focused on what I found to be an engaging topic. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008 (Talk) 21:27, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

New pages patrol May 2026 Backlog drive

May 2026 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
On 1 May 2026, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. 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) 11:23, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

2025–2026 United States redistricting map

Hi Delcoan, I noticed you uploaded a new color scheme and legend for c:File:US Congress mid-decade redistricting causes 2026.svg. I was wondering if you could upload this new color scheme as a separate file and return the existing file to the previous legend; the title of the current file still includes the word "causes" (which is not reflected in the new legend), and I think having separate maps of both the party gains and redistricting causes could benefit the 2025–2026 United States redistricting article. --Leviavery (talk) 22:44, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

Done! And I added the reasoning map back to the page; it is now under the main infobox. Delcoan (talk) 23:10, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

an award

	a duckling for you
	thx for helping with getting my idea materialized in 2025–2026 United States redistricting you are greatly appreciated so here is a duckling for you. make sure you feed it ;-) Daisytheduck quack quack 22:50, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Thank you! Great suggestion for the map :) Delcoan (talk) 23:38, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

New Page Patrol Newsletter - May 2026

Hello Delcoan,

New Page Review queue November 2025 - May 2026

Backlog update

At the time of this message, there are 15,282 articles and 32,951 redirects awaiting review.

After the January–February drive the article backlog was reduced to 15,179 articles and the redirect backlog to 19,053 respectively. Great job! However, both queues are growing rapidly and any additional reviews are highly appreciated.

2024 and 2025 NPP Awards

JTtheOG was selected as the NPP reviewer of the year for both 2024 and 2025, for reviewing the most articles amongst all reviewers.

Hey man im josh and MPGuy2824 won the Redirect Ninja Master Award for 2024 and 2025 respectively, for reviewing the most redirects.

Overall in 2024, one Platinum, two Gold, eight Silver, 12 Bronze and 45 Iron Barnstars were awarded. Additionally, 66 reviewers got the NPP barnstar for doing more than 100 reviews through the year. In 2025, one Platinum, ten Silver, 13 Bronze and 38 Iron Barnstars were awarded. Additionally, 38 reviewers got the NPP barnstar for doing more than 100 reviews through the year.

BoyTheKingCanDance, Rosiestep, SunDawn, and Vanderwaalforces were inducted into the NPP Hall of Fame for having two separate years of 2,000+ article reviews.

January–February backlog drive

The experimental two-month long backlog drive concluded with 183 reviewers patrolling over 27,761 articles and 35,309 redirects, earning over 36,836 points. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 6,484.6 points in this drive.

May backlog drive

An article-only backlog drive is currently underway. We are hoping to make a big dent in the backlog. You can read more about it or join at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Backlog drives/May 2026.

PageTriage

An attempt was made to get the New Pages Feed to sort by date marked as reviewed instead of date created. However we had to revert it due to bugs. We may try again in the future. You can subscribe to the Phabricator ticket if you're interested in following along.

Reminders:

• You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
• Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:37, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Upcoming expiry of your patroller right

Hi, this is an automated reminder as part of Global reminder bot to let you know that your permission "patroller" (New page reviewers) will expire on 00:00, 1 June 2026 (UTC). For most rights, you will need to renew at WP:PERM, unless you have been told otherwise when your right was approved. To opt out of user right expiry notifications, add yourself to m:Global reminder bot/Exclusion. Leaderbot (talk) 19:41, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

June 2026 GAN Backlog Drive

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) 21:58, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

Pennsylvania State Archives records

Hello! Greetings fellow Pennsylvanian (I assume given your username). I've been noticing some of the references in your referendum articles originate at the Pennsylvania State Archives. How have you been accessing these records, and do you perhaps have scans and/or pics of them? From my quick researches it doesn't seem that really any of what you cite have been digitized sadly (and I don't live near Harrisburg anymore :( ). I would absolutely love to get my hands on old precinct results such as the 1980 ones as well as county results for the off-year judicial races, which aren't really recorded in the Pennsylvania Manuals. Do you perhaps know if the archives have municipal and/or precinct results of the 1991 senate special election? I've been planning on mapping that and realize that going thru newspapers.com is probably the only way to really find them. Average Pennsylvanian (talk) 04:11, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

Hello! I’ve kept most (if not all) photos I’ve taken of results at the Archives.

I don’t think I’ve taken any photos of precinct results yet (other than for referendums). However, regarding your second request about off-year judicial elections, I have taken some when they were in the same folder as pictures I was taking of referendum results, and I was like “Why not take a picture of this too?” In fact, I even made a map a few days ago from data I got in this exact situation. (See the results section of the 1978 Pennsylvania gubernatorial election article).

Here are all pictures I have taken of judicial elections as well as other relatively unknown primary elections that I do not believe have data online (but could- I haven’t checked everywhere. But, the 1986 Senate primaries, for example, aren’t on Dave Leip’s, even though the 1980 and 1992 ones are).

Anyway, here are the images.

https://imgur.com/a/pixbia3

Two notes about these:

1. All images are on that link (just scroll down).

2. The very last image was taken of a results paper that was folded in half, so I took two separate pictures. Also, for some reason an election title wasn’t included on that, but if you search online for an election that matches both the candidates names and results, it becomes clear that it was the May 15, 1979, Democratic primary for Superior Court.

I hope these are helpful.

Best, Delcoan (talk) 04:56, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

Hello, thank you very much for the info and the pics! These are most helpful. I am also curious if you have pics of other non-judicial off-year municipal races, and if you've seen those records, would know if municipal results are broken down into precinct-level results (I'm hoping to map some historical Philly and Pittsburgh races). For your referendum references, which specific records at the archives are you gathering them from, and would you be willing to share pics of them? (I understand if you don't want to since you probably have at least hundreds of them. I'd be down to help map them). If you ever encounter anything related to the 1991 senate special election, please let me know too. Average Pennsylvanian (talk) 08:54, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

Hey! Typically, the way I cite my information I get from the Archives is by rewriting the title and then saying it was via the Archives. So, the citation for the images I sent can just be that.

And yeah, the next time I go to the Archives I’ll definitely look for those things for you.

Also, not sure if you’ve read 1971 Pennsylvania Amendment 2 but in the results section I note what happened in Forest County but no image is provided showing the return paper. If you’re curious, this is what it looked like (I took a photo) https://imgur.com/a/OlJi6DB Delcoan (talk) 16:00, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know about the 1971 Forest County situation! Very interesting, curious if a local newspaper reported anything else. For the archives I was more so wondering which specific archive record group you have been looking at. For example Series-RG-026-DCL-84, which is "State and Federal Election Returns 1963-2021", part of the Bureau of Commissions, Elections, and Legislation (Group RG-026-DCEL), part of Department of State (Collection RG-026). Average Pennsylvanian (talk) 05:05, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

Hello!

Unfortunately, I do not believe I wrote down citations this way, nor did I take a picture of the citations; off the top of my head I know that most of my data I got from State and Federal Election Returns 1963-2021, the example that you mentioned above, but sadly that’s the farthest I remember. Do you still feel that the pictures I sent you could be used/have a purpose, or would you not map them until proper citations could be made?

The citations I gave for the results for 1971 PA Amendment 2, for example, were based off of the titles found here and here which I took pictures of while taking pictures of the results.

On the topic of the PA Archives, the next time I go, which will likely be within 2 weeks, I’ll definitely look for the results you want.

Also, speaking of 1971 Amendment 2, I’ve been doing a project of mapping the municipality vote across the state; I’ve done 13 counties thus far and am currently transcribing the results of the 14th county. So, I wanted to ask a question to you related to Philadelphia County. For the 1971 Philadelphia mayoral election, you created the ward map for the results. For the citation for this map, you put “Results: The Philadelphia Bulletin Almanac 1972, pg 8”. I was unable to find an online version of this source; do you happen to have a copy of it or know where to find one? That way, I’ll be able to, hopefully, if the results are included in the report, put Philadelphia County onto the 1971 Amendment municipalities map.

Best, Delcoan (talk) 03:05, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

Hello!

There shouldn't be any problems making maps with the citations you gave me. Just wanted to confirm which specific archives record group you were getting the documents from, which looks like it's the same as what I was guessing.

I'm sad to say that the Philadelphia Bulletin Almanac did not report any ward results for the 1971 amendment. The Bulletin Almanac only focused on local Philadelphia elections (i.e. mayor, district attorney, city council, city judges, etc.), not state or federal offices. Your best bet would be to check the Philly Inquirer or contact the City Commissioners office.

And thank you for being on the lookout for the 1991 senate special results! Average Pennsylvanian (talk) 06:35, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

Regarding the maps: great! And, for the Almanac: no problem. I'll contact the Commissioners.

Also, I did a lot of digging and found a newspaper about Forest County: https://www.newspapers.com/article/pottsville-republican-1971-pennsylvania/202009908/

Btw, I think I'll be able to go to the Archives this Tuesday, though I am not entirely sure. But, could you send a list of all things you want from there for when I do go? Delcoan (talk) 03:38, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

Very intriguing article. That whole situation is pretty funny to read about.

I'm primarily interested in the "State and Federal Election Returns 1963-2021" (Series RG-026-DCEL-84) I mentioned earlier, in particular any statewide judicial primary and general election you encounter from the years 1963-1999.

And while this may be very impractical for you given there will be hundreds of pages, there are 4 boxes of "General Election Vote Tally, Ballot Certifications, Results by Precinct, Congressional/Senatorial/Representative Results by Precinct 1980" (Box 14A - A1305052, Box 14B - A1305051, Box 14C - A1305050, Box 14D - A1305049). Plus one called "Primary, Municipal, and General Election Materials 1980-1981" (A1604341). I'm very interested in mapping those federal races by precinct for the 1980 elections, but no biggie if you're unable to take pics. Average Pennsylvanian (talk) 07:44, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

Hey AvePenn, I went to a local library today and found the 1980 by precinct/municipality. Here it is! https://link.camscanner.com/9cs4ToVlom Delcoan (talk) 01:34, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

Articles for Creation backlog drive

Hello Delcoan:

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.