User talk:Magnolia677
Page contents not supported in other languages.
 | This user is aware of the designation of the following ascontentious topics:
|
Thank you for reading my addition to the Chicago page. There was absolutely no AI used, nor would I use it, because I find its output bland, redundant, weird, and cliche (sometimes all in the same sentence). What I wrote was adapted from my book about the Secret Six (Red Lightning Books, March 2026), which was researched through my line-by-line review of thousands of newspaper articles at newspapers.com and elsewhere, and organized and written entirely by myself, also with no reliance on AI. Further to my reply: Did you actually read my addition to the Chicago page, follow any of the links and view the vast number of sources cited, or did you revert my contribution because some AI system accused me of being AI, and you believed it? Are the robots going to start calling humans robots, and are Wikipedia's editors going to enable that?
Clearly, I am a novice at this. I simply wished to update Town Officials information for the Town of Almond, NY, that was very much outdated. No one else will take care of this (obviously), so I stepped in. The information was garnered direct from the Town's website.AlmondCitizen (talk)02:58, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
West Halifax is an unincorporated village in Halifax. How about if we add Hilda Stone back in with (West Halifax) in parentheses? ThanksLittenberg (talk)22:15, 4 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Can you please revert your edits on our page back to the version from Kmateika? She is the head of marketing at the school and we want to keep the page up to dateAseeley1 (talk)20:38, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please checkyour reversion. I think you reverted my reversion instead of your intended edit.GeneralIzationTalk21:35, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I was about to leave a note onUser_talk:Leunghoching1234567 about unsourced election results, and saw that you had already left some comments about their editing. I appreciate that election results are being added to so many of these articles, but some of them just point towards a source in an edit summary, while others -- and Leunghoching1234567 is a real issue here -- don't even bother to mention a source.
Do you have any thoughts on this issue, both in terms of Leunghoching1234567 and of the problem in general? Would WP:AN be an appropriate place to escalate the matter?Alansohn (talk)09:35, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You made a revert about an event not being noteworthy because it had "limited tickets and no promotional advertising". You also asked why would we include this on a city article? To answer your questions. The event had to be kept secret due to threats of violence against two much larger events earlier in the year. Therefore, due to the real threats of political violence, the towns Pride event being kept secret is a pretty significant thing historically. The historical significance is tied to the history of pride events having to be kept secret in the past. This cancellation due to the threats garnered national media attention and is the only story about this town that comes up on media scans from the last year. Perhaps I could have wrote the edit better and would appreciate your advice on how to become a better writer, but the threats of violence are the most significant story, in terms of media attention, in the towns history from the last 5 years. Major events getting canceled due to threats of violence leading to national media attention seem historically relevant to the towns history in my opinion.
If you want to read more about the event to help me improve the section, here are some sources: Source 1:https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/steinbach-2slgbtq-pride-9.6953790 / source 2:https://www.thecarillon.com/local/2025/11/03/steinbach-holds-queer-country-fair-in-lieu-of-steinbach-pride / source 3:https://ca.news.yahoo.com/steinbach-pride-march-postponed-safety-143904477.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAEsokbggtpls4rRf6FzxtYq_c3xgbhbj3zqBeoJttImnRBURzKcFnJlYYwlLBHQmq2UsyxjyTGuAjAI8BzL_yT2y2Rk8al8Sy_YRqpWt3gOX5UI0XBaXtX1v-is2aLJVKIoWzDiZEA-yLgtqBQbt6FS16cG5GZ5qvTrjetr99s4k / source 4:https://www.steinbachonline.com/articles/local-leaders-condemn-threats-after-steinbach-pride-event-postponed / source 5:https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/steinbach-pride-postponed-threats-1.7633415 / Source 6.https://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/editorials/2025/09/20/a-tale-of-two-different-rallies / Source 7.https://www.brandonsun.com/local/2025/09/14/steinbach-cancels-annual-pride-event (there are more sources but i assume this is enough for you to learn about the historical event)
I hope this answered your questions. If you would be open to giving me advice on how I can be a better writer and contribute better to Wikipedia by writing about this event more effectively, I would be very appreciative. If you still feel this issue has no relevance to the towns history can you please let me know why? Thank you.McCIrishman (talk)21:05, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I reverted your reversion, for the reason explained in my new edit comment. If you really want this quotation to appear, please rewrite the sentence so as to transparently explain that this was a smear by a contemporary newspaper (and that source no longer seems to be viewable, unless I'm mistaken). We should not be throwing in smears,even in quotation marks with a source footnoted, without couching them appropriately: otherwise it gives the appearance of Wikipedia endorsing the epithet.Jcejhay (talk)22:59, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure why you are using the revert button.User:Seb az86556 addedKin Łigaaí to the article 15 years ago.[1] I linked tochindi, which appears to be the Navajo way of saying "haunted". This doesn't seem like anything to revert others over, so I'm not clear what the problem is here.Viriditas (talk)23:53, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Colman2000 (talk) is wishing youHappy Holidays! This greeting (and season) promotesWikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another userHappy Holidays, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Happy holidays}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Colman2000 (talk)20:45, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Elvisisalive95 (talk) is wishing you aMerryChristmas! This greeting (and season) promotesWikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user aMerry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Elvisisalive95 (talk)15:38, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the ping. They are a time sink. 🇵🇸🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦🇵🇸14:51, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hey @Magnolia677. Your wiki edit anniversary is today, marking 13 years of dedicated contributions to English Wikipedia. Your passion for sharing knowledge and your remarkable contributions have not only enriched the project, but also inspired countless others to contribute. Thank you for your amazing contributions. Wishing you many more wonderful years ahead in the Wiki journey. :) -❙❚❚❙❙ GnOeee❚❙❚❙❙✉18:21, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I really don't understand what you have against this article, venue, or the people editing it. You seem to have a personal vendetta against it:
Anyone using this article outside of someone from the area is not going to have a clue what is being spoken of, much less have any inclination to visit the park or the website.
Do you have something against using the talk pages to suggest changes or leaving section headers recommending changes?
~2025-42219-33 (talk)18:30, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 | The Red Maple Leaf Award | |
| This maple leaf is awarded toMagnolia677 for creating four new articles on Ontario villages and heritage during the ninth year ofThe 10,000 Challenge ofWikiProject Canada. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions!Reidgreg (talk)16:20, 26 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] |
You did not give me time to add sources to previously removed information in Tarrytown / Geography section, which I was in the process of doing. They are now added. Please wait for a couple of minutes and review again. Thanks.Irina S.B. (talk)12:51, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Whenremoving content, asyou did at Nova Scotia, it's important to give a valid reason for the removal. You wrote: 'perTemplate:Infobox province or territory of Canada
', however there is no information in the link that explains why the content should be removed. Then inyour revert you said 'please wait for a consensus on the talk page
' but it's not clear which talk page you're referring to:Template talk:Infobox province or territory of Canada orTalk:Nova Scotia. I did skim both but didn't see anything that looked relevant. You also wrote 'There is no "first language" parameter
' but I wasn't under the misapprehension that there was, so I'm not sure where that came from.
I'd appreciate if you could make adummy edit giving avalid reason for the removal.
Thanks —W.andrea (talk)20:38, 29 December 2025 (UTC)edited 20:43[reply]
I am seeking help regarding users whose names didnt follow naming policy. In this regard please suggest appropriate forum where I can raise the issue.J Bee Verma (talk)11:43, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Magnolia677,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyableNew Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (talk)16:13, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
Abishe (talk)16:13, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg)
Magnolia677,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyableNew Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.Safyrr19:53, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Safyrr19:53, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed that you had removed two people from the notable people section citing "unsourced content". I'm writing to ask what was done wrong, and how in the future I could avoid whatever it was I did wrong?ProudOhioan1803 (talk)15:25, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
HiMagnolia677, thanks for the note. I wanted to clarify regarding my recent edits to theCelebration City page.
I am a local who grew up visiting this park, and I have been trying to expand the article because the current version is a stub that doesn't capture the park's history. I spent time gathering sources and going through the website through Wayback Machine. I made a mistake by including some generic links like the "Ride Entertainment" projects page that didn't verify the specific claims.
I have gone back and manually verified the content. I replaced the generic links with specific, reliable citations from RCDB andTravel Weekly (2003). I also converted the lists into standard tables to match the formatting of verified pages likeSilver Dollar City.
I would appreciate it if you could take a look at the revised sourcing. I am just trying to ensure this defunct park is accurately documented. Thank you!Captk2233 (talk)16:24, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Last July, I made a small edit toSacramento, CA to remove a factual inaccuracy. Today I noticed that you had reverted it less than 3 hours later, with the summary "not an improvement". Said inaccuracy has since been removed by another editor, and no longer appears on the page.
Initially I was annoyed, but after looking at your contributions I appreciate how quick and ruthless you are on reverting edits for machine-written content, vandalism, bad sources, et c. I see how my edit could easily look like pointless nitpicking to someone working as quickly as you do.
Thank you for all the time and work you volunteer. If you end up in Sacramento for some reason I'd love to get you coffee on the house at my shop.Conkaan (talk)06:20, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Assuming the article is deleted one of us needs to remember to suggest speedy deletion G10 (advert) at Commons. Currently I doubt Commons will view it as a problem 🇵🇸🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦🇵🇸12:45, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed the paragraph about the 1966 Ypsilanti Greek Theatre was removed for lacking a citation. Rather than deleting it, it’s usually better to tag it with[citation needed] or raise it on the talk page so the information isn’t lost. I raised this concern over this ref on the talk page a couple days ago but did not remove it due to signifigance. easily found three solid sources — New York Times, Time, and an AADL photo — and added the paragraph back with proper citations. They all confirm the single 1966 season, the productions (The Oresteia and The Birds), and the involvement of Dame Judith Anderson and Bert Lahr. In general, it’s helpful to check for sources before removing content, that way relevant information isn’t lost.Braneyac (talk)13:37, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Magnolia677!
You may remember contributing to the article on 'Silicon Slopes', only for your edits to be aggressively reverted by the businessman (the user called teaminvise) who uses that page as a promotional campaign to which he is directly financially connected. If you are interested in getting admin support for deleting teaminvise's promotional article, then you may be happy to know that I have nominated that same article for deletion: your participation in the discussion surrounding its deletion would be highly appreciated (if, after all, the only two votes are myself and teaminvise, then the discussion shall come to an impasse).
The link to the discussion is here:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Silicon Slopes (2nd nomination)Whumbler (talk)09:08, 18 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Greetings,
Don't want to start an edit war, but...can you explain how the Fox News article youcitedisn't a political story?Jenny Death (talk)00:36, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hey there. Just wanted to let you know that foxnews.com is not a reliable source for politics. Please seeWP:FOXNEWS. This is in reference tothis edit. Thanks. –Novem Linguae(talk)21:10, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,Magonila677. I apologize to you for editing.Rock Life 864 (talk)07:32, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. You accused me of using AI to update the entry forMonitor, and reverted my edits. I would like to understand your justification, given that I did not use AI whatsoever. That page was a product of spending hours of my free time researching this hamlet, as I have set myself a personal project of fleshing out the pages for all of Alberta's hamlets eventually. (To demonstrate this, you also queried an edit I made toTaylorville, though I believe you will find it defended to your satisfaction on my talk page.) While I am unsure which aspect of my update to Monitor's entry made you suspect AI, I ran the copy through AI detectors and none of them suggest it was written by AI, nor explain which section(s) gave you that impression.
If it is because you could not access some of the newspaper sources I referenced, I am an amateur historian who pays for access to paywalled archives of historical North American and European newspapers. I have been trying to share the knowledge this affords me access to, which I had believed was the point of Wikipedia. Nevertheless, I try to ensure that if I can find something in a public source, I use that for a citation instead, precisely so that editors such as yourself can check my work. With that in mind, could you please say whether you checked the freely available sources I cited before you reverted my edits? You should have seen that nothing I wrote was unfounded or 'hallucinated' by an LLM.
I apologise if my tone is frustrated, but it is quite demoralising to have one's hard work wiped away by someone who does not appear to have actually read my article or checked the sources properly. If this clears things up, I would sincerely appreciate you restoring my edits and noting on my talk page that this was a misunderstanding. I am also truly open to learning from your concerns so that I can avoid any missteps that made you think my article was AI to begin with.Forecastkathryn (talk)14:25, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The articleBen-Gay, Arkansas has beenproposed for deletion because of the following concern:
A single sentence about a supposed place with no evidence it actually exists as a distinct location. No secondary sources. FailsWP:GEOLAND.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the{{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in youredit summary or onthe article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing{{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop theproposed deletion process, but otherdeletion processes exist. In particular,articles for deletion allows discussion to reachconsensus for deletion based onestablished criteria.
If the proposed deletion has already been carried out, you mayrequest undeletion of the article at any time.AusLondonder (talk)00:57, 21 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Can I know what minchia you want? What bothers you about the article that you don't agree with? Nougat recipes? I'm inserting the links!!--Dorian88A (talk)17:43, 25 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Dorian88A deletedmy questions from their talk page, but the material that they've added is borderline gibberish. I'm not sure if I feel better or worse if this AI or if it this editor's research. Thanks for your efforts to try to explain and address the very fundamental issues here.Alansohn (talk)01:45, 26 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
thanks for checking the change. can you explain the revert fore-yearbook ™ toe-yearbook (tm) ? I made a few of those and would like to better understand(tm)[2]Tonymetz💬16:52, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@User:Magnolia677, I've read your message, and response, and would like you to prove that you've actually engaged with the position I've put forward. You yourself have violated several policies at the same time that you've asserted that I need to familiarize myself with"our" policies. Your message, and response to my revert, was rude, condescending, and frankly disregard the ideals you claim to represent. The number of edits you have does not grant you free license to hold your position over other editors. I've performed far more edits anonymously than you clearly assume to be true based on your brief review of the information available on my user and talk pages. I don't appreciate this, and expect an explanation, if not an apology.CSGinger14 (talk)23:53, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
hi, an IP address made edits to Engens political positions regarding ICE in Minnesota. They put the line "Engen also said that ICE agents apprehending people solely based on the color of their skin is wrong" in the article. I reverted that edit because it was unsourced and i could not find Emgen saying that quote anywhere via a google search. then you reverted my revert and put the false information back on the page. Are you okay if I fix it or do you want to fix it yourself?MinnesotaNiceGuy (talk)23:09, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@CSGinger14: Please discuss your issues on the article talk page.Magnolia677 (talk)22:16, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you atWikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy onedit warring. Thank you.MinnesotaNiceGuy (talk)22:25, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again, thanks for your interest in improving the quality of content on this page. I believe we share the same goal of high quality information with strong citations.
You reverted edits with multiple new citations stating that the content was not supported by the citations. I encourage you to read the citations to determine whether the content was supported before reverting them. The citations were to primary source materials and scholarly articles contextualizing them, so clearly not produced by AI as you state.Bargsnaffle (talk)21:00, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Magnolia677, thanks for taking the time to review my edit.The research, structure, wording and sourcing of the History section are entirely my own and were developed over an extended period using published secondary sources. I primarily relied upon Dr. Ronald V. Mershart’s Frontier Village: The Birth of Superior, Wisconsin, 1853–1883, along with The Eye of the North-West (1890), the Wisconsin Magazine of History, and archival materials that I cited. My edit briefly summarizes Dr. Mershart’s chapters and follows his interpretation of Superior’s early development.
I did use a tool to assist with converting my already-written prose into Wikitext formatting, which can be cumbersome for me, but the language itself is drawn from the cited sources and my own summaries. The full draft was posted on the article’s Talk page and sat without objection for months, after which an editor indicated approval.
For transparency: my father assisted Dr. Ronald V. Mershart in the mid to late 1990s as a research librarian for the preparation of Frontier Village. The book itself is a published, peer reviewed local history issued by the Douglas County Historical Society and is widely cited. I clearly knew both Dr. Mershart and my father personally, but my edits summarize its chapters and don't introduce unpublished or personal research.
If you have any concerns about sourcing, neutrality, or wording, I’m very happy to address them.Singer2cantor (talk)19:51, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, how does One Fare work if travelling from Oakville to Toronto using public transit on a Presto fare card?
Scenario A: Oakville Transit to MiWay to TTC?
Scenario B: Oakville Transit to GO Transit to TTC?Alexscarborough (talk)23:07, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there can Toronto TTC streetcars honk? Some people say "there is no such thing as TTC streetcar horns" as they only had gongs. Your thoughts?Alexscarborough (talk)23:31, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Magnolia667, why did you remove something about which city/town borders Randolph? Just because it's not a travel guide doesn't mean it's not allowed to be mentioned. Also, there's not guideline saying that mentioning which town or city borders is not allowed. If other city/town of Massachusetts mentions with borders, then what's the point of unnecessarily removing them? It just dosen't make any sense.~2026-64171-4 (talk)21:27, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at theWikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a disagreement over content with which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The thread is "Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard#Culpeper".
Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!
CSGinger14 (talk)03:55, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The articleLittle Hope, Alabama has beenproposed for deletion because of the following concern:
FailsWP:NPLACE.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the{{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in youredit summary or onthe article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing{{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop theproposed deletion process, but otherdeletion processes exist. In particular,articles for deletion allows discussion to reachconsensus for deletion based onestablished criteria.
If the proposed deletion has already been carried out, you mayrequest undeletion of the article at any time.JHD0919 (talk)13:42, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
