User talk:Kisseran

June 2026

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Luwian language have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

• ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
• If you need help, please see the Introduction to Wikipedia, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, place {{Help me}} on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
• The following is the log entry regarding this message: Luwian language was changed by Kisseran (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.940961 on 2026-06-15T04:42:48+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 04:42, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Welcome to the DCWC!

See a    "developing" or    "least developed" country? Write about it to earn points!

Hey Kisseran, the third annual Developing Countries WikiContest is now open for submissions. Welcome to the contest! You can now list your work at your submissions page to earn points. We hope that you enjoy participating in this drive to fight Wikipedia's systemic bias. If you haven't done so already, please review the following:

• New to Wikipedia? Many experienced editors are part of this contest and willing to help; feel free to ask questions on the talk page.
• Got open nominations? List them at the review requests sidebar.
• Looking for a topic to work on? Check out suggested articles and eligible reviews.
• Not sure if your article qualifies? See the scoring rules for more information or contact a coordinator.
• Know someone else who might be interested? Sign-ups remain open throughout the contest, so don't hesitate to invite other editors!

On behalf of the coordinators, we hope you enjoy participating and wish you the best of luck! If you have any questions, please leave a message on the contest talk page or ask one of the coordinators: Arconning (talk · contribs), Generalissima (talk · contribs), Magentic Manifestations (talk · contribs), sawyer777 (talk · contribs), or TechnoSquirrel69 (talk · contribs). (To unsubscribe from these updates, remove yourself from this list.) —TechnoSquirrel69 (talk) 03:40, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

PIE phonology project

Given that you are running circles around me on PIE topics lately, I'm wondering if you might be interested in helping with a project I'm working on to improve PIE phonology articles to Good Topic status. There's no pressure or end date or anything like that, but I thought you (like me) might like to have a measurable goal for putting this knowledge to good use. It's been wonderfully humbling to work with you on the glossary FLC (and now on the WT:LING page) and clearly there are substantive gaps in my knowledge on this topic. Feel no obligation to help out, but if you are interested, let me know and we can collaborate both on the pages contained (and maybe develop a more cogent plan for getting it done). All the best, ThaesOfereode (talk) 23:55, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

Yes, I'd quite certainly be interested in helping out. I had seen your PIE phonology project previously browsing your user page and found it quite an admirable goal. I was just going to say that Proto-Indo-European phonology seemed to be the more appropriate main article, but you seem to have gotten to that just now. Kisseran (talk) 04:43, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

I agree. Originally, I'd stuck with just sound laws since I didn't want to bite off more than I could chew, though I expected the GT nomination to question whether the broader topic was better. Now that IE laws collapsed into the glossary, there's no question. I'm also still sort of feeling out which articles need to be created and which are fine to leave as redirects to entries in the glossary, so any input there would be good as well. Feel free to mill through the drafts as well; Szemerényi's still needs some work and Schmidt–Hackstein is mostly just a skeleton draft right now. I figured we'd mostly collaborate through that project page's talk page so if you want to discuss anything, go ahead and created it and ping me. Looking forward to making some headway on these pages with you. ThaesOfereode (talk) 10:38, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

Thank you again for the kind words, and do ping me if you intend discuss this in more detail somewhere else. Kisseran (talk) 07:57, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

Flag of China

I see that you closed the Flag of China review, which I understand. What recommendations would you have for me to get the article back to GA status? The Account 2 (talk) 16:54, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

Apologies if the comment I left before I closed the review wasn't clear enough. There were two problems with the article in my view that stand in the way to GA status. The more important one is the prevalence of errors in sourcing and referencing. I would suggest going through the article systematically checking the rest of the references, perhaps cutting down on some of the unneeded sources, and making sure that they are reliable and support the statements that are used to verify. The other problem was the excessive detail with the prose. The sections that simply quote laws verbatim can still be summarized further to a more encyclopedic style, while also avoiding potential copyvio concerns. I don't think anything else stood out to me as much in the review. Kisseran (talk) 17:04, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

Thanks! Will look into it. The Account 2 (talk) 17:28, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of Ancient Cappadocian language is under review

Your good article nomination of the article Ancient Cappadocian language 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 Vigilantcosmicpenguin -- Vigilantcosmicpenguin (talk) 02:21, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of Ancient Cappadocian language has passed

Your good article nomination of the article Ancient Cappadocian language 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 Vigilantcosmicpenguin -- Vigilantcosmicpenguin (talk) 00:01, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of Kazan school is under review

Your good article nomination of the article Kazan school 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 Bgsu98 -- Bgsu98 (talk) 22:24, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for your reviews and thoughts

Saw your comment at WT:GA and looked over the 9 (!) reviews you've completed over the past few weeks. I'm impressed, all of them being careful, tight and timely. I also enjoyed reading your thoughts on what did and didn't work with the GA process. I mentioned in that discussion that I am currently asking new reviewers to reflect on their experiences with the GA process at Wikipedia:Good articles/New reviewer reflections - do you mind if I adapt your feedback there so it can be centralized, allowing for the identification of trends etc? Alternatively, you're more than welcome to write there directly, with any elaboration you are able to provide. Whonting (talk) 03:53, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind words! Feel free to adapt my feed back there. By the time I saw your page there I was already a couple reviews in, and so I wasn't sure how to answer most of the questions there, which seemed to be intended for after the first review. Kisseran (talk) 06:20, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

Thankyou, now done. That's fair with how you read the questions, I think your feedback works well there given it is really about getting the perspective of new reviewers and how they experience the process, which after a few dozen reviews can be difficult to empathize with and appreciate. Just on your comment on model reviews, you may be interested Wikipedia talk:Good Article proposal drive 2023#Proposal 4: Proposed model reviews, which passed a few years back but hasn't been implemented, because picking which reviews should serve as models is fairly tough. If you see any model reviews in your travels that you think merit inclusion, let me know, I have asked another editor recently to keep an eye out to the same end. Whonting (talk) 06:39, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

DCWC August update

The 2026 Developing Countries WikiContest has been running for a month now, so let's check in with the competition so far!

As of the time of writing, our top contestants are:

1. Vanderwaalforces (submissions) ahead of the pack with 715 points, with two FAs and many GAs on the monarchs of the Kingdom of Benin;
2. Simongraham (submissions) with 291 points, mostly with GAs on jumping spiders, alongside various GAN and FAC reviews;
3. Jaguarnik (submissions) with 240 points, mostly from an FA on the 1945 film Ivan the Terrible;
4. Grnrchst (submissions) with 215 points, mostly from GAs on anarchist history in various countries, alongside many GA reviews, and;
6. Vestrian24Bio (submissions) tied for 4th with 215 points, with an FL and four GAs on Indian cricket!

These competitors are in the lead, but if past experience is any indication, big shake-ups might still await us in the contest. If you're looking for a way to boost your position, we got a table of review requests from fellow participants—you can rack up a lot of points through reviews, and it might just convince others to review your own nominations! You can also look through the eligible reviews page to find other articles to review, with highlights for articles eligible for the 1.5× multiplier. The coordinators would like to thank Jaguarnik (submissions) for his work to keep this page up to date.

Thank you so much for all your work in the contest so far, dear participants, and keep on the good fight against systemic bias on our wiki! Have any questions? Leave a message on the contest talk page or send it to one of our wonderful coordinators: Arconning (talk · contribs), Generalissima (talk · contribs), Magentic Manifestations (talk · contribs), sawyer777 (talk · contribs), and TechnoSquirrel69 (talk · contribs). (To unsubscribe from these updates, remove yourself from this list. Sent via MediaWiki message delivery.) Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 05:25, 2 August 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of The Sound Pattern of English is under review

Your good article nomination of the article The Sound Pattern of English 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 Kusma -- Kusma (talk) 21:28, 9 August 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of Kazan school has passed

Your good article nomination of the article Kazan school 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 Bgsu98 -- Bgsu98 (talk) 11:25, 10 August 2026 (UTC)

Good article nominations RfC

Hi Kisseran,

There is an ongoing Request for Comment (RfC) at Wikipedia:Good article nominations/August 2026 RfC, which you may be interested in because in the past year, you have nominated or reviewed more than one good article nomination. This message has also been sent to all subscribers to the Good Article Gazette. The RfC contains many proposals (33 at the time of writing), which are split into the following categories: nominators, reviewers, reviews, volunteer roles, reviewing initiatives, and others. However, you are more than welcome to add any proposals of your own that you wish to put to the community.

By the end of September, all the proposals will have been closed by an uninvolved editor, either as a consensus for one of the options or with no consensus. At this point, editors will be invited again to develop these proposals into coherent policy and implement them.

Thank you for your contributions to the good articles project, and I look forward to your input! (in solidarity), JacobTheRox^{(talk|contributions)} 16:02, 11 August 2026 (UTC)