User talk:A.Cython

Your nomination of Battle of Thannuris has passed

Your good article nomination of the article Battle of Thannuris 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 Vestrian24Bio -- Vestrian24Bio (talk) 06:02, 6 October 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of 1976 Aegean Crisis has passed

Your good article nomination of the article 1976 Aegean Crisis 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) 08:20, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

DYK for Battle of Mammes

On 8 October 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Mammes, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Berbers waited for the departure of Byzantine general Belisarius to rebel, leading to the first battle at Mammes against his trusted commander, Solomon? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Mammes. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (Battle of Mammes), 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.

Dclemens1971 (talk) 00:02, 8 October 2026 (UTC)

Hovhovhov

Hello A.Cython, I've been wondering if User:Hovhovhov is a reincarnation of User:BreadAndHumus. Do you reckon? I seem to remember you had quite a bit of exposure to that account's antics too. They seem to have some eerie similarities, though the concrete overlap in article content and individual edit-warring issues is rather limited. What d'you think? Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:46, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

Future Perfect at Sunrise I have by no means any expertise on this sort of thing. But here are my 2 cents. Despite the similar flare of common tendency to draw the desired conclusion from sources, there are differences. B&H focused on overemphazing any distinctions between mainland Greeks and local Anatolian people in ancient times and the Romanness of Byzantines. The new editor seems to focus more on the Latin language and lineage of various emperors, which is a bit a different spin. It is a spin found in different editors, who think Romans are cool and should be everywhere. The two editors also appear to respond differently when challenged. B&H was ready to escalate things quickly, using every tool in WP and able to name different WP policies. The new editor has not yet demonstrated familiarity with the WP inner workings so far. As I said my 2 cents. A.Cython(talk) 18:56, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I happened to stumble upon this message, since I've lately been active in some articles where you two also have. @Future Perfect at Sunrise, that is certainly an interesting notice. Given that I've had long interactions with the old editor, A.Cythons points above, regarding their patterns, appear accurate to me, but I still won't reach a conclusion. For example, the points of view are not necessarily contradictory, or upon resurgence a user can learn to be more cautious. I guess, time will tell, but I wouldn't rule out the possibility. Piccco (talk) 22:06, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

I have nothing to do with him, nor I know what you are talking about. Hovhovhov (talk) 09:47, 10 October 2026 (UTC)

I believe the two users to be unrelated. Besides the nuanced behavioral analysis by A.Cython above, they geolocate in different countries, and their timecards also differ, with BreadAndHumus having been significantly more active throughout the day. Regardless, I find Hovhovhov's behavior just as problematic as BreadAndHumus's, and I would urge admins to keep a closer eye on them. – Demetrios1993 (talk) 13:48, 11 October 2026 (UTC)

@Demetrios1993 I appreciate your input as well. Piccco (talk) 19:06, 12 October 2026 (UTC)

Battle of Guastalla

Thanks for your GA review critique about the introduction of this article. I admit my original introduction needed improvement, and I believe the rewritten version is now a lot better. Djmaschek (talk) 01:28, 13 October 2026 (UTC)

@Djmaschek No worries, that's why we have reviews. An extra pair of eyes helps to spot where there is room for improvement. I depend on others to learn on how to improve my writing. Btw, it was a great article. A.Cython(talk) 22:38, 13 October 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for your valuable assistance!

		The Cartography Barnstar
		For performing both a Peer Review and FA review on the Map article, resulting in promotion to Featured Article status. Map is a Level 3 vital article, and many readers will benefit from your detailed and insightful work on the article! – Noleander (talk) 21:05, 12 October 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of Battle of Mosynopolis has passed

Your good article nomination of the article Battle of Mosynopolis 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) 05:02, 18 October 2026 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 246, October 2026

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 and Nick-D look at four works on Australian and Canadian subjects Timeline: This month in military history

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 10:16, 18 October 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of Koskotas scandal is under review

Your good article nomination of the article Koskotas scandal 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) 13:05, 18 October 2026 (UTC)

DYK for Siege of Rome (537–538)

On 19 October 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Siege of Rome (537–538), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that, during the siege of Rome, the Goths told the citizens of Rome that its Byzantine defenders had previously visited Italy only as actors and thieving sailors? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Siege of Rome (537–538). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (Siege of Rome (537–538)), 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.

Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 00:02, 19 October 2026 (UTC)

DYK for Battle of Satala (530)

On 20 October 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Satala (530), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Byzantine victory at the Battle of Satala in 530 against a numerically superior Persian army depended on the actions of a single individual? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Satala (530). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (Battle of Satala (530)), 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, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of Battle of Melantias has passed

Your good article nomination of the article Battle of Melantias 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 Jishara -- Jishara (talk) 00:21, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

Battle of Melantias

I just looked at the talk page. The page has a banner that states "Banner shows GA-class but no corresponding GA/FA/ACR listing was found. Incomplete-checklist backlog | Unassessed backlog." Yet the page also states that the article is "listed" as a Good Article. The review shows that as well but I see that the pass/fail icon was not checked by the reviewer. I have not run into this before. The review is not to be edited further. I don't know how to change the review or whether it makes any difference since the intended pass result is obvious. Maybe there is something in the guidelines for GA.

I am approving the contest entry because the article was obviously passed to GA. Also, since the banner was placed by the Adjutant bot, perhaps only Military History Project coordinators can see it. I am guessing that the only potential complication might come if the banner is visible to others and you submitted the article for a higher assessment. And it is a guess. As info in case you wish to look into it. Donner60 (talk) 05:05, 21 October 2026 (UTC)

@Donner60: I think this might be related to the Toolforge website being down (see here). A.Cython(talk) 12:13, 21 October 2026 (UTC)

Thanks. That's really strange. Nothing seems to be safe from hacking and other nefarious deeds these days. Donner60 (talk) 08:02, 22 October 2026 (UTC)

DYK for 1985 Greek constitutional crisis

On 23 October 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 1985 Greek constitutional crisis, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the 1985 Greek constitutional crisis "raised a potential danger to the balance of power in the Mediterranean"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/1985 Greek constitutional crisis. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (1985 Greek constitutional crisis), 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.

Dclemens1971 (talk) 00:03, 23 October 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of Greek Constitution of 1952 is under review

Your good article nomination of the article Greek Constitution of 1952 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 TheBritinator -- TheBritinator (talk) 23:03, 24 October 2026 (UTC)

Re-assessment of Kharagpur now a GAN again

Hi @A.Cython: I remember the comments you left in this review when you quick-failed the nom. I have since then submitted it to WP:GOCE which was finished yesterday by Dhtwiki and I have cleared up all your suggestions today. I have proposed the article as a GAN but before sending it to WP:GARC, I want your opinion on it should there be anything else left to do.

A few quick points: The Hijli Kingdom paragraph had details very specific to Hijli, a neighbourhood in Kharagpur (although the last part can be removed but it will miss a lot of important history relevant to Bengal including Kharagpur) so I decided to not trim it. And for the WWII, the first two sentence provides important context so I didn't trim that too. Other than these two, I applied your remaining suggestions. Thanks. Sddarealone (talk) 13:49, 25 October 2026 (UTC)

GARC#149

Hey, just wanted to follow up and make sure you knew - because of Bgsu's withdrawal from the GARC, I've moved your assigned review to Campaigns of Amda Seyon (1332–1333) - I hope that works, let me know. Jishara (please ping upon response) (talk) 19:11, 27 October 2026 (UTC)

@Jishara Yes I am well aware what happened, which is rather unfortunate, particulate because it is the second time happening while I properly finishing my corresponding reviews in the GARC. I have accepted to review the new article. It will take a few days as I am a bit slow these days. A.Cython(talk) 19:22, 27 October 2026 (UTC)

Thank you, I'm very sorry about that - if you'd already gotten well into the other one I could probably take care of the Amda review if you'd prefer, lmk Jishara (please ping upon response) (talk) 19:27, 27 October 2026 (UTC)

@Jishara Apologies, I meant that Bgsu also withdraw from the GARC#148, where he/she reviewing one article of mine. A.Cython(talk) 20:15, 27 October 2026 (UTC)

That's unfortunate :( I'd pick it up rn, but I'm also in that circle (Mange, which you're reviewing) so that'd be a two-person loop, and Noleander already completed their review of Bgsu's article so it wouldn't work to make them do a second. If it's not picked up by the time Mange's done (regardless of how her article closes) I'll review it for you. Jishara (please ping upon response) (talk) 20:19, 27 October 2026 (UTC)

No worries. I will submit it in one of the following GARCs.A.Cython(talk) 20:25, 27 October 2026 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Ovonramwen

Ovonramwen has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:12, 28 October 2026 (UTC)

DYK for Battle of Bourgaon

On 30 October 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Bourgaon, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the prices of slaves in Carthage fell drastically after the Battle of Bourgaon? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Bourgaon. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (Battle of Bourgaon), 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, 30 October 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of Greek Constitution of 1952 is on hold

Your good article nomination of the article Greek Constitution of 1952 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 TheBritinator -- TheBritinator (talk) 14:23, 31 October 2026 (UTC)

WikiCup 2026 November newsletter

The 2026 WikiCup has come to an end. Our top scorers, based on the tournament point rankings (which can be seen here), are:

1. Generalissima (submissions) with 1077 tournament points, will receive the 1st place award.
2. Bgsu98 (submissions) with 1046 tournament points, will receive the 2nd place award.
3. MCE89 (submissions) with 762 tournament points, will receive the 3rd place award.
4. A.Cython (submissions) with 606' tournament points
5. Vestrian24Bio (submissions) with 537 tournament points
6. Reconrabbit (submissions) with 349 tournament points
7. BeanieFan11 (submissions) with 297 tournament points
8. Arconning (submissions) with 183 tournament points

Our three high scorers in the final round, who each got over 1,000 points, happen to all be among the top 8 as well:

1. Generalissima (submissions) with 2846 round points from 40 good articles, 4 pieces of featured content (including 2 featured articles), 11 DYK articles, and various reviews.
2. Bgsu98 (submissions) with 2603 round points from 43 good articles, 5 pieces of featured content (1 featured article and 4 featuyred lists), and various reviews.
3. Vestrian24Bio (submissions) with 1141 round points from 20 good articles, a good topic, a featured list, and 30 good article reviews.

The final round was very productive, and contestants had 29 featured articles, 8 featured lists, 1 featured picture, 150 good articles, 43 good topic articles, 189 article reviews, 28 did you know articles, and 4 in the news articles. Altogether, Wikipedia has benefited greatly from the activities of WikiCup competitors all through the contest. Well done everyone!

The top eight scorers will receive awards shortly. The following special awards will be made, based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. These prizes are awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field over the course of the competition.

• Generalissima (submissions) wins the following prizes:
  • The featured article prize, for 12 featured articles.
  • The featured picture prize, for submitting the only featured picture for the second year in a row.
  • The good article prize, for 82 good articles.
• Bgsu98 (submissions) wins the following prizes:
  • The featured list prize, for 21 featured lists.
  • The featured content reviewer prize, for 72 featured article reviews.
• Vestrian24Bio (submissions) wins the following prizes:
  • The featured topic prize, for 8 pages in featured topics.
  • The good topic prize, for 26 pages in good topics.
  • The good article reviewer prize, for 84 good article reviews.
• BabbaQ (submissions) wins the ITN prize, for 9 ITN pages.
• BeanieFan11 (submissions) wins the DYK prize, for 47 DYK pages.

A special mention also goes to these users who scored the highest in a particular category in a single round:

• A.Cython (submissions), for 20 good-topic articles in round 5.
• Olliefant (submissions), who withdrew during the competition but who had 38 featured-content reviews in round 2. Olliefant also had 43 good article reviews in round 1.
• The Robot Parade (submissions), for 5 ITN pages in round 1.

Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate. We are also looking for an experienced editor to help write the bimonthly newsletter. If you would like to help write next year's newsletters, please contact Epicgenius at his talk page.

The WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2027 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement!

On behalf of the judges, Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email), Epicgenius (talk · contribs · email), Frostly (talk · contribs · email), Guerillero (talk · contribs · email) and Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs · email):

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:12, 1 November 2026 (UTC)

WikiCup 2026 November newsletter (update)

In our November 2026 newsletter, there was a mistake in calculating the final tournament point rankings (which have been updated here). We regret the error.

1. Generalissima (submissions) with 1461 tournament points, will receive the 1st place award.
2. Bgsu98 (submissions) with 1302 tournament points, will receive the 2nd place award.
3. Vestrian24Bio (submissions) with 793 tournament points, will receive the 3rd place award.
4. MCE89 (submissions) with 762 tournament points
5. A.Cython (submissions) with 606 tournament points
6. BeanieFan11 (submissions) with 425 tournament points
7. Reconrabbit (submissions) with 349 tournament points
8. Arconning (submissions) with 183 tournament points

On behalf of the judges, Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email), Epicgenius (talk · contribs · email), Frostly (talk · contribs · email), Guerillero (talk · contribs · email) and Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs · email):

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:42, 1 November 2026 (UTC)

2026 WikiCup

Awarded to A.Cython for being one of the eight finalists in the 2026 WikiCup.

Epicgenius (talk) 02:45, 1 November 2026 (UTC)

Congratulations - October 2026 Military History Writing Contest

		The Writers Barnstar
		On behalf of the Wikiproject Military History coordinators, I am pleased to reward your sterling performance - 5 articles, including 4 brought to GA class, for 25 points - and second place finish in the October 2026 Military History Writing Contest with this award of the Writers Barnstar. Congratulations, Donner60 (talk) 04:11, 4 November 2026 (UTC)