User talk:Thebiguglyalien/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

frances cleveland

hello, Thebiguglyalien! i had a quick question regarding this article and the associated blurb. both the blurb and article lead mention that cleveland participated in the movement to get the u.s. involved in world war i, but i was unable to find a citation for this statement, either in the article lead or the body. did i somehow miss it? the assertion is believable, though i was surprised that it does not appear to be sourced. dying (talk) 04:39, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

dying, her association with the movement is described in the first paragraph of "Later life". That's a good catch though that it doesn't use that phrasing specifically, so I've adjusted the wording of that sentence a little bit. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 05:21, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

dying looking more closely at the sources though, it seems to only be supported indirectly (i.e. she was involved with a group that supported it). The only explicit statement is that she supported military preparedness, so maybe it should be removed. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 05:32, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

i am not sure if her involvement with a group that supported the movement would allow us to conclude that she supported it herself. she donated to the woman's christian temperance union and supported the temperance movement, but did not dress as modestly as the union would have liked.

also, if you decide to remove this assertion from the article, i think the blurb should be changed similarly. what would you think about replacing the sentence mentioning world war i with the sentence "During World War I, she advocated military preparedness."? dying (talk) 06:21, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, that's what I'm thinking. I've made the change to the article, and I've put in an edit request for the blurb. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 06:31, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

looks good. thanks, Thebiguglyalien. dying (talk) 06:38, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you today for the article, introduced: "Frances Cleveland was first lady of the United States during the presidencies of Grover Cleveland. She became an instant celebrity after marrying the sitting president in the White House, and her popularity may have surpassed even his."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:17, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Killer toy

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Killer toy you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:41, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Killer toy

The article Killer toy you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Killer toy for comments about the article, and Talk:Killer toy/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of GhostRiver -- GhostRiver (talk) 16:43, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Lucretia Garfield

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Lucretia Garfield you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Sammielh -- Sammielh (talk) 11:41, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of History of the United States (1776–1789)

The article History of the United States (1776–1789) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:History of the United States (1776–1789) for comments about the article, and Talk:History of the United States (1776–1789)/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Lingzhi.Renascence -- Lingzhi.Renascence (talk) 05:22, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Thank you!!!!

Hi, just wanted to say thanks for the feedback and reviewing of the When I Die article!!! I'm eternally grateful lol. Ty. Chchcheckit (talk) 09:19, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Chchcheckit, I enjoyed reading about (and listening to) the album. I usually try not to review the same type of article too frequently so as to avoid burnout, but I might go through another one of the articles you've listed for review if no one else grabs them in the next few days. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 16:16, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

...And once again, THANK YOU SO MUCH for enjoying and reviewing the good article (TOL)!!!!! thanks a lot Chchcheckit (talk) 17:46, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Federalist No. 6

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Federalist No. 6 you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of AryKun -- AryKun (talk) 11:22, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Centre-left politics

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Centre-left politics you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of DimensionalFusion -- DimensionalFusion (talk) 01:02, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Centre-left politics

The article Centre-left politics you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Centre-left politics for comments about the article, and Talk:Centre-left politics/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of DimensionalFusion -- DimensionalFusion (talk) 19:01, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Batal Hajji Belkhoroev

Hello @Thebiguglyalien. How you doing? In the talk page of Batal Hajji Belkhoroev I replied to your concerns (1, 2) but it's seems you didn't see them. Could you check them and answer? Best regards, WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 16:01, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

WikiEditor1234567123 there were still concerns that weren't addressed. I've checked them and replied to a few. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 16:43, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Federalist No. 7

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Federalist No. 7 you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Fritzmann2002 -- Fritzmann2002 (talk) 00:01, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

New pages patrol invitation

Hello, Thebiguglyalien. The new pages patrol team is currently struggling to keep up with the influx of new articles and redirects needing review. We could use a few extra hands to help. I believe that someone with your activity and experience is very likely to meet the guidelines for granting. Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time, but it requires a strong understanding of Wikipedia’s CSD policy and notability guidelines. Kindly read the tutorial before making your decision, and feel free to post on the project talk page with questions. If patrolling new pages is something you'd be willing to help out with, please consider applying here. Thank you for your consideration. We hope to see you around! Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 19:30, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

In regards to the Johannesburg ITN item

Just to clarify, because that section was hatted, that I was not implying bias on your part, and to be honest I don't believe you would be the type to be too convinced by location as an indicator of notability. I will admit I was venting again about ITN bias in a general sense and was out of line. My WP:N point still stands but that's not something I really feel like would be productive to discuss at length. No hard feelings! DarkSide830 (talk) 20:50, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Much appreciated! Thebiguglyalien (talk) 22:44, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Katalin Rényi

On 3 September 2023, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Katalin Rényi, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Black Kite (talk) 11:13, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 4

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Iron Man, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages James Rhodes and Franklin Richards.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

WikiCup 2023 September newsletter

The fourth round of the competition has finished, with anyone scoring less than 673 points being eliminated. It was a high scoring round with all but one of the contestants who progressed to the final having achieved an FA during the round. The highest scorers were

• Epicgenius, with 2173 points topping the scores, gained mainly from a featured article, 38 good articles and 9 DYKs. He was followed by
• Sammi Brie, with 1575 points, gained mainly from a featured article, 28 good articles and 50 good article reviews. Close behind was
• Thebiguglyalien, with 1535 points mainly gained from a featured article, 15 good articles, 26 good article reviews and lots of bonus points.

Between them during round 4, contestants achieved 12 featured articles, 3 featured lists, 3 featured pictures, 126 good articles, 46 DYK entries, 14 ITN entries, 67 featured article candidate reviews and 147 good article reviews. Congratulations to our eight finalists and all who participated! It was a generally high-scoring and productive round and I think we can expect a highly competitive finish to the competition.

Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them and within 24 hours of the end of the final. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.

I will be standing down as a judge after the end of the contest. I think the Cup encourages productive editors to improve their contributions to Wikipedia and I hope that someone else will step up to take over the running of the Cup. Sturmvogel 66 (talk), and Cwmhiraeth (talk)

A cup of tea for you!

Hey there! I haven't seen you name around and wanted to say hello. I saw you on the Wikicup newsletter; keep up the great work! People that work on-wiki as hard as you do are very inspiring. Panini! • 🥪 19:48, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hi there—just wanted to express my thanks again for your GA review of the KNP Complex Fire article and your patience re: my working to complete it. Your feedback was immensely helpful and I'm sure it was a good bit of work, too! I see you have done a lot of work in the GA nomination/review arena and I hope you know it's appreciated. Have a great week. Penitentes (talk) 21:10, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Concert abuse tag

Hi, you recently added a recentism tag to concert abuse. I don’t think the tag is needed or justified for the following reasons, and I would like to remove it. Here’s why:

• The primary contributor wrote the original article about recent events, primarily those in the post-covid era. Up until last week, the title reflected that scope
• The title and scope of the article were recently decided by the consensus of WikiProject Music to be better suited at a more neural title for the general phenomenon
• The larger and older phenomenon still exists at the bottling (concert abuse) article and editors are considering how to deal with this
• Appropriate coverage of the larger historical phenomenon is covered in the history section
• The recentism tag is used to to alert editors of a problem in relation to recentism bias. The article did not have this perceived problem until last week when the article title and scope was changed. Because the main history (bottling) is linked from the history section, and post-covid incidents are clearly noted as section headings, and the concerts project is working on how to best deal with this, there is no need for the tag as all parties are aware of and working on the problem. In fact, the recent move to this general title was part of the solution, as the previous title was considered too narrow in scope. So you can see, the addition of the recentism tag doesn’t make much sense. Viriditas (talk) 01:52, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

What the article used to look like isn't relevant. Tags are about whether the problem exists now and whether it still needs to be resolved. Currently, a disproportional amount of the article is about the last few years rather than the general concept indicated by the article's title. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 02:10, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Just to clarify, the article hasn’t changed, it now refers to the general concept. And it links to the pre-2020 list of events in the bottling article and highlights the main history. I don’t see a recentism problem, and since tags are used to notify the interested parties, it doesn’t make any sense to tag it, since everyone has been talking about this issue for the last several weeks and is aware of it. The new title is an attempt to address the problem. Unfortunately, you aren’t aware of any of this, and perceived a problem of "recentism" because of the article title, which was just changed. So you see it’s a catch 22. If the article title is changed back to what it was last week, you remove the tag. But that would go against the consensus of the commmunity. This isn’t how tags are supposed to be used. Viriditas (talk) 02:16, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

I temporarily moved the article to a restricted scope, which was one alternative presented last week prior to the work needed to be done to create a larger, more inclusive article. Viriditas (talk) 02:26, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

The content of the article should match the scope designated by the title. If it doesn't, then it should be categorized appropriately with a tag. With your move, it currently does. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 02:30, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

I think you mean well with your strict rules-based approach, but there are times where that approach is not a good fit for the situation. We aren’t supposed to do moves when an article is linked from the main page, and that was the only way to fix your request and remove the tag. I think you would have been just as effective leaving a message on the talk page and waiting until it was off of the main page to add the tag. Viriditas (talk) 05:09, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Iron Man

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Iron Man you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:02, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Can you review this GAN article?

Hello! Hope you are doing well. Since you have reviewed many GA nominations, i was wondering if you can review mine. The GAN article i am referring to is Wii U GamePad. Cheers. Summerslam2022 (talk) 18:07, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Summerslam2022, I've taken a break from reviewing for the time being. It's not uncommon for articles to wait a few months at GAN before a reviewer takes it, although video game articles are generally a bit quicker. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 18:27, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Lou Henry Hoover

Hope you don't mind me switching the lead image. Not sure if I'll be able to get it to FP, but do think this is better and clearer than what we had. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.5% of all FPs.} 03:39, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Not at all! It was a pleasant surprise when I saw it. I usually don't do too much with images when writing articles just because I don't know how to find good ones (let alone tag their licensing). Thebiguglyalien (talk) 03:56, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 11

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited War Machine, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cable.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

New essay for you

In light of the events from seven months ago on WP:YEARS, I suggest you give this a read if International Notability ever returns: User:InvadingInvader/Against international notability InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 20:22, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

InvadingInvader, mentally filed away for the future. I think that the lessons learned from the whole WP:YEARS and international notability debacle have relevance to the project more broadly. It touches on several dispute-prone areas where best practices are unclear: event notability, trying to determine weight from primary sources, local consensus, WikiProject ownership, and Americentrism. And side note if you're interested, I've been working on fine tuning 2001 as a proper non-stub article in the GA process. The main thing being worked out now is the sourcing, which might be relevant to this. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:58, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

I do agree – and I'm thinking about making a similar renovation to 2022 in the US in the future. God speed! InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 01:19, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for helping out with the GAN backlog drive

{{The Order of the Superior Scribe of Wikipedia|We really appreciate that you reviewed 41 GANs during the drive. Due in part to your efforts, the backlog of unreviewed nominations was reduced by 440 articles, an astonishing 69 percent.}} (t · c) buidhe 07:16, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Half Barnstar
	Just letting you know I value and respect your opinion, no matter if we agree or not. Curbon7 (talk) 04:02, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Much obliged! Sometimes it can be hard to tell whether the other person interprets a discussion as an interesting conversation or a frustrating argument. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 04:28, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Martha Washington

The article Martha Washington you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Martha Washington and Talk:Martha Washington/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of SusunW -- SusunW (talk) 19:41, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Martha Washington

The article Martha Washington you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Martha Washington for comments about the article, and Talk:Martha Washington/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of SusunW -- SusunW (talk) 20:42, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia editor's personal opinion

Hello. You've reverted me on Far-left politics and then toned down the claim that far-left and far-right politics "overlap significantly" to that they "overlap in some areas". Regardless of emphasis, this is an exceptional claim that would be best backed up with multiple sources. Have a nice day. –Vipz (talk) 13:23, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi again, I believe it is not productive to have non-content discussion on article talk pages, but wanted to address this message of yours from there: It's a massive timesink when an editor comes to a talk page with The Truth and then works backward from it, trying to find sources that justify their beliefs rather than finding the best sources and summarizing them. I sensed some of that in this discussion. This is called confirmation bias. Our entire interaction was based on me pointing out issues with sourcing and synthesis and you dismissing them because I've not provided sources for other statements ("personal opinions") I made, then when I went out to provide sources for previously posted statements, tacitly accusing me of confirmation bias. Messages towards me I feel weren't worded in the most "assume good faith" way, but that's another story. Hope to hear back, have a nice day again. –Vipz (talk) 12:32, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Maria Stromberger

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Maria Stromberger you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Ppt91 -- Ppt91 (talk) 19:21, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Personal attacks

Comments like this do nothing to bring down the temperature of the discussion and are likely to be seen as personal attacks. Such accusations are not appropriate to levy without a lick of evidence.

Furthermore, how about some self-reflection? You frequently edit in AMPOL as well, but I guess you're holier than the rest of us. ––FormalDude (talk) 00:10, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

There are plenty of AMPOL editors who don't endorse a position or make an edit just because it strengthens or weakens a conservative viewpoint or a progressive viewpoint. You can't tell which "side" of a discussion they'll be on just from political ideology. But there are also editors where no matter what the issue is, you can always bet that they'll be on a certain ideological side before even opening the discussion. If you're one of the former, then I apologize for invoking your name in this way. But when encountering the latter, I believe that failing to prevent WP:CPUSH is far more harmful than challenging it.

I've come to expect certain editors to always support the right-wing position (regardless of the merits of the argument), and I've come to expect certain editors to always be on the opposite side of the debate (regardless of the merits of the argument). Every time one of these little spats emerges, it always lines up consistently. There seems to be an unspoken agreement that we all just pretend this isn't happening, but that doesn't make it go away. Again, I hope I'm mistaken and that there aren't as many of these editors as it appears. But CPUSH does emerge from time to time, and editors who are unwilling to identify it are doing the project a disservice. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 01:23, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the apology, because I really strive to be as neutral as possible and make PAG-based arguments. Overall I actually largely agree with you on this, but I do not think that accusing editors of POV-pushing in the manner you did is helpful. The thing is, it's extremely sensitive and labeling any experienced editor a civil POV-pusher is always going to be controversial. Such an accusation deserves a detailed report with clear evidence, and even then it rarely ends with sanctions specifically for CPUSH. It's a complex problem that the project has yet to remedy. For now the community's primary solution is to enforce strict behavioral standards for those participating in the topic area. That's why I started the report, not because of any viewpoint from the reported editor, but because of the behavior I saw from them: edit-warring, incivility, and canvassing. Some of the responses to the report are subpar, but I can't help that, and their responses are not as important as the responses of uninvolved admins anyway. ––FormalDude (talk) 02:04, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Your WP:ASPERSIONs are sanctionable; please strike the entire statement and this one as well or substantiate your allegations, which are personal attacks and inappropriate. Andre🚐 02:46, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

I have already struck the portion that mentioned you any anyone else. All that remains now is my statement is that admins should be more firm with POV pushing in situations like this. Whom do you consider that an aspersion against? I'm not referring to you in that portion. Do you feel that I am? Thebiguglyalien (talk) 03:10, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

You already referred to me; simply striking my name while leaving the message, is not a suitably strike for the allegation. Please strike the entire statement, and your response to FormalDude, or explain the POV pushing allegation with diffs. Andre🚐 03:21, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

• To the best of my knowledge, I have never edited AMPOL except perhaps two articles on mass-shootings (which were remarkably free from any POV-disputes) and one/two odd comments in RfCs/t-p discussions. I do not recall coming across your name ever, either. So, maybe explain the PA? TrangaBellam (talk) 06:49, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Anaximenes of Miletus

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Anaximenes of Miletus you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Phlsph7 -- Phlsph7 (talk) 08:43, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Julia Gardiner Tyler

The article Julia Gardiner Tyler you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Julia Gardiner Tyler and Talk:Julia Gardiner Tyler/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Alanna the Brave -- Alanna the Brave (talk) 23:02, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Julia Gardiner Tyler

The article Julia Gardiner Tyler you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Julia Gardiner Tyler for comments about the article, and Talk:Julia Gardiner Tyler/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Alanna the Brave -- Alanna the Brave (talk) 13:22, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

File:Julia Tyler advertisement.jpg was a little odd, given the LoC apparently only uploaded a black-and-white copy, but I think I've sorted it. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.5% of all FPs.} 18:09, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Births in 2001 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Births in 2001 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/Births in 2001 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.

MirrorPlanet (talk) 01:01, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Iron Man

On 30 September 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Iron Man, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Stan Lee modeled Tony Stark after 20th-century business magnate Howard Hughes? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Iron Man. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Iron Man), 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 suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Schwede66 00:03, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Fyappiy

Hello @Thebiguglyalien. Thank you so much for reviewing Batal Hajji Belkhoroev and giving it GA status. I have another candidate for GA status, Fyappiy, which been more than a month a candidate with no review being done so I was wondering if you would be interested in reviewing it? WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 21:49, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Thebiguglyalien. I'm sorry to bother you again, but I didn't get an answer. Will you consider reviewing the article? WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 20:59, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

WikiEditor1234567123, I'm taking a break from reviewing right now after doing 40 reviews for GA drive last month. Fortunately, the drive means that there aren't as many nominations waiting, so yours should get picked up soon. And you can always reduce the backlog and get your nomination prioritized by doing some reviews of your own, if that's something you're interested in. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:12, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Alright. Thanks for the answer! WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 21:27, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello again @Thebiguglyalien. How you doing? Do you happen to know any GA reviewers who could review the article? Best regards, WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 21:30, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

You'll just have to wait until someone takes an interest in it and initiates the review. It's normal for it to take a few months. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:54, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Barbara Bush

The article Barbara Bush you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Barbara Bush and Talk:Barbara Bush/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Vaticidalprophet -- Vaticidalprophet (talk) 18:40, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Barbara Bush

The article Barbara Bush you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Barbara Bush for comments about the article, and Talk:Barbara Bush/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Vaticidalprophet -- Vaticidalprophet (talk) 18:03, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Rose Cleveland

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Rose Cleveland you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Generalissima -- Generalissima (talk) 07:01, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Invitation to Cornell study on Wikipedia discussions

Hello Thebiguglyalien,

I’m reaching out as part of a Cornell University academic study investigating the potential for user-facing tools to help improve discussion quality within Wikipedia discussion spaces (such as talk pages, noticeboards, etc.). We chose to reach out to you because you have been highly active on various discussion pages .

The study centers around a prototype tool, ConvoWizard, which is designed to warn Wikipedia editors when a discussion they are replying to is getting tense and at risk of derailing into personal attacks or incivility. More information about ConvoWizard and the study can be found at our research project page on meta-wiki.

If this sounds like it might be interesting to you, you can use this link to sign up and install ConvoWizard. Of course, if you are not interested, feel free to ignore this message.

If you have any questions or thoughts about the study, our team is happy to discuss! You may direct such comments to me or to my collaborator, Cristian_at_CornellNLP.

Thank you for your consideration.

-- Jonathan at CornellNLP (talk) 17:54, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

GAR of HDMI

How long should we give them to respond? So far they somewhat ignored you, and have completely ignored my longer review. A week or two then close with a delist? I am not competent to edit the page. Ldm1954 (talk) 11:26, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment was reworked this year to have coordinators, so they can decide when it's appropriate to close. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 14:14, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of It's the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown

The article It's the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:It's the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown and Talk:It's the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of SNUGGUMS -- SNUGGUMS (talk) 05:21, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of It's the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown

The article It's the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:It's the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown for comments about the article, and Talk:It's the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of SNUGGUMS -- SNUGGUMS (talk) 15:22, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

GA feedback of Josef Hoop

Hello – Regarding your feedback on the GA nomination on Josef Hoop, I have added more secondary sources for the points in the article, but I have kept some primary sources that serve to back up the main points and connect them together (i.e. how this is relevant to Hoop and his career). So my question is, how much can I exactly get away with? Thanks. TheBritinator (talk) 13:00, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

At a glance, it definitely looks better. I'll take a closer look today or tomorrow. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 15:41, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

TheBritinator, I looked more at the sourcing, and there are still significant portions of the article sourced entirely to primary sources, often using them to make general statements. Using primary sources is more of an art than a science, but the rule of thumb is that they should be used sparingly and that you shouldn't need any outside knowledge or expertise to verify them. Anyone reading the primary source should be able to confirm that "yes, this is true" because the fact is plainly stated in the source. I gave you the main policy about primary sources, but there's a more technical write up about it at Wikipedia:Identifying and using primary sources if you're interested.

When in doubt, lean toward using books or journal articles. I searched through the Wikipedia Library (which I believe you should have access to), but I didn't have much luck. It can be difficult to find good sourcing for subjects in small, non-English speaking countries, especially when they're not from the 21st century. Primary sources are better than no sources, but they aren't quite enough for the good article process in most cases. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 14:51, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Alright thanks, I'll see what I can do. There's a limited number of secondary sources on these things, but I can keep looking for more hidden ones. Is there anything part specifically that could do with more? TheBritinator (talk) 15:57, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

I would just look to see where entire paragraphs are sourced to primary sources. But really it comes down to a case by case basis on how exactly the source is being used. That's more important than the simple number of primary sources. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 16:08, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

So, like the diplomatic career and economic section? TheBritinator (talk) 17:09, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Yeah. But like I said, it's more about the type of information than the sheer number of sources. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 17:19, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Zeno of Elea

I see that earlier today you added nine new harv/sfn no-target errors to this article. They all relate to Vlastos's book, which was first published in 1995 (print version), with an eBook version published in 2022. The short-form cites all point to 1995, but the full cite in the biblio listing states 2022, hence the errors. Normally I would fix these no-target errors myself, but I can't tell which version you used for your editing. See Category:Harv and Sfn no-target errors. --NSH001 (talk) 19:35, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, I hadn't even noticed! I think I've fixed it now. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 19:39, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

2023 Israel–Hamas war

Would you consider splitting your second comment, about reactions and analysis, in a separate section, so that it can be discussed separately from the timeline issue. Thanks. Talk:2023_Israel–Hamas_war#Article_length_and_timeline_format fgnievinski (talk) 04:34, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Gregory Cousins previously prodded

I removed the PROD tag from Gregory Cousins, since a proposed deletion was previously contested in March 2016. No objection to taking this to AfD. • Gene93k (talk) 09:51, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Cesária Évora

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Cesária Évora you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of SusunW -- SusunW (talk) 16:41, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

Promotion of Barbara Bush

Congratulations, Thebiguglyalien! The article you nominated, Barbara Bush, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles 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 article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:05, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 17

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Leucippus, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Abdera and Elea.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Leucippus

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Leucippus you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of HistoryofIran -- HistoryofIran (talk) 16:22, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Mandate (politics)

On 19 October 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Mandate (politics), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that no single political party has a mandate in a coalition government? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mandate (politics). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Mandate (politics)), 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 suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

—Kusma (talk) 00:02, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Leucippus

The article Leucippus you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Leucippus for comments about the article, and Talk:Leucippus/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of HistoryofIran -- HistoryofIran (talk) 15:01, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Revamping 11th Millennium BC.

Because I have not done anything to this page in a long time, I will revamp it due to me knowing more knowledge about citations and knowing what is credible (reliable) or not. While I was looking at the 10th millennium BC for reference, I noticed that some of the information there talks about dates that are even earlier than the 10th millennium BC probably because at the time The Great Shaker thought that the 11th millennium BC or earlier millennium pages will never exist which has been proven wrong. This makes me a bit confused because it would be a bit weird for the 11th millennium BC to talk specifically about dates from 11,000 BC to 10,001 BC while 10th millennium BC talks about events that are earlier as well. Because of this, I'm not sure what to do right now, but I just want to see your thoughts about this since you helped me a bit while I was working on that page a year ago. FerdinandLovesLegos (talk) 20:38, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

FerdinandLovesLegos, it's generally okay for an article to speak broadly about things as long as its in the context of that topic. For example, if you're writing that the Younger Dryas ended in a particular millennium, it's fine to write a sentence about how it had started or what it was so the reader understands the significance, even if that gets into other millennia. It's also okay for a little overlap between articles. I would just worry about finding sources that describe the 11th millennium BC and getting everything they say into the article. Everything else, like sorting out what goes where, can come later. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:11, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Alright. Thanks for letting me know! FerdinandLovesLegos (talk) 21:16, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Redirects of mass stabbing articles

Hi, you have redirected numerous standalone mass stabbing articles, seemingly without discussion or consensus. Would you care to comment on this? Thanks, WWGB (talk) 06:18, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

You're looking for the second half of this discussion: Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab)#Drafting an RfC for whether news coverage counts toward GNG. The real question is when the discussion happened to exempt these articles from WP:NEVENT and WP:PRIMARY. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 13:23, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Grnrchst -- Grnrchst (talk) 11:03, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Zeno of Elea

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Zeno of Elea you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of L'OrfeoGreco -- L'OrfeoGreco (talk) 21:41, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Thebiguglyalien. Thank you for your work on 1960s in Bulgaria. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thank you for writing the article on Wikipedia! I genuinely appreciate your efforts in creating the article on Wikipedia and expanding the sum of human knowledge in Wikipedia. Wishing you and your family a great day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 03:40, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

List of War Machine titles moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, List of War Machine titles, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Dan arndt (talk) 09:09, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Nona Gaprindashvili

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Nona Gaprindashvili you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of BennyOnTheLoose -- BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:02, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Priscilla Cooper Tyler

The article Priscilla Cooper Tyler you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Priscilla Cooper Tyler and Talk:Priscilla Cooper Tyler/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Vacant0 -- Vacant0 (talk) 12:21, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mary Harrison McKee

The article Mary Harrison McKee you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Mary Harrison McKee and Talk:Mary Harrison McKee/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Vacant0 -- Vacant0 (talk) 14:23, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mary Harrison McKee

The article Mary Harrison McKee you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Mary Harrison McKee for comments about the article, and Talk:Mary Harrison McKee/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Vacant0 -- Vacant0 (talk) 22:42, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Priscilla Cooper Tyler

The article Priscilla Cooper Tyler you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Priscilla Cooper Tyler for comments about the article, and Talk:Priscilla Cooper Tyler/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Vacant0 -- Vacant0 (talk) 23:01, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Military dictatorship

The article Military dictatorship you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Military dictatorship for comments about the article, and Talk:Military dictatorship/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Pbritti -- Pbritti (talk) 19:04, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

		The Content Creativity Barnstar
		Your work on Military dictatorship, exemplified by your patience and proactive action during its GA review, are characteristic of the finest Wikipedia has to offer. Thank you! ~ Pbritti (talk) 19:16, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Louisa Adams

The article Louisa Adams you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Louisa Adams and Talk:Louisa Adams/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Simongraham -- Simongraham (talk) 11:03, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Louisa Adams

The article Louisa Adams you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Louisa Adams for comments about the article, and Talk:Louisa Adams/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Simongraham -- Simongraham (talk) 01:42, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Samia Suluhu Hassan

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Samia Suluhu Hassan you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Firefangledfeathers -- Firefangledfeathers (talk) 01:43, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

WikiCup 2023 November newsletter

The WikiCup is a marathon rather than a sprint and all those reaching the final round have been involved in the competition for the last ten months, improving Wikipedia vastly during the process. After all this hard work, BeanieFan11 has emerged as the 2023 winner and the WikiCup Champion. The finalists this year were:-

• BeanieFan11 with 2582 points
• Thebiguglyalien with 1615 points
• Epicgenius with 1518 points
• MyCatIsAChonk with 1012 points
• BennyOnTheLoose with 974 points
• AirshipJungleman29 with 673 points
• Sammi Brie with 520 points
• Unlimitedlead with 5 points

Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether they made it to the final round or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the competition, some of whom did very well. Wikipedia has benefitted greatly from the quality creations, expansions and improvements made, and the numerous reviews performed. All those who reached the final round will win awards. The following special awards will be made based on high performance in particular areas of content creation and review. Awards will be handed out in the next few days.

• Unlimitedlead wins the featured article prize, for 7 FAs in total including 3 in round 2.
• MyCatIsAChonk wins the featured list prize, for 5 FLs in total.
• Lee Vilenski wins the featured topic prize, for a 6-article featured topic in round 4.
• MyCatIsAChonk wins the featured picture prize, for 6 FPs in total.
• BeanieFan11 wins the good article prize, for 75 GAs in total, including 61 in the final round.
• Epicgenius wins the good topic prize, for a 41-article good topic in the final round.
• LunaEatsTuna wins the GA reviewer prize, for 70 GA reviews in round 1.
• MyCatIsAChonk wins the FA reviewer prize, for 66 FA reviews in the final round.
• Epicgenius wins the DYK prize, for 49 did you know articles in total.
• Muboshgu wins the ITN prize, for 46 in the news articles in total.

The WikiCup has run every year since 2007. With the 2023 contest now concluded, I will be standing down as a judge due to real life commitments, so I hope that another editor will take over running the competition. Please get in touch if you are interested. Next year's competition will hopefully begin on 1 January 2024. You are invited to sign up to participate in the contest; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors. It only remains to congratulate our worthy winners once again and thank all participants for their involvement! (If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.) Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:52, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

November songs

my story today

Congratulations! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:40, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2001

The article 2001 you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:2001 for comments about the article, and Talk:2001/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Freedom4U -- Freedom4U (talk) 12:23, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Autocracy

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Autocracy you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Ljleppan -- Ljleppan (talk) 16:02, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

"Theatrical mask" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Theatrical mask has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 7 § Theatrical mask until a consensus is reached. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{blaze__wolf} 15:16, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

WikiCup Awards

Awarded to Thebiguglyalien for being one of the eight finalists in the 2023 WikiCup, and taking second place. Congratulations! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:04, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Amazing work- impressed by the progress you've made on the First Ladies topic, while still revising many important articles! Great job MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 12:56, 11 November 2023 (UTC)