User talk:48JCL/Archive 3
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
Women in Red June 2024
Announcements from other communities
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk 07:03, 23 May 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Minnesota State Highway 36
Thank you for your GA review of Minnesota State Highway 36. I'm wondering where you found basic references in the article? To my knowledge all of the sources are cited with a template, I would appreciate you pointing out where they are if I've missed something.
Also, would you advise that I continue improving the article for higher classes or work on other articles instead? NotDragonius (talk) 14:01, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
- you could nominate it for A-class 48JCL (talk) 15:56, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
GA mentorship
Hi 48JCL, I noticed the note you left at WP:GAMENTOR, and I'm willing to mentor you. We can do this in a couple of ways: I can pick out a couple of articles you might want to review, or you can choose one yourself; we'll then go through the review process together. What sounds best to you? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:00, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- @AirshipJungleman29 Thanks for responding! I’ll go for the second option 48JCL (talk) 19:14, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- @AirshipJungleman29 Currently reviewing Talk:Npm left-pad incident/GA1 48JCL (talk) 11:55, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- Okay! When starting a review, most people use a reviewing template: I personally like {{GAList2}}, but all the others are perfectly fine. What's important is that they are only a guide—you should aim to go beyond just ticking them off. Personally, I nearly always find that I can comment on GA criteria 1, 2, and 3. Here's what I look for in relation to each criterion:
- Well-written: I read the article top-to-bottom. If there is anything that doesn't look right (grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation) I either comment at the review or am bold and fix it myself. Then, I look at the Manual of Style (MOS) pages the article needs to comply with. This one isn't a work of fiction and it doesn't have lists, so it just needs to comply with MOS:LEAD, MOS:LAYOUT, and MOS:WTW. You should actively try to find places where the article doesn't match the MOS.
- Verifiable:
- First, you need to check whether the sources used are all reliable (helpful links for this are WP:RSP and the archives of WP:RSN). If a source isn't considered reliable, make sure that the nominator can justify having it in the article.
- Second, you need to actually open some of the citations to check that a) the article is actually supported by the citations and doesn't include original research, and b) doesn't plagiarised (copy-pasted, or closely paraphrased) the sources. It's good practice to note the sources you have checked in the review, as this check (we call it a "source spot-check") is required in reviews. If you can't access some of the sources, ask the nominator to provide quotes.
- Broad this is fairly easy—does the article include everything you expect to be told as a reader? Does it go into too much detail at any point? This is a bit subjective.
- Neutral like you did with the MOS pages, check that the article meets everything in WP:NPOV.
- Stable just make sure there haven't been edit wars or big disputes recently (also check the talk page)
- Illustrated if the article has no images, try and see if some could be added; if it does, go to their pages to check that all looks ok with the basic parameters (year, source, author) and that the license looks alright. You'll rarely find problems here, but it's good to check.
- In general, if you've checked something, note it down in the review, even if nothing was wrong in the end. This helps assure people that you have actually reviewed the article. I think that's a good starting point—how about you continue with the review now, and ping me when you think you're done (or earlier, if you need an opinion!) so I can look it over? Best of luck! ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:00, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- Alright thanks! 48JCL (talk) 00:53, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- Okay! When starting a review, most people use a reviewing template: I personally like {{GAList2}}, but all the others are perfectly fine. What's important is that they are only a guide—you should aim to go beyond just ticking them off. Personally, I nearly always find that I can comment on GA criteria 1, 2, and 3. Here's what I look for in relation to each criterion:
Your GA nomination of Larrabee County, Iowa
The article Larrabee County, Iowa you nominated as a good article has passed 
; see Talk:Larrabee County, Iowa for comments about the article, and Talk:Larrabee County, Iowa/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of CosXZ -- CosXZ (talk) 04:20, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- LETS GOOOOO 48JCL (talk) 11:29, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for including me in Larrabee County, Iowa :-)
|
The Special Barnstar | |
| I have been chickening out of my first GA for months and suddenly, because of you, I kinda sorta got half a GA without even realizing it. Last week at work was gnarly and my self esteem has been bouncing around like the logo on the DVD menu. This was such a nice surprise! Thanks for all you do. I'm excited to see what articles you write next! Crunchydillpickle🥒 (talk) 00:23, 27 May 2024 (UTC) |
- Yay! My first barnstar! 48JCL (talk) 13:57, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Welcome!
Hello 48JCL and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history.
A few features that you might find helpful:
- Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
- The announcement and open task box is updated very frequently. You can watchlist it if you are interested, or you can add it directly to your user page by copying the following: {{WPMILHIST Announcements}}.
- The project Academy has lots of useful information about editing and writing military history articles. One very useful introductory course to get you started is Writing a good stub.
- Important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.
- The project has several departments, which handle article quality assessment, detailed article and content review, writing contests, and article logistics.
- We have a number of task forces that focus on specific topics, nations, periods, and conflicts.
- We've developed a set of guidelines that cover article structure and content, template use, categorization, and many other issues of interest.
- If you're looking for something to work on, there are many articles that need attention, as well as a number of review alerts.
- If you would like to receive the project's monthly newsletter, The Bugle, please sign up here.
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask any of the project coordinators or any other experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome, and we are looking forward to seeing you around! Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 15:52, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Jwaneng diamond mine
The article Jwaneng diamond mine you nominated as a good article has failed 
; see Talk:Jwaneng diamond mine for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Esculenta -- Esculenta (talk) 15:24, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
A bowl of strawberries for you!
|
hope you're doing well! take care :D xRozuRozu (t • c) 17:48, 29 May 2024 (UTC) |
A cookie for you!
|
Hey 48JCL, thank you so much for doing the GA review for my article npm left-pad incident! I appreciate the feedback about sourcing and I'll be sure to keep it in mind for the future. Have a good one! ~Liancetalk 21:55, 2 June 2024 (UTC) |
GA reviewing
Hello there, I saw you've completed two reviews (Npm left-pad incident and Kiribati at the 2020 Summer Olympics) since my last message. I just wanted to check that you didn't just check the sources in those reviews, and that you also took a look at the prose, the layout, and the other bits of the GA criteria? If you did, it's good practice to just say so in the review. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:21, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- Just checking you saw this 48JCL? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:11, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- @AirshipJungleman29, terribly sorry I somehow did not see this. I made a promise, more specifically to Pokelego that I would add stuff on the talk page. Cheers 48JCL TALK 11:20, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
- OK, I did that stuff on Talk:Rhapsody (climb)/GA1. xq 12:52, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – June 2024
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2024).
Administrator changes
Bureaucrat changes
Guideline and policy news
- Phase II of the 2024 RfA review has commenced to improve and refine the proposals passed in Phase I.
Technical news
- The Nuke feature, which enables administrators to mass delete pages, will now correctly delete pages which were moved to another title. T43351
Arbitration
- The arbitration case Venezuelan politics has been closed.
- The Committee is seeking volunteers for various roles, including access to the conflict of interest VRT queue.
Miscellaneous
- WikiProject Reliability's unsourced statements drive is happening in June 2024 to replace {{citation needed}} tags with references! Sign up here to participate!
Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!
- Hi 48JCL! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
| Mission 1 | Mission 2 | Mission 3 | Mission 4 | Mission 5 | Mission 6 | Mission 7 |
| Say Hello to the World | An Invitation to Earth | Small Changes, Big Impact | The Neutral Point of View | The Veil of Verifiability | The Civility Code | Looking Good Together |
-- 02:07, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!
- Hi 48JCL! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
| Mission 1 | Mission 2 | Mission 3 | Mission 4 | Mission 5 | Mission 6 | Mission 7 |
| Say Hello to the World | An Invitation to Earth | Small Changes, Big Impact | The Neutral Point of View | The Veil of Verifiability | The Civility Code | Looking Good Together |
-- 02:08, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
Your signature
I saw your signature at this AfD, which has gotten pretty heated, and thought – did they really tag this guy's !vote with citation needed and dubious? That would be a whole new level of badgering! Thankfully, it was just your signature, which gave me a good laugh. Toadspike [Talk] 08:41, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
Sorry
Per this discussion, it appears I was wrong about that redirect from the old user talk page. I've now deleted it, sorry for the hassle. Floquenbeam (talk) 19:26, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
Odd welcomes
Why are you welcoming editors who haven't edited in years? -- Ponyobons mots 20:14, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Ponyo: I mean, is it prohibited? 48JCL TALK 20:15, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- It's just useless. They made three edits 7 years ago. In addition, the edits introduced unsourced promotional content to a BLP, but your welcome makes no mentions of these concerns. -- Ponyobons mots 20:20, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- k ill stop 48JCL TALK 20:20, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- It's just useless. They made three edits 7 years ago. In addition, the edits introduced unsourced promotional content to a BLP, but your welcome makes no mentions of these concerns. -- Ponyobons mots 20:20, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
GA reviews
Hello. I appreciate that you're trying to get into reviewing, but I was hoping that you could return Talk:Fear of bees/GA1 and Talk:Autocracy/GA3 so more experienced reviewers can address them. I'd also prefer if you didn't appoint yourself the source reviewer of my other nomination Talk:Federalist No. 8/GA1 despite the actual reviewer not accepting your offer to share the review. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 00:11, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you, and done. Cheers! 48JCL TALK 02:31, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
- 48JCL, it would be more appropriate for you to request a G7 speedy deletion on both the Talk:Fear of bees/GA1 and Talk:Autocracy/GA3 pages, so they can be deleted, rather than request a second opinion; there's been very little done on the former review and nothing on the latter one. See WP:G7 for more information. Please note that I have already made an adjustment on the Talk:Autocracy page to help deal with that one, but the best thing is still the G7. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:05, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
- Based on the "done" above, and the latest addition of a semi-retired template, I've gone ahead and G6'd both of these. Let me know if something else needs to be done. I don't think anything needs to be done with Federalist No. 8.--Floquenbeam (talk) 16:26, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
- 48JCL, it would be more appropriate for you to request a G7 speedy deletion on both the Talk:Fear of bees/GA1 and Talk:Autocracy/GA3 pages, so they can be deleted, rather than request a second opinion; there's been very little done on the former review and nothing on the latter one. See WP:G7 for more information. Please note that I have already made an adjustment on the Talk:Autocracy page to help deal with that one, but the best thing is still the G7. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:05, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
Hi 48JCL, I would just like to check in on this regarding Talk:Slowpoke (Pokémon)/GA1. You have carried out some defined Spot checks, but it is very unclear what the process means. What is a pass, if not a reliable source? How are you checking offline sources such as Millennial Monsters: Japanese Toys and the Global Imagination for original research and copyvio? CMD (talk) 13:20, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: List of world heritage sites in botswana has been accepted
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Redirect-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .
Thanks again, and happy editing!
Relativity ⚡️ 22:15, 9 June 2024 (UTC)