User talk:History6042

Archives (Index)

1

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Thanks for your contributions to Linn-Elise Øhn Mehlen. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:56, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PLEASE ASSUME GOOD FAITH before knee-jerk pressing the undo button; I am updating 2 articles with several tabs open.

ALL content was cited at section, and the drive-by IP attacked the lede.

I haven't yet checked the warning you sent, as it locked up my computer and now using a different browser

I am in my 12th wiki-year (so WP:DNTTR) .

Thank you.-- 82.13.47.210 (talk) 02:42, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, sorry. I will start to check the edit summaries in more depth. Thank you for bringing this up. History6042 (talk) 20:42, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red | December 2024, Vol 10, Issue 12, Nos 293, 294, 324, 325 Online events: New: Women who died in 2024 | Religion Continuing: #1day1woman | Education (year-long initiative) Announcements from other communities Women in Religion have a monthly virtual edit-a-thon and the next session is December 2nd 4:00 - 5:00 p.m. CST. For Zoom meeting details, contact Dzingle1 or RosPost. Women in Red members are welcome to join the Zoom Meeting here Tip of the month: Think of rewarding contributors, especially newcomers, with a barnstar. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter/X

--Lajmmoore (talk 18:45, 29 November 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Hello History6042, You have been paired at good article review circles to review Charles Brenton Fisk. At the same time, another user will be reviewing the article you nominated. Please wait 24 hours or until all users have accepted their nomination before starting your review in case a user in your circle decides to decline their invite.

To accept or decline this invitation to review the article, visit WT:GARC#Circle #17.

GMH Melbourne (talk) 13:07, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Central Powers 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 BarntToust -- BarntToust (talk) 14:05, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Thaumas, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Iris, Eurybia and Pontus.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:53, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article Central Powers you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Central Powers for comments about the article, and Talk:Central Powers/GA2 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 BarntToust -- BarntToust (talk) 16:05, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm SG5536B. I understand that your intentions may be genuine, but some of your recent welcomes, such as those to Meowstempo, Perezmuffs, and Eruptsammy were incorrect because those accounts are sockpuppets of the banned user MidAtlanticBaby. Please stop issuing those welcome templates to new users unless they actually have made edits to this Wikipedia and are likely genuine newcomers, not sockpuppets. ~SG5536B 04:06, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh sorry, I'll stop. Thanks for letting me know though. History6042 (talk) 04:07, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi History6042. I'm looking for experienced editors to interview here. Feel free to pass if you're not interested. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 03:14, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I'll do it. Thanks for the invitation. History6042 (talk) 03:15, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abishe (talk) 15:13, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Abishe. History6042 (talk) 15:14, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi History6042, you've recently created articles such as Lips (mythology), Euronotus, and so on, for mythological figures who have no individual mythological content. I don't see that these articles add anything. I suggest discussing the matter before creating more of these articles. – Michael Aurel (talk) 15:33, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I though they were notable because they have sources. Don't they just need a few sources to be notable. History6042 (talk) 15:39, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Currently the articles are only really sourced to Theoi.com, and a decent amount of their content looks to be incorrect (eg. what source is there for either having been the offspring of Eos and Astraeus?). Not a major issue (they can be easily merged, or reworked, if there's something worth saying about them), but I thought I'd say something before you started creating too many of these articles. – Michael Aurel (talk) 15:58, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'll try to expand them and find new sources, I'm working on Lips right now. History6042 (talk) 16:05, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also the source is the first inline citation. At least for Lips. It says who the Anemoi's parents are if you scroll down a bit. History6042 (talk) 16:09, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that Theoi.com is a pretty unreliable source, and tends to contain bogus claims, of which this looks to be one. While I appreciate your efforts here, we fundamentally need reliable secondary sourcing to justify a page. – Michael Aurel (talk) 16:21, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will find a different source than Theoi.com. History6042 (talk) 16:23, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi History6042, the problem is that, currently, all of the claims made at Euronotus, and most of those made at Lips (mythology), are either unsupported by the cited sources, or not cited to reliable sources. For instance, there's no source which substantiates that "Eurynotos" was a member of the Anemoi, or the offspring of Eos and Astraeus, and sources such as "weirditaly.com" and "study.com" don't meet WP:RS in a Greek mythological context. – Michael Aurel (talk) 01:07, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for pointing this out, but could you please tell me if there are any sources you may know of that could have this information. I do not know how but could you please turn these into drafts as well, so I may continue working on them and finding reliable sources. History6042😊 (Contact me) 01:42, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

While I appreciate your resolve here, I'm not sure there really is anything to say about these figures. I'd recommend just turning Euronotus into a redirect to Anemoi, as I'm pretty certain that it's subject doesn't have any existence in reliable sources (notice that the cited source which mentions εὐρόνοτος only give a definition for the word, and doesn't say that it represents a deity). You can draftify Lips (mythology) if you like, as there is at least a semi-reliable source which mentions them (so they are probably mentioned in an actual ancient source) – WP:DRAFTIFY has information on this. – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:41, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'm fine with turning Euronotus into a redirect. I'll try and draftify Lips. History6042😊 (Contact me) 02:43, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, here are a few sources for Lips. They seem to be mentioned by Aristotle in his Meteorologica – see the Loeb edition – and this is mentioned in the DGRBM. And, while it doesn't look especially reliable, this source does mention their appearance on the Tower of the Winds. – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:53, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I'll be sure to use these. History6042😊 (Contact me) 02:54, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for making an article out of my original redirect, the 1966 Ghanaian coup d'état!! Crucial moment in Ghanaian history!! Happy Christmas/Happy Holidays!! Buckshot06 (talk) 21:12, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome and thanks for the barnstar. History6042 (talk) 21:15, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That was a very bad close. Per WP:CLOSEAFD discussions should be left open for a week and this isn't close. Secondly you failed to explain consensus, you just counted votes.

I would advise you to undo the close and let someone more experienced close a contentious AfD, especially given this was closed early. Traumnovelle (talk) 18:02, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I'll undo it. History6042😊 (Contact me) 18:04, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for rectifying it. Traumnovelle (talk) 18:05, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. History6042😊 (Contact me) 18:06, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red | January 2025, Vol 11, Issue 1, Nos 324, 326, 327, 328, 329 Online events: New: Music (year-long initiative) | Alphabet run A & B | Internet personalities Continuing: #1day1woman (year-long initiative) | Women who died in 2024 Announcements from other communities Celebrate Wikipedia Day on Jan 15, 2025 Participate in #1Lib1Ref Jan 15 – Feb 5, 2025 Tip of the month: Celebrate WiR's 20% achievement by adding {{User:ForsythiaJo/20%Userbox}} to your user page. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter/X

--Lajmmoore (talk 17:49, 28 December 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Hello History6042! The thread you created at the Teahouse, Tools, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread. See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by KiranBOT, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=KiranBOT}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). —KiranBOT (talk) 03:12, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2025 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor, we hope the WikiCup will give you a chance to improve your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page ready for you to take part. Any questions on the scoring, rules or anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page.

For the 2025 WikiCup, we've implemented several changes to the scoring system. The highest-ranking contestants will now receive tournament points at the end of each round, and final rankings are decided by the number of tournament points each contestant has. If you're busy and can't sign up in January, don't worry: Signups are now open throughout the year. To make things fairer for latecomers, the lowest-scoring contestants will no longer be eliminated at the end of each round.

The first round will end on 26 February. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email), Epicgenius (talk · contribs · email), Frostly (talk · contribs · email), Guerillero (talk · contribs · email) and Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:13, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Regrettably, I had to remove a review you added from the January GA backlog drive. Only reviews started after 00:00 (midnight) on January 1 are eligible, and that review began on 29 December. However, please don't be discouraged - thanks for signing up and I hope to see many great reviews from you during the January drive. Happy editing. —Ganesha811 (talk) 01:41, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh thanks, I didn't see that. History6042😊 (Contact me) 01:42, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your review of Fatima Payman! GraziePrego (talk) 03:41, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, you did a good job on it. History6042😊 (Contact me) 03:42, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As someone who has mainly contributed to the area of Serbian politics, my recommendation for you would be to rescind the GA nomination for now, considering that it has a lot of missing information and unsourced content (therefore it would fail criteria 2c and 3 only from taking a look at the state of the article). If you remove the nomination, I could help you by organising the article better in consistency with other articles, adding missing references, and missing content (with references to back up the content of course). Cheers, Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 15:29, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh sure, thanks for offering. History6042😊 (Contact me) 15:31, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:46, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I just wanted to touch base regarding your recent GAN reviews. While there is nothing wrong with them, it seemed to me that you were a bit confused with the proccess of source reviews. I've personally shared how I do source reviews here: User:IntentionallyDense/October 2024 GAN backlog drive#My process. If you have any questions about GAN reviews or source checks, you can contact me personally through my talk page, by replying to this message, or posting to WP:GANMENTOR. Happy editing! IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 03:43, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks, I'll try to implement your process now. History6042😊 (Contact me) 12:05, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You don’t have to implement my process by any means I just thought it would be helpful to see how other people do reviews! IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 16:50, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thank you. History6042😊 (Contact me) 16:51, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @History6042 and thanks for your interest in the WikiCup. I noticed you submitted Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Michelin-starred restaurants in Washington, D.C./archive1 and Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/CSS General Earl Van Dorn/archive1 for FACR/FLCR points.

Unfortunately, both of these reviews are too short to qualify for points. Generally, we want to see at least 4-5 pieces of substantive feedback or (barring that) a comment explaining in detail how the article already complies with the FA criteria. Per WP:WC/SCO, "If the judges feel your review is substandard or too short, you will not be awarded round points for the review." I understand this may be disappointing, but without you "showing your work", so to speak, it's difficult for us to tell apart a short, comprehensive review and a drive-by review. – Epicgenius (talk) 14:05, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I can add more to the reviews. History6042😊 (Contact me) 14:09, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. Once you have completed these reviews, you may resubmit them for points. – Epicgenius (talk) 14:19, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thank you for letting me know. History6042😊 (Contact me) 14:20, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I should also mention that, if you genuinely did not find any other issues, you don't have to add extra comments for the sake of doing so. You could just briefly summarize how the article meets the FAC/FLC criteria in that case. – Epicgenius (talk) 14:21, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, for letting me know. History6042😊 (Contact me) 14:25, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Each one has five things on it now so I am going to go ahead and add them back. History6042😊 (Contact me) 14:26, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! I've been looking for interesting article writing areas to write in, and the South Korean articles offer you posted to WP:REWARD seems enticing (I don't need the money though, I'd just like to help, you can donate it to a charity if you'd like when I make each article). I have a working competency in reading/writing Korean. Thanks for offering this! :) MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 10:40, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, this was meant for the other editor who also posted Korean topics on WP:REWARD, but the same still applies, the 3 kingdoms looks enticing and I'd be happy to help! :) MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 10:42, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you wish to get the good topic on the 3 kingdoms, the rewards are still available if you do. History6042😊 (Contact me) 12:21, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect, thank you for running this, it does seem like a really interesting topic, I'll see if I can get any of them to GA! :) MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 04:09, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Central Powers, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cassell.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:53, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article Tuvalu at the 2024 Summer Olympics you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Tuvalu at the 2024 Summer Olympics 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 Arconning -- Arconning (talk) 03:23, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi History6042. I'm a bit worried by some of your submissions, especially as they don't seem particularly in the spirit of the cup.

The WikiCup is here to help improve the encyclopedia by fixing articles and being thorough. Epicgenius has previously talked to you about GAN reviews that are not of sufficent quality, but I am also concerned that you have claimed an ITN for Ayla Erduran, where you only have a single edit. We aren't looking for users to see things that are in the news, or recently deceased and nominating for the front page.

I am a bit worried that you have done so many reviews, but that they might not be sufficiently in-depth, and have nominated three items for ITN which you haven't written. Please try to use the WikiCup to help expand the encyclopedia. Thank you. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:16, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Lee Vilenski, I did not know that I had to write the article, I remember being told that I just had to add a source or two and a couple sentences. History6042😊 (Contact me) 20:21, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@History6042, the rules regarding contribution percentages were recently updated due to some confusion over how much is considered a significant contribution. For a short article, we'd preferably like to see you contribute at least 10% of the article, but for a longer article, we may still accept a substantial contribution even if it's less than 10% of the article. The edit count doesn't really matter as much as the contribution size does, but XTools indicates that you only added 467 bytes or 4.4% of the current version of the article, which wouldn't have been enough regardless. You need to be a significant contributor, but you do not need to be the person who started the article.

I apologize for any confusion that may have arisen earlier. – Epicgenius (talk) 20:43, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Epicgenius, thank you, I understand now. If I add enough now to get to 10% does that count or does it have to be before it is ITN. History6042😊 (Contact me) 20:47, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@History6042, you would have had to complete the expansion prior to submitting the article for points, sadly. – Epicgenius (talk) 21:21, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. Thanks for letting me know. History6042😊 (Contact me) 21:24, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Saint Kitts and Nevis at the 2024 Summer Olympics 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 Z1720 -- Z1720 (talk) 21:41, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article Saint Kitts and Nevis at the 2024 Summer Olympics 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:Saint Kitts and Nevis at the 2024 Summer Olympics and Talk:Saint Kitts and Nevis at the 2024 Summer Olympics/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Z1720 -- Z1720 (talk) 22:43, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article Saint Kitts and Nevis at the 2024 Summer Olympics you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Saint Kitts and Nevis at the 2024 Summer Olympics for comments about the article, and Talk:Saint Kitts and Nevis at the 2024 Summer Olympics/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 Z1720 -- Z1720 (talk) 23:05, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tupou VI 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. I T B F 📢 16:04, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Cook Islands at the 2024 Summer Olympics 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 ReturnDuane -- ReturnDuane (talk) 13:01, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article Cook Islands at the 2024 Summer Olympics 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:Cook Islands at the 2024 Summer Olympics and Talk:Cook Islands at the 2024 Summer Olympics/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of ReturnDuane -- ReturnDuane (talk) 14:21, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article Cook Islands at the 2024 Summer Olympics you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Cook Islands at the 2024 Summer Olympics for comments about the article, and Talk:Cook Islands at the 2024 Summer Olympics/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 ReturnDuane -- ReturnDuane (talk) 11:43, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article South Sudan at the 2024 Summer Olympics 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 Tomobe03 -- Tomobe03 (talk) 22:04, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article South Sudan at the 2024 Summer Olympics 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:South Sudan at the 2024 Summer Olympics and Talk:South Sudan at the 2024 Summer Olympics/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Tomobe03 -- Tomobe03 (talk) 12:21, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article South Sudan at the 2024 Summer Olympics you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:South Sudan at the 2024 Summer Olympics for comments about the article, and Talk:South Sudan at the 2024 Summer Olympics/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 Tomobe03 -- Tomobe03 (talk) 16:41, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red | February 2025, Vol 11, Issue 2, Nos. 326, 327, 330, 331 Online events: New: Black women | Alphabet run C & D Continuing, year-long initiatives: #1day1woman | Music Announcements from other communities: Wiki Loves Ramadan begins on 25 February - a great opportunity to focus on women from Islamic history Tip of the month: Looking for an image? Sometimes you can find openly licensed ones on Creative Commons search Suggestion: Consider helping to promote women under In the news and On this day on Wikipedia's main page Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter/X

--Lajmmoore (talk 08:55, 26 January 2025 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Not a huge deal, just FYI the closing template goes above the header. If you put it below it causes weird errors in the day's AFD log. Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 21:55, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article South Sudan at the 2020 Summer Olympics 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 Z1720 -- Z1720 (talk) 02:45, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article South Sudan at the 2020 Summer Olympics 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:South Sudan at the 2020 Summer Olympics and Talk:South Sudan at the 2020 Summer Olympics/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Z1720 -- Z1720 (talk) 03:21, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article South Sudan at the 2020 Summer Olympics you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:South Sudan at the 2020 Summer Olympics for comments about the article, and Talk:South Sudan at the 2020 Summer Olympics/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 Z1720 -- Z1720 (talk) 21:41, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi History6042, thanks again for participating in the Cup. Unfortunately, I just received a complaint indicating that you were performing subpar reviews in order to claim FAC, FLC, or GAN points—specifically, that you were submitting reviews with exactly five pieces of feedback. For example, in Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Sakurai Prize/archive1, you suggested four minor grammatical changes; the fifth suggestion, which recommended swapping out an image, was the only substantial feedback in the review.

I know that I told you that we were not going to accept submissions with less feedback than that, but if you are doing superficial reviews with the bare minimum of feedback, that can be considered WP:GAMING. My concern is that, if you are not conducting a full review of the FAC, FLC, or GAN to the best of your ability, it lowers the quality of the reviews. As Lee said above, the goal of the WikiCup is to improve the encyclopedia and not to claim points; as such, overly short reviews don't help nominators whose FACs, FLCs, and GANs actually have substantial issues.

As such, I encourage you to go over your recent reviews. If the nomination is still open, I encourage you to either add more substantial feedback, or if that's not possible, write a paragraph explaining how the article or list meets the respective criteria. Otherwise, we may have to unfortunately reject some of your recent review submissions. I'm also going to ping my co-judges—@Cwmhiraeth, @Frostly, @Lee Vilenski and @Guerillero—so that they are aware. – Epicgenius (talk) 23:57, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, @Epicgenius, I do not have time to fix them today, but if you could provide me with a list of the reviews with issues I can fix most/all of them tomorrow morning. Also, I did not know that grammatical changes didn't count, sorry about that, I will stop counting them from now on. History6042😊 (Contact me) 02:41, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@History6042, I did not mean to say that grammatical changes don't count; on the contrary, if you proposed 10 or 20 grammatical changes, these may amount to a substantive review in themselves. I meant to say that they may count less than content-related comments. Five substantial comments is the bare minimum for a review, but even these may not count for points if the only things you're suggesting are minor grammatical comments. – Epicgenius (talk) 04:27, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so I will assume that grammatical changes count as 1/3 of a review. Also, do you know which specific reviews are subpar? If so please tell me. History6042😊 (Contact me) 13:05, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Forgot to ping @Epicgenius. History6042😊 (Contact me) 13:06, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will check again tomorrow and let you know. The specific complaint I received mentioned Sakurai Prize. However, I suggest that you look at all the reviews you performed over the last 2-3 weeks and see if there is any feedback you can add. We aren't looking for you to make a certain number of comments - so you don't need to make 15 grammatical comments - but we do need you to review the entire article to the best of your ability. Epicgenius (talk) 13:25, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]