User talk:Spinixster

Hi Spinixster! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Marquardtika (talk) 03:50, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I had to revert your edit at Huntsville, Alabama, in order to revert a previous edit by an IP. I would restore your edit, but I'm not exactly sure what it was. Thanks! Magnolia677 (talk) 10:36, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Magnolia677 It's okay, I just removed some double spaces. You don't need to remove them per MOS:DOUBLESPACE - just found out today. Hope this clears things up. Spinixster (talk) 12:40, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In this edit, you were "resorting refs" according to which guideline? Thank you - wolf 08:39, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Thewolfchild Ah, I just saw that the refs weren't in order (ex. [23][2][45]) so I resorted it. Please do revert if that isn't needed, I just found it odd that they're out of order. Spinixster (chat!) 08:54, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The thing is, the community kinds of frowns on superfluous edits like those, that make no real demonstrable improvement to the article. These pages are on the watchlists of other editors, some are watched by many, many editors. When changes show up on these lists, some editors will take the time and effort to check these changes, and if it turns out they weren't really necessary, then that is time wasted that could've been used to work on articles. When you're talking about people with limited time, and time that they are volunteering... then perhaps you can see what I'm trying to convey. (There was an acquaintance of mine who made similar types of edits, was asked to stop, but unfortuantely he didn't, and now he's blocked.) Anyway, I won't revert your edit, nor will I ask you too. But I will ask that when making any edits going forward, that they are worthwhile and actually improve an article, or contribute to a process, or otherwise help maintain the project. Thank you for your understanding. - wolf 09:24, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Steven Spielberg, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Classic FM. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Arnhemcr. I noticed that you recently made an edit to Leeds 13 in which your edit summary did not appear to describe the change you made. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Arnhemcr (talk) 10:41, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Arnhemcr They were not unconstructive, see MOS:APOSTROPHE. Spinixster (chat!) 13:11, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should check out the Manual of Style before warning me about abiding by the MOS. Spinixster (chat!) 13:14, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this, and this is the second time I've had to get in touch about your edits on Leeds 13. This time you replaced one apostrophe in the title field of a citation with a non-ASCII character. The article has another four apostrophes in citation titles, but you didn't change those. A theme running through the MOS is the need for consistency within articles. Please explain how your edit improved the consistency (or any other aspect) of that article. Arnhemcr (talk) 20:09, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, I read the edit history the wrong way round. You replaced the non-ASCII character with an apostrophe. I've now repeated that edit myself. Arnhemcr (talk) 02:36, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's okay, mistakes happen. Spinixster (chat!) 02:39, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Spinixster, in this edit to Mount Piper Power Station you tried to put the names of two authors into one set of author fields: |first=Nick Toscano, Mike|last=Foley instead of |first1=Nick |last1=Toscano |first2=Mike |last2=Foley. Please try to be more careful in the future. Thanks. XAM2175 ^(T) 10:02, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops, sorry about that. Didn't notice. Spinixster (chat!) 10:03, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop nominating articles for deletion. You are doing so at an unsustainable rate that prevents those of us who look at sources from appropriately responding to them. Please pick ~20 of your recent nominations, ideally ones where no one has commented, and withdraw them without prejudice, so that we can give each one appropriate review. Jclemens (talk) 23:00, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jclemens I'm sorry, but I'm very confused. I've only nominated 9 articles for deletion yesterday, not over 20, I don't usually do AfDs that often unless the article is obviously not notable. Can you explain what I've done wrong? Spinixster (chat!) 09:01, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed the discussion on the AN, so I would like to clarify again that I have not touched AfDs for a long time before yesterday, so I am not a "prolific nominator," as you have said. I am still very confused as to what you're saying, though. Spinixster (chat!) 09:07, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What I saw is a lot of new DELSORTs, the most recent series were from you, and I missed that much of the total were also from Pokelego999, who is also nominating many similar articles at once. Obviously, I should have addressed him too, and asked that of the total, 20 be closed. In general, 9 articles in a similar vein or topic would be borderline high, but it's problematic to get good discussions with so many similar articles running at once, especially over a holiday weekend. Jclemens (talk) 19:49, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag from Adam Ross (CSI: NY), which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think this article should be deleted, please do not add {{proposed deletion}} back to the page. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! Ducky Submarine (talk) 20:53, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Spinixster. The new pages patrol team is currently struggling to keep up with the influx of new articles 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) 18:02, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Spinixster, Thanks for your edit here. This is only an easy fix for people who have access to the particular database in question. Since you evidently do, can you please add full bibliographic details (author, publication, date) to the reference? (And ideally change the link to something that points directly to the article, rather than points to a search page that points to the article.) I spent a considerable amount of time trying to find this article in other databases to correct it myself, but I was unsuccessful. Thanks, JBL (talk) 17:15, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@JayBeeEll I based my search off of previews, so I cannot access the articles themselves. I don't have a subscription to NOLA, so it's not easy to find more information. Spinixster (chat!) 01:15, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, what you did find was already a big improvement. I'll try looking again some time now that I know the article title. Happy editing, JBL (talk) 22:10, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

	The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
	We really appreciate that you reviewed several GANs during the drive. Due in part to your efforts, the backlog of unreviewed nominations was reduced by 440 articles, an astonishing 69 percent.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:08, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not an admin and have zero official authority to tell you what to do. Here's some information to use or not use as you see fit: Through hard-earned experience I have learned that repeating the same argument over and over at people just makes them angry. 1) Once someone has said they they find your argument unconvincing, don't reply at all unless it's to say something that you haven't already said. 2) Consider not repeating arguments you already made in the same thread even if you're replying to different people.

This sort of thing isn't supposed to matter around here, but Jc37 has been a Wikieditori since 2006 and has a lot of recognition around here. I don't mean that they'll sic the dogs on you if you annoy them, but if someone else gets mad at you and tries to drag you to ANI or whatnot six months from now, Jc37 might remember having a negative opinion of you, not remember that technically you didn't do anything wrong, and it could have consequences.

Not offended if you delete this. Also not offended that you pick apart almost all the sources I cite. The way I see it, that's exactly what you're supposed to do, and it proves you're awake and thinking about what I said. Darkfrog24 (talk) 00:15, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Darkfrog24 Thanks for the advice. I'm not very good at picking up social cues, so that is very helpful. Spinixster (chat!) 08:59, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I'll feel free to say some more. Before you tell someone one of the non-obscure policies, like WP:N, check how many years they've been on the site. I've used that one myself. I don't remember which policy it was, but it turned out they'd been here since 2009. It's like in The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe: "Do not cite the deep magic to me, Witch. I was there when it was written!" Darkfrog24 (talk) 00:16, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Darkfrog24 That's really useful, but I think checking the year that they began actively editing instead would be better. For example, one of the conversations I had on top was with a user who joined a long time ago but only started editing in recent years. Spinixster (chat!) 09:28, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Great use of core concept. Darkfrog24 (talk) 11:31, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Would you mind changing your most recent edit to strike through and restate, so as not to confuse other editors who read my comments? Changing the original subject like this is not the best etiquette. I hope that’s OK with you! — Jacona (talk) 12:33, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, sorry about that. Spinixster (chat!) 13:33, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Spinixster. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Stefon at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome!

Schwede66 00:02, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

	The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
	Thank you so much for filling in bare URLs! Mach61 (talk) 15:09, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! Spinixster (chat!) 01:03, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Spinixster -- I note you say you did a "quick Google search" on Clarice Starling. Academic sources on fictional characters are not usually available on the web, it's much better to search at the WP:Wikipedia Library. You need to bear in mind that the top-level Ebsco search doesn't actually cover the underlying publishers' databases (and doesn't cover Proquest at all); I always get a lot better results searching directly. Project Muse is quite good for film & television, for example. Regards, Espresso Addict (talk) 07:05, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the advice! Spinixster (chat!) 07:08, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I wanted to reach out and see if I can help provide some guidance here. I'll start by being clear, the quantity of recent AfDs that you've put forth, given how frequently the articles are kept, is starting to border on disruptive. I appreciate your other contributions to Wikipedia, and I don't doubt your good faith on this, but I am concerned about how your methods are affecting other editors' time and focus.

Please understand, it's easy to nominate an article for deletion. But it can take time to provide sources. For some context, one of the best Wikipedia researchers I've run into, Cunard, says he can take up to three hours finding sources for a single AfD discussion sometimes.

Here's one specific thought. Based on other discussions I've had with you or seen others have with you in AfD, you might reconsider what you consider to be "plot summary". Understand that most fictional elements can only be examined with a lens of plot, they don't exist outside of it. Academic sources and many of the better reviews of fictional works will generally tie their analysis deeply to the underlying artifact (text, film, audio etc). In other words, the best secondary sources will generally have substantial coverage of plot. You might find some of the "oppose" comments in this recent RFC enlightening on this matter as well: Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Archive 186 § RfC on requiring non-plot coverage to demonstrate book notability

More generally, you might consider withdrawing AfDs once sources are provided. I would also recommend slowing the pace at which you nominate articles for deletion, as reading this talk page I can see I am not the first one expressing a similar concern.

I truly hope this helps. —siroχo 09:18, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the words. Though I don't know if I entirely agree with the plot summary sentiment here, some sources may only be plot summaries with no commentary whatsoever. And if there is, it also depends on if it's just a brief commentary or substantial. At least that's what I think. Spinixster (chat!) 09:23, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A long time ago, I found a large number of articles I thought needed to be deleted, and started nominating them for deletion. My actions weren't too popular. An old admin, User:Kudpung suggested that I consider as an alternative, boldly redirecting the articles. I did, and in most cases, the redirects remain to this day. With these fictional characters, that might be a great approach as well. My complete advice is to pick around maybe two or three a day, redirect them, and wait. If someone reverses your action, wait a while (remember, we have WP:TIME) then open a discussion on the article talk page. If a mutually satisfactory outcome cannot be gained there, consider moving on with an AfD. This approach, while it may seem longer, saves a ton of time project-wide, because instead of going through all these arguments at AfD, in all likelihood most of the redirects will stand, or a discussion with just a couple of editors will determine whether a stand-alone article is needed, instead of being researched ad-nauseum on AfD. You are in no way obligated to try this approach, but I think that if you do, you will come to appreciate it as a much less contentious way that achieves better results. — Jacona (talk) 16:37, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I did do so in the past, but I got reverted en-masse by another editor (they did not even bother to tell me, and I only found out months later), causing me to go back and nominate them all for deletion. The pages have very low view count, so I doubt anyone would participate in the talk discussion. But I will do that in the future, thank you. Spinixster (chat!) 07:35, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If someone reverts your edits then you should get a notice (the little bell symbol). People who revert bold edits including redirects, tend to assume that the original bold editor/redirector will either will receive a notification and/or will have watchlisted the articles.

You should try going to the talk page of the relevant wikiproject, or on the top-level article, eg the television series for fictional television characters. I did this for your recent redirects on CSI: Miami characters. If you get no response there then cautiously proceeding to redirect a few at a time, starting with the least notable, is a more collegiate approach. Regards, Espresso Addict (talk) 04:05, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I did not get a notice because it was a manual revert. Spinixster (chat!) 06:35, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Spinixster,

One message I'm seeing here is simply "Slow down". In many cases of the articles you are nominating, they have existed on Wikipedia for a decade or longer and there is no rush to delete them. Siroxo is correct in that it is MUCH more time-consuming for an editor to argue for Keeping an article, looking for new, additional sources, than for an editor to simply type "Delete per nom". So please try to ration your nominations and not flood AFD with a lot of similar articles nominated for deletion over a short period of time. It does only take minutes to file a nomination and much more time for editors to give an article and its sourcing a proper and thorough evaluation. Thank you for taking into consideration the time and effort of your fellow editors. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:26, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea why you keep adding characters from TV series like Law and Order to the Science fiction and fantasy deletion sorting page. This is in no way either science fiction or fantasy. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:48, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Necrothesp, I saw that other deletion sortings for characters added that sorting page as well. Is that not true? Spinixster (chat!) 13:58, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, Fictional elements is the correct page for all characters from films and TV series. Only add Science fiction and fantasy for characters from actual science fiction and fantasy. Thanks. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:02, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I won't do that again. Spinixster (chat!) 14:03, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Spinixster. Thanks for your recent activity nominating articles at GAR :). Really appreciated, given how much of a backlog we have. One request.

Would you be able to give slightly more information in your nomination statements? Doesn't have to be much, but as a closer it's nice to see a strong case made. For instance, in the Cliff Burton article, you state that some of the sources are self-published or primary. While that can certainly be a problem, there are instances where these type of sources are allowed. For instance, WP:ABOUTSELF for self-published if the "publisher" is the person in question. In Tropical cyclone rainfall forecasting, it would be nice to see examples of poor prose you'd like other to chime in on.

Thanks again! —Femke 🐦 (talk) 15:19, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I will explain in the GARs. Spinixster (chat!) 01:05, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Spinixter, when nominating GARs, you must always follow the GAR instructions and notify relevant WikiProjects using the template. You have not done so for many of your nominations. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 06:53, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. Spinixster (chat!) 08:37, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

		The Article Rescue Barnstar
		For your work at Henry Winkler. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:12, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Spinixster (chat!) 06:35, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

you are a cat lover

Harukkaaario (talk) 15:10, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! And yes, I do love cats. Spinixster (chat!) 01:02, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

You know what you did. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 04:11, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

XD yes I do. Spinixster (chat!) 04:14, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Spinixster, I believe I've actioned everything that could possibly be needed here. Are we waiting for anything else to be done before the GAR is closed as Keep? Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:33, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I'll archive it now. Spinixster (chat!) 10:04, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks! Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:21, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm done with the review. Is there anything else I should do? — Davest3r08 >:) ^(talk) 01:43, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll reply to you shortly. Spinixster (chat!) 01:45, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Stefon 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 Sammi Brie -- Sammi Brie (talk) 06:43, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article Stefon 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:Stefon and Talk:Stefon/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Sammi Brie -- Sammi Brie (talk) 07:23, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article Stefon you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Stefon for comments about the article, and Talk:Stefon/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 Sammi Brie -- Sammi Brie (talk) 17:42, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there Spinixster, thanks for reviewing the article I nominated so promptly. With regards to the newspaper resources you found for the ISOHAM series, I have not used Discord before, and I do not have access to The Wikipedia Library until another month. However, you can contact me via email. Lotsw73 (talk) 12:44, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for sending the newspaper clippings through, I'm surprised that they even existed! I'll see what I can add from the clippings to the article shortly. Cheers, Lotsw73 (talk) 23:30, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Spinixster! The question if the reception of Lucifer Morningstar (Hazbin Hotel) belongs into List of Hazbin Hotel and Helluva Boss characters has already been discussed here, with my understanding of the preliminiary consensus being that it does. If you would like to discuss further, I believe that is the best place. Daranios (talk) 10:01, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Daranios I've already started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Lists#Details in a list? (Specifically for lists of characters), which I expect will have more people who know about lists to form a consensus. Feel free to join and give your opinion. Spinixster (trout me!) 10:04, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Spinixster: Thanks for pointing me there. Always good to get additional opinions. I am not sure I can contribute more, as I am very much in line with the reply you have gotten by Hydrangeans there. The discussion I had linked would in my view be the corresponding one suggested for content questions to resolve at the article level. Daranios (talk) 14:26, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

	The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
	Thank you for participating in the March 2024 GA backlog drive. Your noteworthy contribution (8.5 points total) helped reduce the backlog by more than 250 articles! Here's a token of our appreciation. —Ganesha811 (talk) 16:25, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:02, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Stella, excuse me, why removed the cover version from Adele's song Set Fire? I think 30 million views presents very reliable topic. Is it related to the fact you call yourself The Idiot? No insult:D AdVony (talk) 15:12, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@AdVony Notability is not based on popularity. See WP:COVERSONG for more detail. Spinixster (trout me!) 15:25, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I mean it is, since recorded in the different genre in a different language from the original. I suspect you being disgraced by the rock music. Why the other cover version has been maintained? What extras does it have? AdVony (talk) 15:40, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe rock music deserves the same attention like pop, rap, rnb.. AdVony (talk) 15:57, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The guidelines write nothing about rock/metal covers are forbidden. AdVony (talk) 16:25, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Don't you mind if I re-work the paragraph and add details about lyrics meaning and re-upload it please? Btw. how can I treat you seriously, if you are having such a nickname? :D AdVony (talk) 18:53, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever cover version it is, rock, pop, etc. if it's not covered by reliable sources or notable per the guidelines at WP:NSONG (again, WP:COVERSONG), it should not be included. Spinixster (trout me!) 01:48, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) @AdVony, you can treat her like any other editor; with respect that is expected as a fellow wikipedia editor. Do not try to make a personal attack on her character over a nickname that she has given herself. She is giving you advice about the information and policies to help convey the information. Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 01:57, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry for being steered by emotions, however I would like to know a specific rule why the cover has been removed, since I cannot see it under the link. AdVony (talk) 06:17, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

She had told you that the cover should be covered by reliable sources in order to be notable enough to be an addition to the article. The source that you used was to a youtube video, please look at WP:RSPYT for more information on using youtube a source. Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 06:40, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Than you for constructive remarks. I really appreciate it. I am sure we can find a compromise. AdVony (talk) 11:38, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We can only find a compromise if you are able to find a reliable source about the cover of the song. Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 19:21, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I saw your proD on The Minx. Would you consider redirect the page to Mia Park#Films (where it's listed) with that source for example? (she's the lead actress and the only blue possible target on the page). Up to you. Best, -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:47, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done No idea why I didn't think of that. Spinixster (trout me!) 09:01, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot! -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:55, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Did you find an answer to this question? I saw it in the archives and it was unanswered. I'm going to investigate a possible solution if you haven't found one.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:06, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No one has responded but I asked here.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:54, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Use of unreliable sources is a potential reason for reassessment, but it would need to be article-by-article, using the process outlined here for GAs and here for FAs. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:14, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spinixster gave us a general idea of which articles but not a complete list.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:46, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey -- wow, that was nearly a year ago. I was kinda worried back then that GARing an article with such tiny problems can cause problems, and I don't want to pull myself into drama again. The articles can (mostly) be found at Template:Nigel Kneale. Spinixster (trout me!) 04:11, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'm way behind. Well, people can decide what to do independently of what you want to do.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 15:45, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think Quatermass II would need a FAR, that's all. I've already GARed the articles that need it. Spinixster (trout me!) 00:43, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to participate in WikiProject Podcasting, a WikiProject dedicated to developing and improving articles about Podcasts. Feel free to add your name to the list of WikiProject participants and use the WikiProject's userbox by placing {{User WP Podcasting}} on your userpage.

I noticed your work on Strike Force Five. Nice work! TipsyElephant (talk) 11:27, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Spinixster (trout me!) 13:21, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Strike Force Five 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 Eagowl -- Eagowl (talk) 12:01, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was looking at a redirect on the article Penelope Garcia and it was put in place in 2023 by you saying "redirect non notable character"

I've been watching the show her character is in for many many years, (a show about a team solving crimes by understanding how they think) and if it wasn't for Penelope a significant chunk of the people doing the crimes would still be out there (in universe) and they would have gone unsolved.

Can you please explain how a major character of the series was dismissed as an "non notable character"?

Thanks,

Urbanracer34 (talk) 20:34, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, sorry for the late response.

Wikipedia’s notability policy does not rely on the significance of the subject but rather the sources covering it (WP:N). The Penelope Garcia character may be significant in the series, but she isn’t notable in Wikipedia standards. (WP:FICT may help here.) Cheers! Spinixster (trout me!) 03:28, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem!

I understand where you are coming from. Thanks for the clarification. Urbanracer34 (talk) 17:09, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article Strike Force Five you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Strike Force Five for comments about the article, and Talk:Strike Force Five/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 Eagowl -- Eagowl (talk) 01:43, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, once the AfD or whatever happens is finalised and the new article is in mainspace (I'm having technical issues moving its right now so I'll need assistance, which I've mentioned there), I'm going to replace the History section on the main Saturday Night Live page with a condensed version of the new article. I've made an attempt at that condensed version and it's in my sandbox right now at User:StewdioMACK/sandbox; I won't go ahead with it yet but if you had any feedback or wanted to adjust it I'd love your input. Thanks! StewdioMACK (talk) 09:25, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. I'll check it out. Spinixster (trout me!) 09:26, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Also, I am considering withdrawing the AfD and boldly redirecting all the old articles, as there has not been a single opposer to the new article/course of action, including on the SNL talk page where I announced it a week ago. What do you think? Only thing is I have to get technical assistance to move the new article to mainspace. StewdioMACK (talk) 19:02, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what the best course of action is, considering that the result would need technical assistance. Perhaps you can ask someone at WT:AFD? Spinixster (trout me!) 00:48, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the rec, I've asked there. Once someone advises me either there or at AfD I'll get moving on it and let you know when that happens if you like. StewdioMACK (talk) 14:31, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can provide proof that it was not me who vandalized using that IP privately, if needed. Do I have to request an IP block exempt? Spinixster (trout me!) 06:41, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It would not be possible for you to provide such proof. That's not the problem, though. The problem is that IP address is running tor/proxy software. You need to ensure that is removed and no students are running any proxy software on that IP address. Once Spur.us notes this problem is fixed, let us know. I do not believe you would be eligible for WP:IPBE as you have demonstrated the ability to edit without it. --Yamla (talk) 11:37, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was able to edit without it because I used my home IP address, and I'm at school most of the time. I do not have any control over who runs the IP proxy, and my concerns would probably be rejected if I bring it up to the IT department or whoever else. Spinixster (trout me!) 13:20, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

School IP. Unfortunately, there are many students in my school, so I have no idea who might have done this. I don't know why the entire IP is blocked and not just the anonymous people editing with the IP, I checked by trying to edit my sandbox. As proof of me not being the one vandalizing, please check my contributions. Spinixster (trout me!) 00:42, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Spinixter, I have recently come across your edit of My Deer Friend Nokotan, where many details of the characters that I added had been removed. I understand that some of the details I added may be unnecessary and lengthy, but removing all of them appears to be a bit of over-simplification of the introduction. I feel like the article will look better if some of the details (especially that of Noko Shikanoko, the titular protagonist) is added back. I wonder what you think about this. Bimolecular nucleophilic substitution (talk) 16:44, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bimolecular nucleophilic substitution It should comply with Wikipedia guidelines (WP:CRUFT is generally discouraged, everything should be neutral, etc.) Plus, you should have this discussion on the talk page of the article; I am merely not enough for a common consensus (WP:CONSENSUS) and you may run into problems if other editors have an issue with your edits. Better safe than sorry is what I've learned over the years. Spinixster (trout me!) 01:02, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see... I am still not very familiar with the guidelines of Wikipedia and had applied the ethos of fan wikis here...

thanks for your reminder! :) SusMathMan (talk) 13:00, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

After your comments at Emily Prentiss's second AFD, I just wanted to let you know that regardless of how people felt regarding your AFDs in the past, your AFDs were doing valuable work in clearing through the backlog of non-notable characters we have on the site. It's something very few people are doing on a dedicated level, so the work you did back then is highly appreciated. From one editor to another, thank you for your work at past AFDs. I know you aren't planning on doing too many again, but regardless, happy editing! No matter what work you're doing, don't let anyone get you down. You're doing great work no matter what. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 22:19, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! Mmm, stroopwafels. Spinixster (trout me!) 01:01, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

January 2025 GAN Backlog Drive
On 1 January 2025, a one-month backlog drive for good article nomination reviews will begin in hopes of addressing the growing backlog. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number, length, and age of nominations reviewed. Each article review will earn 1 point; for each 90 days an article has been in the backlog, an additional half-point is awarded; one extra point will be awarded for every 2500 total reviewed words. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:25, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]