User talk:Cremastra

Your GA nomination of Draughton, North Yorkshire

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Draughton, North Yorkshire 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 Vigilantcosmicpenguin -- Vigilantcosmicpenguin (talk) 23:27, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Draughton, North Yorkshire

The article Draughton, North Yorkshire 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:Draughton, North Yorkshire and Talk:Draughton, North Yorkshire/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Vigilantcosmicpenguin -- Vigilantcosmicpenguin (talk) 00:24, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Notice of Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Me (DragonofBatley). Thank you. Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 22:58, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I got DragonofBatley's ping already. Thanks, Cremastra (u — c) 23:02, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Draughton, North Yorkshire

The article Draughton, North Yorkshire you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Draughton, North Yorkshire for comments about the article, and Talk:Draughton, North Yorkshire/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 Vigilantcosmicpenguin -- Vigilantcosmicpenguin (talk) 03:45, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

@Vigilantcosmicpenguin Thanks for a fair and speedy review! Cremastra (u — c) 20:42, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks?

Okay, Vanderwaalforces, you've piqued my curiosity: why did you thank me for this edit? :) Cremastra (u — c) 21:56, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

Hehe, I was actually seeing you do the SuggestBot thingy... I was wondering what you were doing, but as soon as I saw the "Utterly unhelpful", I was like "I thought as much, thanks!", lol Vanderwaalforces (talk) 22:05, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 January 2025

• From the editors: Looking back, looking forward

• Traffic report: The most viewed articles of 2024

• In the media: Will you be targeted?

• Technology report: New Calculator template brings interactivity at last

• Essay: Meet the Canadian who holds the longest editing streak on Wikipedia

• Opinion: Reflections one score hence

• News and notes: It's a new dawn, it's a new day, it's a new life for me... and I'm feeling free

• Serendipity: What we've left behind, and where we want to go next

• Op-ed: Elon Musk and the right on Wikipedia

• In focus: Twenty years of The Signpost: What did it take?

• Arbitration report: Analyzing commonalities of some contentious topics

• Humour: How to make friends on Wikipedia

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:53, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

Clean-up

Hi - very much appreciate the offer to work on this. I've done a table here, User:KJP1/sandbox10-DoB. It's basically the CCI approach:

• Review the article
• Take any remedial action - redraft/re-source/delete content/merge/AfD etc.
• Note the decision in the final column - just over-write any existing wikicode.
• Record any wider issues, questions/learning points for DoB at the top.

Rupples and I have tried a few for size, and it seems to work, but completely open to any suggestions for improvement. The more difficult issue is how to effectively involve DoB. That's of course essential, but may prove harder to achieve. Again, any suggestions welcome. KJP1 (talk) 16:53, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

Looks good, I've gotten started. Cremastra (u — c) 18:05, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

DYK for Castilleja chromosa

On 19 January 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Castilleja chromosa, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the flowers of the desert paintbrush (example pictured) are small, green, and unremarkable? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Castilleja chromosa. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Castilleja chromosa), 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.

—Ganesha811 (talk) 12:02, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

Credit for this should go to or at the very least be shared with MtBotany, who has written most of the article. Cremastra (u — c) 15:32, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. Though I'm not that concerned with credit for DYK. I just love seeing plants get onto Wikipedia's front page. Also: group effort. I probably would have put this species off for another year while being distracted by other species. Seeing others work on it inspired me to pitch in. 🌿MtBotany (talk) 22:00, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

Cremastra (talk) 22:01, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Balanus trigonus

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Balanus trigonus 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 Esculenta -- Esculenta (talk) 19:06, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

RfD Closure

Hey @Cremastra, could you possibly relist your closure at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2025_January_11#BlSOD? The two keep votes argue that the term is used in sources, but the sources listed by Bugghost exclusively use BlSoD (another redirect which seems appropriate). The main issue of my RfD (this particular capitalization is not used and therefore should be deleted) does not have any arguments against. Thanks! ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 12:33, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

@Bunnypranav Noting that I have seen this and will respond in detail presently... I have a GAN to work on.

I do not think that capitalisation is a defining issue here and there was consensus that the redirect was appropriate. To me, that consensus implies that the capitalisation is not a defining feature of the redirect and that "BlSOD" is satisfactorily equivalent to "BlSoD". In any case, if BugGhost's sources didn't satisfy your concerns, a ten-second search yields some more [1] [2] [3]. Cremastra (talk) 21:13, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

To elaborate, I'm willing to withdraw my closure and relist, but I'll need confirmation and a bit of further evidence from you before proceeding in that direction. As it stands, I'm happy with the close I made. Cremastra (talk) 20:46, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the links you gave. My search engine for some reason just showed Blood, even with the "BlSOD" search modifiers (whole reason I did an RfD instead of just patrolling it). I do not have any wishes to relist ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 13:03, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Okay, cheers. Cremastra (talk) 13:16, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Plantae Barnstar
		Co-awarded to you and MtBotany for your work at Castilleja chromosa. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 13:07, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

2025

story · music · places

2025 opened with trumpet fanfares that first sounded OTD in 1725 (as the Main page had). Today I had a composer (trumpeter, conductor) on the main page who worked closely with another who just became GA, - small world! To celebrate: mostly flowers pics from vacation ;) - Thank you for improving article quality in January! -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:35, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Reward Board: Pushing Asia towards GA Status

Hello! as per [4] I am informing you that I have started editing Asia with the intent to reach GA. It is my first thrust into the content assessment system so wish me luck. Relm (talk) 00:24, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

@RelmC I do wish you luck, but also, less appealingly, caution. GAs are difficult – I'll note that my first four nominations failed – and they're even harder for broad articles like Asia. I'm sure you'll succeed, but take it slowly and don't be disspirited if your first nomination fails. Cremastra (talk) 22:05, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks! I will keep that in mind. Relm (talk) 23:57, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Balanus trigonus

The article Balanus trigonus you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Balanus trigonus for comments about the article, and Talk:Balanus trigonus/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 Esculenta -- Esculenta (talk) 16:22, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

Denali - 1 week of RM discussion?

Boy that was a quick close, especially with it being so active even today. I've seen discussions opened over a month before they are closed. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:48, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

Ideally things shouldn't be relisted. Often relisting is done because there's less participation and more discussion is needed. Here there was a positive surfeit of participation, so a relist wouldn't help matters, I think. Cremastra (talk) 21:38, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

This close was poorly-thought out, please undo this, let the discussion run its course. 1 week to declare a weak "no consensus" is absurd. Zaathras (talk) 22:00, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

@Zaathras I'm happy to reconsider my closure, but I don't think it was too early. WP:RMCI tells us: Relisting is an option when a discussion cannot otherwise be closed, usually due to lack of consensus. Editors are under no obligation to wait to close a move request after it is relisted. Once a move request has been open for the full seven days, it may be closed at any time by an uninvolved editor. Cremastra (talk) 22:04, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

I also don't think that relisting it would've changed the outcome since the same points are getting made over and over again since about day 2 - rather, it would've just prolonged the agony of that discussion. I probably would've closed it as not moved rather than no consensus, but the end result is the same. Turnagra (talk) 00:04, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

DYK for Tesseropora rosea

On 2 February 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Tesseropora rosea, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Tesseropora rosea. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Tesseropora rosea), 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.

charlotte ^👸♥ 00:22, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

Move review for Denali

An editor has asked for a Move review of Denali. Because you closed the move discussion for this page, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the move review. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zaathras (talk • contribs) 03:33, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

Zaathras I have responded at the move review, and as I said there I think this is unnecessary drama. Cremastra (talk) 18:16, 2 February 2025 (UTC)