User talk:TheNuggeteer/Archive 8
 | 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 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 |
DYK Update?
Hi @TheNuggeteer: I assume you'll be reviewing my DYK DYK:Dilaw (song) nomination. I just want to check if it's been approved or not. Thanks! Royiswariii (talk) 11:52, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
- Hmm, why not? I plan on nominating AmBisyon Natin 2040 for DYK and this can probably be my QPQ.
🍗TheNuggeteer🍗12:07, 16 September 2024 (UTC)- sure, i can do that. Royiswariii (talk) 12:58, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
DYK nomination of Typhoons in Taiwan
Hello! Your submission of Typhoons in Taiwan at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and your nomination has been rejected. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry before nominating further. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Leafy46 (talk) 15:23, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
DYK for Teodoro Asedillo
On 17 September 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Teodoro Asedillo, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that a former teacher in the Philippines became a Robin Hood–like outlaw? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Teodoro Asedillo. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Teodoro Asedillo), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
—Kusma (talk) 00:26, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Philippines at the 1928 Summer Olympics
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Philippines at the 1928 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 Arconning -- Arconning (talk) 13:21, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
Hey there TheNuggeteer. I got your email about the 1953 Pacific typhoon season. I wondered what you meant by reformatting. Do you mean expanding? If so, that would be really beneficial. Almost all of the sections are empty.
A few easy sources you could use:
- IBTRACS
- This source from USAID has a lot of older Philippine typhoons, including bits of info for Judy and Cora
- Info on older Guam typhoons, including a few 1953 storms
- Alice was one of the wettest storms on record in Guam, so that should be easy to find information on it.
Hopefully this is a good start! Good luck fellow Wikipedian. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:40, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
- I wanted to reformat the page to have monthly sections, like the 1937 season, because most of the sections are empty.
🍗TheNuggeteer🍗04:00, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
Nomination of Kevin Sagra for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kevin Sagra (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.C F A 💬 12:59, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 19
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited A Boy Is a Gun, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Igor.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:55, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Philippines at the 1928 Summer Olympics
The article Philippines at the 1928 Summer Olympics you nominated as a good article has failed 
; see Talk:Philippines at the 1928 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) 14:43, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
GA reviewing
Hi -- I noticed you've started another GA review, and I see from above that there's a thread that you haven't responded to in which some have suggested you should not be reviewing articles at GAN until you have a bit more experience. There was also a conversation at WT:GAN to the same effect; you responded there but didn't comment on the request for you not to review for a while.
Since you've now picked up another review, can I ask you to address those concerns? You've had some experienced editors telling you you need to slow down, but you seem to be ignoring them. Can you tell me why? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 14:26, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
- I honestly don't know how long to take a break for, I took a break for five days, and I don't know how much longer.
🍗TheNuggeteer🍗23:12, 21 September 2024 (UTC)- By the way-I already completed the review, which is leaning towards a fail.
🍗TheNuggeteer🍗23:15, 21 September 2024 (UTC)- @TheNuggeteer I hate to insert myself here and I can't speak on behalf of anyome else but I have reached out offering to help you out with your review of Tumor necrosis factor. It's a pretty tricky article for anyone to review let alone someone who isn't experienced with medical topics. I know others have suggested you take a break but I'm thinking maybe collaborating on a GA review might be a good way to ease back into things. IntentionallyDense (talk) 03:34, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- @IntentionallyDense What about you review the medical parts and I review the rest?
🍗TheNuggeteer🍗03:38, 22 September 2024 (UTC)- @TheNuggeteer It's a little hard to just review the medical parts since every part of the page from prose, format, and sources are all dependant on the medical manual of style. I was thinking maybe we could kinda just work alongside each other and share our proccess. It might be easiest for you to start with the prose review and for me to start tackling the sources as sources tend to be the hardest part with medical pages (see WP:MEDRS). With reviweing prose for medical articles it might be helpful for you to look over WP:MEDLANG, Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Medicine-related articles#Writing for the wrong audience, and Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Medicine-related articles#Writing style. One of the biggest things is making sure that these articles are understandable to a broad audience. Meaning that if you find yourself confused while reading something then that probably needs to be changed to be more understandable. If in doubt I would lean on the side of caution and bring up anything you find overly technical and I can help you figure out if the wording used is appropriate. IntentionallyDense (talk) 03:48, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- @IntentionallyDense What about you review the medical parts and I review the rest?
- @TheNuggeteer I hate to insert myself here and I can't speak on behalf of anyome else but I have reached out offering to help you out with your review of Tumor necrosis factor. It's a pretty tricky article for anyone to review let alone someone who isn't experienced with medical topics. I know others have suggested you take a break but I'm thinking maybe collaborating on a GA review might be a good way to ease back into things. IntentionallyDense (talk) 03:34, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- TheNuggeteer, I was going to suggest that you find another editor who is willing to help you; a mentor, in other words. It looks like IntentionallyDense is offering to take that role on for at least one review. Can I suggest that you stop picking up new GA reviews until you've completed the review with IntentionallyDense? And if IntentionallyDense is willing to take on the extra responsibility, perhaps you could follow their advice on when you are ready to start doing new reviews again? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:58, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Mike Christie Okay.
🍗TheNuggeteer🍗13:11, 22 September 2024 (UTC) - @Mike Christie Side note I am happy to take on the extra responsibility. Because the page is so complex I am probably going to ask for a third set of eyes at the GA talkpage, more so for peace of mind. I have started doing the review however @TheNuggeteer hasn't started reviewing yet (which is fine as prose reviews can take awhile). I'm hoping that they will chime in with some prose review soon and then we can take it from there! I am trying to lay out each step of my review so this can be a learning experience for everyone and hopefully that will help a bit. IntentionallyDense (talk) 18:32, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Mike Christie Okay.
- By the way-I already completed the review, which is leaning towards a fail.
Nomination of Al Gelato for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Al Gelato until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.Netherzone (talk) 23:36, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
You've got mail
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
IntentionallyDense (talk) 03:38, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
Hello. Please note that according to the proposals page of the WikiProject Council, which determines if a proposed WikiProject can be created, no WikiProjects should be started unless their proposal process is overhauled. Once you see this message, you might want to WP:G7 that page and all relevant pages thereof. Elias / PSA 🏕️🪐 [please make some noise] 05:00, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- You can also consider
If your group can't wait for the new process, please only create group pages in the userspace of one of your members.
So I can probably move it into my userspace.🍗TheNuggeteer🍗07:41, 22 September 2024 (UTC) - seconding this. given that this wikiproject only has one other participant and such a niche scope, i don't think it will be very useful in the grand scheme of things, and even less so in userspace where it will be sequestered away. i suggest you have a look through Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject SZA (2nd nomination). ... sawyer * he/they * talk 13:18, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
DCWC submission declined
Hey TheNuggeteer, and thanks for your participation in the Developing Countries WikiContest. I've declined your submission of this GAN review for points as it does not meet the standards expected for a review of this kind. Your review is quite short and none of your comments make reference to the good article criteria to explain why you failed the nomination, and some of the suggestions you made — such as lengthening the lead or rearranging sections — are neither within the scope of a GAN review nor explicitly required by any policy or guideline. Please see the relevant section of the scoring rules for more information, and let me or another coordinator know if you have any questions.
Speaking only as an editor and not an event coordinator, I would highly recommend that you immediately disengage from content quality–related processes on Wikipedia and focus your efforts elsewhere for some time. Many editors over the last few months have warned you about the improvements needed in the way you approach these processes. So far, those improvements have not been forthcoming, and continuing on that path will likely lead to the community placing sanctions on you based on the "competence is required" rule. These kinds of decisions are unnecessarily stressful for everyone involved, and will make it much harder for you to return to contributing to those areas in the future. I think everyone would prefer if that mess could be avoided, so the best option that I think you have is to voluntarily step away from article creation, GAN, FLC, NPP, and possibly others. Use your time away to take it slow, build your editorial experience in other areas, and familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines so you can come back in the future (at least a few months later) a much more constructive contributor. And you don't need to dive back into things headfirst, there are resources in place for you to seek help if you need it. For example, you could make use of the GA mentorship, articles for creation, or NPP school processes to ease your transition back into those roles with lower stakes and guidance from experienced editors. I hope you will consider my suggestions, and I wish you the best wherever your editing career takes you next. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 22:34, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
Bilorv's minimalist challenge
Hey, I don't want to be the fun police, but that challenge is for getting an article to GA before there are 50 revisions in the page history total. Both of the articles you're citing have well over 100 edits, so they don't qualify. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 04:19, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oh, I thought you meant the how many edits the user created to the page. Did you revert it?
🍗TheNuggeteer🍗04:22, 23 September 2024 (UTC)- Yeah, a few people have made that mistake, I think I'm going to clarify the wording of the challenge. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 04:36, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
Hey, quick question: you have been around for a while and could create an article directly into mainspace yet decided to submit Draft:Bigkis Pinoy Movement for review (I'm currently going through the AfC backlog). Is there any specific reason for doing so? Superboilles (talk) 21:14, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Bigkis Pinoy Movement (September 24)
- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Bigkis Pinoy Movement and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
- If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.
The Wikipedia Library
Hey there, I'm reviewing Philippines at the 1928 Summer Olympics which I saw you nominated for GA. I think looking at the improvements made by another editor before they renominated it, and their use of WP:The Wikipedia Library would really help you with writing better Wikipedia articles. Tell me if you have any questions. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 08:04, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
- Nice! The only library I know was JSTOR.
🍗TheNuggeteer🍗08:17, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
DYK Nomination
Hi TheNuggeteer! I'm asking if you can review my DYK nomination here: DYK/Bini (group). Thanks! Royiswariii (talk) 16:56, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Royiswariii I have no QPQs lined up yet.
🍗TheNuggeteer🍗22:50, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
The Signpost: 26 September 2024
- In the media: Courts order Wikipedia to give up names of editors, legal strain anticipated from "online safety laws"
- Community view: Indian courts order Wikipedia to take down name of crime victim, editors strive towards consensus
- Serendipity: A Wikipedian at the 2024 Paralympics
- Opinion: asilvering's RfA debriefing
- News and notes: Are you ready for admin elections?
- Recent research: Article-writing AI is less "prone to reasoning errors (or hallucinations)" than human Wikipedia editors
- Traffic report: Jump in the line, rock your body in time
GA Review
Hey TheNuggeteer! I responded to your comments on the GA nomination for Swawilla Fire a few days ago, which you may not have seen. Just a reminder, no need to rush anything. :) SirMemeGod 13:03, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, just a bit shaken by a discussion made to me and a recent talk page message above.
🍗TheNuggeteer🍗13:08, 27 September 2024 (UTC)- You're fine, I completely understand. I'm not one to rush people about things,
if it takes a month, I'm fine with that.(striking out my comment as things should be done in a timely manner, but you get my point). :) SirMemeGod 13:25, 27 September 2024 (UTC)- Hey Sir MemeGod, I'll take over this review, I'll get to your comments soon. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 06:24, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- You're fine, I completely understand. I'm not one to rush people about things,