User talk:The Blue Rider/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Your GA nomination of José Cobo Cano

The article José Cobo Cano 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:José Cobo Cano and Talk:José Cobo Cano/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Sammi Brie -- Sammi Brie (talk) 06:41, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of José Cobo Cano

The article José Cobo Cano you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:José Cobo Cano for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Sammi Brie -- Sammi Brie (talk) 07:23, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for participating in the August 2023 GAN backlog drive

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]

DYK for José Cobo Cano

On 12 September 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article José Cobo Cano, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that José Cobo Cano compared officiating same-sex marriages to celebrating the Eucharist with Coca-Cola? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/José Cobo Cano. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, José Cobo Cano), 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) 16:52, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Thought broadcasting

The article Thought broadcasting you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Thought broadcasting for comments about the article, and Talk:Thought broadcasting/GA2 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Ganesha811 -- Ganesha811 (talk) 01:01, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I see you are expanding the article. I would have preferred you let me know that you planned to expand it, or done so before renominating it for GA. It's best if the GA review is of a stable version, and expanding the article so soon after it passes GA means that while it will have the GA tag, large parts of it will not have been reviewed to make sure they meet GA standards. In the future, please bear this in mind. —Ganesha811 (talk) 22:08, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. My expansion was not significant and was prompted by your (rightful) removal of the «Causes» section. For me, it seems essential the inclusion of such section in medical articles, so I researched for more studies and added what I found. Good articles should not stay indefinitely uniform, all new information is more than welcomed. The Blue Rider 19:44, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute discussion

I'm obliged to notify you of this. Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard#José Cobo Cano Killuminator (talk) 21:40, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question about the GA review

I took the liberty to address the suggestions for the 'Early life and background' section you made in your review right away, but I wanted to ask: is that alright or do you prefer me to wait until you've finished reviewing? – Editør (talk) 22:51, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Editør: Hello. Yes, that's more than fine, just make sure to strike the suggestion or put the  Done template bellow. Thanks. The Blue Rider 22:56, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Alright! I was about to post my reply on the review page when realized I should ask you about this first. – Editør (talk) 22:59, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your review and helping to improve the article! – Editør (talk) 11:52, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Editør, my pleasure. Good job on the article and good luck with the Amsterdam Marathon! The Blue Rider 11:59, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! – Editør (talk) 12:07, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

unsourced content

I rewrote the four-term fallacy article to give it an easier flow for the reader. It's not really a matter of sourced vs unsourced content, since (I presume) the content that I replaced was also written by us Wikipedia editors. If the content I replaced is actually taken from the 1990 book cited at the end of the section, then I think my revision should also remain, as to keep it as it was would be a copyright violation. I was going to make some additional touchups, but before I go back to the article, could you explain please why you reverted my edits? I understand the unsourced content edit summary was automated and that you could have written more. Thanks, —Soap— 15:06, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Soap. I only revised your last edit in which you added a sentence without any source cited at the end of it. I didn't realize that Ultraviolet also reverted your other edits; nevertheless your other changes don't seem to be just copyedit, you changed the content of the examples from fishes, goldfishes and fins to weapons, knives and dangerous. That's original research and your comment that if the content you replaced is from the 1990 book it should prevail just shows that you didn't take into consideration the source. I've reverted my edit, do the whatever touchups you want but do look at what the book says or add new sources that back up your example. The Blue Rider 18:20, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Delusional disorder

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Delusional disorder, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

  • A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 15:54, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Isabelle Urquhart

So the editor who is posting in your GA review wrote most of the lede and removed all of the links you are suggeting upon learning that I was editing for GA. I figured any issues would all get resolved in the 20 Minute and GA review. I would not have nominated this for GA if I had known this was going to be outcome. Apologies for the rudeness towards you; you are making helpful suggestsions and, of course, are voluteering your time to this process. Hopefully, things will be smooth moving forward, as I really wanted to upgrade an article during the women's initiative. Rublamb (talk) 22:20, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comments and for addressing the suggestions in a civil manner contrary to the other editor. Even assuming good-faith, he seems to present WP:OWNBEHAVIOR towards the article. Let's hope he won't engage with you in a edit war regarding those linking suggestions and we can finish up this review. Thanks again. The Blue Rider 22:40, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I was terrified you were going to suggst an Infobox.... Rublamb (talk) 09:37, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I thought of that for a moment but after seeing the Russian novel the other editor wrote opposing it, I wouldn't even dare. The Blue Rider 09:46, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your patience and thoughful review

The Purple Barnstar
For being a thoughtful GA reviewer and for surving the review of Isabelle Urquhart. Rublamb (talk) 09:31, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Anna Burke GA review

Hi there, I was just wondering whether you have any more comments for the GA review? I think I've addressed all of the comments you made before, and with one or two I was unsure whether I'd fully addressed it. GraziePrego (talk) GraziePrego (talk) 23:39, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I was taking a short wiki-break. Sorry for the wait, everything looks fine. I will be passing the article. Cheers. The Blue Rider 20:59, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That’s totally ok! Thank you very much for your reviewing and assistance with the article, I am very delighted to have helped get it to Good Article status. Many thanks. GraziePrego (talk) 22:52, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you too. The GA was all due to you, nice job! It's always good to have women in green :) It was a pleasure working with you. See ya around. The Blue Rider 22:58, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No consensus was reached?

Your edit summary here does not make sense.

See the consensus on RfC held here: Talk:Regional_power/Archive_5#RfC:_On_quality_of_sources.

There are no sources meeting WP:CONTEXTMATTERS for Pakistan's inclusion. That's why Pakistan is not included on the list. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 09:48, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I only saw the sources analysis and wasn't seeing any consensus, you're right. The Blue Rider 22:56, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder on GA completion

Hey there, just wanted to remind you to follow the full steps on finishing a GA review, as I noticed you haven't been updating the classification in WikiProject templates or listing the articles in the GA list. I've now done this myself for both Clara Thalmann and Margarita Ortega, so I just wanted to let you know of this for any future reviews you may do. --Grnrchst (talk) 13:09, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I thought a bot would add the article to the list. Thank you for the heads up. The Blue Rider 22:55, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note re Amazons close

5 votes in favour are necessary at VA4. J947 † edits 09:23, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just as purplebackpack89 is knee-jerking opposing everything, I will knee-jerk support everything.

Hey, just wondering if you read my general rationale for opposing the American politicians removals and my specific rationale on various politicians. To call it knee-jerk is kind of disrespectful and ignores the nuances of what I said


I'm frustrated by the original nominator, who clearly blanket-nominated a whole bunch of people without due diligence. And now I have two other people, Piotrus and you, blanket support every single proposal, again without much scrunity.


I have a degree in American history and, not to toot my horn too much, but I feel I'm more of an expert in American politicians than most of the other VA editors. And I feel like my expertise is going to be outvoted by people with little or no knowledge of American history


Also, 1991 for America as a world power? From 1914, they were one of a small handful and from 1945 they were one of two pbp 14:59, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging @QuicoleJR: pbp 15:13, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I will be answering you in the respective VT5 page. The Blue Rider 15:48, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You didn't really allay my concerns tho. It still strikes me as a kneejerk reaction that a) really didn't analyze how I actually felt or voted, and b) didn't really understand the topics you were voting on pbp 01:42, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't responded to all your comments yet, I know. I'm on vacations, I will answer you when I have the time. Sorry if you felt disrespected. The Blue Rider 14:35, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Is there a way to prompt User:Cewbot to help me (de)list and (de)tag these results.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:59, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Add Popeye: discussion closed (add 4-0) undo
Remove TurboGrafx-16: discussion closed (remove 4-0) undo
‎Remove Intellivision: discussion closed (remove 5-0) undo
Remove Wii U: discussion closed (removed 4-0) undo
‎Remove Game Gear: discussion closed (removed 4-0) undo
‎Add Rummikub: discussion closed (add 4-0) undo
‎Remove Ludus latrunculorum: discussion closed (5-0 add) undo
Add Social deduction game: discussion closed (7-0 add) undo
‎Add Live action role-playing game: discussion closed (6-0 add) undo
Add Tabletop role-playing game: discussion closed (7-0 add) undo
Add Cooperative board game: discussion closed (add 6-0) undo
Star Trek: The Next Generation: discussion closed (5-1 support add) undo
Remove Klavdiya Shulzhenko, Add Viktor Tsoi: discussion closed (unanimous for swap)

TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:59, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@TonyTheTiger: as far as I know the bot only updates the section 1 quota numbers, not the subsections and they add the talk page banner if the article is listed at VT5, but it might take a few days. The Blue Rider 16:54, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New Order

It looks like there were the votes to remove for me. The closer said it was 4–3; I only see 4–2. But either way, the 55% opposition for inclusion is there. J947 ‡ edits 00:19, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Section levels on VA5 talk subpages

Are we going to use the same archive for all level-5 talk subpages? I think it would make sense to do so, but in that case, probably section levels should be adjusted to make main sections of level 1 and all discussions for archival as level 2. Kammerer55 (talk) 18:53, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Due to the tremendous size each subpage will have, I think it's for the best if each of them has their own archive. Changed the section headings level. The Blue Rider 18:58, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, not sure I fully understand the point, since the archives seem to grow new pages as needed and the subpage division might change later (according to the participation activity), so supporting multiple archives for unstable subpage divisions might feel a bit unnatural. However, I guess you have more experience with (auto-)archival, so will leave that to you. :) Just to confirm, do you think it will be easier to search across individual subpage archives rather than across a single archive, or will the search work across all archives simultaneously? Kammerer55 (talk) 19:12, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My point is, if people are searching for a specific proposal they can easily find it either if there's one or multiple archives, but if they are unsure about the exact heading's naming, just want to do a general check, etc, it is easier to find what they're looking if the archives are divided by themes. By contrast, if there's only a centralized archive it would be x5 times harder to find it. An alternative solution would be to have the subpages archives but to transclude everything to the main talk page one as well. The Blue Rider 19:33, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, got it, thanks for explanation. Kammerer55 (talk) 19:36, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Also, in any case, thanks a lot for doing great job implementing the split! Kammerer55 (talk) 19:15, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! The Blue Rider 19:33, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

For working on splitting the talk page at V5. For people, I think you missed the recently added Jurists. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:19, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for pointing out, done! The Blue Rider 11:41, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Minor error

Somehow you blanked the Ranma 1/2 discussion in here? It doesn't seem transcluded anywhere? Could you restore it and then mention it from the anime&manga discussion where I mentioned the forgotten Ghost in the Shell discusion, so new folks active there can check it out as well? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:44, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Weird. I've restored the content, it's on the Society subpage. The Blue Rider 09:03, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WiG Editathon Barnstar – October 2023

Women in Green Editathon October '23
At last – here is your barnstar! Thank you for your excellent contributions through GA reviews completed for Patricia Beer, Femke Bol, Isabelle Urquhart, Clara Thalmann, Hilda Hilst and Anna Burke during the WiG "Around the World in 31 Days" Good Article editathon. Best, Alanna the Brave (talk) 00:05, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to subscribe to the WikiCup newsletter

Closures

Thx for closing Wikipedia_talk:Vital_articles/Level/5/Archive_19#2022_nominations. As I look at your edits, I don't see you enacting your closures.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:22, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The dogs were already added... The Blue Rider 23:24, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Canines too?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:25, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm working on it. The Blue Rider 23:27, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why don't I see your edits in main space and talk space. Also, I don't understand Wikipedia_talk:Vital_articles/Level/5/Archive_19#Auto_archiving_discussions this closure.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:30, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know, but keep calm I just closed the discussion and I will add the canines soon. What you don't undersand about the auto-archiving? I simply removed it as per discussion. The Blue Rider 23:32, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I clarified my closure and put "partial pass" instead, the rest didn't get enough votes to be enacted. The Blue Rider 23:48, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am really confused. You seem to have closed a lot of stuff and don't see any Talk space edits. How is that possible? Also, the comment at Wikipedia_talk:Vital_articles/Level/5/Archive_19#Auto_archiving_discussions does not clarify what passed and what didn't.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:46, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Seems like it's high time for a PSA that to add or remove entries to the list, you aren't required to update the article talk pages. Cewbot does that for you on sensing changes to the subpage lists. J947 ‡ edits 22:35, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
O.K.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:59, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Fork-tailed drongo

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Fork-tailed drongo 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 Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 00:40, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Fork-tailed drongo

The article Fork-tailed drongo you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Fork-tailed drongo 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 Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 01:44, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:The_Blue_Rider/Archive_2&oldid=1213752830"