Panini!

Oooh, secret!

🥪

Show another

Question from Brianbladewilson on American Me (band) (18:10, 13 April 2024)

Hello, I was editing the “current members” section and something went wrong in the coding/format. I think it’s something small I’m missing. Please help? Thanks --Brianbladewilson (talk) 18:10, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Hey there @Brianbladewilson! I've reverted your edit to see what the problem was (make sure if you accidentally break something you revert the edit to not leave it broken), and it seems like all that was missing was two curly brackets }} at the end of the box.

If you look into the code you'll see this table on the side reads "{{Infobox musical artist" at the top. This template specifically is used to give specific info about the artist. All templates are defined by two curly brackets on either side; they'll display anything that is on that page inside of the page you use the template on. By using {{Infobox music artist}}, it will display everything on the Template:Infobox musical artist article (except the instructions). This works for every non mainspace article.

Panini! • 🥪 19:49, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Question from Zozopelli (12:39, 18 April 2024)

https://coronadoconcert.com/our-beloved-bandstand/

I would like to preserve Coronado, California history... A music teacher sold his car to create an on-going community concert lasting over 50 years.

Don't want to re create the wheel or just the current website... Best way to ingest stories, images, videos.

Thanks in advance... Best zozo --Zozopelli (talk) 12:39, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Hey there @Zozopelli! This is an interesting read.

Although it is interesting information, it seems to be too outside of the Wikipedia:Scope of the article about Coronado, California. This article is about the city itself, and details about the history of concert within it are too specific for an article of its size.

Perhaps you can find another more specific article where this information can be used, or even creating an article about the location itself? Panini! • 🥪 22:12, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Question from Beachweak (22:05, 21 April 2024)

Hello! I'm new to editing Wikipedia. There are various pages on the Aphex Twin discography (such as Joyrex J4 EP & Joyrex J5 EP) that have limited sources. I wanted to add sources from something like Discogs to show the appearance and / or track listings of the EPs are accurate, but I've read Wikipedia disallows Discogs as a source. What should I do? Thank you. --Beachweak (talk) 22:05, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Hey there, @Beachweak! Can you let me know what exact information you are trying to source in these lists? That will help with my answer.

If you are just trying to source the songs on the track lists such as the one on Analogue Bubblebath#Track listing, you technically don't need to. The object of discussion is usually the source itself (such as how we don't source plot sections per WP:PLOTCITE), so this does not need to be verified, per se. Information that needs verification to be true, such as writer credits and release dates, require sources however. Let me know what it is you want to source and I can help you out from there! Panini! • 🥪 20:57, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi! After I did some more reading on Wikipedia sources and verification and such, I realised the verification was needed for other claims in the article and not the track listing. However, on a semi-related note, would Discogs be able to be cited if I couldn't find information on a topic anywhere else? I'm currently drafting an article on an EP, Draft:London 19.08.2023, and some of the information (mainly the price and stock numbers of the record) can only be found on this Discogs page[1]. I plan to eventually write other articles on related Aphex Twin EPs and it would be helpful to know in case I make a mistake. Thank you! Beachweak (talk) 21:10, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

@Beachweak, So I'm having trouble finding where exactly it says this right now, but price and stock numbers are not usually mentioned in our articles because they don't serve much encyclopedic value. In some cases where the price itself is of note (such as people widely complaining about the price of something) we include it, but this rule is in place to keep it neutral and free of promotional info (see WP:NOTAD). As such, don't worry about it! Panini! • 🥪 03:52, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

@Beachweak, found it (I say I found it but they did, the rule is WP:NOTPRICE. Panini! • 🥪 02:09, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Growth News, April 2024

The Growth team will now send quarterly reports to keep you in the loop. Growth team weekly updates are available on wiki (in English) if you want to know more about our day-to-day work.

If you want to receive more general updates about technical activity happening across the Wikimedia movement (including Growth work), we encourage you to subscribe to Tech News.

Community Configuration

Growth features are currently configurable at Special:EditGrowthConfig. This quarter we are working on making Community Configuration accessible for other MediaWiki developers while also moving Growth feature configuration to the new CommunityConfiguration extension.

An early version of Community Configuration can be tested at Spanish Beta Wikipedia. We plan to release the new Community Configuration extension to pilot wikis (Arabic and Spanish Wikipedia) in early May, 2024. The first non-Growth team feature to utilize Community Configuration will be Automoderator.

In parallel with the development, the Growth team will propose Community Configuration usage guidelines, Community Configuration design guidelines, and provide technical documentation.

Experiment Results

Add a Image experiment analysis results

The Growth team conducted an experiment to assess the impact of the “Add an Image” structured task on the Newcomer Homepage's "Suggested Edits" module. This analysis finds that the Add an Image structured task leads to an increase in newcomer participation on the mobile web platform, particularly by making constructive (non-reverted) article edits:

• The likelihood that mobile web newcomers make their first article edit ( 17.0% over baseline)
• The likelihood that they are retained as newcomers ( 24.3% over baseline)
• The number of edits they make during their first two weeks on the wiki ( 21.8% over baseline)
• A lower probability of the newcomers' edits will be reverted (-3.3% over baseline).

Personalized praise experiment results

This feature was developed for Mentors as part of the Growth team's Positive Reinforcement project. When A/B testing on Spanish Wikipedia, we found no significant impact on retention, but we found a significant positive impact on newcomer productivity. However, we concluded that the results weren’t positive enough to justify the time investment from Mentors. We plan to discuss this feature with our pilot wikis, and consider further improvements before scaling this feature further. Meanwhile, communities willing to test the feature can ask to have it deployed. (T361763)

English donors encouraged to try editing

As in previous years, donors were directed to a Thank you page after donation (example). However, this year we tested a new “Try editing Wikipedia,” call to action on the Thank You page. This call to action linked to a unique account creation page. From this account creation page we were able to track Registrations and Activation (editing for the first time). During the English banner campaign, the Donor Thank you page led to 4,398 new accounts, and 441 of those accounts went on to constructively edit within 24 hours. (T352900)

Future work

Annual Plan

The Growth team and the Editing team will work on the WE1.2 Key Result in the coming fiscal year. We will start initial discussions with communities soon to help finalize our plans. (T361657)

Newcomer Homepage Community Updates module

We plan to A/B test adding a new Community Configurable module to the Newcomer Homepage that will allow communities to highlight specific events, projects, campaigns, and initiatives. We are early in the planning phase of this project that will take place first at our pilot wikis and wikis volunteering. We welcome community feedback on initial designs and plans, in any language at our project talk page.

Growth team's newsletter prepared by the Growth team and posted by bot • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

18:55, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Question from Beachweak (22:40, 25 April 2024)

Hi there! I've been doing some reviews of the pages Money Money 2020, Trans Am (EP) and Money Money 2020 Part II: We Told Ya So!. In the "chronology" section for each release, it seems to differ slightly; in the first, Trans Am (EP) isn't mentioned anywhere and the page contains a blank "singles" category in the infobox. In the second, Trans Am (EP) is inserted into the chronology. In the third, it's not present in the chronology, but is present in the "singles" section. How do you think the EP should be displayed? I couldn't find any pages on how the chronology section works but I feel like the EP should be mentioned somewhere in their chronology. Thank you! --Beachweak (talk) 22:40, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Hey @Beachweak, sorry for the late reply, but here I am finally.

1. The blank singles was because it was never technically filled out. The "name" header was to cite the name of the album, and a "single1" parameter needed to be used (see the difference in my edits for clarification). Why it doesn't just assume the name of the album I don't know.
2. For the chronology I'm not sure why Trans Am (EP) wasn't mentioned but I added it to the chronology. Now I'm not too sure why that is or if there's a specific rule for this one as well, but for all the music works I've done so far I skip over those EPs if there isn't an article for it. If there is, go for it!

Panini! • 🥪 03:13, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

WikiCup 2024 May newsletter

The second round of the 2024 WikiCup ended on 28 April. This round was particularly competitive: each of the 32 contestants who advanced to Round 3 scored at least 141 points. This is the highest number of points required to advance to Round 3 since 2014.

The following scorers in Round 2 all scored more than 500 points:

• Sammi Brie (submissions) with 707 points, mostly from 45 good article nomination reviews and 12 good articless about radio and television;
• Generalissima (submissions) with 600 points, mostly from 12 good articles and 12 did you know nominations about coinage and history;
• SounderBruce (submissions) with 552 points, mostly from a featured article about the 2020 Seattle Sounders FC season, three featured lists, and two good articles;
• BennyOnTheLoose (submissions) with 548 points, mostly from a featured article about the snooker player John Pulman, two featured lists, and one good article;
• voorts (submissions) with 530 points, mostly from two featured articles (Well he would, wouldn't he? and Cora Agnes Benneson) and three good articles.

The full scores for Round 2 can be seen here. So far this year, competitors have gotten 18 featured articles, 22 featured lists, and 186 good articles, 76 in the news credits and at least 200 did you know credits. They have conducted 165 featured article reviews, as well as 399 good article reviews and peer reviews, and have added 21 articles to featured topics and good topics.

Remember that any content promoted after 28 April but before the start of Round 3 can be claimed during Round 3, which starts on 1 May at 00:00 (UTC). Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed.

If you would like to learn more about rules and scoring for the 2024 WikiCup, please see this page. Further questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges (Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), Epicgenius (talk · contribs), and Frostly (talk · contribs)) are reachable on their talk pages. 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) 13:38, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

Question from UnlockSalmon on User:UnlockSalmon/sandbox (15:35, 29 April 2024)

How do sent draft for review? --UnlockSalmon (talk) 15:35, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

Hey there @UnlockSalmon! After looking at your draft you seem to have submitted it correctly already. Good work!

All there is left to do is wait. Wikipedia has a large backlog of pending articles at any given time, so it is likely to take a while before the article is reviews. In the meantime you can work on other articles, or polish the draft. I would recommend writing a lead section for your article (see here), and translating your article's references into English (see WP:RSUE). Perhaps there is an image of traditional clothing in Thailand that you can find on Wikimedia Commons as well? Panini! • 🥪 16:47, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

Question from Heathledford79 on User talk:Heathledford79 (11:20, 6 May 2024)

Hello I just found that this is a talk page and I was wondering is there a certain kind of questions I should ask --Heathledford79 (talk) 11:20, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Hey @Heathledford79! I'm here as your mentor to help answer any questions you may have about editing Wikipedia. Whether that be technical help, sourcing issues, or simple advice on how to word something, you can hit me up here and I'll get back to you as soon as I can (about ~1 day).

I was a new editor too once. There is no wrong answer you can ask! Granted, questions like these are... I guess not easy for me to answer all too well, but don't be afraid to reach out. Panini! • 🥪 13:15, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Question from Shamshelly (06:58, 9 May 2024)

Naupenda ufundi wa pikpik sana --Shamshelly (talk) 06:58, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

@Shamshelly, [2] Panini! • 🥪 13:21, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

asante sana nimekalibiya na nime waelewa vema Shamshelly (talk) 09:52, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

TFA

story · music · places

Today's TFA, Felix M. Warburg House, was written by Vami_IV and Epicgenius, introduced: "This article is about another of the great houses that once lined Fifth Avenue in New York. Specifically, this is the mansion of Felix M. Warburg, a Jewish financier who ignored fears of anti-Semitic reprisal to his decided to build himself a big Gothic manor in the middle of New York City. Although the Warburgs no longer remain, their legacy does: the museum is now the home of the Jewish Museum (Manhattan) and the building largely survives as they left it. It's a beautiful building and I hope you will all enjoy it."! - in memory -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:34, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Today's story mentions a concert I loved to hear and a piece I loved to sing in choir, 150 years old OTD. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:18, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Out of curiosity @Gerda Arendt, why was their work banned by the Nazis? Was it because of its Austrian origin, or something else? Panini! • 🥪 23:17, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Please read "Degenerate art", or their biographies. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:35, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing this one out to me @Gerda Arendt! I had been vaguely aware of book burning during this time period but this was a very interesting read. I really like the articles that are mostly historical reads.

Probably not the best idea to ask questions about this, then go on a cruise vacation for a week... sorry about the late response. As always, keep up the good work! Panini! • 🥪 23:54, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Question from Puzzleshaman (07:40, 11 May 2024)

HELLO I HJJAVE UPLOADED A PAGE REGARDING A COMIC BOOK BUT YET I AM NOT ABLE TO FIND IT --Puzzleshaman (talk) 07:40, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello, @Puzzleshaman! I apologize for the wait on my response. 6 days is really bad on my end...

Looking through your contributions and user page, it seems the page (which you have accidentally created on your user page instead of a draft), was speedy deleted per WP:NOTBLOG. This deletion was conducted by the user Fastily (great user), and since I have no access to the article they can give you a more detailed explanation if you politely reach out to them. I'm pretty sure you should also be able to retrieve the contents, as I assume that is where your panic comes from (be wary of all-caps, per WP:SHOUT).

I recommend you upload your article through our WP:Article Wizard in the future, where you can workshop your article in the background of Wikipedia until you're ready to officially submit it for review, where you can also receive further advice as you work on it. Panini! • 🥪 22:13, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 52 (album series)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 52 (album series) 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 IanTEB -- IanTEB (talk) 16:42, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Question from Hadich528 (05:07, 14 May 2024)

Hey there, I want to write an article with side image and the details, but it takes too much time to approve. --Hadich528 (talk) 05:07, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Hey there @Hadich528! Unfortunately, long wait times for reviews on Wikipedia is fairly common. Wikipedia is run by regular ol' people like you and me, and reviews come out of a user's generosity. They are usually quite a time commitment to review as well. As such, it will take time, and the best thing you can do is wait. For example, drafts via the Article's for creation process can take up to three months! Panini! • 🥪 22:30, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Signature poll

I kind of screwed up the votes by making changes to the options so now I truly understand why that is a big no-no in important RfC discussions, but I was able to set things right since the discussion was thankfully still early into it and I just wanted to let you know I think all has been set right if you had any concerns. Huggums^{537 _Vote! (guest🖋️book)} or ^{(suggestion🗳️box)}? 01:27, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

@Huggums537 In your case you should be fine. Rules for polling only really apply to discussions that will affect anything relating to Wikipedia content or Wikipedia itself. Your page is user-run and you can do whatever you want with it per user page rules. Panini! • 🥪 18:54, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

I thought as much. Thanks for the supporting sentiments. You can change your vote if you want. I really like the light blue you suggested so I changed my vote to undecided for now... Huggums^{537 _Vote! (guest🖋️book)} or ^{(suggestion🗳️box)}? 19:10, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Question from Raman4610 (15:20, 23 May 2024)

How to create new article --Raman4610 (talk) 15:20, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Hey there @Raman4610! You can create a new article through the WP:Article Wizard. It can be pretty difficult, so be sure to follow the instructions and presented information very carefully as you go along. I'm here to help you out with any questions, so if you get stuck or need help making something work, reach out to me here! Panini! • 🥪 23:14, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Question from Charon870 (02:46, 24 May 2024)

Hello, I am looking to add to an page of a ship that I work on. I Would like to add some pictures that the average public wouldn't normally get to see. but I'm not sure how to add images. --Charon870 (talk) 02:46, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

@Charon870 Hey there @Charon870! It seems like you have access to some useful imagery. To upload images under a free use license, the best and easiest way to do so is to upload them to Wikimedia Commons, Wikipedia's public domain library of images and videos. You'll see the big ol' upload button there. Make sure you're certain your images meets the criteria for being 100% free; be sure to click any links to guidelines along the way if you need help. Panini! • 🥪 23:12, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Question from Poisoned Comics (16:59, 3 June 2024)

Hello, how do I create an article? --Poisoned Comics (talk) 16:59, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Hey there @Poisoned Comics! Just as a heads-up, do not expect me to answer this fast in the future; you coincidentally caught me on my morning browse (although today's "morning" browse is very late as I had other things to do before this).

First check to see if your article meets our general notability guidelines. Give this linked list a look-over first, and I also recommend browsing the rest of it to see if there's other information relevant to the article you want to make. Then, you can use our WP:Article Wizard as an easy-to-use template to get you started. There will be a lot of relevant information as you go forward that will help ensure the process goes as smoothly as possible.

Creating an article is tricky, and requires some hard work; my first article barely made it through without the help of other veterans picking it up. But that's why I'm here! If you have any questions, please reach out to me the same way you did here. Panini! • 🥪 17:07, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Question from Nifemimustshine (22:17, 4 June 2024)

Hello --Nifemimustshine (talk) 22:17, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Question from Nifemimustshine (22:18, 4 June 2024)

How can I write my own article as I'm biography --Nifemimustshine (talk) 22:18, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Hey there @Nifemimustshine! Sorry for the late reply.

For instructions on how to create an article, see the information above that I gave to Poisoned Comics. I'm quite proud of the way I presented that information, and I'm a bit jealous that present day Panini can't think of anything better to say than 3 days ago Panini.

With regards to new advice, I strongly recommend you visit this advice page. Tread carefully, and ensure that your article is verifiable within our notability guidelines, and dictated from a WP:NPOV. Let me know if you have any further questions, or if you come across any trouble while editing. Panini! • 🥪 01:54, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Weird messages due to Elliot Rodger article

Bro today I received such an odd message on my talkpage and saw it was a barnstar, but the message was really weird [3]. People think his attacks were a "sacrifice" which is just disgusting to think about it. The internet is such a weird place. Shoot for the Stars (talk) 09:30, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

Hey @Shoot for the Stars, sorry you have to put up with this. Difficult and controversial subjects can garner a lot of trolls and mobs into your corner (see SandyGeorgia unfortunately). The best advice I can give you is report them to ANI or a trusted administrator immediately, and do not, under any circumstances, feed the trolls. I highly recommend you also read this essay to prepare you for future encounters. Such article subjects are very involved with the internet and will therefore attract a lot of people to this site.

Also, I've reported this to Sergecross73 (see talk), my trusted admin friend to get eyes on it because I've gotta run to work, but I'll follow up on my break. Panini! • 🥪 13:05, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

Shoot for the Stars, update: they've been blocked, sockpuppetry. ferret got to it (see here). Panini! • 🥪 01:46, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Update update: I talked with ferret about it a bit. It's just a general WP:LTA that's vandalizes randomly. She suggests going to ANI to report any future suspicious behavior. Panini! • 🥪 02:05, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Apologies for the late reply Panini!. I really appreciate the help and advice. I'll make sure to follow it the next time this happens. Shoot for the Stars (talk) 19:24, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Question from Brownmen91 on Wikipedia:Writing better articles (08:01, 17 June 2024)

How do I create an better version of my own website and then create an app for my website --Brownmen91 (talk) 08:01, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Hey there @Brownmen91! This question does not seem best suited for Wikipedia, although we do have a Wikipedia:Reference desk where you can ask general questions and get answers from editors. Panini! • 🥪 02:17, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Question from Pokemongounitefan (14:11, 24 June 2024)

Hi --Pokemongounitefan (talk) 14:11, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Hey there @Pokemongounitefan, and welcome to Wikipedia! I gave you some starting info on your talk page to get you started. Panini! • 🥪 16:23, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Question from HistoryRiderIndia (21:31, 25 June 2024)

I am creating a new page. The following is the link. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Thiruvancheri_kavu

There are issues in the format of pictures and I need guidance on the getting the page approved. --HistoryRiderIndia (talk) 21:31, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Hey there @HistoryRiderIndia! Welcome to Wikipedia. I have placed your images under a gallery command for you. As for getting the page approved, the best thing to do is wait; since these article drafts are reviewed by volunteer editors just like you, the process isn't formalized and it may take a while; it's estimated that article reviews take up to 3 months at the latest. Panini! • 🥪 12:41, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks HistoryRiderIndia (talk) 07:58, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

WikiCup 2024 July newsletter

The third round of the 2024 WikiCup ended on 28 June. As with Round 2, this round was competitive: each of the 16 contestants who advanced to Round 4 scored at least 256 points.

The following editors all scored more than 400 points in Round 3:

• Generalissima (submissions) with 1,059 points, mostly from 1 featured article on DeLancey W. Gill, 11 good articles, 18 did you know nominations, and dozens of reviews;
• Skyshifter (submissions) with 673 points, mostly from 2 featured articles on Worlds (Porter Robinson album) and I'm God, 5 good articles, and 2 did you know nominations;
• Sammi Brie (submissions) with 557 points, mostly from 1 featured article on KNXV-TV, 5 good articles, and 8 did you know nominations; and
• AryKun (submissions) with 415 points, mostly from 1 featured article on Great cuckoo-dove, with a high number of bonus points from that article.

The full scores for round 3 can be seen here. So far this year, competitors have gotten 28 featured articles, 38 featured lists, 240 good articles, 92 in the news credits, and at least 285 did you know credits. They have conducted 279 featured article reviews, as well as 492 good article reviews and peer reviews, and have added 22 articles to featured topics and good topics.

Remember that any content promoted after 28 June but before the start of Round 4 can be claimed during Round 4, which starts on 1 July at 00:00 (UTC). Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether for a good article, featured content, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed.

If you would like to learn more about rules and scoring for the 2024 WikiCup, please see this page. Further questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges (Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), Epicgenius (talk · contribs), and Frostly (talk · contribs)) are reachable on their talk pages. 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) 21:30, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Question from FilmmakingFanDude (23:27, 29 June 2024)

Working on getting a draft page approved, what would you think would need to be added to this page in general. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Miles_Morales_(Spider-Verse) --FilmmakingFanDude (talk) 23:27, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Hey there @FilmmakingFanDude! This is a good question, and also a tough one. Your work here so far is pretty good for one, but the decline reason is a lack of reliable sourcing.

What I have seen time and time again with fictional character articles is that they are usually declined for a lack of significant coverage pertaining to the character, and the character alone. They're pretty tough to get published because they're put under very tough scrutiny by the community, as they usually look through the sources to see if the source actually discusses the character in any significance. This doesn't usually happen with other articles. Because they hate character articles. They're chracist. Chracism.

So make sure that the sources you use are in-depth and really relevant to the character. Does this source discuss the character's design and development with in-depth detail? Or the voice actor? Or their role in the films? What about critical discussion? This is just a hunch and I have not looked into it at all so don't take my word for gospel, but this just has to be a notable character. It just has to be! But that's about the best advice I can give since this stuff isn't really my domain. For more specific advice, I call on Kung Fu Man and (Oinkers42), who are heavily involved in this line of work, and should be able to spot specifics better than I can. Any suggestions, you two? Panini! • 🥪 19:55, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Question from AsifibnShahNavas (09:48, 1 July 2024)

hello i want to contribute an Article how i can do that!! --AsifibnShahNavas (talk) 09:48, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Hey there @AsifibnShahNavas! To create an article it would be best to follow through our WP:Article Wizard process. Make sure you click on relevant info links as you go and follow the steps carefully to ensure that pursuing your article is worthwhile. Panini! • 🥪 19:45, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Question from Nickpetersen2023 (10:34, 3 July 2024)

I would like to add an article about the Bulgarian Top Level Domain register .bg. The organization that operates the national registry is called "Register.BG". I did create a draft page at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Nickpetersen2023/Register.BG Please help me how the page can be published. Thank you! Attempted to publish link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Register.BG --Nickpetersen2023 (talk) 10:34, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Hey @Nickpetersen2023, sorry for the late reply! It seems the article was unfortunately declined since, but it seems to bee just for reliability issues and the formatting looks perfect; as long as you can find more detailed documentation from reliable sources (see that link for what makes a source reliable), the article will definitely go up from there. Panini! • 🥪 19:35, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Question from Mustafa Khan Dilzak (05:28, 5 July 2024)

How can I make my article --Mustafa Khan Dilzak (talk) 05:28, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Hey @Mustafa Khan Dilzak! This may not be the answer you want to hear, but I strongly advise you do not. See here for why this is not such a good thing as it seems. Panini! • 🥪 19:36, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Some bubble tea for you!

Hi Panini! I just want to say goodluck with Mario. That would be one of the biggest achievement if you made it through.🥪 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 22:50, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks @Boneless Pizza! All these kind wishes help keep me motivated. By the way, what the heck is boba? What's in it, and what are those little balls at the bottom like? Panini! • 🥪 18:59, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

I had no idea what "tapioca balls" were either until I looked it up at google. lol 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 23:00, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

@Panini! It seems like you're good at writing. If only you have some time, could you perhaps review Ada Wong? (It is active at peer review). Many thanks! 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 12:35, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Hey, @Boneless Pizza!, I can give it a look when I start editing actively at the end of the week, as I'm pretty booked IRL currently. You've gotten some great names to review already though, so I'm glad you have something to chew on! If I wind up being too late I'll just leave you some general comments outside of a peer review. Panini! • 🥪 15:37, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Many thanks Panini! Take care. (I ended up sending it to FAC. You can leave some comments right there. Thanks~) 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 17:11, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Hey @Panini!. Sorry for bothering you, but can you conclude your review for my references in the FAC in the future, and also does the reception reads fine for you? Many thanks! 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 23:00, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Sure @Boneless Pizza!, I'll give a follow-up "okay" tomorrow. I gave it a look and it looked great from a glance, but since most character articles live or die by their reception section I'll give it a more critical second look based on what you expanded it to. Panini! • 🥪 03:29, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! Reception is truly the hardest part of the article. And I was wondering that to Mario (which is the hardest). Glad the vg shared their thoughts about the format so far. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 03:41, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@Panini! I hope you will continue your review at my current FaC process, but if not feel free to ignore it. Thanks! 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 07:38, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Cruft

Why do you think Special:Diff/1236229523 is cruft? Emiya Mulzomdao (talk) 14:43, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Without response, your edit was regarded WP:NOCRUFT and reverted. Nintendo Life is a reliable source on WP:VG/S so I suggest you discuss over talk page first if you find the source questionable Emiya Mulzomdao (talk) 02:21, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Hey @Emiya Mulzomdao, that's totally fair on your end. You've done all you can to discuss and that's on me for not reaching out when necessary. Although I was a bit trigger-happy on the revert, after some thought I still believe it counts as a form of cruft, but I'm short on time (as in, it's late for me, I'm tired) at the moment. When I get around to being more active, probably tomorrow, I'll spew some ☝️🤓 nonsense and thoroughly discuss why on the talk page. For now, it's a high quality edit so it's not too big of a deal to revert right now, especially considering it's disagreed upon. You could reach out to Wikiproject video games if you want a second opinion in the meantime, and considering how most article talk pages aren't actively watched some faces there will likely weigh in regardless. And sorry to postpone something so trivial! Panini! • 🥪 03:08, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Growth News, July 2024

Community Configuration

The Growth team released Community Configuration at all Wikipedias. You can access it at Special:CommunityConfiguration.

This new special page replaces Special:EditGrowthConfig. For now, all Growth features can be configured using Community Configuration. Configuration for AutoModerator (T365046) and other features will be available in the future.

You can help with translations. The interface translation is done at Translatewiki.net. You can also help translate the documentation.

If you attend Wikimania 2024, please join us for the session about Community configuration's future!

Current work

Newcomer Homepage Community Updates module

We will add a new Community Configurable module to the Newcomer Homepage that will allow communities to highlight specific events, projects, campaigns, and initiatives. We have released a simple version available to beta wikis. We will conduct an A/B test at our pilot wikis using the new Metrics Platform. We still welcome community feedback on initial designs and plans, in any language at our project talk page.

Future work

Increase constructive activation on mobile

As part of the Growth team 2024/2025 Annual Plan, the Growth team will explore various ways to increase the percentage of newcomers who successfully start editing.

Editing a Wikipedia page requires too much context and patience. It means many trial and error for newcomers to contribute, meaning a steeper learning curve and potential discouraging reverts. To support a new generation of volunteers, we will increase the number and availability of smaller, structured, and more task-specific editing workflows (E.g. Edit Check and Structured Tasks). The Growth team will primarily focus on Structured Tasks, while working closely with the Editing team to ensure our work integrates well with Edit Check.

Stay informed

Growth team weekly updates are available on wiki (in English) if you want to know more about our day-to-day work. If you want to receive more general updates about technical activity happening across the Wikimedia movement (including Growth work), we encourage you to subscribe to Tech News.

Growth team's newsletter prepared by the Growth team and posted by bot • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

15:08, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

WikiCup 2024 August newsletter

The fourth round of the 2024 WikiCup ended on 29 August. Each of the 8 contestants who advanced to Round 4 scored at least 472 points, and the following contestants scored more than 700 points:

• Generalissima (submissions) with 1,150 points, mostly from 3 featured articles, 2 featured lists, 7 good articles, and 13 did you know nominations;
• Arconning (submissions) with 791 points, mostly from 2 featured lists, 8 good articles, 4 did you know nominations, and plenty of reviews;
• AirshipJungleman29 (submissions) with 718 points, mostly from a high-multiplier featured article on Genghis Khan and 2 good articles; and
• BennyOnTheLoose (submissions) with 714 points, mostly from 1 featured article on Susanna Hoffs, 2 featured lists, and 3 good articles.

Congratulations to our eight finalists and all who participated. Contestants put in extraordinary amounts of effort during this round, and their scores can be seen here. So far this year, competitors have gotten 36 featured articles, 55 featured lists, 15 good articles, 93 in the news credits, and at least 333 did you know credits. They have conducted 357 featured content reviews, as well as 553 good article reviews and peer reviews, and have added 30 articles to featured topics and good topics.

Any content promoted after 29 August but before the start of Round 5 can be claimed during Round 5, which starts on 1 September at 00:00 (UTC). Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. If two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether for a good article, featured content, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Remember to claim your points within 14 days of earning them, and importantly, before the deadline on 31 October.

If you would like to learn more about rules and scoring for the 2024 WikiCup, please see this page. Further questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges (Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), Epicgenius (talk · contribs), and Frostly (talk · contribs)) are reachable on their talk pages. 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) 03:12, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Checking up

Hey Panini!. I've been wanting to see how you've been because it's been a while now. I was away from Wikipedia for almost two months due to personal issues but have come back after a long break. I am finishing up my undergrad so I'll be less active than usual, but I hope to hear from you soon bro! Shoot for the Stars (talk) 22:53, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Hey @Shoot for the Stars! I'm actually starting Bible college myself. I'm currently messaging you from the sanctuary in fact, because me typing in a computer deters people from small talking with me. I've currently got Mario and Ben Rector on my docket. Panini! • 🥪 18:23, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Re:A barnstar for you!

Thanks for the barnstar! In regards to whether I intend to work on any other Mario Party games, although I originally planned to move on to games in the Yoshi and Kirby series, seeing as I've already started working on Mario Party: Island Tour, I might as well as work on all of the handheld games. I don't have access to Mario Parties 4–7 or Mario Party Advance, so help with any of those would be greatly appreciated. (Also, even though Mario Party 4 and Mario Party 5 are already good articles, their nominations passed in 2008, so both articles could probably still use some work.) ★ The Green Star Collector ★ (talk) 18:14, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Hey @The Green Star Collector, if you had no further plans for the series then don't feel obligated to do so; I was just checking to make sure since I saw the pattern, and it'd be great to knock them all out with someone.

Of the 20 GAs I have 14 of them are for games I've never played, so tackling those GameCube ones wouldn't be a problem for me in that case. Pre-2008 is when source-hunting gets a little hard so that may be a new challenge, so I'll test the waters on one of them when I get the time (see below). Panini! • 🥪 05:22, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

Asking for help

Hi, Panini! Since you have a lot of experience with making GAs, I was wondering if you could help me with one I am trying to make. I'm trying to make Super Kirby Clash into a GA, but I am having trouble with the Reception section. Would you be willing to help with that? Thanks, QuicoleJR (talk) 18:53, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Hey @QuicoleJR! I'm right there with you. I hate doing them and they never stop hurting the head. It's the only reason why Luigi's Mansion isn't a good article and why Year of Luigi isn't a good topic.

I've been busy with schoolwork (Bible college does schoolwork too) that should clear up by next week but it currently has me in a headlock. I can't sit down and directly lay hands (not the Christian kind) on the article until then unfortunately. If you'd rather not wait that long, you can check out this guide I wrote a long time ago that helped me simplify the process enough to make it easier. It's a little outdated to my current standards nowadays-note how I site USGamer as an example-but it should definitely outshine any reception section prior to a rewrite. It should help your GA review go more smoothly.

Let me know if you have any questions! Panini! • 🥪 13:18, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

@QuicoleJR, I have some general comments for now. I'm not going to go source digging while in school because I don't want any of these talkative people seeing Kirby on my screen and starting a conversation about it ("omg I love Kirby!"). Unlike the me on this website that will say some stupid quip to anything anyone has to say, I am dead silent IRL.

• Now that I'm looking at this, it doesn't look like this game had much traction due to its short release window and free to play nature. I've done these before: see Amiibo Tap: Nintendo's Greatest Bits and Animal Crossing Plaza. In fact, Animal Crossing Plaza didn't even have a reception section at all at first but still passed it's GA review. Only afterward was Kung Fu Man able to find enough for me to put something together, and I reached out to him just in case to see if he can find something we can't.

Nintendo Life, Nintendo World Report, and Kotaku are the only ones who gave detailed commentary, so feel free to exhaust them. Since you have a lack of many sources, it's not expected of you to do some huge reception section. Just take those three sources and cover anything they give you to a comprehensive extent. Try to see if you can use these sources to hit all of the main points a typical reception section would (plot, gameplay, graphics, etc.), even if it's small.

• If you find two editors have a similar critique, to any extent at all, please merge the two! This helps give balance to the fact that there is some critical consensus on certain topics.
• I would move the IGN sentence to right after the Metacritic info, and split that into a separate paragraph. Unlike the rest of the details, these are specifically statistics, and have enough merit to be split.
• Don't forget to italicize these news sites (Nintendo Life)
• Here is a minor minor blurb and mention by PocketGamer. You can mention this right after IGN. They cite the in-game purchases as a downside.

Panini! • 🥪 05:36, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Question from AbuzarRoohi (06:37, 7 October 2024)

Hello! How can I make a Wikipedia article? Thanks, AbuzarRoohi --AbuzarRoohi (talk) 06:37, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Hey there @AbuzarRoohi! The simple guide we have can be found at Help:Your first article. Be sure to follow the steps very carefully s you don't get into any trouble down the road. If you have any questions about general editing from there, please let me know! Panini! • 🥪 17:21, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Hello Panini!

Thank you for your message and help.

Thanks,

AbuzarRoohi AbuzarRoohi (talk) 20:59, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you

story · music · places

Thank you for a kitten, and for missing Boing! - Today brought a timely promotion of Helmut Bauer (bishop) to the Main page on the day when pieces from Mozart's Requiem were performed for him. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:42, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

Hey @Gerda Arendt! I like to send appreciation to everyone I don't come across too much to send acknowledgment and appreciation their way. The best part of Wikipedia is the community. I was sad to see them retired.

What a great article! It's of the upmost importance to spotlight dedicated servants of the Lord. We should love the people who look like Jesus, but because they do such a good job at it we sometimes can't see it! We often spotlight the scandalous; most people who spend their entire lives loving Him are often overlooked by the world, and even the church, but luckily not in God's eyes. Panini! • 🥪 21:02, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

Yes! One more good: Leif Segerstam, my big story today. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:50, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

A cool image I found

Sorting by random on Commons. I don't know where to put it so I'll put it here for my own enjoyment. Panini! • 🥪 03:39, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Growth News, October 2024

Current work

Newcomer Homepage Community Updates module

We will add a new module to the Newcomer Homepage that will allow communities to highlight specific events, projects, campaigns, and initiatives. We have released a simple version on beta wikis and we will soon start an A/B test on our pilot wikis. This module will only display on the Newcomer Homepage if communities decide to utilize it, so learn how to configure the Community Updates module, or share your thoughts on the project's talk page.

One design concept aimed to increase constructive activation

Constructive activation experimentation

After showcasing early design ideas at Wikimania, we conducted user testing of design prototypes. We now aim to engage communities in further discussions and plan to run a targeted experiment, presenting a structured task within the reading view to logged-in new account holders with zero edits.

Community Configuration

This Community Configuration extension was developed to help communities customize wiki features to meet their unique needs. The Growth team is now helping other Wikimedia Foundation teams make their products configurable:

• The Moderation Tools team now provides Community Configuration for Automoderator. (T365046)
• Certain Babel extension settings will be configurable soon. (T328171)

Future work

As part of the Growth team annual plan, we will continue to investigate ways to increase constructive activation on mobile, while also working with Data Products to move forward A/B testing functionality via the Metrics Platform.

Community events

• Growth team members presented Community Configuration: Shaping On-Wiki Functionality Together at Wikimania (slides). The session recording is available to watch on YouTube. This session provided an update on the Community Configuration project and introduced details about the upcoming features that communities will soon be able to configure. Representatives from the Moderator Tools, Editing, Web, and Campaigns teams shared their plans for utilizing Community Configuration in the future. Following these presentations, the WMF Growth team's Benoît Evellin and Martin Urbanec answered audience questions.
• Habib Mhenni gave a presentation of how mentorship works at WikiIndaba 2024. The recording is available.

Stay informed

Growth team weekly updates are available on wiki (in English) if you want to know more about our day-to-day work. If you want to receive more general updates about technical activity happening across the Wikimedia movement (including Growth work), we encourage you to subscribe to Tech News.

Growth team's newsletter prepared by the Growth team and posted by bot • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

Trizek_(WMF), 15:43, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in a research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:27, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Done! Panini! • 🥪 18:39, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Luigi Video Games

I was discussing recently the situation of List of Luigi video games with some other editors. Per its prior AfD, very few editors seem to think it really should be included on Wikipedia, since Luigi games aren't one overarching series, and there is no strong sourcing to tie the games together as one group. (Yes, I looked, you'd be surprised.) However, it was kept under a no consensus as there was no agreement as to what should be done with the article. A suggestion that was brought up in the recent discussion was to create a Luigi's Mansion series page, which is the bulk of the list's main games, in order to split that list off, which was a big suggestion for improving this list during the AfD. That way, it can be better illustrated that the list doesn't really function on its own, while also creating a helpful series split-out more informative than what can currently be communicated on the current list.

Given your work on Mario related topics before, including Year of Luigi, among other Luigi-related topics, I was wondering if you had any thoughts on the matter, or if you feel this idea is even feasible in the first place. This admittedly isn't an article too high on my priority list for tackling, but I felt it may be worthwhile to bring this up in order to discuss potential outcomes for the article with someone who's far more experienced in this subject area than I am. That way a plan be created for next steps regarding this article going forward. Please let me know if you have any strong thoughts on any aspects of the above, and let me know if I can clarify anything in my proposal. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 16:59, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

You're right about that, @Pokelego999. I'm the record-holder for most amount of Luigi good articles in one year (verify). So, yeah, I know my stuff.

I planned on weighing in to that AFD discussion, but I guess I didn't. I probably forgot, sorry. I pretty much agree that such an article no longer needs to exist if this were the plan we take. The only weight the article carries comes from the Luigi's Mansion games, as well as the little stuff they put together for the Year of Luigi.

The Year of Luigi more than covers the relationship between those games. As for a Luigi's Mansion series article: is it possible? Yes. One billion trillion percent. Luigi's Mansion was Miyamoto's passion project and was also one of the best titles for the GameCube. There's a lot to say about it because of that. With 2 and 3 they passed development off to Next Level Games. This practically doubled the amount of critical commentary on the games, as well as the series evolution as a whole, for two reasons. One, NLG is based in Canada so American journalism was pretty easy. Miyamoto loves this series and is heavily involved with them, so not only does he help draw in journalism but he also likes doing the interviews with them. Two, NLG does not shut up and they love talking about the games so much. Dark Moon's development section is massive, and talks heavily about the transition between developers and entries. I go into detail of the series in that article because no series article existed when I made it, and it was not on my list to do so at the time. I have not touched the Luigi's Mansion 3 article, but even a page one google search reveals a lot of commentary: [4] [5] [6] [7] [8].

It really just comes down to whether or not effort is put into making a good one. Me personally, I'll do it if necessary, but only if I can do it right. I was burned out when I was working on the article Mario & Luigi and never finished it, but someone moved it over to mainspace regardless. I hate putting unfinished work out there with my name on it.

So I could get something basic out on my own, but it'd be a while. It's not on my list to do at the moment, but I think if I push myself to make it I would eventually start picking up traction to finish it. I would rather partner up to work on it f you're on a time crunch to have an article made. Panini! • 🥪 19:11, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

@Panini! I'm not in a time crunch myself to make this, so I'm perfectly fine with taking some time to cook this up, especially since I don't want to impact your schedule with this. If you'd like, I can start a userspace draft and just focus on source gathering for the time being and see what I can scrounge up. Once I've found everything I can we can work from there on next steps for creating this. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 19:53, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

WikiCup 2024 November newsletter

The 2024 WikiCup has come to an end, with the final round being a very tight race. Our new champion is AirshipJungleman29 (submissions), who scored 2,283 points mainly through 3 high-multiplier FAs and 3 GAs on military history topics. By a 1% margin, Airship beat out last year's champion, BeanieFan11 (submissions), who scored second with 2,264 points, mainly from an impressive 58 GAs about athletes. In third place, Generalissima (submissions) scored 1,528 points, primarily from two FAs on U.S. Librarians of Congress and 20 GAs about various historical topics. Our other finalists are: Sammi Brie (submissions) with 879 points, Hey man im josh (submissions) with 533 points, BennyOnTheLoose (submissions) with 432 points, Arconning (submissions) with 244 points, and AryKun (submissions) with 15 points. Congratulations to our finalists and all who participated!

The final round was very productive, and contestants had 7 FAs, 9 FLs, 94 GAs, 73 FAC reviews, and 79 GAN reviews and peer reviews. Altogether, Wikipedia has benefited greatly from the activities of WikiCup competitors all through the contest. Well done everyone!

All those who reached the final will receive awards and the following special awards will be made, based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, these prizes are awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round, or in the event of a tie, to the overall leader in this field.

• Generalissima (submissions) wins the featured article prize for 3 FAs in round 4, and 7 FAs overall.
• Hey man im josh (submissions) wins the featured list prize for 23 FLs overall.
• MaranoFan (submissions) wins the featured topic prize for 9 articles in featured topics in round 1.
• Hey man im josh (submissions) wins the featured content reviewer prize for 110 FA/FL reviews overall.
• BeanieFan11 (submissions) wins the good article prize for 58 GAs in round 5, and 70 GAs overall.
• Fritzmann (submissions) wins the good topic prize for 6 articles in good topics in round 2.
• Sammi Brie (submissions) wins the good article reviewer prize for 45 GA reviews in round 2, and 78 GA reviews overall.
• BeanieFan11 (submissions) wins the DYK prize, for 131 Did you know articles overall.
• Muboshgu (submissions) wins the ITN prize, for 15 In the news articles in round 1, and 36 overall.

Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2025 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement!

If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), Epicgenius (talk · contribs), and Frostly (talk · contribs). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:49, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

One more cool image

Taken by Gerda Arendt. I'm a cross guy :) Panini! • 🥪 00:24, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:46, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Guestbooks

• Guestbook 1 Y
• Guestbook 2 Y
• Guestbook 3 Y
• Guestbook 4 Y
• Guestbook 5 Y

That final prize (and the whole activity) is super cute, but sincerely, the only prize I want is friendship. Darcyisverycute (talk) 15:24, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Article feedback

Hi Panini! I hope you had a good Thanksgiving and enjoyed time with your family. I was wondering if you could provide some feedback on Elliot Rodger and 2014 Isla Vista killings because I have updated a lot more since you last read it. Shoot for the Stars (talk) 06:04, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Hey @Shoot for the Stars! I'd be happy to read it again, but I simply strapped for time at the moment. I've said that like a lot in the past (which was more along the lines of just kinda being lazy) but recently I haven't had much time to commit myself to major stuff here. I will eventually read the article through again and give some copyediting pointers, but something like that would probably take me about a month to do in full. But I can give you some general advice for now since advice riffing is easy for me.

Is it your goal to take this to GA then FA? If so, that'd be awesome; what a win for Wikipedia that would be. But don't forget to take this WP:ROPE chance very seriously (not that I think your block is relevant to your modern work-hence why you were unblocked in the first place-but I foresee some sticklers giving you extra scrutiny just because they "feel it's necessary"). Be absolutely certain your work is the best it can be before running it through the FA gauntlet. My best advice is to not only get this article to be very high quality, but after you do all of this work you should also do a checklist of "checking it twice" ordeals as well.

• From your history your source work is great, so I recommend prose verification itself should be a priority of yours. This is going to be boring, like absolutely boring, but I suggest this brute force tactic: go through at least a third of your sources and check to make sure the source actually backs the text it cites. Those spot checks are very tricky at FA.
• High level press cases about criminal matter can very easily result in incorrect facts and certain bias pushes. Make sure your sources are immediate parrots of nothing but the facts, without any press flare or opinion. Sources that spawned immediately when the attacks happened should be avoided, since they had a scarcity of details.
• It looks like you've reached out to other users for suggestions on your article. That's great, I always do that. Only fresh eyes can find the most minute mistakes. If you aren't getting any biters, the best course is to be patient. Simply wait until they do. If they don't, look elsewhere. Find associated users from similar article subjects or Wikiproject topics, for example. I'm certain people that dig this stuff would be happy to help. I've found from experience that the best article is the one that's been touched by a billion different people before it was reviewed by a billion different people. Ironic, I know. I remember for my first FA, during the peer review, I somehow managed to convince Atsme to review it; she had completely no relation to the subject, not even tangentially, and I'm not sure how I came across her username in the first place. But hey, a review is a review!

• While on the subject, you don't need to go into the FA alone. To reference my first FA again, at the FAC review I was pressed about my sourcing quality and the use of Japanese and Chinese sources. I was in early 10th grade at the time (AKA, I didn't really know much of anything) and the hard pressing was stressing me out so I immediately hid behind MilkyDefer, and hoped to God they would be able to resolve it. And they did! And I feel bad nowadays for making it their problem without warning. I was fumbling some of the other source questions and ImaginesTigers bailed me out on those too, umprompted. I'm so thankful the two did, I probably would have failed that FAC otherwise. If you wan't additional help during the FAC process don't be afraid to ping a trusted name to help you with something. I think reviewers would appreciate your choice of second opinions if anything. If you want to you could also co-op the FAC with someone; those exist, and I'm considering doing one myself to tackle the article Mario.

• And, just as a general precaution (and one that ticks me off, as does PresN), you do not WP:OWN your article. Compromise is key to quality. People are picky about prose and a lot of it is simply creative expression, but some people see it as a genuine fault. If it doesn't look one particular way to them, it's wrong. So if a user wants something worded one way, just do it to make them happy. This pass around of prose expression is what generalizes your work to be overall, more encyclopedic, rather than more personal to you. The more eyes you have on an article conversely means more hands, and they're going to take a portion of the authorship. It may hurt when someone forces you to remove a sentence, or an image, but it ultimately means the article is more individually high quality to multiple people; it kind of takes the weight of your hands, but in the end of the day it's still your work.

Okay that all took me much longer to write out. I could have read like a half of your article in that time. But these are foundational truths for quality so I hope you consider them. This is essentially what I do myself. Panini! • 🥪 06:21, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Got pinged. It still traumatized me to this day when just a couple of months later, Stand News, that particular source I did my best to defend, was suppressed, tried and convicted. MilkyDefer 07:43, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

For those two articles, Elliot Rodger and 2014 Isla Vista killings, I am quite overwhelmed by a plethora of sources you cited. They have roughly the same amount of citations as Adolf Hitler but I seriously question whether the incident and the culprit have that much to investigate and analyze. See also: WP:TOOMANYREFS. MilkyDefer 07:56, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Hey @MilkyDefer! Tagged you just for the sake of letting you know about my thoughts on the old FAC. I felt bad for, like I said, making that your problem haha. I cannot believe the turnout of that news source, that's absolutely tragic...

MilkyDefer brings up a great point. I think it would be very beneficial to consolidate your sources as much as you can, for source merit and quality, on top of the fact that itd be easier for you to track. I would assume that a lot of the sources cover a lot of the same details just for the sake of making sure the reader is caught up, so I recommend pulling back on sources that directly parrot the details, only using the most high quality and fully comprehensive covers of the subject. In the case for Elliot Rodger, I think its safe to say youve more than proved its individual notability, so don't worry about not cutting back in fear people would get on your case about lack of coverage. Panini! • 🥪 19:33, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Hey Panini! and MilkyDefer I really appreciate the feedback. The reason I added so many sources two both article is because both are very contentious topics. I wanted to make sure that all the content in the article was right and up to date. And regarding FA and GA, I sadly don't have time for that anymore due to college. I will make to fix add your recommendations as soon as finals are done. Shoot for the Stars (talk) 07:40, 7 December 2024 (UTC)