User talk:Cerebellum

How to have article class reassessed?

Hello Cerebellum, Alright I think I have the MDRx Rifle page suffeciently detailed over the last year for a class re-assessment from start class (complete with better images as well as many additional contributors too!). What is the process to request a class reassessment?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desert_Tech_MDR

@FrozenIceman01: Good work!! There's no formal process, I reassessed it to B class for you :) If you want to take the next step, consider nominating it for a Good Article review! --Cerebellum (talk) 09:42, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Good Article reviews by Vami_IV

Per your posting to WP:JOB. Here are my submitted reviews:

1. Talk:Woolworth Building/GA1
2. Talk:Light on Yoga/GA1

X –♠Vami_IV†♠ 09:20, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Great! There should be an "email this user" button in tools, if you email me your paypal info I'll send you the money. --Cerebellum (talk) 09:45, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Would it be possible to be paid with an Amazon gift card? That's where I've been buying my reference material. –♠Vami_IV†♠

Sure that's fine, I think all I need is an email address to send the gift card to. --Cerebellum (talk) 11:25, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Another one :) –♠Vami_IV†♠ 07:05, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

1. Talk:Magha Puja/GA1

Sent! Sorry for the delay. --Cerebellum (talk) 21:20, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

I noticed you were still awarding the $10 prize for good article reviews almost at the end of November? What're the terms and conditions on that? I didn't see a(nother) listing on WP:JOB. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 00:59, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Hey there, those are just because Bryn initiated them in October, if you have any that were begun before 31 October they would still qualify. --Cerebellum (talk) 12:55, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Oh, cool. Here's Talk:History of Grand Central Terminal/GA1, then. I have one more begun in October, but it's still in progress. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 08:37, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Sent! --Cerebellum (talk) 11:47, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Final one: Talk:Parshvanatha/GA2. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 19:37, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Abd al-Masih Haddad

Could you review Draft:Abd al-Masih Haddad? 92.184.116.156 (talk) 14:54, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't see this in time, I would have been happy to. --Cerebellum (talk) 21:22, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Removing "unreferenced" tags

Hi. I see you've been correctly removing {{unreferenced}} tags from a great many articles. However, it appears, based on the sample I looked at, that a great many of them are in need of maintenance in that they have only one source. It would be very helpful if, at the time you're removing the unreferenced tag, you would replace it with {{one source}} and {{more citations needed}} tags where needed. Largoplazo (talk) 11:51, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Ok, thank you for the feedback! I'm not a huge fan of {{more citations needed}} because I think most articles on Wikipedia need more citations, it's not terribly helpful, but you're right about {{one source}}. I'll change my ways. --Cerebellum (talk) 21:55, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Review old AfC submissions by User:Kvng

Conincidentally I've been working on Category:AfC pending submissions by age/8 weeks ago. Here's some qualifying work. There will be more. ~Kvng (talk) 04:30, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

1. Declined Draft:Ready, Set, Food!
2. Accepted Register of Professional Archaeologists
3. Declined Draft:Somatic cells in milk
4. Accepted Gravity Noir
5. Declined Draft:Daniel Montez Barnes
6. Declined Draft:Junkyard Drive
7. Accepted Jorge Ayala
8. Declined Draft:Filippo Tarantino
9. Declined Draft:Council of the City of Youngstown
10. Accepted Enscape
11. Declined Draft:Move Concerts
12. Accepted Secunder Kermani
13. Declined Draft:Titans (season 1)
14. Accepted Squatters union
15. Accepted John Arthur Nelson
16. Declined Draft:Gravity Internet
17. Declined Draft:Totaljobs
18. Declined Draft:Aleksandra Rudes
19. Declined Draft:Windjingayr
20. Accepted Adam Magyar
21. Accepted Open mouth operations
22. Declined Draft:Precision Agriculture for Development
23. Declined Draft:Kenneth A. Nava
24. Accepted Hihintayin Kita sa Langit
25. Declined Draft:Burhan Karkutli
26. Accepted Kus Bani Koshur Karorpaet
27. Accepted Al Rockett

Great, email sent. --Cerebellum (talk) 09:32, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Reward board for good article reviews

• [1]
• [2]
• [3]
• [4]
• [5]
• [6]
• [7]

And I have five more GAs that fit the bill that will be done once the issues are resolved. I hope that these fit the bill for the $10 per thing. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 02:27, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Cool, email sent, just let me know when the others are complete. --Cerebellum (talk) 22:23, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

More:

• [8]
• [9]
• [10]
• [11]

Thanks again. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 17:14, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

Sent! --Cerebellum (talk) 16:10, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

User:Utopes's reviews of old AfC articles

Hey there! As I was wondering about why the "Very Old" category was split into subcategories by month, I came across your offer at the your offer at the Articles for Creation talk page! Now, I frequently review AfC articles, and I had plans to review old AfC articles today, but I figured I would make use of this opportunity! I don't plan to run you dry, but here were the articles that I got around to today. If you don't believe that a review is high enough quality, just let me know. It's your money after all.

1. Draft:Yamaha Montage (Diff: [12]). Declined for advertising issues.
2. Draft:Kevork Yeramian (Diff: [13]). Declined for not containing independent sources.
3. Draft:Farrokh Shayesteh (Diff: [14]). Declined for advertising -> COI issues.
4. Draft:Nokia 3.1 Plus (Diff: [15]). Declined for duplication, suggested merge to Nokia 3.1.
5. Draft:Mickaël Wolski (Diff: [16]). Declined for not meeting notability criteria for WP:NFOOTY.
6. Draft:Lewis Walsh (Diff: [17]). Declined for verifiability issues.
7. Draft:Star Life (Diff: [18]). Declined for not being notable individually, suggested merge to Star India.
8. Science Fund of the Republic of Serbia. (Diff: [19]). Accepted.
9. Draft:Yieldlove (Diff: [20]). Declined for notability issues.
10. Draft:Andrew Pawiak (Diff: [21]). Declined for not meeting notability criteria for WP:NFOOTY.

While a 10% passing rate does look pretty intimidating, I promise that this was just the selection. Hopefully you agree with my decisions; I started from the two-month marked and continued, doing most of the articles and skipping a few article that could have passed, but I wasn't confident would last an AfD in their current state. Anyway, cheers! Thanks for putting this on, and hopefully I don't have to refer to this as "editing for pay". The pay was just a bonus for doing what I already do. Utopes (talk) 04:09, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Yes that's the idea! Some of these drafts can be very tedious, no reason you shouldn't be compensated for wading through them. How would you like to be paid? I'll just need your email address for an amazon card, or username for paypal/venmo. I suggest sending me the info by email, through the "email this user" button under tools. --Cerebellum (talk) 22:17, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Review of old AfC Submissions by User:Taewangkorea

Hello! While looking at the AfC talk page, I saw your notice on rewarding AfC reviewers, so in an attempt to make use of this opportunity, I have reviewed some AfC submissions in the 2 month and 3 month old categories. There are some 49 51 drafts that I reviewed from this category, with an average acceptance rate of around 14%. While this may sound low, this was just the random selections. If you don't think that some reviews are of quality, please let me know. Also, if I need to enable email on my account to get the reward, also please let me know. Also, is the reward for GA reviews still active? I saw that some people posted a notice at your talk page, but it does not show up in the reward board (I am currently reviewing a GA, with plans to do some during the Thanksgiving holiday, so I was wondering) Taewangkorea (talk) 20:57, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

I added 2 more. Taewangkorea (talk) 01:18, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

1. Declined Draft:Rinosh George
2. Accepted Soul Sanctuary Gospel Choir
3. Declined Draft: Rako Prijanto
4. Declined Draft:Agreement on the Swiss banks‘ code of conduct with regard to the exercise of due diligence
5. Declined Draft:Suleiman Bolaleh
6. Declined Draft:Adesoji Adesugba
7. Declined Draft:John De'Mathew
8. Declined Draft:Society of Technical Analysts
9. Declined Draft:Indonesia Music Museum
10. Declined Draft: Brent Cowles
11. Declined Draft:Classic 100 Composer
12. Declined Draft:Tyrel Dodson
13. Declined Draft:Leszek Rychlewski
14. Declined Draft:All Shore Industries, Inc.
15. Declined Draft:Guido Reinhardt Rahr III
16. Declined Draft:Aaron Berman
17. Declined Draft:MadMidaas Films
18. Declined Draft:Babar Yaqoob (Sitara-e-Imtiaz, Government of Pakistan)
19. Declined Draft:Nicholas Draper
20. Declined Draft:SellnSale
21. Rejected and CSD G11’d Draft:K R Rajagopal
22. Declined Draft:Turbines & its Performance Characteristics
23. Accepted Charcoal Island, Alaska
24. Declined Draft: German Embassy, Baghdad
25. Declined Draft:Egbunike (surname)
26. Declined Draft:List of Entertainment One programs
27. Declined Draft:Sugunavardhini
28. Declined Draft:Willy van Ryckeghem
29. Declined Draft:Non-Conservative Systems
30. Declined Draft:Kondli, Gandal, Bamanwas, Sawai Madhopur
31. Accepted The Health Wagon
32. Rejected and CSD G11’d Draft: Hammad Safi
33. Declined Draft:Rodrigo Mendes Institute
34. Declined Draft:Sahib Dayal Saxena
35. Accepted Nulled
36. Accepted Rob Friedman
37. Declined Draft:FoodMaven
38. Rejected and CSD G11’d Draft:Institut Mozdahir International (IMI)
39. Declined Draft:FoodMaven
40. Declined Draft:Computer Research Center of Islamic Sciences
41. Accepted Three Daughters of Eve
42. Declined Draft:Rob Howard
43. Declined Draft:Mishäel Lopes Cardozo
44. Declined Draft:Sheeshmahal (film)
45. Declined Draft:Bronchial Artery Embolization
46. Declined Draft:Miss World Philippines USA
47. Declined Draft:Lifelong Learning Platform
48. Accepted 2018 Bracton Law Society Scandal
49. Declined Draft:Planète Rap
50. Declined Draft:Envato
51. Declined Draft:Q-Gaussian

Those look good, I don't think a 14% acceptance rate is too low at all. I do recommend using email so your personal info remains private, but I'm not sure if you need to enable it on your account - can you see an "email this user" button in Tools? If so you can contact me via that. The GA review thing ended on 31 October, but I'll still pay for reviews initiated before then. --Cerebellum (talk) 12:59, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

@Cerebellum: I have sent you an email. I also reviewed Draft:Eusmed in the meantime. Is there a limit to rewards per reviewer? Taewangkorea (talk) 01:56, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

No limit, I'll respond to the email tonight. --Cerebellum (talk) 21:24, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks for putting this up. Taewangkorea (talk) 21:46, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Tim Mulrooney

The article Tim Mulrooney has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails GNG

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. TTN (talk) 14:23, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Cerebellum. Please check your email; 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. Taewangkorea (talk) 01:56, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

I hope you agree...

I replaced the prod you placed on Esmail_(Afghan_leader) with a {{db-g7}}. Lots of people edited the article in the thirteen years since I started the article, but all those edits were to the article's metadata. My initial edit was the only edit that contributed intellectual content, which I think is what should count in a {{db-g7}}.

I have some really unfair critics, who refuse to recognize how much the wikipedia's standards have changed. There is no way any experienced contributor would try to put up a stub like that today. But it did measure up to the standards of 2006.

I'd prefer to have the deletion log say G7, rather than prod, so it can't be used as ammunition for the unfair critics who like to label me a "serial creator of non-compliant BLPs".

Don't worry, in the unlikely event an administrator declines my G7 I'll make sure it gets deleted, even if I have to take it to DRV.

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 22:32, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Works for me! Some of my articles from 2007 probably need to get deleted too. --Cerebellum (talk) 09:37, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

Review old AfC submissions by User:Kvng part 2

Thanks for the reward for the first batch. Here's a second. These things are endless :) ~Kvng (talk) 22:53, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

1. Declined Draft:Shane Fennessey
2. Declined Draft:Alana Pang
3. Accepted Rank and File Mobilising Committee
4. Declined Draft:Malcolm Anthony
5. Declined Draft:UICR Professional Driver World Championship
6. Accepted Still Here (film)
7. Declined Draft:Kajaanin Honka
8. Declined Draft:Two Shires Ambulance Service
9. Accepted Factory 25
10. Declined Draft:John Moehring
11. Declined Draft:Nathaniel George Reichman
12. Declined Draft:HASSE
13. Declined Draft:Lucas Sirkar
14. Declined Draft:Delugan Meissl
15. Declined Draft:Chris Doss
16. Declined Draft:Smart Export Guarantee
17. Accepted Ingedore Grünfeld Villaça Koch
18. Declined Draft:Survive Said The Prophet

Proposed deletion of Clan Chosen

The article Clan Chosen has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. TTN (talk) 17:26, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Request on 06:55:20, 14 December 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Vandree1

• Vandree1 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Fabrizio Grossi (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Honestly I am confused, but I am taking your advice and I am going to try to resubmit it. Thank you for your patience — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vandree1 (talk • contribs) 20:43, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for you fast reply. So is this a final decision? Did you read the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vandree1 (talk • contribs) 15:33, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi, I am not sure what I did wrong with my article... can you be a little more specific? I thought I substantiated all the claims made. Thank you Vandree1 (talk) 06:55, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

@Vandree1: The article was previously deleted during a deletion discussion (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fabrizio Grossi), so there is a community consensus that this individual should not have an article on Wikipedia. --Cerebellum (talk) 11:44, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

@Vandree1: Yes I read it, it's a final decision for me but you can always resubmit and another reviewer will look at it. --Cerebellum (talk) 11:29, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

More old Afc Reviews by Taewangkorea

Hello, here are 30 more old reviews that I did. The page says the reward goes until Jan.20, so I hope these fit the thing for the rewards. I would prefer amazon gift card like before, and I also sent an email with this info. There sure are a lot of these to do. Best, Taewangkorea (talk) 06:40, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

1. Declined Draft:PUBG Korea League
2. Declined Draft:Nintex
3. Declined Draft:Berklee Online
4. Declined Draft:John Cumbers
5. Declined Draft:Mark G. Lawrence
6. Declined Draft:Bosnia and Herzegovina at the 2005 World Championships in Athletics
7. Declined Draft:Chris "Flict" Aparri
8. Declined Draft:Autism2Work
9. Declined Draft:David R. Huber
10. Accepted 2019 Gush Etzion Ramming Attack
11. Declined Draft:Manouchehr Farhangi
12. Declined Draft:Kaili Rampur
13. Declined Draft:Conduit Magazine
14. Declined Draft:Scott Parkinson
15. Accepted Wallace C. Gregson
16. Declined Draft:28th Stinkers Bad Movie Awards
17. Declined Draft:Chien Yao
18. Accepted M. Geethanandan
19. Declined Draft:ASME V&V Standards
20. Declined Draft:UFC Now
21. Declined Draft:Camping Club
22. Declined Draft:Latin American Federation of Nutritional Therapy, Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism
23. Declined Draft:Secondary professional school in Stará Turá, Slovakia
24. Declined Draft:Rocco Lupoi
25. Declined Draft:Troppy effect
26. Accepted Andre Michel (Haiti)
27. Accepted Kyoikuto
28. Declined Draft:Chelmsford Athletics Club
29. Declined Draft:Erik Hedegaard
30. Declined Draft:State Guaranteed Loan for higher education in Chile

Yes, so many! Reward on the way. --Cerebellum (talk) 12:09, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

AfC reviews

With your WP:RB request having expired, I'm assembling my list of AfC drafts I've completed over the past couple months. I expect to have almost 200 put together in the next day or so. Chris Troutman (talk) 03:32, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Ok, sounds good! --Cerebellum (talk) 12:39, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

It took me longer to compile this list than I expected: User:Chris troutman/AfC reviews for money. I've sent you an email for the payment details. Thanks. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:47, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Great, money sent. --Cerebellum (talk) 22:48, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! I've received it. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:56, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Afghanistan

It have been vandalized again (the location of Afghanistan). I think it should be fixed for once to south central asia and and that is the perfect defination. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:4643:C8EC:0:21AE:278B:CC1D:7950 (talk) 22:36, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Afghan peace process

On 2 March 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Afghan peace process, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:59, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Ezatullah (Nangarhar)

You redirect Ezatullah (Nangarhar) to Eastern Shura, without, so far as I can see, any discussion.

Hmmm. When you took a good look at the revision history you saw that when a {{prod}} was challenged, there was an AFD?

In that discussion we discussed whether he measured up to WP:POLITICIAN, as the leader of a provisional government. My reading of that discussion is that we concluded he should be evaluated by the critieria of that special purpose notability guideline, not GNG. I suggest that, if that conclusion is still consistent with how POLITICIAN is interpreted today, your edit summary that you could only find one reference would be insufficient to justify redirection.

I did my own web search. This guy, a former member of the legislature, from Nangarhar, may be our Ezatullah. Or he may not. The Afghan namespace, for individual's names, is very sparse. In the namespace for individual names in the Anglosphere, it is mainly individuals whose parents thougthlessly named them "John Smith" who have a name collission. Afghans have the problem that almost everyone is at risk of being mistaken for namesakes.

What do you think about reversing your redirection? Geo Swan (talk) 02:02, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

I didn’t check the history, didn’t see the previous PROD or AfD. I’ll abide by that consensus and reverse my redirect. --Cerebellum (talk) 01:12, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bjarne Kroepelien has been accepted

Bjarne Kroepelien, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Cerebellum (talk) 03:00, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Wildfires in Galicia

Hey, thanks for moving that to article space! I'd rescued the content from Delmi Alvarez and was hoping someone would be interested in improving it if I didn't get around to it, as we had some excellent photographs, which I've now added. —valereee (talk) 16:15, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Awesome! I love seeing articles at AfC that aren't self-promotional BLPs haha. --Cerebellum (talk) 01:10, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you, Cerebellum, for reading my submission page on Yardley Taylor, a truly remarkable person. He will now get some of the attention he deserves. Lee1101 (talk) 11:57, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! Glad I could help! --Cerebellum (talk) 15:02, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Jaber I Al-Sabah, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ottoman (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:48, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Jim Gant at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 01:22, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Monkey on My Back

Thanks for removing the tag on "Monkey on My Back." I added the tags but forgot to detag it afterwards.Bjones (talk) 18:12, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Glad I could help! --Cerebellum (talk) 04:21, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Jim Gant

On 25 May 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Jim Gant, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Major Jim Gant of the US Army Special Forces has been compared to both T. E. Lawrence and Colonel Kurtz? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jim Gant. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Jim Gant), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. 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.

 — Amakuru (talk) 12:01, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of List of G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero characters (A–C) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero characters (A–C) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero characters (A–C) 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. Sandstein 19:25, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

April–May 2020 GAN Backlog drive

	The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
	Thank you for completing 5 reviews in the April–May 2020 GAN Backlog drive. Your work helped us to reduce the backlog by over 60%. Regards, Harrias talk 07:25, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Outlaw Platoon for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Outlaw Platoon is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Outlaw Platoon 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. Bearcat (talk) 16:52, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

October 2020 GAN Backlog drive!

-- Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 16:39, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ta'abbata Sharran

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Ta'abbata Sharran 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 Legobot, on behalf of Alanna the Brave -- Alanna the Brave (talk) 00:01, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ta'abbata Sharran

The article Ta'abbata Sharran 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:Ta'abbata Sharran for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Alanna the Brave -- Alanna the Brave (talk) 17:21, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ta'abbata Sharran

The article Ta'abbata Sharran you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Ta'abbata Sharran 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 Legobot, on behalf of Alanna the Brave -- Alanna the Brave (talk) 18:21, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

Enlabs draft

Hello Cerebellum,

Thank you for your comment on Draft:Enlabs_AB. What's your recommended course of action? Adding more references?

Also, wanted to point out that the company is publicly traded. I know that doesn't make the company automatically notable according to WP:LISTED, but just wondered if it has been taken into account?

Cheers

Randomhero77 (talk) 14:29, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

@Randomhero77: Hey, my advice is to cut out low-quality references. Reviewers don't have unlimited time, they probably only spend 5-10 minutes on an article. It's difficult to thoroughly read 23 references in that time and for me at least, if I see press releases or promotional content used as a reference it makes me think the article is promotional in nature and I'm likely to decline it.

So for your article, you have five references for the sentence "Enlabs stands for Entertainment Laboratories", three of them are to the Enlabs website. Remove those per WP:42 - sources should be independent of the topic. I would also remove #1 for the same reason. Remove #2, it's just a stock quote and the sentence it supports has other references. Does that make sense? For LISTED, I don't know how Nasdaq Stockholm compares to other major exchanges. --Cerebellum (talk) 11:55, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

@Cerebellum: Hey, thanks a lot for helpful tips. I have now removed all low-quality references you mentioned.

Regarding stock exchange, not sure if it helps but a quote from WP:LISTED "There has been considerable discussion over time whether publicly traded corporations, or at least publicly traded corporations listed on major stock exchanges such as the NYSE and other comparable international stock exchanges, are inherently notable"

According to list of major stock exchanges, Nasdaq Nordic ranks 15th on the list. So I guess it is a major stock exchange?

Cheers Randomhero77 (talk) 14:41, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Ok, looks good to me, but I'll let another reviewer make the final call. --Cerebellum (talk) 11:18, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Advantage & Forbes Books

Hello, Cerebellum! The sources show that Advantage & Forbes Books Inc. is not a part of Forbes. It is a separate business entity and independent publishing house. I believe it deserves a stub page for at least. I don't have much time on it but if you show me which sources are not good, I'll remove them and try to find replacement or cut the draft before re-submitting. Please, let me know what can be done. I'm looking for your advice as you definitely have a lot of experience and knowledge. Here is the link for your convenience. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Advantage_&_Forbes_Books_Inc._(publisher)

--Retrostyle799 (talk) 20:05, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

@Retrostyle799: Please review WP:RS and remove any unreliable sources. I suspect that sources #1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 11 and 12 all need to be removed. --Cerebellum (talk) 12:02, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Cerebellum! I edited the draft, removed all the sources you mentioned and added a cut the text. Also, I re-submitted. Let me know if it works! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Advantage_&_Forbes_Books_Inc._(publisher) Thank you.--Retrostyle799 (talk) 20:48, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

@Retrostyle799: Hey there, you've definitely made a lot of improvements to the article. It looks like another editor just declined the draft, please get with them to see what notability concerns they had. --Cerebellum (talk) 12:06, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2021!

Hello Cerebellum, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2021. Happy editing, Alivardi (talk) 08:43, 25 December 2020 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

You probably don't remember me but you had performed the review for my first GA nomination. I still remember your kindness and patience and I really appreciate it. Alivardi (talk) 08:43, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Thank you!! --Cerebellum (talk) 23:26, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 1

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Nabataean Agriculture, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Syriac.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:20, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 21

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Nabataean Agriculture, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mercury.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:13, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Hey, Cerebellum. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! CommanderWaterford (talk) 07:28, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, Commander!! :) --Cerebellum (talk) 10:24, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Nabataean Agriculture

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Nabataean Agriculture 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 Legobot, on behalf of Extraordinary Writ -- Extraordinary Writ (talk) 06:42, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Nabataean Agriculture

The article The Nabataean Agriculture 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:The Nabataean Agriculture for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Extraordinary Writ -- Extraordinary Writ (talk) 07:02, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Nabataean Agriculture

The article The Nabataean Agriculture you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Nabataean Agriculture 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 Legobot, on behalf of Extraordinary Writ -- Extraordinary Writ (talk) 22:22, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For steadily working up, over the weekends as it were, a simple redirect not just to a good, but to a truly Great Article, I thank you, Apaugasma (talk|contribs) 22:35, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

@Apaugasma: Would have been a much worse article without your contributions :) I barely know Arabic and spend my work days making PowerPoint presentations, I need all the help I can get! --Cerebellum (talk) 00:15, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Christian ethics

Hello! I am excited - and grateful - that you have volunteered to review this article. I hope to hear from you soon. :-) Jenhawk777 (talk) 04:47, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

I'm having fun reading through the article! You've obviously put a ton of work into it. Hoping to have the review done by Monday :) --Cerebellum (talk) 14:17, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Oh! Ummm, well, hmmm. I would like to make a request, and if it doesn't suit you that's fine, I'll cope, but if you could give me your comments a little at a time instead of all at once it would certainly make life easier for me. If it makes your life harder, then nevermind, but taking this in bite sized pieces would certainly improve mine. No whining! Just asking if it's all the same to you. Jenhawk777 (talk) 19:56, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

@Jenhawk777: Sounds good! I'll get you some initial thoughts tomorrow morning. And I know you said you have a lot of other projects going on right now, if you end up needing extra time once the review is finished that's no problem. --Cerebellum (talk) 21:29, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Bless you! Thank you! Jenhawk777 (talk) 04:44, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your interest in reviewing Pre-socratic philosophy

Hi! I am so excited you are about to review the article I have nominated for GA. But may I ask a favor, can it await a little, since a C/E cleanup is pending? [22] Apart from that, I am not about to make any significant changes, maybe add a picture or two. Thanks again for taking up this GAN and looking forward to working together to improve the article, regardless of the GA status! Cinadon36 14:28, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Hey it’s not a problem! I will wait a bit and if I get impatient I can do the copy editing myself. Cerebellum (talk) 14:53, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

@Cinadon36: Hey, I am going to knock out this review over the next three days! Should be complete by end of the day Wednesday.--Cerebellum (talk) 11:26, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! :) Cinadon36 13:04, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

		The Reviewer Barnstar
		For reviewing Pre-socratic philosophy. Your review was fast but not hasty. It was careful but not nitpicking. But most importantly, it was pleasant. Cinadon36 12:27, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you :) I appreciate that you actually cared about making the article better, not just getting the GA icon. --Cerebellum (talk) 00:44, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Yapperbot gone crazy

I observe that Yapperbot - today - left me a message on my talk page asking me to review Iranian Enlightenment, which, I note, you have reviewed, and placed on hold. I don't know what the bot is up to here, but I have glanced over your work and find it replete with wisdom. Thank you. (No thanks to Yapperbot!) --Whiteguru (talk) 02:36, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

@Whiteguru: Thanks for the kind words :) Maybe my review didn't satisfy our bot overlords! --Cerebellum (talk) 22:27, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Ezequiel Matthysse

Hello, could you review: Draft:Ezequiel Matthysse and create it as an article on wikipedia? Thanks! Emat20211 (talk) 13:56, 31 May 2021 (UTC)Emat20211

@Emat20211: Hey, I usually don't review biographies of living people. I like to focus on historical or geographical topics. --Cerebellum (talk) 09:44, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

ARBPIA articles created by fresh users

Hi, the Arbitration Committee ruled that "Editors who are not eligible to be extended-confirmed may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations." The last part means that it was not strictly forbidden for you to accept Nazi Scouts. But it should have been clear that the article is deliberately provocative and has cherry-picked sources. It also contains some arrant nonsense. Brand new editors who are not permitted to edit ARBPIA articles should not have such freedom. Zero^talk 13:00, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, I accept the rebuke. I wasn’t aware of the ARBPIA ruling and will be more careful in the future. Cerebellum (talk) 13:12, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

GAN Backlog Drive - July 2021

Good article nominations | July 2021 Backlog Drive
July 2021 Backlog Drive: This Thursday, July 1, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number, length, and age, of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 10 good article reviews or participated in the March backlog drive. Click here to opt out of any future messages. --Usernameunique

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:31, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Articles for Creation July 2021 Backlog Elimination Drive

Hello Cerebellum:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running until 31 July 2021.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.
There is currently a backlog of over 1600 articles, so start reviewing articles. We're looking forward to your help!

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for Creation at 21:53, 7 July 2021 (UTC). If you do not wish to recieve future notification, please remove your name from the mailing list.

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	Thank you for accepting George Habib Bebawi to be moved from draftspace to mainspace. Here is a special star for you!! CaeserKaiser (talk) 22:14, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Happy to help :) --Cerebellum (talk) 09:12, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Alayoubi family

Dear Cerebebellum,

I would like to thank you for your wishing and message. Plus regarding my first page, I do apologize but I think you misunderstood the purpose. It's not about one person (Saladin), nor about the Dynasty. It's a page about a very influential levantine family and a part of it is the history. Nothing to do with politics as well. There is a need for it just like the need for many other similar prominent families of that region on Wikipedia. Regarding people on the list, these are very famous persons and the family still owns manuscripts and governmental certified family tree both in Syria and Lebanon.

I do please urge you to look at other similar pages and hope I can publish the page soon.

Kind regards

AAANDA (talk) 09:46, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@AAANDA: Ok, I'd be happy to look at the article again, but it is going to need some different sources. Most of the sources now talk about individual people, and most of them are about Saladin and the Ayyubid dynasty. We need sources talking specifically about the modern family, they do not have to be in English. --Cerebellum (talk) 09:51, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Cerebellum (talk)

@Cerebellum: Thanks you very much indeed! And as said, I even took names of 100% authentic members because there are no reliable enough sources(even though other pages list no sources when it comes to members).

I also as you wished added two more authentic sources talking about the family in modern time. It's the family is very well organized and kept a lot of manuscripts and papers, it even the only one allowed to bury it's members where the sons and sisters of Al-Kamil and Saladin. here you can read an article on the lebanese famous newspaper alwatanvoice about stoping and following people from faking identity trying to make profit off it. Lastly I would like again to thank you for your time, it's my first article and I'm enjoying the experience and in this article it's not about politics or a specific person or an neutral personal use family page. It's about the heritage, traditions and history of the region.

Kind regards, --AAANDA (talk) 16:13, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@AAANDA: Great, thank you for providing more sources! I can see that this page belongs on Wikipedia. What I am thinking is that since Ayyubid dynasty already exists, this page should mostly be about the family in modern times, do you agree? If so we should add a bit more information before I accept the article. The best source is probably going to be the موسوعة الأسر الدمشقية which you added. Could you help me find which pages of that book discuss the al-Ayoubi family? Then I can help expand the article a bit and put the finishing touches on it before publishing. I'm going to remove a couple unreliable sources as well. --Cerebellum (talk) 11:21, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Cerebellum (talk)

@Cerebellum: Thank you very much for your beneficial advices and encouragement, I know understand so much more about sources and what makes a page special and worthwhile. I now deleted Notable people and Today sections and made a new "Modern history" section where I expanded on details and sources (official governmental sites, credible historians books, authentic newspaper;multipliable on the same subject). I'm planning on adding more informations about the modern history in the future and keep adjusting the page in order to make it better if it got published. I wanted in this page to be fully neutral and added no oral history or unreliable sources. I would surely love a native speaker and well cultured one like yourself (I read most of your articles and mostly I admired "Ta'abbata Sharran" a poet I read about alot ) to add his touches.

Kind regards, AAANDA (talk) 09:50, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, I had a lot of fun writing the Ta'abbata Sharran article :) And thank you for your additions to the article!! You added some great sources and information, keep up the good work! --Cerebellum (talk) 11:16, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Antonije Orešković

Hi. I noticed you accepted this new article from an anonymous submission, but immediately found it to be lacking in that most of its references are not in English (not only the works themselves, but the reference text is in Serbian Cyrillic). Furthermore, one of the article's early claims about religion is referenced to a work by one Ivo Vukčević, who I remember from earlier discussions for being a completely unreliable source. Sadly we don't have a ready-made WP:RSN thread about that, but you can get the impression from e.g. a search in talk pages for that name. So, this sounds like typical anonymous nationalist soapboxing, but that doesn't mean that we should let this go through in the future. If you notice further claims of ethnicity, nationality, religion etc in the WP:ARBMAC topic area submissions, and the reference isn't in English, please reach out at WT:SRB or WT:HRV or WT:BiH and have someone translate it first. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 22:19, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

@Joy: Thank you, it's certainly true that I am not knowledgeable about the Balkans and am likely to make mistakes when reviewing AfC drafts in this area. I only do it because a very prolific anonymous editor or editors submits lots articles about Serbian history to AfC, and I figure someone has to review them. I don't want to make demands on your time but if you ever feel like getting involved at AfC, we could use your help with articles like Draft:Josip Šišković, Draft:Lazar Dobrić, Draft:Živko Dabić, Draft:Ostoja Spuž, etc. --Cerebellum (talk) 22:39, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

More to the point though, since you've provided good evidence that this user is POV-pushing, I'll probably stay away from their drafts in the future. --Cerebellum (talk) 22:42, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. It looks like they're translating other Wikipedia's articles, where referencing and NPOV standards appear to be way lower, so junk seeps in together with what may well be good info. I guess it's probably fine to just let it sit there until someone with a specific knack for what appears to be history of the Austro-Hungarian Empire gets to it. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 07:25, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Alaa_Shoier

Hello, Cerebellum I have been removed some promotional language as well as make corrections to make it non-promotional. Kindly review it. ThanksAlaaShoier (talk) 21:46, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@AlaaShoier: Done! --Cerebellum (talk) 09:26, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Request on 21:18:12, 29 July 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Stefsoccerdude

• Stefsoccerdude (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Wyatt Borso (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Thank you for your review on Draft:Wyatt_Borso. You remarked that "I think he has to actually play in a game with the Pittsburg Riverhounds to meet the notability guidelines." Borso did make his debut on May 1, 2021. https://www.riverhounds.com/news_article/show/1161435 Stefsoccerdude (talk) 21:18, 29 July 2021 (UTC)Stefsoccerdude

Stefsoccerdude (talk) 21:18, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Setfsoccerdude: Thank you for letting me know! If you resubmit the article, I'll accept it. --Cerebellum (talk) 19:28, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

U.S. Stove Company

Good afternoon! Thank you for taking the time to edit my article on the United States Stove Company! I really appreciate your feedback. I made the requested adjustments and resubmitted. Please le me know if you see any other changes needed. :) ChattWiki423 (talk) 17:44, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Hey there, looks like another reviewer got to the article before I did. --Cerebellum (talk) 10:56, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Requesting your support

Hi Cerebellum. My name is Taylor and I work for Zendesk. In compliance with Wikipedia’s policies, I disclosed a conflict of interest and shared some proposed content here a little over four months ago. @John Broughton: gave some positive feedback six weeks ago here, but I haven’t gotten anyone to actually approve/reject the content, make any changes, suggest any additional necessary improvements, or anything like that. I was hoping you might be willing to take a look? Tskillin (talk) 21:28, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

@Tskillin: Hey Taylor, I appreciate you respecting Wikipedia's policies. Looks like you have been working on this for a while. I copied the history section to the article and most of the lead, I did not copy the "Software and services" section because to me it reads like sales material. I left the controversy section as is. --Cerebellum (talk) 02:00, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Advice needed

Hi Cerebellum! Since I 've noticed you are experienced at GAN, may I ask you some advice? I have nominated Socrates for GAN. The reviewer made some comments (see Talk:Socrates/GA1 but he has not been around for some time. I have already left him a message at his talk page [23]. How should I proceed? Cinadon36 05:47, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

@Cinadon36: Hello Cinadon, good to hear from you! Sorry to hear that, I wish I could take over the review but I'm not feeling up to a GA review at the moment, I've mostly been working at AfC lately :( This has happened before though, see Wikipedia_talk:Good_article_nominations#Open_reviews_by_Mikehawk10. What you can do is either relist the nomination (instructions at WP:GAN/I#N4) or request a second opinion, one of those two options should draw in a new reviewer. Hope that helps! --Cerebellum (talk) 09:41, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, I might wait a bit longer and if there is no response from reviewer, I ll go with 2nd opinion. Cinadon36 09:46, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Sounds good! --Cerebellum (talk) 09:53, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Steve Ravic Submission - Removing non-neutral material

Hi Cerebellum,

Thanks for taking the time to go over my draft. Like you've recommended I've removed the material you've pointed out as well as removed some of the more flowery words and kept it tp just facts. I've also edited some of the draft to read better in places. I've resubmitted it, however if you notice anything else that needs fixing please let me know. Cheers! MetalDarren (talk) 19:28, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Great, reply left on the article. --Cerebellum (talk) 10:38, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for approving page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Miller_(art_collector)

Thanks Cerebellum for approving this page. Cheers, Campbell

Happy to help! --Cerebellum (talk) 10:25, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

Steve Ravic - Notability Criteria

Hi just writing to indicate what criteria I think Steve Ravic falls under in my draft, thanks in advance for going over the lengthy read.

I believe the following 2 lines are most applicable here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(music) Others 1) Is frequently covered in publications devoted to a notable music sub-culture. Creative professionals https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Creative_professionals 1.) The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors;

And potentially 3) The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of an independent and notable work (for example, a book, film, or television series, but usually not a single episode of a television series) or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews; or

This first portion will cover the musically involved portion of his career: Steve is well known within Melbourne's Heavy Metal scene, however this is pretty hard to find documentation online for due to the fact that a lot of this era of his work is either locked to various DVD features and documentaries which need to have either been purchased or someone online has to have released it in some capacity or they're reviews and articles written about him in printed metal magazines and newspapers are either lost to time and or overseas publications.

Here's a list of the most notable DVD releases : ( Dungeon: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Under_the_Rising_Sun , Doro: https://www.metal-rules.com/2015/03/01/doro-fur-immer-dvd/ The Poodles: https://dangerdog.com/2010-music-reviews/the-poodles-in-the-flesh-dvd-review.php#.YRZoU4gzaUk ) Since this is wikipedia however I can't just cite a review for facts, nor can I cite any Swedish or German articles about him since I don't speak either of those languages and can't just take someone's word for what they say, nor do I think I can cite the actual DVD's documentaries themselves in an article about Steve as that might end up being seen as a conflict of interest. I myself am a big follower of the Melbourne metal scene and own both the Doro and Dungeon DVD's (which is how I came to be more familiar with Steve's work).

The best case to be made for his involvement in his mostly behind the scenes roles would then would either be how often he is mentioned from online publications by those he has worked with, which ends up being very little as with most interviews the focus is on the artist. This is apparent even in articles and interviews written about his son Rocky Ravic and his band Mystery (Who have released 3 albums and have played internationally) that Steve manages and does music videos for, which can be proven by looking at the Youtube uploads of their music videos ( https://www.rockarena.co.uk/mystery-the-youngest-hard-rock-band-to-ever-tour-the-world/ & https://www.vjesnik.com.au/entertainment/mystery-rising-stars-of-rock-n-roll/ )

However there are crumbs of this like in the articles I did post on the Draft as citations, thought to be fine by me to establish the actual link between Steve and the bands mostly, however specifically in these two examples I would say there's veracity to the claim that he is a key part of having international metal music acts come to Australia due to the cost and thought to be lack of appeal at the time, remember this was in the period when Metal music was less favored for the Grunge boom that happened in the 90's, bands couldn't get decent gigs in the USA, let paying for a tour over in Australia.

https://www.metal-rules.com/concerts/edguy/EdguyAus/edguydownunder.htm "Then Steve Ravic, Mr Metal Warriors himself..."

http://www.loudmag.com.au/features/doro-25-years-queen/ "Steve Ravic was the guy who got us there,” Doro recalls. ... So thanks to him I was able to go to Australia. Sometimes all it takes is one person with a big heart and a deep understanding.”

Not to mention the fact that Steve assisted Australian music acts in getting to the international level like his son's Mystery or Dungeon.

https://www.blabbermouth.net/news/drummer-stevo-quits-australia-s-dungeon/ "I'd also like to thank the unending efforts of DUNGEON's manager Steve Ravic, as his everlasting commitment is the reason DUNGEON is now at the international level — thank you, mate!

I believe these prove the point that he was involved in the sub-culture to a fairly large extent.

Now there is the case for his dealing with the Croatian diaspora in Australia and the Croatian homeland itself. He has been featured several times on the cover of the Hrvatski Vjesnik (The Croatian Herald) a few can be tracked down on the publications public Facebook page which posts the covers, as well as articles within. I assume I can't cite Facebook posts as evidence however. In Croatia itself he has had web articles talking about his involvement with the music artist Thompson as well as other dealings one example of which where he judged a Top Model contest I cited, though they're in Croatian. On his public profile page on Facebook there are good overviews of his work in this case in English but again, it's a Facebook page so I can't use that either.

With his film career I've added articles that interview him, including two from SBS which is a major Australian TV and Radio network, one which is in Croatian and one in English. As for the rest I've omitted articles that probably do not match criteria as well as parsing it down to avoid further Reference Bombing. For example there is one that discusses his involvement with Charles Billich and his wife Christa on the documentary and Biopic he is working on them from The Daily Mail but was told The Daily Mail is not a reliable resource, so in that vein I removed an article from The Herald Sun and The Daily Telegraph but kept two, one from the New York Times and one from Saphiramusic.com

Now I know that there's a general rule of thumb against comparing to other articles that are already published and going "why not mine" but from an objective stand-point comparing to filmmaker peers and contemporaries listed here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Australian_film_directors and here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Music_video_producers

The draft isn't an enormous difference from many of those, though I did notice a few did have Filmography/Videography lists which thinking about it I may add to the article.

I believe that there is enough variety and mentions of Steve across the 3 major fields I've written about above to be considered a person of note, it was enough to engage my interest in writing this article about him after seeing he didn't have one when reading through the Australian heavy metal wikipedia article for some research I was doing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_heavy_metal

Thanks again for your time reading this and I hope to hear back soon, though apologies in advance, I only get the time to jump on when I have free time between work. MetalDarren (talk) 17:58, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

@MetalDarren: Hey there, thank you for the in-depth analysis. You've convinced me and if you nominate the article again I will approve it. --Cerebellum (talk) 10:25, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

@Cerebellum: Hey Cerebellum, thank you for such a speedy response. You actually managed to catch me before my lot of upcoming shifts luckily enough. I'll be nominating the article again then. I hope you have a pleasant day MetalDarren (talk) 10:30, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

s.Pz.Abt.506 page

Greetings, Cerebellum

It has been a while! I've finally had the chance to make extensive revisions to my page on the 506th. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/506th_Heavy_Panzer_Battalion

My intent was to make some minor edits and provide page numbers, but some other users' edits butchered a few sections with both grammatical and informational errors. I've corrected these, made some additions with more detailed information (as I was able to get my hands on more sources) and have added inline citations with page numbers throughout. I plan to revisit the page to proofread again tomorrow, but I would like to ask if you would consider having a look at it- I am still keen to improve the article to a B rating.

As always, thank you for your time and I look forward to hearing from you.

Best Wishes, Herr

P.S. I am still not too well-versed with Wikipedia's systems. How might one go about changing their username (assuming this is possible)? Thanks

@Herr514: Good to hear from you!! The article is definitely b-class now, I've updated the rating accordingly. I think it has a good shot at Good Article status, you can nominate it for a review if you'd like :) Here is the page that explains how to change a username: Wikipedia:Changing username. --Cerebellum (talk) 14:17, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply and the information; I'll be sure to look into the "good article" process. Cheers! --Herr514(talk)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations open

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:58, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nomination period closing soon

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are still open, but not for long. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! No further nominations will be accepted after that time. Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:42, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Glen Tullman Proposed Updates

Hi Cerebellum. I saw that you had responded to a couple other inquiries from editors with a conflict of interest and was wondering if you had time to chip-in at Talk:Glen_Tullman#Suggested edits. I would like to improve the overall neutrality, reference quality, and completeness of the page. I got started by asking for a few small changes as I work down the page. Thank you for considering it. MelissaCarson (talk) 13:55, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

@MelissaCarson: Hey there, I'm not sure I understand the point of the proposed changes. The article already discusses his work at Certified Collateral Corporation and Enterprise Systems. --Cerebellum (talk) 09:27, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history coordinator election voting has commenced

Hey y'all, voting for the 2021 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2021. Voting will be conducted at the 2021 tranche page itself. Appropriate questions for the candidates can also be asked. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:38, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Socratres nomination again...

Socrates FA nomination has stuck amd I do not know why or how to proceed...Any ideas? Thanx! Cinadon36 18:40, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

I'm sorry, that's discouraging :( But you've properly nominated the article, all you can do now is sit back and wait - I've waited up to six months for a GA review! --Cerebellum (talk) 09:19, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Six months? OMG! Ok. I can wait! Cinadon36 10:35, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Article needs review

Hello mr. I hope you are good I have an unreviewed article that needs to be reviewed by someone who speaks Arabic. When I put the last references I put, one of the editors advised me to look for an editor in the English Wikipedia who speaks Arabic so that he can verify the authenticity of the attached references, and here I have found you, sir! The article talks about a higher institute located in Giza, Egypt. I hope you can help me. Here is the article: Draft:Pyramids Higher Institute for Engineering and Technology Shahba3049 (talk) 19:31, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

أهلا وسهلا! It is notable based on the El Watan and El Wakala articles, it just needs some formatting cleanup before it can be accepted. I will fix it for you tomorrow (Sunday) morning and then accept it :) --Cerebellum (talk) 13:17, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Requesting your support

Cerebellum, I wanted to check-in on whether you had seen my comment addressed to you here and had any interest in taking a look. No problem if you’re busy (or just not interested), but wanted to see if it was on your radar. Tskillin (talk) 18:24, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

@Tskillin: Sorry, did not see it! I am going to pass on this one - I'm pretty busy with grad school currently so I don't have much time for Wikipedia. --Cerebellum (talk) 09:33, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election voting period closing soon

Hey y'all, voting for the 2021 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche will be closing soon. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2021. Voting will be conducted at the 2021 tranche page itself. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:31, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Wishing Cerebellum a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Birthday Committee! Best wishes! CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 03:24, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:14, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Baqibillah Mishkat Chowdhury

Hello, Cerebellum,

I saw on Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/List of reviewers by subject that you are a AFC reviewer who has some knowledge of Islam. Could you look over this article? I believe the page creator says it passed AFC review but I find that doubtful. Thanks for any help you can offer. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:26, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Sorry for the delayed response, I've been out of town. Looks like someone has already reviewed the draft. I don't speak Bengali but as far as I can tell from Google Translate, many of the sources don't even mention the subject. --Cerebellum (talk) 16:00, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

Editing Request

Hi Cerebellum. Pursuant to WP:COI, I shared a proposed draft rework of the SunPower page a couple months ago that contains a robust and well-researched summary of the company’s history. @Chidgk1: removed a lot of poorly-sourced content on the current page, but didn’t have time to review the proposed expanded content. I was wondering if you’d be willing to look it over and see if you feel the proposed draft would be an improvement. Sanahsue (talk) 19:57, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

@Sanahsue: I read the draft and it looks good, definitely an improvement on the current page. I think you should go ahead and make the changes. I don't have any authority to tell you what to do but I recommend that you add a source for the operating income (Yahoo Finance gives -$13 million for 2020, not -$6 million) and specify what the actual efficiency is. The current page says 22.2%. --Cerebellum (talk) 23:28, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi Cerebellum. My name is Jillian and I work with user Sanahsue at Sunpower. Sanahsue got pulled away on other things, so I went ahead and implemented the expanded page per your instruction. I added a citation to the financials in the infobox as you requested first. Let me know if I did anything wrong or if there's any other way I can be of assistance. Thanks for taking the time to review our draft! I think it is a much needed improvement to the page. Jillianhailey (talk) 21:25, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Administrators will no longer be autopatrolled

A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:05, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Survey about History on Wikipedia

I am Petros Apostolopoulos, a Ph.D. candidate in Public History at North Carolina State University. My Ph.D. project examines how historical knowledge is produced on Wikipedia. If you are interested in participating in my research study by offering your own experience of writing about history on Wikipedia, you can click on this link https://ncsu.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_9z4wmR1cIp0qBH8. There are minimal risks involved in this research.

If you have any questions, please let me know. Petros Apostolopoulos, [email protected] Apolo1991 (talk) 14:25, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

GAN Backlog Drive – January 2022

Good article nominations | January 2022 Backlog Drive
January 2022 Backlog Drive: On New Year's Day, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number and age of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage.
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 10 good article reviews or participated in the March backlog drive. Click here and remove your username from the mailing list to opt out of any future messages. --Usernameunique

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles at 21:17, 31 December 2021 (UTC).

Merchandise giveaway nomination

A token of thanks Hi Cerebellum! I've nominated you (along with all other active admins) to receive a solstice season gift from the WMF. Talk page stalkers are invited to comment at the nomination. Enjoy! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk ~~~~~

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:50, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

How we will see unregistered users

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:14, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Reviewer Barnstar
	Thank you for your GA review of Bulletproof hosting! It was very smooth and fast :-) Keep up the good work! (it was my first GA) WikiLinuz🍁(talk) 18:30, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you!! Your first GA but I'm sure it won't be the last :) --Cerebellum (talk) 20:02, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Fast flux

You're invited to review Fast flux for GA. Thanks, WikiLinuz🍁(talk) 18:08, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, it's a cool topic, I try not to review multiple articles by the same nominator though – I'm always unsure about my judgment and I think it's better to get another opinion on if articles meet the criteria. --Cerebellum (talk) 19:24, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

WP:WIKICUP

Good luck in the WikiCup. You see, I think we are the only two users representing Indiana. Severestorm28 01:47, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Haha good luck to you too! Stay safe in the storm! --Cerebellum (talk) 12:11, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Gaius Marius

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Gaius Marius 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 Legobot, on behalf of Johannes Schade -- Johannes Schade (talk) 10:00, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

WP:AFC Helper News

Hello! I wanted to drop a quick note for all of our AFC participants; nothing huge and fancy like a newsletter, but a few points of interest.

• AFCH will now show live previews of the comment to be left on a decline.
• The template {{db-afc-move}} has been created - this template is similar to {{db-move}} when there is a redirect in the way of an acceptance, but specifically tells the patrolling admin to let you (the draft reviewer) take care of the actual move.

Short and sweet, but there's always more to discuss at WT:AFC. Stop on by, maybe review a draft on the way? Whether you're one of our top reviewers, or haven't reviewed in a while, I want to thank you for helping out in the past and in the future. Cheers, Primefac, via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:59, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

"MicroScript (programming language)" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect MicroScript (programming language) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 18#MicroScript (programming language) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Happy Editing--IAmChaos 00:58, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

15 years

Thank you very much!! --Cerebellum (talk) 12:34, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

Much appreciated :) --Cerebellum (talk) 12:34, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

WikiCup 2022 March newsletter

And so ends the first round of the WikiCup. Last year anyone who scored more than zero points moved on to Round 2, but this was not the case this year, and a score of 13 or more was required to proceed. The top scorers in Round 1 were:

• Epicgenius, a finalist last year, who led the field with 1906 points, gained from 32 GAs and 19 DYKs, all on the topic of New York buildings.
• AryKun, new to the contest, was second with 1588 points, having achieved 2 FAs, 11 GAs and various other submissions, mostly on the subject of birds.
• Bloom6132, a WikiCup veteran, was in third place with 682 points, garnered from 51 In the news items and several DYKs.
• GhostRiver was close behind with 679 points, gained from achieving 12 GAs, mostly on ice hockey players, and 35 GARs.
• Kavyansh.Singh was in fifth place with 551 points, with an FA, a FL, and many reviews.
• SounderBruce was next with 454 points, gained from an FA and various other submissions, mostly on United States highways.
• Ktin, another WikiCup veteran, was in seventh place with 412 points, mostly gained from In the news items.

These contestants, like all the others who qualified for Round 2, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. Between them, contestants completed reviews of a large number of good articles as the contest ran concurrently with a GAN backlog drive. Well done all! To qualify for Round 3, contestants will need to finish Round 2 among the top thirty-two participants.

Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Anything that should have been claimed for in Round 1 is no longer eligible for points. 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.

Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:06, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Gaius Marius

The article Gaius Marius you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Gaius Marius 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 Legobot, on behalf of Johannes Schade -- Johannes Schade (talk) 09:21, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Jim Gant

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Jim Gant 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 Legobot, on behalf of Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 14:21, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Jim Gant

The article Jim Gant 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:Jim Gant for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 15:21, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Levantine Arabic FAC

Hi Cerebellum, You reviewed Levantine for GA back in December and since then I improved it a lot and nominated it for FAC. I would love if you could have a second look at the article and give a review. Thanks for any help you can provide. A455bcd9 (talk) 20:00, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

@A455bcd9: This is exciting! So glad the article is at FAC! I will review it :) --Cerebellum (talk) 22:44, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! :) A455bcd9 (talk) 08:38, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Jim Gant

The article Jim Gant you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Jim Gant 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 Legobot, on behalf of Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 13:21, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

New administrator activity requirement

The administrator policy has been updated with new activity requirements following a successful Request for Comment.

Beginning January 1, 2023, administrators who meet one or both of the following criteria may be desysopped for inactivity if they have:

1. Made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least a 12-month period OR
2. Made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period

Administrators at risk for being desysopped under these criteria will continue to be notified ahead of time. Thank you for your continued work.

22:52, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Luigi Barbasetti

Please check my improvements. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Luigi_Barbasetti — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pepsinus (talk • contribs) 08:32, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

@Pepsinus: Done! Sorry you had to wait so long. --Cerebellum (talk) 10:23, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Axos Financial Proposed Change

Hi Cerebellum. I work for Axos Financial and have a disclosed COI. My predecessor at Axos requested criticisms of the company cited to Axos' own investor presentation be removed. The request was posted about six weeks ago but got no response. I was hoping you might be willing to take a look and accept or reject the proposed change. Anthompson44 (talk) 20:06, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

@Anthompson44: Hello An, please know that I have no authority over you and it's not up to me to accept or reject anything. But for what it's worth, I oppose the change you requested. If a company wants negative information removed, my instinct is to distrust the company and keep the information. --Cerebellum (talk) 11:32, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Cerro Gordo

Hi Cerebellum, we've both been working on the former settlement Cerro Gordo, California and it seems like it would make sense to merge Cerro Gordo Mines into the article on the settlement. Do you have any thoughts about this? Netherzone (talk) 13:54, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

@Netherzone Thank you for your diligent work on the article! I don't have an opinion on whether to merge or not, I just saw the draft at AFC and figured it must be notable as a former populated place. I did not see the mine article. If you want to merge go for it! Cerebellum (talk) 13:59, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the quick response. Alrighty then, I may attempt to do it! This will be the first time for me to merge. I'm reading up on the process described at WP:MERGE and it seems a little complicated (especially merging article histories.) I think it would be considered an uncontroversial merge (that could be boldly done) but perhaps the best practice (that would get the attention of other editors) would be to open a proposed merger discussion. Netherzone (talk) 14:21, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

@Netherzone Good luck :) In this case I don't think a history merge or discussion is required but it's up to you! Cerebellum (talk) 14:51, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Hi

Hi! Please look at my draft. I am ready to listen to comments and correct the article. Thanks!31.40.143.16 (talk) 12:37, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't typically review biographies of living people. They don't interest me that much. --Cerebellum (talk) 08:55, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	Thank you for approving my first article, Igoeti! I was super excited when I looked at my talk page and heard the news. Thank you again. 𝙷𝚎𝚕𝚕𝚘𝚑𝚎𝚊𝚛𝚝 (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔) 02:01, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Great job with the article :) It's better than my first article, that's for sure! Keep up the good work and let me know if you need anything! --Cerebellum (talk) 08:54, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

WikiCup 2022 May newsletter

The second round of the 2022 WikiCup has now finished. It was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 115 points to advance to round 3. There were some very impressive efforts in round 2, with the top seven contestants all scoring more than 500 points. A large number of the points came from the 11 featured articles and the 79 good articles achieved in total by contestants.

Our top scorers in round 2 were:

1. Epicgenius, with 1264 points from 2 featured article, 4 good articles and 18 DYKs. Epicgenius was a finalist last year but has now withdrawn from the contest as he pursues a new career path.
2. AryKun, with 1172 points from two featured articles, one good article and a substantial number of featured article and good article reviews.
3. Bloom6132, with 605 points from 44 in the news items and 4 DYKs.
4. Sammi Brie, with 573 points from 8 GAs and 21 DYKs.
5. Ealdgyth, with 567 points from 11 GAs and 34 good and featured article reviews.
6. Panini!, with 549 points from 1 FA, 4 GAs and several other sources.
7. Lee Vilenski, with 545 points from 1 FA, 4 GAs and a number of reviews.

The rules for featured and good article reviews require the review to be of sufficient length; brief quick fails and very short reviews will generally not be awarded points. Remember also that DYKs cannot be claimed until they have appeared on the main page. As we enter the third round, any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed now, and anything you forgot to claim in round 2 cannot! Remember too, that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. 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. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:39, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of United States invasion of Afghanistan

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article United States invasion of Afghanistan 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 Legobot, on behalf of Ovinus -- Ovinus (talk) 04:40, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Request on 10:26:16, 8 May 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Super30867

• Super30867 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Sunil Sihag (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Super30867 (talk) 10:26, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

FYI: It was resubmitted and then declined after you declined it. David notMD (talk) 19:43, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

@David notMD: Understood, thank you. --Cerebellum (talk) 08:48, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

@Super30867: The article is still heavily promotional. Remove phrases like His fiction and his social activities are part of one whole and one is inclined to agree., he found his true calling in cricket, kickstarted his career, He didn't shy away from pointing out the injustice plaguing society, etc. --Cerebellum (talk) 08:48, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

I have add another reliable secondary sources through Citation. I request to you please review again and help me to fix my article and space in main article. if any sentence does not meet criteria to wikipedia policy please resolve it. Super30867 (talk) 03:02, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

@Super30867: Sorry, I don't usually work on articles about living people. --Cerebellum (talk) 08:35, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of United States invasion of Afghanistan

The article United States invasion of Afghanistan you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:United States invasion of Afghanistan 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 Legobot, on behalf of Ovinus -- Ovinus (talk) 23:01, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Question about Draft:Victor F. “Trey” Trahan III, FAIA

Hi Cerebellum, thank you so so much for reviewing my draft and I appreciate your feedback. I have been reading other architect's pages and trying to use them to mirror my draft. Are there any specific parts of the draft that need improvements or does it need a complete rewrite? I feel like I have the sources to make it completely neutral and encyclopedic-like, as I have been working on this for several months. Again, thank you so much for reviewing my draft and any tips an experienced editor like you could give me would be amazing. Usually, I have been editing existing articles and this is my first article. Thank you! Architect110402 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 13:07, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

@Architect110402: My recommendation is a little drastic: Cut the whole article down to one section, called career, and only include the most important and well-cited information. Renovating the Superdome is a big deal and readers will care about it, but listing every project he's ever done like the article does now just makes it seem like a resume.

You also need to remove promotional phrases, such as “an organization that explores how design can transform cities and landscapes to improve people’s lives,” “Conservation is an important aspect of Trahan’s practice”, “The significance of this project lies in its role as a prototype for stewardship practices”. --Cerebellum (talk) 09:46, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I really appreciate you geting back to me and I will definitely do what you are suggesting.

After doing research into what articles wikipedia likes, do you think it still has a chance of getting approved if it is shorter in length?

Thank you so much again you have been extremely helpful. I've updated my draft with the revisions, but am still working on what else to remove. Architect110402 (talk) 15:54, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Looks a lot better! I think you can resubmit. --Cerebellum (talk) 08:39, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

June 2022 Good Article Nominations backlog drive

Good article nominations | June 2022 Backlog Drive

On 1 June, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number and age of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? Sign up here!

You're receiving this message because you have conducted 5 good article reviews or participated in previous backlog drives. Click here to opt out of any future messages. (t · c) buidhe 04:26, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

WikiCup 2022 July newsletter

The third round of the 2022 WikiCup has now come to an end. Each of the sixteen contestants who made it into the fourth round had at least 180 points, which is a lower figure than last year when 294 points were needed to progress to round 4. Our top scorers in round 3 were:

• BennyOnTheLoose, with 746 points, a tally built both on snooker and other sports topics, and on more general subjects.
• Bloom6132, with 683 points, garnered mostly from "In the news" items and related DYKs.
• Sammi Brie, with 527, from a variety of submissions related to radio and television stations.

Between them contestants achieved 5 featured articles, 4 featured lists, 51 good articles, 149 DYK entries, 68 ITN entries, and 109 good article reviews. As we enter the fourth round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met. Please also remember that all submissions must meet core Wikipedia policies, regardless of the review process.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is a good article nomination, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. 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. WikiCup judges: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:51, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

Human history query

Thank you for your remarkable work on human history! May I ask what your plans are for it? I am happy to help or advise on all matters related to East Asia, but do not want to get in your way either! Best – Aza24 (talk) 07:34, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello Aza! I don't have any plans I'm just having fun with it, prehistory is killing me right now! So complicated. Please jump in you won't get in my way :) --Cerebellum (talk) 11:47, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Having fun? On Wikipedia?—You must be joking :)

I'm not surprised that the prehistory section is confusing—the topic seems to occupy an unusual place between genetics, biology, history and sociology, and of course, all mostly without the aid of written records. I will certainly try and find time to take a look a East Asian related content there. If we need further insight/assistance in the future I know some editors who are each specialists in Iranian history, African history, Indian history and the Middle Ages. – Aza24 (talk) 19:03, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much!! The more eyes on the article the better. --Cerebellum (talk) 23:29, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Reward board

Just wanting to verify your reward board post for "Improve level 1 vital articles to GA". You're offering $1,000 USD? ––FormalDude talk 19:15, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes, that's right :) I would just ask that you pick one besides human history, I've been working on that one myself. --Cerebellum (talk) 10:18, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations opening soon

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are opening in a few hours (00:01 UTC on 1 September). A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:51, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

WikiCup 2022 September newsletter

The fourth round of the WikiCup has now finished. 383 points were required to reach the final, and the new round has got off to a flying start with all finalists already scoring. In round 4, Bloom6132 with 939 points was the highest points-scorer, with a combination of DYKs and In the news items, followed by BennyOnTheLoose, Sammi Brie and Lee Vilenski. The points of all contestants are swept away as we start afresh for the final round.

At this stage, we say goodbye to the eight competitors who didn't quite make it; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia, and we hope you will join us again next year. For the remaining competitors, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them, and importantly, before the deadline on October 31st!

If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. The judges are Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:43, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Request on 17:48:35, 11 September 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Butler26

• Butler26 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Holland Brook (Essex) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

You reviewed & rejected a page I began about Holland Brook. Draft:Holland Brook (Essex). on the grounds that it lacks reliable sources but the brook is marked on the GB Ordnance Survey map and I supplied a grid reference. What other information could be necessary?

Butler26 (talk) 17:48, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello! We need significant coverage of the brook in books or newspapers to show that it is notable. You can find more information at Wikipedia:Notability (geographic features). --Cerebellum (talk) 08:38, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election voting opening soon!

Voting for the upcoming project coordinator election opens in a few hours (00:01 UTC on 15 September) and will last through 23:59 on 28 September. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. Voting is conducted using simple approval voting and questions for the candidates are welcome. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:26, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Correction to previous election announcement

Just a quick correction to the prior message about the 2022 MILHIST coordinator election! I (Hog Farm) didn't proofread the message well enough and left out a link to the election page itself in this message. The voting will occur here; sorry about the need for a second message and the inadvertent omission from the prior one. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:40, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election voting closing soon

Voting for the upcoming project coordinator election closes soon, at 23:59 on 28 September. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. Voting is conducted using simple approval voting and questions for the candidates are welcome. The voting itself is occurring here If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:13, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

WikiCup 2022 November newsletter

The 2022 WikiCup has drawn to a close with the final round going down to the wire. The 2022 champion is

• Lee Vilenski (1752 points), who won in 2020 and was runner up in both 2019 and last year. In the final round he achieved 3 FAs and 15 GAs, mostly on cue sports. He was closely followed by
• Bloom6132 (1732), who specialised in "In the news" items and DYKs, and who has reached the final round of the Cup for the past three years. Next was
• BennyOnTheLoose (1238), another cue sports enthusiast, also interested in songs, followed by
• Muboshgu (1082), an "In the news" contributor, a seasoned contestant who first took part in the Cup ten years ago. Other finalists were
• Sammi Brie (930), who scored with a featured article, good articles and DYKs on TV and radio stations,
• Kavyansh.Singh (370), who created various articles on famous Americans, including an FA on Louis H. Bean, famed for his prediction of election outcomes. Next was
• PCN02WPS (292), who scored with good articles and DYKs on sporting and other topics and
• Z1720 (25) who had DYKs on various topics including historic Canadians.

During the WikiCup, contestants achieved 37 featured articles, 349 good articles, 360 featured article reviews, 683 good article reviews and 480 In the news items, so Wikipedia has benefited greatly from the activities of WikiCup competitors. Well done everyone! All those who reached the final round will receive awards and the following special awards will be made, based on high performance in particular areas of content creation and review. 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 the overall leader in this field.

• Lee Vilenski wins the featured article prize, for a total of 6 FAs during the course of the competition and 3 in the final round.
• Kavyansh.Singh wins the featured list prize, for 3 FLs in round 2.
• Adam Cuerden wins the featured picture prize, for 39 FPs during the competition.
• Z1720 wins the featured article reviewer prize, for 35 FARs in round 4.
• Epicgenius wins the good article prize, for 32 GAs in round 1.
• SounderBruce wins the featured topic prize, for 4 FT articles in round 1.
• Lee Vilenski wins the good topic prize, for 34 GT articles in round 5.
• Sammi Brie wins the good article reviewer prize, for 71 GARs overall.
• Sammi Brie wins the Did you know prize, for 30 DYKs in round 3 and 106 overall.
• Bloom6132 wins the In the news prize, for 106 ITNs in round 5 and 289 overall.

Next year's competition will begin on 1 January and possible changes to the rules and scoring are being discussed on the discussion page. You are invited to sign up to take part in the contest; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to have a good turnout for the 2023 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners and finalists, 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. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:28, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 00:31, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Captain Wonder (Timely Comics) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Captain Wonder (Timely Comics) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Captain Wonder (Timely Comics) 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.

_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:07, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Cerebellum

Chris Troutman (talk) — is wishing you a Happy New Year! Welcome the 2024. Wishing you a happy and fruitful 2024 with good health and your wishes come true! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year! May the 2024 go well for you.

Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:User:Pratyya Ghosh/Happy New Year}} to their talk page with a Happy New Year message.

Posted at 20230101033921

Reward Board for Level 1 Vital Articles: Science

Hello! I would like to work on the Science Level 1 article up to GA status if the offer is still available. I'm a former scientist but currently in med school and on break right now, so I should have plenty of time to make some decent improvements in the next few weeks.

Thanks,

Leslie Lesliedriskill (talk) 09:28, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

{@Lesliedriskill: Hello Leslie! I fear you may be too late, because someone else has already nominated the article for a GA review, we are just waiting for the review at the moment. If the article fails the review, I will let you know and you can give it a go! --Cerebellum (talk) 10:08, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2023 WikiCup!

Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2023 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page ready for you to take part. Any questions on the scoring, rules or anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:16, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for First Battle of Tikrit

First Battle of Tikrit has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 20:32, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Improvements on draft at Afc

Hi and thanks for your suggested improvements on this draft over on AFC. I have removed the non-encyclopedic phrase and the repeated use of the word "praise". Do you suggest any other improvements? 2405:201:1006:E279:DC96:396B:B979:695E (talk) 07:43, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

WikiCup 2023 March newsletter

So ends the first round of the 2023 WikiCup. Everyone with a positive score moved on to Round 2, with 54 contestants qualifying. The top scorers in Round 1 were:

• Unlimitedlead with 1205 points, a WikiCup newcomer, led the field with two featured articles on historical figures and several featured article candidate reviews.
• Epicgenius was in second place with 789 points; a seasoned WikiCup competitor he specialises in buildings and locations in New York.
• FrB.TG was in third place with 625 points, garnered from a featured article on a filmmaker which qualified for an impressive number of bonus points.
• TheJoebro64, another WikiCup newcomer, came next with 600 points gained from two featured articles on video games.
• Iazyges was in fifth place with 532 points, from two featured articles on classical history.

The top sixteen contestants at the end of Round 1 had all scored over 300 points; these included LunaEatsTuna, Thebiguglyalien, Sammi Brie, Trainsandotherthings, Lee Vilenski, Juxlos, Unexpectedlydian, SounderBruce, Kosack, BennyOnTheLoose and PCN02WPS. It was a high-scoring start to the competition.

These contestants, like all the others, now have to start again from scratch. The first round finished on February 26. Remember that any content promoted after that date but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Some contestants made claims before the new submissions pages were set up, and they will need to resubmit them. 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 want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:36, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Smash!

You've been squished by a whale!
Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know you did something really silly.

WikiCup 2023 May newsletter

The second round of the 2023 WikiCup has now finished. Contestants needed to have scored 60 points to advance into round 3. Our top five scorers in round 2 all included a featured article among their submissions and each scored over 500 points. They were:

• Iazyges (1040) with three FAs on Byzantine emperors, and lots of bonus points.
• Unlimitedlead (847), with three FAs on ancient history, one GA and nine reviews.
• Epicgenius (636), a WikiCup veteran, with one FA on the New Amsterdam Theatre, four GAs and eleven DYKs
• BennyOnTheLoose (553), a seasoned competitor, with one FA on snooker, six GAs and seven reviews.
• FrB.TG (525), with one FA, a Lady Gaga song and a mass of bonus points.

Other notable performances were put in by Sammi Brie, Thebiguglyalien, MyCatIsAChonk, PCN02WPS, and AirshipJungleman29.

So far contestants have achieved thirteen featured articles between them, one being a joint effort, and forty-nine good articles. The judges are pleased with the thorough reviews that are being performed, and have hardly had to reject any. As we enter the third round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. 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. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:14, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Lastpass

Hi Cerebellum. I noticed you were a major contributor to the password management page and was hoping you would be willing to participate on the Lastpass page here. AmyMarchiando (talk) 20:17, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

@AmyMarchiando: Sorry Amy, I have never edited that page and I have never heard of LastPass. Maybe you could try Wikipedia:WikiProject Computing? Cerebellum (talk) 09:46, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

WikiCup 2023 July newsletter

The third round of the 2023 WikiCup has come to an end. The 16 users who made it to the fourth round had at least 175 points. Our top scorers in round 3 were:

• Thebiguglyalien, with 919 points from a featured article on Frances Cleveland as well as five good articles and many reviews,
• Unlimitedlead, with 862 points from a high-scoring featured articles on Henry II of England and numerous reviews,
• Iazyges, with 560 points from a high-scoring featured article on Tiberius III.

Contestants achieved 11 featured articles, 2 featured lists, 47 good articles, 72 featured or good article reviews, over 100 DYKs and 40 ITN appearances. As always, any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met. Please also remember that all submissions must meet core Wikipedia policies, regardless of the review process.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. 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. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:17, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Philosophy of science

Philosophy of science has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 23:16, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

August 2023 Good Article Nominations backlog drive

Good article nominations | August 2023 Backlog Drive
August 2023 Backlog Drive: On 1 August, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year. (t · c) buidhe 05:15, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations open

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election have opened. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:04, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

WikiCup 2023 September newsletter

The fourth round of the competition has finished, with anyone scoring less than 673 points being eliminated. It was a high scoring round with all but one of the contestants who progressed to the final having achieved an FA during the round. The highest scorers were

• Epicgenius, with 2173 points topping the scores, gained mainly from a featured article, 38 good articles and 9 DYKs. He was followed by
• Sammi Brie, with 1575 points, gained mainly from a featured article, 28 good articles and 50 good article reviews. Close behind was
• Thebiguglyalien, with 1535 points mainly gained from a featured article, 15 good articles, 26 good article reviews and lots of bonus points.

Between them during round 4, contestants achieved 12 featured articles, 3 featured lists, 3 featured pictures, 126 good articles, 46 DYK entries, 14 ITN entries, 67 featured article candidate reviews and 147 good article reviews. Congratulations to our eight finalists and all who participated! It was a generally high-scoring and productive round and I think we can expect a highly competitive finish to the competition.

Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them and within 24 hours of the end of the final. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.

I will be standing down as a judge after the end of the contest. I think the Cup encourages productive editors to improve their contributions to Wikipedia and I hope that someone else will step up to take over the running of the Cup. Sturmvogel 66 (talk), and Cwmhiraeth (talk)

November Articles for creation backlog drive

Hello Cerebellum:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than 2 months outstanding reviews from the current 4 months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 November 2023 through 30 November 2023.

You may find Category:AfC pending submissions by age or other categories and sorting helpful.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.

There is a backlog of over 1600 pages, so start reviewing drafts. We're looking forward to your help! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:23, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

WikiCup 2023 November newsletter

The WikiCup is a marathon rather than a sprint and all those reaching the final round have been involved in the competition for the last ten months, improving Wikipedia vastly during the process. After all this hard work, BeanieFan11 has emerged as the 2023 winner and the WikiCup Champion. The finalists this year were:-

• BeanieFan11 with 2582 points
• Thebiguglyalien with 1615 points
• Epicgenius with 1518 points
• MyCatIsAChonk with 1012 points
• BennyOnTheLoose with 974 points
• AirshipJungleman29 with 673 points
• Sammi Brie with 520 points
• Unlimitedlead with 5 points

Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether they made it to the final round or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the competition, some of whom did very well. Wikipedia has benefitted greatly from the quality creations, expansions and improvements made, and the numerous reviews performed. All those who reached the final round will win awards. The following special awards will be made based on high performance in particular areas of content creation and review. Awards will be handed out in the next few days.

• Unlimitedlead wins the featured article prize, for 7 FAs in total including 3 in round 2.
• MyCatIsAChonk wins the featured list prize, for 5 FLs in total.
• Lee Vilenski wins the featured topic prize, for a 6-article featured topic in round 4.
• MyCatIsAChonk wins the featured picture prize, for 6 FPs in total.
• BeanieFan11 wins the good article prize, for 75 GAs in total, including 61 in the final round.
• Epicgenius wins the good topic prize, for a 41-article good topic in the final round.
• LunaEatsTuna wins the GA reviewer prize, for 70 GA reviews in round 1.
• MyCatIsAChonk wins the FA reviewer prize, for 66 FA reviews in the final round.
• Epicgenius wins the DYK prize, for 49 did you know articles in total.
• Muboshgu wins the ITN prize, for 46 in the news articles in total.

The WikiCup has run every year since 2007. With the 2023 contest now concluded, I will be standing down as a judge due to real life commitments, so I hope that another editor will take over running the competition. Please get in touch if you are interested. Next year's competition will hopefully begin on 1 January 2024. You are invited to sign up to participate in the contest; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors. It only remains to congratulate our worthy winners once again and thank all participants for their involvement! (If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.) Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:51, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Carlos Scharff

Peer review for Scharff is active. Sending a notification here as I am not sure if replying to an archived review would give send you a notification Arawoke (talk) 20:19, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Hey Arawoke! I love what you are doing with these rubber room articles. It looks like right now you have three different processes open: did you know, good article nomination, and peer review. Typically we would only do one of those at a time. If you would like, I can help you choose one to keep open and close the others. Cerebellum (talk) 10:39, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

I think the most important of the processes would be the GAN followed by the DYK. The article could probably use a bit of feedback improvements. It is a fairly in depth article at the moment however there hasn’t been a lot of community involvement regarding editing. Arawoke (talk) 12:35, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

@Arawoke: You are right, the article is very in-depth and I think it has a good shot at GA. I guess it can't hurt to leave the DYK and GAN nominations both open, so my recommendation is to follow these instructions to close the peer review. I will warn you though, it can take a couple of months for someone to review the article at GAN! Don't get discouraged! --Cerebellum (talk) 10:16, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:26, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Request on 10:42:44, 10 December 2023 for assistance on AfC submission by Coconut257!

• Coconut257! (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Kinneret Day School (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi, I need assistance with publishing this article. The subject matter, Kinneret Day School, meets (in my opinion) the notability, significant coveage, and reliable source guidelines required by Wikipedia. This independent private school has had numerous newspaper articles written about it over many decades (I included a few in the reference section), as well an actual encyclopedia entry (also referenced). The school is notable due to the fact it was established by a political movement (the Irsrael Labor Party) and had involvement from a future Prime Minister. In regard to the Wiki guidelines for elementary/middle school notability, the fact that this is an independepent school, with no regional organization to roll into, creates the need for its own Wikipedia entry. It is also unlike other schools given the history I mentioned before. Please advise if there's anything else I can do to have this article published - there are more sources out there, but I'll have to take the time to organize them. I thought that by showing multiple newspapers and an encyclopedia entry, that would be enough.

Coconut257! (talk) 10:42, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

@Coconut257!: Hey there, you make a good point about there being no regional organization to roll this article into. I think you are correct. If you resubmit the article, I will accept it. --Cerebellum (talk) 10:45, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Wonderful, will resubmit now! Coconut257! (talk) 10:48, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Satish Chandra Sharma (politician)

Dear Cerebellum,Hello,can you accept this Draft:Satish Chandra Sharma (politician) at this time. 😊~~ αvírαm|(tαlk) 13:10, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Andrea Diprè

I removed the mentions of pornographic actor from the page and just submitted for a review now. Could you please be kind enough to have a look now? Also, his name should be "Andrea Diprè" and not "Andrea Dipre" because most references mentions his surname with the accent when you search in Google with "Andrea Diprè"'. Thank you very much. 103.1.205.90 (talk) 08:17, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Sure! Done. --Cerebellum (talk) 22:31, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Draft: William John Titus Bishop

Good Morning @Cerebellum,

I hope you are well. Many thanks for your recent review of Draft:William John Titus Bishop! Are you able to provide any more detailed feedback on how to improve the article?

All my Love, @Topg1985

Topg1985 (talk) 10:51, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

@Topg1985: First, remove unreliable sources such as musicbrainz, allmusic, and msn. Second, can you provide links to the coverage of this artist in The Guardian and Pitchfork? The article claims he was covered in those publications but there are no links that I can find. If there are really reviews of his work in The Guardian and Pitchfork, he is almost certainly notable. --Cerebellum (talk) 11:26, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Bassetlaw Bulldogs Rugby League Football Club

Hi. Thanks for taking the time to read my hard work. I thought - given previous feedback from two reviewers - that we had established notability and that the sourcing had been fixed, so I am really disappointed that you concluded that this article sounds more like an advert.

The club in question has a number of notable world firsts, all referenced with reliable secondary sources. I would imagine the authors of these articles (including the Press Office of a National Governing Body of a World Sport, several journalists and a Charity Trustee) will be upset to hear this! Forgive me if I am wrong, but perhaps you are not familiar with the sport of Rugby League and in particular the significance of the development of the sport in England beyond the heartland areas on the North of England. It is this context that makes the achievements of this club far more notable than many.

Would you be kind enough to tell me which sources need to be removed, and which parts of the article are perceived to sound like advertising, rather than being factual? Can you be more specific about the phrases you are not keen about, so I can remove them?

Thanks in advance for your positive support. Hovispride (talk) 15:44, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

@Hovispride: The biggest issue is the sentence Bassetlaw Bulldogs RLFC is unique in that, despite its relatively young age, it has provided a number of firsts in the game of rugby league. This is sourced to Focus on Young People in Bassetlaw, which is a sponsor of the team so is not an independent source. I recommend removing that sentence and resubmitting. --Cerebellum (talk) 22:27, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Cerebellum. Thank you very much for the advice. I have removed the link and reframed the statement so it flows with the achievements/events listed below it. Hopefully that's ok? Would you be happy with the rest of the submission now? If so, I would very much appreciate you signing it off for me. Thanks. Hovispride (talk) 08:20, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

@Hovispride: I am unsure. Do any other junior teams in the Midlands League have articles? --Cerebellum (talk) 10:11, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi. Most will struggle to be notable as they have not been part of the historical firsts that this club has provided and, therefore, that’s what sets this club aside. Hovispride (talk) 10:35, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Ok, personally I do not think it is notable but I will leave the review open so another editor can make the call. As you mentioned, I don't know anything about rugby league. --Cerebellum (talk) 10:38, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

So, in terms of notability, these are the other clubs in the Midlands whom have managed to get an article live:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_East_Worcestershire_Ravens -Not as well referenced and certainly not as notable in terms of firsts

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telford_Raiders - Nothing notable in terms of notable firsts, unlike Bassetlaw Bulldogs

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nottingham_Outlaws_(rugby_league_team) - More back-history, but again, not the notable firsts of Bassetlaw Bulldogs

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leamington_Royals - No more notable than this article, and less-well referenced, IMO

I appreciate you don't know much about rugby league and it is frustrating that, with every submission, we get back to the same three points. One reviewer agrees it is notable, another not, another one not sure. I guess I would question - within any sport - why a club who played in the first ever fixture of a National Development League (referenced by the sport's governing body), became the first club from outside its established heartlands to play a girls fixture in the National League (referenced by the sport's governing body), was the first team in the County fo Nottinghamshire to launch an Over 35s Masters team and became the first club to win an inaugural regional award for excellence wouldn't be notable.

It seems we are frustratingly close with this one and my fear is that letting someone else have a look will just continue the seemingly endless cycle of chopping and changing to get back to where we started. I appreciate this is a tough one, but would love someone to bite the bullet and say yes!

Many thanks indeed. Hovispride (talk) 11:08, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Ok, fair enough. Accepted. --Cerebellum (talk) 12:08, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much. I appreciate the rigour and the keenness to understand the context of a relatively unknown topic and the help the Rugby League Wiki Space develop further. Best wishes. Hovispride (talk) 12:59, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Draft: Central Kanuri

Hi Cerebellum I forgot to add the source for the Kwayam dialect claim. It's from Ethnologue I now added it, you can check and verify it yourself now. I will resubmit that draft again this time and hopefully it will be accepted. 2600:1700:2F01:CDC0:DDF1:72AB:7BC7:E9F8 (talk) 15:17, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

I don't see it :( It's possible I don't understand how to use ethnologue. The only thing I see on that page is Yerwa Kanuri is a language of wider communication that originated in Nigeria, Cameroon, Chad, and Niger. It belongs to the Nilo-Saharan language family. Direct evidence is lacking, but the language is thought to be used as a first language by all in the ethnic community. It is used as a language of instruction in education. --Cerebellum (talk) 18:01, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Oh you aren't subscribed to Ethnologue that's why you can't view it here I'll quote you what the website says. 2600:1700:2F01:CDC0:DDF1:72AB:7BC7:E9F8 (talk) 18:34, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Are you able to access Ethnologue? Can you view population estimates?. 2600:1700:2F01:CDC0:DDF1:72AB:7BC7:E9F8 (talk) 18:35, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

"Kwayam dialect not understood by other Kanuri (Lukas 1937). Maiduguri dialect mutually intelligible." The part of Maiduguri dialect named after Maiduguri is the one i added without a source for that but the dialect is named after the town of Maiduguri in Northeast Nigeria. 2600:1700:2F01:CDC0:DDF1:72AB:7BC7:E9F8 (talk) 18:38, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Ok, that's fine. There is one other problem with the article, the copyvio report shows that some text is copied from here. If you fix that I will accept :) --Cerebellum (talk) 18:41, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

It's fixed now you can check it. 2600:1700:2F01:CDC0:DDF1:72AB:7BC7:E9F8 (talk) 19:37, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Can you also check my draft for Manga Kanuri and see if it is good to be accepted or can you accept it if you think it is a Good Wikipedia article. [[24]] 2600:1700:2F01:CDC0:DDF1:72AB:7BC7:E9F8 (talk) 01:57, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Sure, done. --Cerebellum (talk) 10:22, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello so I just found the right source I meant to cite for the claim about the second paragraph for Tumari Kanuri I just submitted now. If you would like to check here it is [[25]] 2600:1700:2F01:CDC0:D89D:AE01:B955:D4CD (talk) 15:48, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Sure, looks good. --Cerebellum (talk) 17:32, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

And also for Bilma Kanuri make sure to check that out and see if it is good for a Wikipedia article. [[26]]. Thank you. 2600:1700:2F01:CDC0:D89D:AE01:B955:D4CD (talk) 23:30, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Done. --Cerebellum (talk) 11:07, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Request to review a draft article

Hi can you help me with a review Draft:Mohamed Aarab Some officials asked to rephrase the article, and I did so and added reliable and independent Arab sources, but I am still waiting for a response. Can you review it? Chamosuhdod (talk) 15:40, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Voting for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2023 is now open!

Voting is now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2023! The the top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki . Cast your votes vote here and here respectively. Voting closes at 23:59 on 30 December 2023. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. Hawkeye7 (talk · contribs) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:55, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Request a review

Hi can you review Draft:Torres Castle (Al Hoceima) Can you review it and correct the grammatical errors if there are any Ali Maalouf (talk) 21:30, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Draft Bagirmi Fulfulde

Hi Cerebellum can you review my draft for Bagirmi Fulfulde and see if it is ready to be accepted as a Wikipedia article, here it is. Thank you. [[27]] 2600:1700:2F01:CDC0:D89D:AE01:B955:D4CD (talk) 22:04, 24 December 2023 (UTC) Looks good! Great job on these language articles. --Cerebellum (talk) 10:18, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Draft: Tharu languages

Hello can you review my drafts for Dangaura, Kathariya, Rana, and Chitwania Tharu. Here they are. Thank you. [[28]] [[29]] [[30]] [[31]] 2600:1700:2F01:CDC0:D89D:AE01:B955:D4CD (talk) 23:49, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Also can you check my draft for the Sonha language. Thank You. [[32]] 2600:1700:2F01:CDC0:D89D:AE01:B955:D4CD (talk) 01:00, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello Cerebellum I am the IP address that sent you this message last month requesting that you review the drafts for the Tharu languages. Anyways another kind user added more sources for the Dangaura Tharu and also the Chitwania Tharu draft has many sources that are reliable. I have resubmitted them. Please review these two drafts if you have time. Thank You. Test name please ignore24 (talk) 23:19, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Draft: Eastern Magar & Western Magar

Hi I also created the drafts for Eastern and Western Magar varieties also make sure to check those out as well. Thank you. [[33]] [[34]] 2600:1700:2F01:CDC0:D89D:AE01:B955:D4CD (talk) 03:42, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Have you thought about creating a Wikipedia account? That would allow you to create the articles on your own without having to go through AfC. I think you are skilled enough now that you don't need to use AfC. --Cerebellum (talk) 10:27, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Whats AFC? Is that Articles for Creation?. Also yes i did create my account. 2600:1700:2F01:CDC0:CDB:CEB6:91A7:23BB (talk) 14:24, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

So how well are these articles?. 2600:1700:2F01:CDC0:CDB:CEB6:91A7:23BB (talk) 14:25, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

So i went to the wikipedia articles instrcutions for creating articles without the afc and it is confusing. They also said users need to have a lot of edits to be able to create an article if im not mistaken. Test name please ignore24 (talk) 14:38, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi cerebellum can you please take a look at my drafts and see if they are ready to be accepted please. Thank you. 2600:1700:2F01:CDC0:CDB:CEB6:91A7:23BB (talk) 05:41, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

I have not looked at them, I don't think it's a good idea for me to review all of your articles. It is better for someone else to review them since they can catch things that I will miss. As for creating an account, yes you do need a few edits to create articles. But in your case a lot of the articles you want to create already exist as redirects, so it is not really creating a new article from scratch. You can just go to the redirect page and edit it to add your content. For example, if you go to the Western Magar redirect page, you can click edit and add the information you want. --Cerebellum (talk) 10:41, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Robert Mcleonnon or Anomiebot added those redirects they were not there I am trying to add these articles to attach them to the main Tharu languages articles same with Magar. 2600:1700:2F01:CDC0:CDB:CEB6:91A7:23BB (talk) 12:57, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

I dont understand you reviewed my drafts perfectly for Fula and Kanuri yet you can't review them for these easy languages with information from Ethnologue and two other sources cited?. 2600:1700:2F01:CDC0:CDB:CEB6:91A7:23BB (talk) 13:12, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

User:2600:1700:2F01:CDC0:CDB:CEB6:91A7:23BB - I did not create the redirects to which you refer. I tagged the redirects. They were already there. Cerebellum has only pointed one reason to create an account. There are others. Your IP address shifts, and it is often impossible to maintain a communication with an IP address. Also, many editors ignore unregistered editors. You may think that you have some advantages as an unregistered editor, but those are myths. There are several reasons to create an account, including that it better maintains privacy. Robert McClenon (talk) 07:01, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

OK I will use this account till Cerebellum reviews my drafts and if I want to make any other drafts in the future. Test name please ignore24 (talk) 15:17, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Quite right. As for your articles I am currently reviewing some of the older drafts in the queue, if no one else reviews your drafts in two weeks I will take a look at them. --Cerebellum (talk) 10:12, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

I have also resubmitted the draft for Eastern Magar, I would really appreciate it if you had a look at that as well. [[35]] Test name please ignore24 (talk) 23:27, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Declining of SRO GT4

Hello Cerebellum, I saw that you declined Draft:SRO GT4 on the reason that an article on the subject already exists (GT4 European Series).

However, you might not have seen on the talk page for GT4 European Series it was discussed to create the SRO GT4 article for the class itself, separate from the championship. (as the cars are used in many other championships). So I feel like the reason for the article being declined isn't entirely valid

(obviously the GT4 european series article would be changed to no longer hold double information in case the SRO GT4 is published) Robin tales fighter (talk) 12:51, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Okay, no problem. If you resubmit the article I will approve it. --Cerebellum (talk) 13:08, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Alright, I've resubmitted it now Robin tales fighter (talk) 11:26, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

List of songs recorded by Fey

Hello, I saw you declined my submission because you consider it a duplicate. The article I'm trying to submit is a list of all songs recorded by Fey, which is different from the artist discography that only lists albums, EPs, singles, etc.

As far as I'm concerned, most artists have both kind of articles, sometimes even a separate article for albums discography and singles discography, and I didn't know there was any restriction due to them being considered the same topic. To name a few:

- Shakira discography / List of songs recorded by Shakira

- Beyoncé discography / List of songs recorded by Beyoncé

- Britney Spears discography / List of songs recorded by Britney Spears

- Luis Miguel discography / List of songs recorded by Luis Miguel

Relatively newer acts have both kind of articles as well, even if they don't have a lot of material yet, for example Olivia Rodrigo discography and List of songs recorded by Olivia Rodrigo.

Even most navigation templates for musical artists list Discography and Songs (which directs to their "List of songs recorded by [artist]") separately.

Pokémon Spears (talk) 05:57, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Ok, I accepted it. --Cerebellum (talk) 10:23, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2024 WikiCup!

Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2024 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page ready for you to take part. Any questions on the scoring, rules or anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close on 31 January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email), Epicgenius (talk · contribs · email), and Frostly (talk · contribs · email). 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) 00:21, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Operation Unokat FAC

Operation Unokat which you reviewed to GA is undergoing Featured Article review here: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Operation_Unokat/archive1

If you fancy giving it a look I'd appreciate it. Lankyant (talk) 12:09, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Michael Liani's article

Thanks for reviewing Michael’s article. Can you advise me on the sentences that need to be edited/removed, so that the article will be written from a neutral point of view and the “paid contributions” template can be removed?Adig-pt (talk) 15:14, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

I removed it, the article is written in a neutral fashion. --Cerebellum (talk) 10:59, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

🙏🙏🙏 Adig-pt (talk) 15:33, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

WikiCup 2024 February newsletter

The 2024 WikiCup is off to a flying start, with 135 participants. This is the largest number of participants we have seen since 2017.

Our current leader is newcomer Generalissima (submissions), who has one FA on John Littlejohn (preacher) and 10 GAs and 12 DYKs mostly on New Zealand coinage and Inuit figures. Here are some more noteworthy scorers:

• AirshipJungleman29 (submissions), with one FA on Hö'elün, two GAs on Mongolia-related articles, and two DYKs;
• Vami_IV (submissions), with one FA on Doom (2016 video game), one GA on Boundary Fire (2017), and 11 reviews;
• MaranoFan (submissions), with one FA on Holidays (Meghan Trainor song), a nine-article FT on 30 (album), and two DYKs;
• Skyshifter (submissions), with one FA on OneShot and one DYK;
• Sammi Brie (submissions), with five GAs and five DYKs on television and radio stations;
• voorts (submissions) and Elli (submissions), both with one FA and one DYK each.

As a reminder, competitors may submit work for the first round until 23:59 (UTC) on 27 February, and the second round starts 1 March. Remember that only the top 64 scoring competitors will make it through to the second round; currently, competitors need at least 15 points to progress. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAN, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, 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) 17:57, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

Human history

Are you still planning to take this to GA? I'm no expert, but I think it has a good chance of passing. QuicoleJR (talk) 18:49, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

No I don't think so! Thank you for asking. --Cerebellum (talk) 12:01, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi Cerebellum, I'm sorry to hear that you changed your plans about bringing Human history to GA status. It would be great to have this level 1 vital article as a GA and it seems that a lot of work has already gone into the preparation. I'm currently considering taking on this task myself. I haven't fully decided and it would take me a while to familiarize myself with the overview sources. As you see it, are there any major problems to be addressed or issues to be investigated before a GA nomination?

If you haven't fully dismissed the idea of getting this article to GA status, we could also consider working together in case you are interested. Phlsph7 (talk) 07:46, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Hey Phlsph7! I've seen you work and I'm confident I could never do what you do. I wish I had a tenth of your patience and capacity for dealing with annoying reviewers. But sure, it would be an honor to work with you on the article if you decide to take it on. The remaining issues are those listed here. I am a teacher and my last day of school is May 31st, so I could start then if you would like to. --Cerebellum (talk) 09:31, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words and I agree, dealing with some reviewer can indeed be challenging. I'm good at researching things but you probably have a more indepth background knowledge on the topic than me.

The first step would probably be to figure out what changes are required but there is no rush in getting things done. The discussion you linked contains various helpful points. I have some putative ideas about more changes, for which it might be good to get some feedback before I dive more deeply into those subjects. Feel free to push back on any of them since this is more me trying to get a grip on the project than well-researched proposals.

• As I mentioned during the peer review, I think it might be a good idea to give some very basic information about the academic study of human history, such as mentioning research methods and periodizations, not so much to give an indepth explanation but to make the reader aware of those issues. This could be done by adding a short section (maybe 3 paragraphs to keep the overall article length at bay) at the end, which I could get started with an initial draft.
• I think the last lead paragraph needs some work. Maybe we can focus more on historical events and cover the topic of the first two sentences in the new section just mentioned.
• The text in the section "Late modern period (c. 1800 CE – present)" could be further subdivided into something like "Long 19th century" and "World wars" since having only "Contemporary history (c. 1945 CE – present)" as the only subsection seems odd.
• The first two sections are subdivided by themes while the second two sections are divided by regions. Is there a reason why the second two sections are not divided by themes as well? Rewritting them along the lines of themes could be a lot of work and they seem to be well-written as they are but it might be good to clarify this point nonetheless.

Phlsph7 (talk) 11:43, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

I agree with all of your points, would love it if you could help write the "metahistory" section! For the last bullet, I think there are advantages and disadvantages to switching those sections to themes. Advantages:

• For an article of this scope, big themes are more appropriate than regional details.
• Matches the rest of the article
• Shows connections between regions

Disadvantages:

• Themes are arbitrary constructs, don't capture the messiness of history.
• Some events won't fit in any theme. Could end up being a disorganized mishmash.
• The Americas and Oceania were isolated from Afro-Eurasia until recently, it kind of makes sense to treat them separately.

I could go either way. If we want to rewrite as themes there's a great book that does something similar, Maps of Time. It treats regional differences as unimportant and focuses on means of production (hunter-gatherer, agrarian, industrial) as the overarching framework. --Cerebellum (talk) 16:29, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

While there are some benefits to the theme-based approach, there are also potential drawbacks. I'm not sure that there is a strong enough reason to justify a radical reorganization, at least not for the GA level. I haven't read Maps of Time specifically, but I find Big History in general fascinating.

Besides the draft of the new section, another thing to do would be to address the remaining suggestions at the pre-GA feedback and possibly ask for more suggestions there. I saw that the multi-volume "Encyclopedia of World History" by Ackermann et al. has a periodization similar to our article, with one volume for each main period. Each volume has a short section called "Major Themes" which acts as a summary. Going through these summaries could be quite useful to make sure that all the main points are covered.

These steps could keep us busy for a while but I'm also open to different ideas. Since you have already done a lot to get this article into shape and are currently occupied, I've no problem if it's me doing more of the heavy lifting for these steps. I will probably get started with a draft of the new section and let you know once I have a basic version ready. Phlsph7 (talk) 11:59, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Sounds good! --Cerebellum (talk) 15:45, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

I have a first draft ready at User:Phlsph7/Human history - Academic research and I'm curious to hear what your thoughts are. It still needs some work on the details, like wikilinks. I'm not sure about the title; alternatives could be "Academic study" and "Field of inquiry". Feel free to edit the draft directly if you have improvement ideas. Phlsph7 (talk) 08:23, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

I love it! "Academic research" is a good title. This will free us up to remove the periodization stuff from the lead. One unrelated question I have for you - what do you think about the reviewer's suggestion here that I should cut some non-Western info to add more on modern European history? Search "Prussia" to find the comment. That really threw me because I disagree but I'm not sure how to adjudicate disagreements over the relative importance of different topics. --Cerebellum (talk) 13:56, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

I wonder if we could use population as a yardstick. Asian population in 1800 was 638 million according to Cambridge World History, European population was 188 million. --Cerebellum (talk) 14:08, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback, I'll do some more polishing and I hope to add it soon.

The issue you mention is indeed tricky and the tension between Eurocentrism vs trying to right great wrongs adds an additional challenge. As I read it, the main suggestions are to mention the partitions of Poland, the formation of Prussia, and the growth in power for the UK. I haven't done a proper research on this, but according my half-knowledge, this could be achieved by adding a sentence on the rise of nation-states and mention France, Spain, England, and Prussia as examples. Maybe we could add a footnote that the partitions of Poland were a side-effect of this general development. If this roughly checks out with the sources then we wouldn't need an extra paragraph. But I'm not sure if that would satisfy the reviewer.

The alternative would be to resort to overview sources to decide the relative weight that should be given to the different regions and events in those regions.

By the way, we should probably add one sentence about the Enlightenment to this subsection. Phlsph7 (talk) 16:48, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Ok, makes sense. I can add that stuff once I'm done with school. --Cerebellum (talk) 23:10, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

@Phlsph7: I had some time this weekend so I revised the early modern section, hopefully it is an improvement. Enlightenment and Prussia are in there now, partition of Poland was already linked in the sentence on Russia. I love the changes you've been making! Looks great. --Cerebellum (talk) 11:09, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

The new version sounds good and addresses several of the concerns from the pre-GA review. I'm currently going through the article section by section to copyedit and respond to the points that stand out to me. Phlsph7 (talk) 17:36, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Ok great! --Cerebellum (talk) 11:22, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

I wanted to check whether you have any remaining non-trivial changes planned for the article. I think we have implemented most of the changes discussed earlier and responded to the outstanding concerns raised at the pre-GA review. Phlsph7 (talk) 08:14, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Nope I'm happy with everything :) --Cerebellum (talk) 09:54, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Great. In that case, we could go ahead with the nomination. It may be a while before a reviewer picks it up so if we become aware of further issues before the review, there is probably time to fix them. Phlsph7 (talk) 11:17, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Sounds good! You can do the honors. A question for my own edification: what is the advantage of {{harvnb}} over {{sfn}}? --Cerebellum (talk) 11:23, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Oh also, some books in the bibliography have page numbers there, for example Abernethy and Abulafia. Is that intentional? --Cerebellum (talk) 11:26, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Done. The main difference between harvnb and sfn is how they are bundled. For sfn, you have to use the sfnm template, which puts all citations in a single line. This can get very confusing if there are many citations and if citations contain quotes, like some of ours do. The harvnb template can be used in combination with the multiref template, which has the advantage of putting each bundled citation in a separate line. As an example, the first is sfnm, the second is multiref-harvnb:

I tried to remove all the page numbers from the books in the Bibliography-section. For journals, we probably want to keep the page numbers since they identify where in the journal the cited article is found. Phlsph7 (talk) 12:20, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

References

References

• Bulliet, Richard; Crossley, Pamela; Headrick, Daniel; Hirsch, Steven; Johnson, Lyman; Northrup, David (2015a). The Earth and Its Peoples: A Global History. Vol. 1 (6th ed.). Cengage Learning. ISBN 978-1-285-44567-0. Archived from the original on 29 April 2024. Retrieved 25 August 2022.
• Christian, David (2011) [2004]. Maps of Time: An Introduction to Big History. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-27144-9. Archived from the original on 19 December 2023. Retrieved 16 December 2023.

Great, you're the best! Thank you for the explanation on the templates. --Cerebellum (talk) 18:47, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

@Phlsph7: I'll be out of town and offline from today until the 27th, I can help with the GAN once I get back if the reviewer has any more comments for us. Not that you need help. Sorry about the unfortunate turn this nomination has taken. --Cerebellum (talk) 15:17, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. Given all the feedback the article got before the nomination, I surely didn't expect this unfortunate turn. I hope you enjoy your short wikibreak and I fully understand if you prefer to take a longer wikibreak from the GA. Phlsph7 (talk) 17:03, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Combat Aviation Brigade, 10th Mountain Division

Combat Aviation Brigade, 10th Mountain Division has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Hog Farm _Talk 13:45, 16 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) 21:29, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Constitution of Carthage

Has an undefined harv reference "Sznycer 1989". DuncanHill (talk) 20:18, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Ca' Morta tomb

Has loads of undefined references, I do not see how it could be rated B. Frankly I don't think you should be accepting submissions with so many undefined references. DuncanHill (talk) 20:31, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I'll make sure to check for undefined references when I'm reviewing. --Cerebellum (talk) 23:49, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, I find User:Trappist the monk/HarvErrors.js very helpful. DuncanHill (talk) 00:09, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Approach to history

Going to try to take this up here to start with. If you don't mind discussing here, I encourage @Phlsph7 to join in as well. I'd like to hear your thoughts on this since I think this is primarily an issue of interpersonal collaboration.

I'm worried neither of you fully appreciate what I'm trying to critique over at talk:human history. I've pointed out numerous issues with periodization, article structure, haphazard selection of references and now I've gotten what in my view is a response[36] that seems like you're trying to shut me down with technicalities. Your approach seems from my perspective like you're forcing us into a fixloop rather than acknowledging the systemic issues.

What worries me is that it seems that you guys have gone into this topic with your own preconceived notions that you're not aware of, or don't want to admit. From our discussions so far, and by looking into the editing history of the article, it seems that you guys have no consistent approach to how you use sources. You seem to be citing sources by the pound without actually reading them properly, and not discriminating good sources from mediocre or outright bad ones. I seriously doubt that any article could cite almost over 260 individual text sources (well over 300 if we count the chapters in Cambridge individually) without losing cohesion.

I just went through the first paragraph of "Academic research", and I can very clearly that it's been written with a lot of preconceived notions that aren't borne out by any of the refs. The term "world history" isn't used by "some" historians in a "narrow sense" as a discipline, but quite clearly in all the sources you've cited. Not one of the sources claim that "human history" and "world history" are somehow synonymous and I'm assuming that simply your own personal take on what you think "history" means.

I'm very interested in improving the article, both because it's our most top-level history article and because it very much sets the standard English Wikipedia's approach to periodization overall. You both are clearly well-motivated and are also interested in the topic so it's not like I'm trying to put you off working on it. If that were the case, I would have just plastered the article with tags and insisted you fixed it yourselves. As it stands, I could easily justify tagging the article with some combination of WP:OR, WP:UNDUE and WP:POV, either the whole article or tons of individual statements. But rather than plaster the article, and in the middle of GA process, I'm trying to get you guys on board on reworking the article. Peter ^Isotalo 11:34, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, I do worry that we're just debating and not collaborating. I'm not sure how to move forward in a more constructive way. Where I am coming from is that I am sick of working on the article, I just want to get this GAN over with so I can move on to something else. I'm sorry that it feels like we are trying to shut you down. --Cerebellum (talk) 11:42, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

I can sympathize with the frustration and I just want to stress that I did not pick the end of a GAN process deliberately. I've been troubled for years about English Wikipedia disregarding history as an academic discipline. As you can see, I started this process quite long ago over at Talk:Late modern period#Sources for the term and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject History#Modernity articles are a hot mess. I've simply followed the problems up the hierarchy of history articles, and this one is basically the pinnacle of the pyramid. Content in this article is likely to have a huge impact to more specific history article further down the trough. The timing with the well-advanced GAN is a coincidence.

So to I understand your perspective here, what is it that you're sick of regarding the article? Is it the disagreements I'm bringing up, that the GAN is taking a long time, just general fatigue with the topic itself? Peter ^Isotalo 16:21, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I can see that you have been pursuing this issue for a long time. You are probably frustrated as well. I think I have taken the human history article as far as I can. I don't have the skills, knowledge, or desire to improve it anymore, so I should probably step back and let others take over. I'm sorry I was rude on the talk page this morning. I will stop arguing with you on there and let you do whatever you want with the article :) (Not suggesting I own it or that other editors don't have a say!) --Cerebellum (talk) 20:51, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Well, I just want to commend you for working on the article for so long. It's an extremely important article in the scheme of things and I think you did a good deed just by taking it on.

I'm going to try to drum up more interest in the article and also try to see what I can do about raising the perspective of the article to a higher level. And I do think you have done a lot of good work on it, especially considering how ambitious such a project is in the practice. It's probably one of the most difficult article topics I've seen anyone take on so wholeheartedly.

It's never a bad idea to take a break from something, especially if you feel fed up with it. ❤️ If you feel like changing your mind, please don't hesitate to return to work on the article. Peter ^Isotalo 22:18, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm sorry to hear about your exhaustion with the article. Now that I've become more involved with it, I know very well what you mean. You have already done a lot for this article, so your temporary or permanent break from it and the GA review is well-earned. If you change your mind, your input would be welcome anytime. Phlsph7 (talk) 07:07, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Collaboration is usually more productive than working against one another, so I appreciate the offer. One difficulty may be that our views seem to be somewhat apart. The barrier for WP:TNT is very high and I haven't found sufficiently strong reasons in your criticisms so far to justify it. For example, the references you tagged as unreliable seem to follow the requirements of WP:RS. That's not to say that there are no better sources but perfection is not required. The timing of the TNT suggestion is also not ideal, as we would have to withdraw from a promising GA review.

If you are interested in restructuring the article, Cerebellum and I considered a less extreme proposal. The idea is to organize the post-classical and early modern sections thematically rather than by regions (search "The first two sections are subdivided by themes" on this talk page). This is not exactly what you suggest but many of your concerns could be addressed in the process, including the ones about sourcing and cohesion. I'm interested to hear what you think about this idea and I could give you some more details if you feel that this could improve the article. It could be done after the GA review.

The section "Academic research" was mostly written by me, so whatever preconceived notions it has would be my fault. World history can mean what happened (a series of events, as in "the invention of paper altered the course of world history") or the study of what happened (an academic discipline, as in "world history examines the interconnectedness of different regions"). The first sense would be human history. That's what the clause about synonyms gets at. I would have to check the references to see which one covers it. According to some definitions, world history is not the study of what happened but one approach among others to the study of what happened (in contrast, for example to global history). That's the narrow sense. Mentioning the narrow sense was explicitly requested during the GA review, see Talk:Human_history/GA2#Academic_research for the discussion and quotes. Phlsph7 (talk) 07:14, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

I didn't post here to discuss specific points of the article, but rather the general approach to it. I'll comment on the specific points there. I just want to stress that I believe you have not represented sources correctly. I'll address this in the article instead of here.

I'm not going to get into a discussion about pausing my concerns regarding article quality in order to make a quality-assurance process go smoother. I feel you're being somewhat condescending in that regard. Whether the article gets a checkmark or not is up to the reviewer, not me, and I'm not going to involve myself in the GAN. But I'm also not going to moderate my criticism just because of an ongoing quality-assurance procedure.

Again, the timing is unfortunate, but in a choice between article quality and decorum, I'm going to prioritize article quality. I believe the issues I'm taking up are serious and that the high-level status of the article is affecting other important articles within a field that I'm very passionate about. Peter ^Isotalo 11:39, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Banners

Regarding this edit, please could you try to make sure that project banners go inside the banner shell. The AFCH script does not behave very well, so you may need to review edits made by that script. Also the Italy banner was duplicated. Thanks — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:05, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Sure! I will add it to my list of things to check. --Cerebellum (talk) 10:46, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Human history

The article Human history you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Human history for comments about the article, and Talk:Human history/GA2 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of AirshipJungleman29 -- ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:44, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm happy that it worked out despite the difficulties along the way. In case you feel like pouring a little bit more work into the article, there is still the question about a Did you know nomination. I've prepared the following suggestions. I would be curious about your thoughts and I'm also open to other ideas.

• Did you know that the agricultural and industrial revolutions are key turning points in human history?
• Did you know that in early human history, humans migrated out of Africa and populated most of the Earth during the Last Ice Age?
• Did you know that for most of human history, children did not have access to public education?

References

• Cajani, Luigi (2013). "Periodization". In Bentley, Jerry H. (ed.). The Oxford Handbook of World History. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-968606-3.
• Christian, David (2008). This Fleeting World: A Short History of Humanity. Berkshire Publishing. ISBN 978-1-933782-04-1.
• Christian, David, ed. (2015). Introducing World History, to 10,000 BCE. The Cambridge World History. Vol. 1. Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139194662. ISBN 978-0-521-76333-2. Archived from the original on 26 January 2023. Retrieved 26 January 2023.
• Pollack, Henry (2010). A World Without Ice. Penguin. ISBN 978-1-101-52485-5.
• Scott, William; Vare, Paul (2020). Learning, Environment and Sustainable Development: A History of Ideas. Routledge. ISBN 978-1-000-20802-3. Archived from the original on 10 December 2023. Retrieved 3 May 2023.

Phlsph7 (talk) 11:41, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

@Phlsph7 Those are great! #1 is my favorite. Cerebellum (talk) 11:46, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look. I started the nomination at Template:Did you know nominations/Human history. Phlsph7 (talk) 12:04, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Barbecue (G.I. Joe).jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Barbecue (G.I. Joe).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:05, 23 August 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) 03:11, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Scream season 1

Hello, Cerebellum. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Scream season 1, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 09:06, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Voting for coordinators is now open!

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election have opened. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:40, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Voting for WikiProject Military history coordinators is now open!

Voting for WikiProject Military history coordinators is now open! A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. Register your vote here by 23:59 UTC on 29 September! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:34, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Scream season 1

Hello, Cerebellum. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Scream season 1".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:18, 28 September 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) 19:22, 23 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) 13:48, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Reminder to participate in Wikipedia research

Hello,

I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.

Take the survey here.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 00:18, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Nominations now open for the WikiProject Military history newcomer of the year and military historian of the year

Nominations now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2024! The the top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki. Nominations are open here and here respectively. The nomination period closes at 23:59 on 30 November 2024 when voting begins. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. MediaWiki message delivery via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:20, 16 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) 00:12, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Voting is now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards

Voting is now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2024! The top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki. Cast your votes here and here respectively. Voting closes at 23:59 on 30 December 2024. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. MediaWiki message delivery via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:59, 29 November 2024 (UTC)