User talk:Kingsif

Archives (Index)

1

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

This editor is a Most Pluperfect Labutnum and is entitled to display this Book of Knowledge with Coffee Cup Stain, Cigarette Burn, Chewed Broken Pencil, Sticky Note, and Bookmark.

Your GA nomination of Glee: The Music, The Christmas Album

The article Glee: The Music, The Christmas Album you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Glee: The Music, The Christmas Album 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. eviolite (talk) 15:45, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Annual report

Whenever you can, do the rest of the write-ups you can claimed (you can also remove yours from George VI if you want, it's only there because he wound up split from his daughter). igordebraga ≠ 18:23, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

"Good" news: you can recycle most of what you wrote for this week's #1 on the annual report! (thought of copy-pasting myself, but who knows if you want to change something?) igordebraga ≠ 03:33, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

@Igordebraga: Go for it (though change the "4 days" to two) - I'd probably also make a note about it being such a late entry, most of those views came in what was 2022 in parts of the world! And how much of an impact White's death clearly had to rack up so many in mere hours. Kingsif (talk) 03:37, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

What is going on in the Betty White Section ?

I must apologize in advance for even bringing up the topic of her image change in the first place because it seems as if I made a mountain out of a molehill. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:204:CF80:7440:296E:659D:DBD3:740B (talk) 16:44, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

I haven't checked it in a little while, but I really don't know. Last I saw, the underlying issue seemed to be one guy thinking that without his vote of confidence then an image can't be used... I don't know. But no, someone else would have suggested an image change (or just done it) soon enough without you, and it is standard if you look across RDs of old people with significant careers. It's not your fault. Kingsif (talk) 21:53, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Betty White on Top 25

I looked at the Betty White section of the Top 25 Report and wanted to mention that Betty White was a staple on TV game shows for decades, from the 1950s to the 1970s back when TV game shows were a big deal. She was a hilarious contestant and even met the love of her life and third husband, Allen Ludden, when she was on his game show. Password. He proposed several times before she said, "Yes!" It might be hard to work this in with all of her other accomplishments but she was a regular feature on TV for decades before her primetime hits. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:41, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

@Liz: Maybe we can paragraph it up; the Ludden notes can go in his entry further down the list! Kingsif (talk) 05:44, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
9		Toshio Kagami (talk)	Add sources
135		Leah Purcell (talk)	Add sources
50		Ginny Tyler (talk)	Add sources
14		Library Network of Western Switzerland (talk)	Add sources
14		Walter Peregoy (talk)	Add sources
846		Celtic Woman (talk)	Add sources
74		150th anniversary of Canada (talk)	Cleanup
68		Joe Grant (talk)	Cleanup
131		Jacques (talk)	Cleanup
667		Afghanistan conflict (1978–present) (talk)	Expand
674		Diamond Jubilee of Elizabeth II (talk)	Expand
3,213		Chloé Zhao (talk)	Expand
200		AFI Life Achievement Award (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
143		William J. Bell (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
152		Ovadia Yosef (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
34		Refugees as weapons (talk)	Merge
29		Merlin in comics (talk)	Merge
52		Diplomatic career of Muhammad (talk)	Merge
40		Will & Grace (season 3) (talk)	Wikify
114		Roone Arledge (talk)	Wikify
32		Will & Grace (season 2) (talk)	Wikify
5		Gotts (talk)	Orphan
1		Amrabad, Zahedan (talk)	Orphan
3		Bernard Michael Gilroy (talk)	Orphan
20		Still Me (talk)	Stub
180		Semantic Scholar (talk)	Stub
14		36th Division (Israel) (talk)	Stub
46		Creative consultant (talk)	Stub
27		Deric Washburn (talk)	Stub
11		Gracie: A Love Story (talk)	Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:24, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2022 WikiCup!

Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2022 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. Any questions on the rules or on 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) 14:37, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2022 WikiCup!

Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2022 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. Any questions on the rules or on 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) 15:02, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Christmas (surname)

On 7 January 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Christmas (surname), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the origin of Christmas is uncertain? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Christmas (surname). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Christmas (surname)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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) 12:03, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
17,952		Billie Eilish (talk)	Add sources
12		Kfar Darom (talk)	Add sources
46		Kfar Etzion massacre (talk)	Add sources
8,977		George W. Bush (talk)	Add sources
3		Fūko Yagura (talk)	Add sources
6		Haruka Komiyama (talk)	Add sources
18		Pets in South Korea (talk)	Cleanup
9		Ayaka Kikuchi (singer) (talk)	Cleanup
156		AKB48 Group (talk)	Cleanup
81		NMB48 (talk)	Expand
5,656		2020 Summer Olympics (talk)	Expand
429		Binge drinking (talk)	Expand
289		United States at the 2020 Summer Olympics (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
39		Ella Jenkins (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
69		Eugene O'Neill Theater Center (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
847		Kris Wu sex scandal (talk)	Merge
586		2020 Summer Paralympics (talk)	Merge
483		Aftermath of the 2021 United States Capitol attack (talk)	Merge
5		Mio Tomonaga (talk)	Wikify
3		Utsukushii Inazuma (talk)	Wikify
27		Israeli hip hop (talk)	Wikify
4		Oded Liphshitz (talk)	Orphan
2		Avraham Avi-hai (talk)	Orphan
2		Elihu Ben-Onn (talk)	Orphan
39		Lake Wobegon Days (talk)	Stub
4		Whispers in the Dark (Mumford & Sons song) (talk)	Stub
9		Miodio (talk)	Stub
38		Yitzhak Hofi (talk)	Stub
3		Barak Feldman (talk)	Stub
13		Ditmas (song) (talk)	Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:24, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Dinosaur Game

The article Dinosaur Game 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:Dinosaur Game for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Most Comfortable Chair -- The Most Comfortable Chair (talk) 14:01, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

GA review mentor

Hey, I was wondering if you could be my GA mentor for a GA review as it would be my first time reviewing one. I familiarized myself with the GA criteria and read the instructions on how to review one. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 19:12, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi, @Kaleeb18:, what article are you thinking of reviewing and what mentoring would you want? (Some people want some tips before going in, others like a bit more guidance through the review, I'd be happy to help in any case!) And welcome to GANR, wonderful to have more willing reviewers! Kingsif (talk) 22:15, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Well I think Im going to review Us Again (film) because it is pretty short and I know stuff about Disney. I would like some tips as well as some guidance through the review process. I think I will need help mostly with stuff related to WP:MOS. Thanks for helping! ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 00:20, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

P.S. I've already taken it and Pamzeis is the nominator. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 00:27, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Awesome! I'm sure you can work through the criteria, you know how to ping me for anything, and I'll probably check in to see if I think any of your comments stray/could go deeper :) Excited to do this Kingsif (talk) 00:30, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Cool! ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 00:35, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Hey does this review for the lead look bad?/What would you change?

• Conceived after Parrish noticed he was growing older, Us Again takes inspiration from his grandparents. – This sentence could be restructured because it kinda comes out of nowhere and seems like it is still talking about the plot at first.
• Its score was composed by Pinar Toprak and was written before storyboarding and animation, in contrast to the usual filmmaking process. – This sentence needs to make it clear that the music was written before the storyboarding and animation process began, because it was very confusing at first and I had to reread it several times to realize what the sentence was trying to say

― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 03:46, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

@Kaleeb18: Hmm, I don't think only two wikilinks next to each other, especially when it's unavoidable really, is SEAOFBLUE. Another note is that, it really depends on the nominator if I would outright suggest sentence replacements, especially without explanation, and not just encourage them along the right lines. If you're not familiar with the nominator, I would probably suggest not doing that (it's more like you're imposing your version rather than reviewing theirs), and instead just explain the issue, and if possible, why - so they can rewrite it their own way that addresses your issue. (On that matter, your suggested replacement for the "Conceived" sentence isn't totally grammatically sound, so be careful if you do make suggestions!) Kingsif (talk) 04:04, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip. How does the above look now? ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 12:39, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Looks good, maybe something between the two, so what needs working on is narrower - like saying the first sentence could be restructured and the second needs to make it clear it was the music that was written first. P.S. I also think the things you are picking up on are good points, you seem to have read the criteria and looked through past GA reviews and I am impressed :) I also think everyone should find their own reviewing style and structure, so if you think I am kinda suppressing that, do tell me. Kingsif (talk) 18:20, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, I find your tips to be really helpful. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 18:30, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Hey isn't there supposed to be a citation after a quote like is that a WP: policy. Im looking at the quote in development section of the article where Parrish says "It made me realize that if I spent all my time focused on what I thought I was missing, then I was going to miss the beauty in the present". or is it fine to put the citation later like they did? ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 03:28, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

@Kaleeb18: I don't think that technically every quotation needs its ref right after it - just that everything needs to be sourced. It is assumed that the next ref after the quotation is the source that supports it. However, it is encouraged to have refs immediately next to quotations, especially if the ref would otherwise be several sentences later/there are multiple refs in the paragraph that may be confusing. In the section here, it looks like another quotation in the next sentence is sourced by the same ref, and whoever wrote it wanted to be economical with how many times they used it (a separate issue is that, quotations notwithstanding, it is considered poor style to needlessly duplicate refs across a paragraph). So, long story short, I would ask to have a ref added at the end of the quotation: even if the ref isn't far away, it's a GA nom, so it can't hurt. Kingsif (talk) 03:34, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Gotcha thanks. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 12:43, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Hey, I think I'm done with my review so if you want to go over it to make sure I didn't miss anything please do. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 13:53, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

@Kaleeb18: I've added a few comments that are more my input on discussion. I like what you've got, but I don't think you've addressed the coverage criteria? Is the article broad enough that it covers all the main points, not so broad that it talks about too-tangential things, and are all relevant points covered in appropriate depth (based on the importance and detail given in sources). Kingsif (talk) 21:46, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

I mean I thought so. What are you seeing that I am not? Do you mean like some areas need to be expanded? ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 22:37, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

@Kaleeb18: I'm not saying there's an issue, just that you should note in your review that you've checked even if there aren't any. The review is a full review - a teacher still ticks correct answers - as well as a kind of accountability record for the article's future. So, if the article is appropriate in its broadness and depth, you have to write that you've checked. (Imagine reviewing an article with zero issues, it wouldn't look like a review if you just passed it without even saying there was nothing wrong!) Kingsif (talk) 22:47, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

I mean I think the critical reception could be expanded. So do you basically just want me to check over if anything could be added to the article like look at the refs they have and say what could be added? I'm trying to figure out how to what I'm supposed to do. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 23:19, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Yes, if you've done a source review, does the article reflect the sources. Like, if a source says 5 things about A and 2 things about B, does the article have sort of the same ratio? But, more, do sources in general all talk about A and B, so they're not small details that have been added, with bigger things about the subject excluded - this requires a bit of searching of your own if you're unfamiliar with the subject of the article. So, to use your example, if there isn't a lot of critical reception, it doesn't need a big critical reception section. But then, does the section mention the major views that critics have so it is representative of what sources say on the subject; and, make sure the article content isn't cherry-picking (which would make it not-neutral, too). Kingsif (talk) 23:23, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Ahh gotcha. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 23:51, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Ok so Ive looked through the ref and here is what Ive I have found. In the first three refs it says "Working with Keone and Mari was the key to making this film work..." and more I think that can be used. In the Indie Wire ref the paragraph that starts "In terms of the color palette, Disney contrasted" that paragraph can be used. And there are plenty of stuff from the CBR ref that can be added to the article. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 02:59, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

@Kaleeb18: So it would fail broadness if not including things that are significantly discussed in sources, you can add that to the review. Kingsif (talk) 03:02, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Okay so, Pamzeis has done everything in the GA review and it all looks good to me and I think I’m ready to pass it. Is there anything you see that is still doesn’t meet the criteria? ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 12:53, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

@Kaleeb18: It all looks good to me! Kingsif (talk) 20:21, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Great! Ill pass it soon. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 20:27, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

@Kaleeb18: Make sure you review finishing the review instructions so all the templates don't break! Kingsif (talk) 21:57, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

I just started to as I got this message lol. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 22:00, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Dinosaur Game

The article Dinosaur Game you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Dinosaur Game 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 The Most Comfortable Chair -- The Most Comfortable Chair (talk) 07:01, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Nebraska v. One 1970 2-Door Sedan Rambler (Gremlin)

Hello! Your submission of Nebraska v. One 1970 2-Door Sedan Rambler (Gremlin) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! 7&6=thirteen (☎) 21:11, 14 January 2022 (UTC) I need some assistance here. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 21:11, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your input. Cheers. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 15:15, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

@7&6=thirteen: Yeah, I kinda checked out when the legal heavy debating happened, but your initial explanation had made sense to me. Hope it's all sorted. Kingsif (talk) 21:28, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Nope. Fram is just a "no" and will not listen to reason IMO. But you take a look and decide what, if anything, there is to say. I'm out of things to say there. The jury is still out. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 21:31, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Holocaust jokes

YOU wrote: don't invent new sentence structures to shoehorn in links, either. I've amended it to more naturally incorporate a link to the article you made, but that Holocaust humor article needs serious clean-up so I'd be cautious linking it anywhere in its current state anyway

What do you mean "dont invent"? It is normal wikipedia process of editling. And I do want to "shoehorn" this wikilink everywhere it is relevant to attract attention to the article. Maybe someone will take some time and insytead of grumbling just impove it.

All three issues are a normal process of collaborative editing in wikipedia: nobody owns articles, but nobody chastises other's work idly: either you help or place tags. Loew Galitz (talk) 01:05, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

@Loew Galitz: What? I did improve it. My edit reason, which you quote, says I've amended it to more naturally incorporate. Did you skip that part to complain that I wasn't helping? Now, by "don't invent", I clearly mean don't invent new sentence structures, you know, exactly what I wrote that you also quoted. It's a friendly way of saying "your English grammar is abysmal, don't put malformed fragments into other sentences with no regard for context, because then none of it is comprehensible." Shoehorning is when a link or phrase is added in a way that is unnatural; as much as you may think it relevant, if it disrupts a sentence, it is inappropriate because it ruins readability for the purpose of advertising a link. Be more careful with your grammar and manner of editing things in. Nobody owns articles, but if I'm watching one and someone is being disruptive, I'm going to remove or clean it up - if you don't like that, Wikipedia editing isn't for you. I cleaned your mess up, by the way, since you're accusing me of being unhelpfully critical (the edit reason was explaining why I'd made the change!), and you come complaining to me because you apparently can't understand more than two words of the edit reason to see that. FYI: repeatedly adding shoehorned links is not collaborative editing. Cleaning that up to keep the new content in a way that doesn't harm the old content, and leaving an edit reason explaining why, is collaborative. Kingsif (talk) 01:15, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Also, let me dispel your belief that "either you help or place tags" when something is bad. Sorry, no, if edits are detrimental, especially when a cleaner version of them is not actually beneficial to an encyclopedia, they can be point blank undone, without clean-up or tags, to keep the article in a stable state. Kingsif (talk) 01:29, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

I am sorry, miscommunication, because I did not ewxpress myself clearly. You did everything correctly in your article; no argument here. I was talkinn about my article Holocaust humor. As you may have noticed, my English is bad. But the subject of Holocaust humor is very notable (LOTS of references to complete books on the subject) and I am baffled nobody wrote about it in Wikipedia until this week. I wrote what I could, threw in plenty of "Further reading" and wikilinked from ewerywhere possible in hopes that someone with better writing skills will expand the article. Believe me, what I've read is enough to write more than The Holocaust article itself. I apologize that I decreased the quality of your article meanwhile. Thank you, Loew Galitz (talk) 04:42, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

@Loew Galitz: Yes, it is a hard subject to write about; the nuance to distinguish gallows humour from sadistic barbs is something many editors have probably worried about putting into an article of its own well. Holocaust jokes are otherwise covered, if tangentially, at related articles. I know you wrote it from scratch (I'd start with improving the structure), but be careful of WP:FORK as well. Kingsif (talk) 04:49, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for an advice on improving the structure: I agree that even small sectioning according to joke subtypes/context. It will prevent meess during possible expansion. Also, can you point out the articles which have a threat of forking. Other than Jewish humor and Black comedy. Surprizingly they don't touch my subject at all, although "Black comedy" (improved) may be used as a cross-link for the essence of the Gallows humor. (By the way, "Black comedy" is a kind of a mess as well because not drawing clear explanations of the synonyms boldfaced in the lede (I noticed that the article is a result of a mechanical merge with "Gallows humor", which resulted in the confusion similar to that you are warning me about.)) Loew Galitz (talk) 00:18, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Well, I was thinking of all the articles about jokes about Hitler. But Polish joke also sees some crossover. Kingsif (talk) 00:23, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
733		Knossos (talk)	Add sources
155		International Youth Day (talk)	Add sources
10		Boston Jewish Film Festival (talk)	Add sources
302		Chubut Province (talk)	Add sources
646		Azad Hind (talk)	Add sources
48		Romanism (talk)	Add sources
31		Martin Agronsky (talk)	Cleanup
41		Hendersonville High School (Tennessee) (talk)	Cleanup
188		Music of Israel (talk)	Cleanup
10		Nashville Public Library (talk)	Expand
256		The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms (talk)	Expand
571		Jaffa (talk)	Expand
60		Intercommunal conflict in Mandatory Palestine (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
231		Thomas Bach (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
84		Yeshivish (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
97		Chinky (talk)	Merge
25		The ReFrame Stamp (talk)	Merge
911		Chink (talk)	Merge
67		Zionist political violence (talk)	Wikify
7		Ruth Kark (talk)	Wikify
62		Somaly Mam (talk)	Wikify
3		Noam Meiri (talk)	Orphan
1		Ludwig Mayer (bookseller) (talk)	Orphan
14		Daniel Landau (talk)	Orphan
14		Guaiqueríes de Margarita (talk)	Stub
20		Yoav Gelber (talk)	Stub
10		Walihan Sailike (talk)	Stub
6		Hadashot (talk)	Stub
2		Ilona Vincze-Krausz (talk)	Stub
55		Jon Caramanica (talk)	Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:24, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diplomacy
	Template:Did you know nominations/Nebraska v. One 1970 2-Door Sedan Rambler (Gremlin) "Fools rush in ..." But scholars arrive in due course. Thanks for stepping in. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:36, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	Thank you for being my GA mentor for Us Again (film). I'm so glad I chose you to be my mentor. Thanks for all the advice and helpful tips you gave me. ― Kaleeb18TalkCaleb 22:11, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
34		The Motive (film) (talk)	Add sources
6		Santa Fe Reporter (talk)	Add sources
151		Bárbara Lennie (talk)	Add sources
6		Lund International Fantastic Film Festival (talk)	Add sources
1,690		Dan Evans (tennis) (talk)	Add sources
580		DanTDM (talk)	Add sources
1,505		Noah Galvin (talk)	Cleanup
84		Bisexual community (talk)	Cleanup
7		Film London (talk)	Cleanup
819		KAI KF-21 Boramae (talk)	Expand
392		Aitana Sánchez-Gijón (talk)	Expand
343		Wife of a Spy (talk)	Expand
186		Khondaker Mostaq Ahmad (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
1,033		Gay village (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
143		Lil Uzi Vert vs. the World (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
39		New York Film Critics Online (talk)	Merge
4,618		Riley Keough (talk)	Merge
727		LGBT slang (talk)	Merge
4		Red Rock Film Festival (talk)	Wikify
52		Siân James (politician) (talk)	Wikify
346		The Mighty (talk)	Wikify
8		Alfred Dellentash (talk)	Orphan
2		Anne McGrew Bennett (talk)	Orphan
3		Bierstedt (talk)	Orphan
7		Macondo Awards (talk)	Stub
7		Argentine Academy of Cinematography Arts and Sciences Awards (talk)	Stub
51		Olivia Tjandramulia (talk)	Stub
35		Cape Greco (talk)	Stub
10		Lorenzo Vigas (talk)	Stub
14		Dream Girl (play) (talk)	Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:24, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

RfA

The recent changes made you less interested in running RfA? valereee (talk) 21:53, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

@Valereee: No, the way it looked like it was going before the recent changes - I haven't looked enough into the changes to see if I would now, but some of them seem really positive! Sorry if that wasn't clear, I'll make some edits because, yeah, not the thing you want to be writing in an RfA. Kingsif (talk) 21:55, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

No worries, nothing you wrote was bad! I just wanted to clarify with you as I know people have discussed you running. valereee (talk) 21:56, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Ha, thanks. Kingsif (talk) 21:59, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Chadwick Boseman

I had meant to return the article back to the stable version - oops and thanks! Shearonink (talk) 01:11, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

No problem! Kingsif (talk) 01:15, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

February with Women in Red

Women in Red Feb 2022, Vol 8, Issue 2, Nos 214, 217, 220, 221, 222 Online events: New: Black women | Hong Kong and Macau | Women in sport Continuing: Climate (year-long initiative) | #1day1woman Other ways to participate: Encourage someone to become a WiR member this month by registering in the box at the top of our main page. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events. Follow us on social media: Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 15:10, 31 January 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
1,333		Fermat's Last Theorem (talk)	Add sources
9		Christian Martin (television executive) (talk)	Add sources
200		Pronunciation respelling for English (talk)	Add sources
1,183		Walter Cronkite (talk)	Add sources
160		Broadcast journalism (talk)	Add sources
4		San Francisco Bay Area Film Critics Circle Award for Best Foreign Language Film (talk)	Add sources
499		Tim Russert (talk)	Cleanup
9		Queers Undermining Israeli Terrorism (talk)	Cleanup
1,721		Alba Flores (talk)	Cleanup
14		Hopeless Savages (talk)	Expand
291		2021 California wildfires (talk)	Expand
216		LGBT culture (talk)	Expand
277		Live television (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
24		Cooke Optics (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
15		Inside Washington (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
87		Money management (talk)	Merge
457		Compass rose (talk)	Merge
13		Parandrus (talk)	Merge
7		Hussein Khalidi (talk)	Wikify
40		Israel–Serbia relations (talk)	Wikify
60		Uranium mining and the Navajo people (talk)	Wikify
3		Ibrahim Salisú (talk)	Orphan
4		Uranium acid mine drainage (talk)	Orphan
5		Betsy Martin (talk)	Orphan
20		Zoe Hives (talk)	Stub
19		Ivory Coast at the Olympics (talk)	Stub
131		Motorama (film) (talk)	Stub
10		Poison Prince (talk)	Stub
3		Star Com Productions (talk)	Stub
3		Killing the Dead (talk)	Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:25, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

About this message...

Hey hey~ I saw your communication with BrownHairedGirl and saw they sent this [1]. Wanted to let you know that this in no ways is a valid sanction. WP:BANAUTH means that they cannot ban you from their talk page, even if they wanted to. Also, on a larger scale, I would not take anything personally. Remember, no single editor has authority to ban other users from their talk page, myself included. Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis 21:45, 1 February 2022 (UTC)