Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15 Archive 16 Archive 17

The August 2023 Good Article Nominations Backlog Drive is at the halfway mark, and has seen incredible progress, dropping the backlog from 638 to 359 unreviewed articles -- a 43.7% reduction in only fifteen days! But we still have over two weeks to go, and there are plenty of articles left to review:

• We've gone from 14 nominations 270+ days old and 65 nominations 180+ days old to 2 and 0 respectively. No more articles will reach 270+ status during the drive, and only three more will reach 180+ if unreviewed, so this is your last chance to get the higher age bonuses!
• We still have plenty of articles in the 90+ range, but the list is shrinking fast.
• Some articles need new reviewers, either because they're officially on second opinion or because the original reviews were deleted or invalidated. You can help prevent these articles from waiting longer!
• While there are starting to be clear favourites for the Content Review Medal of Merit, the field is still very open. A late entrant can still pull an upset to get the most reviews in the drive!

And remember: if you've done reviews, you should log them at the backlog drive page for points, so they can be tracked towards your awards at the end.

Thanks for signing up for the drive, and I hope to see you reviewing! Vaticidalprophet 02:01, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have received this message as a participant in the August 2023 Good Article Nominations Backlog Drive who has logged one or no reviews. This is a one-off massmessage. If you wish to opt out of all massmessages, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page.

The article Book of Common Prayer (Unitarian) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Book of Common Prayer (Unitarian) for comments about the article, and Talk:Book of Common Prayer (Unitarian)/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 08:23, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Amitchell125: Thank you for the exceedingly patient, courteous, and productive review. Truly was a painless experience with you and I appreciate your openness to engaging in your own digging that challenged my perspective! ~ Pbritti (talk) 15:14, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats! Jahaza (talk) 20:40, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Pbritti, in my humble opinion, it would be useful to have a list of books dealing with the Dominican Rite. Ilcultoredarte (talk) 15:01, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ilcultoredarte: I don't disagree! However, a bibliography section is a space for references utilized in the article; please place a Further reading section beneath the references if you wish to include additional resources for readers to consider looking at! Thank you. ~ Pbritti (talk) 15:55, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Pbritti, I understand the misunderstanding. For you Bibliography meant "sources", for me it meant "Further reading". Ilcultoredarte (talk) 16:26, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ilcultoredarte: You're more than fine. On English Wikipedia, bibliography most typically refers to works written or published by an article's subject (eg listing the Summa in the Thomas Aquinas article). It less commonly refers to what we call "References". Due to its many meanings—such as suggested further readings—we distinguish the section for ancillary coverage unused in the article as "Further reading" or "External links" (depending on context). ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:46, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On 21 August 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Tweet Kimball, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Tweet Kimball lived in a castle, herded grand-champion cattle, and preserved a petrified forest? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Tweet Kimball. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Tweet Kimball), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Z1720 (talk) 00:03, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 16,344 views (681.0 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of August 2023 – nice work!

GalliumBot (talk • contribs) (he/it) 03:27, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On 21 August 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Cherokee Ranch petrified forest, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Tweet Kimball lived in a castle, herded grand-champion cattle, and preserved a petrified forest? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Tweet Kimball. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Cherokee Ranch petrified forest), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Z1720 (talk) 00:03, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My Catholic friend,

Hope all is well. I was looking into the page Woman of the Apocalypse, and its lede is not up to good standards. For example, the first paragraph reads:

The Woman of the Apocalypse (or the woman clothed with the sun, Template:Lang-el; Latin: Mulier amicta sole) is a figure, mostly believed to be the Virgin Mary, (this interpretation is held by some commentators of the ancient Church), described in Chapter 12 of the Book of Revelation (written c. AD 95).

I wonder if you would like to give some time into rewriting the lede? I know that August 15 is Assumption day for you folks, so you might as well do it with great *veneration*.

Also, this article is peppered with parenthetical explanations. I can see that it would need a bit of clean-up in the future.

I am bringing this up because my Anglo-Catholic parish put in a Marian hymn for the offertory today. I don't know, I feel strange, my upper limit is the Angelus at the end of the solemn mass.

I hope you have a restful evening.

Cheers, -- TheLonelyPather (talk) 00:40, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@TheLonelyPather: With great fondness for my fellow Christian and editor, I'll see what I can do to remedy the article. Thank you for drawing it to my attention! ~ Pbritti (talk) 01:04, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you–with great fondness too. -- TheLonelyPather (talk) 01:10, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@TheLonelyPather: Just wanted to say I haven't forgotten your request, but I have had my mind in different places these last couple days. I will be making the relevant amendments today UTC! ~ Pbritti (talk) 04:43, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! You are doing better than I am. I am stuck in my research and only go to the Teahouse / AfD as a procrastination outlet. TheLonelyPather (talk) 12:39, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On 22 August 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article William Maldon, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that William Maldon learned to read, which resulted in him almost being killed by his father? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/William Maldon. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, William Maldon), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

—Kusma (talk) 00:03, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 16,234 views (676.4 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of August 2023 – nice work!

GalliumBot (talk • contribs) (he/it) 03:27, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! Pbritti, could you please review my draft Draft:Zauq E Naat. BrownCanary61 (talk) 08:30, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@BrownCanary61: I have reviewed your draft and left comments there. ~ Pbritti (talk) 14:49, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

may i know why you have rejected sn reddy wikipedia this man is a big producer of indian movies most of his movies have wikipedia pages already made on wikipedia then why its page rejected Is सत्यम देवगन (talk) 05:55, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

may i know why you have rejected sn reddy wikipedia this man is a big producer of indian movies most of his movies have wikipedia pages already made on wikipedia then why its page rejected Is सत्यम देवगन (talk) 05:56, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think you have put this page in rejection without collecting information, you are requested to get the right information and do not put this page in rejection and make the page live as soon as possible सत्यम देवगन (talk) 06:00, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@सत्यम देवगन: Hello! I did not reject your draft, but rather declined it in its current form. You are welcome to resubmit it, as you have already. However, you do not appear to have adjusted the draft to reflect my comments nor those of another editor. Please see my comments, repeated here: The sourcing here is unfortunately inadequate. Several of the sources appear to be promotional content, while another source is Wikipedia article. The draft lacks reliable sources. ~ Pbritti (talk) 06:16, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is Wikipedia not an acceptable source? सत्यम देवगन (talk) 06:20, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@सत्यम देवगन: Correct. The policy behind not citing Wikipedia is found at WP:CIRCULAR. I can not locate sources on your behalf, but I can direct you to reading this policy page on understanding how to identify reliable sources. ~ Pbritti (talk) 06:29, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for helping me, I will always be grateful to you big brother सत्यम देवगन (talk) 06:33, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@सत्यम देवगन: No problem. Please note that I've added a notice to your talk page. If it does not pertain to you, please feel welcome to ignore it. ~ Pbritti (talk) 06:35, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot brother, I will take note of the knowledge you have given. सत्यम देवगन (talk) 06:39, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

you सत्यम देवगन (talk) 06:27, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

can you tell me which sources i put wrong so that i can improve सत्यम देवगन (talk) 06:27, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the informal and non-neutral terminology in the members' profiles, as you noted. Much appreciate your comments. Any additional feedback would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! Echohk (talk) 17:42, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Echohk: I have approved the draft—congratulations! However, I would encourage you to continue seeking ways to improve the article. Consider looking at other articles in multiple subject areas to get a sense for what would best improve the article's coverage. Remember, an article getting better sometimes means it gets shorter. Additionally, consider submitting the article as a Did you know? fact, as it can appear on Wikipedia's main page for a day! You have seven days from now to nominate a DYK fact. Happy editing! ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:56, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much to you and all of the experienced editors, who really provided so much guidance and helpful suggestions. I will continue to improve the article and again grateful to your helpful feedback! Echohk (talk) 18:02, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

		The Minor Barnstar
		We really appreciate your efforts to review GANs. During the drive, the backlog of unreviewed nominations reduced by 440 articles, an astonishing 69 percent.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:06, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Flanker235 (talk · contribs) has filed an arbitration case request with you as a party. This request may be declined as premature, but I have yet to receive confirmation on whether I can do this from an arbitrator.

Thanks, Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 13:25, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This case request can be viewed at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case § John Boyd (Military Strategist) NPOV 2023 Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 13:26, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Dreamy Jazz: Thank you very much for the notification. I won't reply there for a day as I can't figure out why it was filed. If an arb wants it to go through for some reason, I'll reply. ~ Pbritti (talk) 13:30, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Very strange leap to go from the article talk page to ARBCOM, especially when they were making comments that could be construed as legal threats. Can't imagine that will go over well with ARBCOM. I wouldn't worry about it! ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 13:38, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly, I am new to this. How would I know if this was a waste of time or not? But if that's what it is then cancel this request and I'll follow it up through another channel. Flanker235 (talk) 13:48, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Flanker235:, when filing requests for arbitration, you should usually go to WP:ANI first. This is because the Arbitration Committee is generally the last step in dispute resolution, with WP:ANI being a step before. In this case you only discussed at the talk page before jumping to ArbCom. If you want to go to WP:ANI instead you can withdraw the case request. Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 14:00, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have received confirmation from arbitrator to remove the case request as premature. As such, the case request has been removed. Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 14:05, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

For those interested, I filed at ANI. ~ Pbritti (talk) 15:09, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ANI archived with no admin action, with Tamzin telling Flanker235 they strongly recommend redacting the legal-related material. Agree with the other editors who felt this was not blockable but that a line was crossed. ~ Pbritti (talk) 15:21, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you removed a source on Our Lady of Zeitoun on the grounds that he is a fraudster. However, that same fraudster is still cited on Miracle of Calanda. There also is a discussion happening at WP:FTN about this. Maybe I could swap a critical analysis from the French Wiki with the Skeptoid podcast? Scorpions1325 (talk) 03:17, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]