Jump to content

User talk:HumanxAnthro/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5

Welcome!

Hello, HumanxAnthro, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article. Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or another editor to proofread it. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

One rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation. If you have a username like this, you should request a change of username or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)

In addition, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for any contribution you make, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation to comply with our terms of use and our policy on paid editing.

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!  I dream of horses  If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{U|I dream of horses}} to your message  (talk to me) (My edits) @ 21:04, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

@I dream of horses: Um, hello.... Why are you making a conflict of interest assumption?..... and towards what? I'm just a college kid who wanted to expand the article. HumanxAnthro (talk) 00:50, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.)

Everybody Loves Raymond (season 1) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Howard Storm and Jeff Meyer
Everybody Loves Raymond (season 4) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to High definition

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:29, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Monk-e-Mail, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Oddcast (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 12:23, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Monk-e-Mail, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sprint (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 12:49, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Peggle 2, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Northwest Symphony Orchestra (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 14:41, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Inequality for All, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Republican (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 11:55, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Everyone's Hero, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Segregation (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 12:58, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Click (2006 film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Imageworks (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 11:42, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hidden History of the Human Race, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gojira (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 12:04, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Natural Selection (Art Department album)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Natural Selection (Art Department album) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a musical recording which does not indicate why its subject is important or significant, and where the artist's article does not exist or is eligible for deletion itself. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for music.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 20:24, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited R.A.P. Music, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Complex (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:19, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dungeons & Dragons (film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page American Beauty (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:12, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dungeons & Dragons (film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Realism (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:09, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Dying (album)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Dying (album) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a musical recording which does not indicate why its subject is important or significant, and where the artist's article does not exist or is eligible for deletion itself. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for music.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Majash2020 (talk) 06:11, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Natural Selection (Art Department album)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Natural Selection (Art Department album) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a musical recording which does not indicate why its subject is important or significant, and where the artist's article does not exist or is eligible for deletion itself. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for music.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Majash2020 (talk) 12:36, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

July 2020

Information icon Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to User talk:The Banner, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. The Banner talk 16:40, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Natural Selection (Art Department album) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Natural Selection (Art Department album) 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/Natural Selection (Art Department album) 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. The Banner talk 17:37, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Quiz Show (film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Up Close and Personal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:24, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Please stop

Thanks for you interest in editing at Wikipedia. Please read both WP:FILMCRITICLIST and WP:INDISCRIMINATE as they will explain why you should not be adding all of the minor best of/worst of items that you are adding to the film articles. Your cooperation and understanding will be appreciated. MarnetteD|Talk 23:28, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

I have opened a thread about these here Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film#More film accolade lists additions. Please add any input that you wish to there. MarnetteD|Talk 23:51, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mario Paint, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Discord.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:33, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Blues Brothers (video game), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nintendo Magazine System.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:11, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Fester's Quest
added a link pointing to CVG
Live Action Toy Story
added a link pointing to Goodwill

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:15, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

2017 May Day protests
added a link pointing to Detention center
Superman 64
added a link pointing to Brainiac

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:10, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2017 May Day protests, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Detention center.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:16, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Animaniacs: Ten Pin Alley
added a link pointing to PlayStation Magazine
Countdown Vampires
added a link pointing to PlayStation Magazine

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:12, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

Addressed all your feedback

HumanxAnthro, thanks very much for your help. I addressed all your feedback at [1]. Do you think it's ready now? Right cite (talk) 21:51, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Special Barnstar
Thank you for your good article review of Aroused (film). You did a good job on the good article review, which is good. It is good to make Wikipedia more good. Good. Right cite (talk) 03:40, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Scary Godmother: The Revenge of Jimmy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page YTV.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:35, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 03:03, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

{subst:DYKproblem|Scary Godmother: Halloween Spooktakular|header=yes|sig=yes}}

DYK for Scary Godmother: Halloween Spooktakular

On 7 December 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Scary Godmother: Halloween Spooktakular, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Scary Godmother: Halloween Spooktakular mixes 3D characters with 3D backgrounds black-edged to look 2D to avoid investors comparing it with theatrical CGI films? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Scary Godmother: Halloween Spooktakular. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Scary Godmother: Halloween Spooktakular), and it may be added to the statistics page if it received over 400 views per hour. 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) 12:02, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Aquarium (Aqua album), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page OCC.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:40, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Conker's Bad Fur Day, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Twitch.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:11, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Scary Godmother: Halloween Spooktakular

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Scary Godmother: Halloween Spooktakular 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 Some Dude From North Carolina -- Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 23:41, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Scary Godmother: Halloween Spooktakular

Congrats dude! The article you were working on, Scary Godmother: Halloween Spooktakular, has passed the GA-criteria, becoming a good article on January 29, 2021. Great job on the improvements! For you're hard work, I award you this interesting image of a cat. Enjoy!
Some Dude From North Carolinawanna talk? 12:56, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Scary Godmother: Halloween Spooktakular

The article Scary Godmother: Halloween Spooktakular you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Scary Godmother: Halloween Spooktakular 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 Some Dude From North Carolina -- Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 13:01, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited RoboCop 2, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Frank Miller.

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

Your GA nomination of The Wizard of Oz (1993 video game)

The article The Wizard of Oz (1993 video 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:The Wizard of Oz (1993 video game) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MuZemike -- MuZemike (talk) 17:20, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

February 2021

Information icon Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give a page a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Plok!. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. IceWelder [✉] 14:43, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Donkey Kong Country, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nintendo Magazine System.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Angry Family

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Angry Family 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 Some Dude From North Carolina -- Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 17:02, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

The Angry Family

Congrats dude! The article you were working on, "The Angry Family", has passed the GA-criteria, becoming a good article on February 25, 2021. Great job on the improvements! For you're hard work, I award you this interesting image of five puppies that are not an angry family. Enjoy!
Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 19:07, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
User:Some Dude From North Carolina Well, the dogs would still bark very loud that it would hurt the kids' ears like in Michael's story, but at lest they're happy. Thanks! HumanxAnthro (talk) 19:09, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
@Some Dude From North Carolina: BTW, since you've already reviewed two of my GA nominations, I just feel that need to give back in some way. Anything you're working on? HumanxAnthro (talk) 19:10, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
All I have are about 20 or so good article nominations that some editors have found to be excessive (not my fault I rewrote several of them). If you would be so kind, maybe a review or two of my articles would help lower the backlog currently at WP:GA. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 19:14, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Angry Family

The article The Angry Family you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Angry Family 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 Some Dude From North Carolina -- Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 19:22, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Lips Are Movin' FAC question

Hello. Apologies for the random message. I was just curious about the status of your review for the "Lips Are Movin'" FAC as I would not want to start my review if it would in any way interfere with yours. Have a great start to your weekend! Aoba47 (talk) 22:34, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

My apologies too in case this feels like badgering, but I would like to know this as well.--NØ 19:00, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

For the Night

It seems like you know a lot about FA. Is there a way you can tell me what is wrong with For the Night in FA terms? The Ultimate Boss (talk) 06:39, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi, there, and thank you for coming by to the talk! Generally speaking, there are prose problems, the reception section suffers from being a quotefarm and not as well organized or presented as it could, it suffers from redundancy sometimes and occasionally feels like an indiscriminate collection of random people's sayings, there's some awkward wording, and a part of a lead isn't reflected in the body: "Many critics praised the track as one of Pop Smoke's best songs." I know this article cites songs that made it in lists of the best songs of 2020, but that isn't equivalent to stating it's one of the rapper's best. In addition, there are a few problems with citation formatting, such as Uproxx and AllHipHop being falsely labeled a publisher and hitparade.ch falsely formatted as a work (italicized), though I think these are easily fixable. I'll say the "Release and commercial performance" is perfectly done, however. Since I'm a bit busy being on a added sugar detox and editing other articles, I might be a bit more delayed in responding than usual, but please ask other questions if you have any, and you always have the previous FA discussion to look at for more clarification, which included my admittedly rudely-presented comments. Thanks. HumanxAnthro (talk) 12:59, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
Is there anyway you help me improve the article to FA status? I know FA is not a memorial service, but I really want to bring one of Pop's articles to FA to honor his amazing legacy he left behind. The Ultimate Boss (talk) 05:20, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
(Update): I have fixed the article a lot. How does it look now? The Ultimate Boss (talk) 08:04, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
@The Ultimate Boss: Hmmm..... It's getting there. It's good you corrected the lead and the composition section is more concise. But here's a couple of things about the reception section. At least it looks a little more organized, with the Slant, Independent, and Pitchfork quotes together properly, but I would still make a few fixes to it. I think the Pitchfork quote needs more context to show its true opinion, as it's an album review and it uses "For the Night" as an example of what it perceives to be a problem with pointless guess rappers on the album, hence the "forced rap" describer. Although it's a bit more organized, it could have less "A said B" sentences and more consolidations of similar opinions. For example, "The staff of the Independent Tribune described the song as a "monster hit".[7]" and "In their review for HipHopDX, David Aaron deemed the song a "social media-ready smash".[18]" look pretty similar and could be combined in something like "Critics suggested the song would be a "monster hit"[7] and a "social media ready smash"[18]." HumanxAnthro (talk) 15:20, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

cups

Can you leave some comments for the "Cups (song)" FAC? Would really appreciate an expert editors opinion. The Ultimate Boss (talk) 01:43, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Gonna go to bed soon, but sure. HumanxAnthro (talk) 02:01, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
Thanks a lot bro. I also want to apologize for being a huge dick a couple weeks ago. You did not deserve for me to get angry like that at you. The Ultimate Boss (talk) 06:48, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:TinStar1stperspective.jpeg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:TinStar1stperspective.jpeg. 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) 03:56, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Invitation to evaluate edits for automatically detecting issues in statements

Hi HumanxAnthro,

I am reaching out to you because of your experience with Wikipedia editing. We are building an automated system that can suggest specific improvements on Wikipedia statements (like removing bias, clarifying, adding citations) based on editing guidelines.

For that, we need the opinion of experienced editors on the semantic intentions (e.g., point-of-view edits, clarifications, adding citations) of a small number of Wikipedia edits. I will conduct the evaluations remotely, online over Zoom. If Zoom is difficult, I can also send the link to the evaluation page over email to finish asynchronously. No personally identifiable information will be recorded as part of this.

The evaluation will take approximately 1 hour to complete and you will be compensated 30 USD per hour for the same.

Please let me know here if you are willing to participate in our study. We will be grateful for your participation in helping us assess the effectiveness of our system to improve Wikipedia.

For more information, see the research page. Sumit (talk) 00:19, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

FAC

Hey there,

I was wondering if you would be able to take a look at my FAC and perhaps leave a review? A coordinator has commented that if the article doesn’t receive another review in the next few days, the FAC may be archived. Thanks, GenericWikiUser1 (talk) 12:41, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

@GenericWikiUser1: Commented HumanxAnthro (talk) 15:31, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Tin Star (video game)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Tin Star (video game) 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 Lee Vilenski -- Lee Vilenski (talk) 10:40, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Tin Star (video game)

The article Tin Star (video 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:Tin Star (video game) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Lee Vilenski -- Lee Vilenski (talk) 11:20, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Tin Star (video game)

The article Tin Star (video game) you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Tin Star (video game) 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 Lee Vilenski -- Lee Vilenski (talk) 15:02, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Tin Star

Hi Humanx. I'll review Tin Star if you'll go ahead and renominate it. ♦ jaguar 23:53, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

@Jaguar: I'm actually gonna leave it alone for now. HumanxAnthro (talk) 00:09, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
It's up to you, but don't lose heart over the derisory review – it shouldn't have been conducted in that way. ♦ jaguar 00:13, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
@Jaguar: That's fine, but I don't want me or anyone else assuming bad faith in the nominator. Plus, I don't like conflicts getting tense, so I'll work on other articles. Plus, he did make notice some things needed to be fixed. HumanxAnthro (talk) 00:15, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Judy Moody and the Not Bummer Summer, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Schultz.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:11, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Adventures in Modern Recording

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Adventures in Modern Recording 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 Kyle Peake -- Kyle Peake (talk) 08:40, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Conker's Bad Fur Day:Controversy Heading Removed?

Why Did You Deleted My Heading i Added On Conker's Bad Fur Day Page Nakita Kelley (talk) 11:00, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

  • (1) It was unsourced.
  • (2) Other sections (such as "Development" and "Release" sections) already discussed what that section talked about in more detail and with citations. HumanxAnthro (talk) 11:02, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Adventures in Modern Recording

The article Adventures in Modern Recording 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:Adventures in Modern Recording for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kyle Peake -- Kyle Peake (talk) 10:40, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Adventures in Modern Recording

The article Adventures in Modern Recording you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Adventures in Modern Recording 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 Kyle Peake -- Kyle Peake (talk) 12:21, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

FAR

It's great you're helping out with nominating articles for FAR :), we can really use all the help we can get. In your latest nomination of 300, you're using the word 'suck' a couple of times. As we're trying to motivate people to engage, this doesn't come over very friendly. Would you mind rewording it a bit? Thanks in advance! FemkeMilene (talk) 11:52, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I've changed it HumanxAnthro (talk) 11:54, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
Your tone has not improved, so I want to second what Femkemilene mentioned here. Real people wrote FAs that were once quality, and things deteriorate over time on Wikipedia through no fault of their own. There is no need to belittle the work of others, and the goal at FAR is to try to improve articles rather than strip featured status when possible. Could you please be more considerate of others in your FAR input? For example, you have used an inappropriate tone at Wikipedia:Featured article review/Spiderland/archive1, Wikipedia:Featured article review/St Kilda, Scotland/archive1 and Wikipedia:Featured article review/300 (film)/archive1. Also, please don't alter your comments[2] after others have already responded to them, as that renders commentary nonsensical. Thanks, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:45, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Specific issues

You asked here, "what part of the tone was inappropriate", adding that "it looks like a typical FAR to me". As Femkemilene pointed out to you a few days ago, "we're trying to motivate people to engage, this doesn't come over very friendly". Do you see any other FAR that uses the kind of language that disparages the past efforts of other editors in the way yours do ? FAR's goal is not to attack other editors who did good work in the past because articles have declined over time, as happens on "the encyclopedia anyone can edit". By doing that, not only do we discourage participation; we risk seeing FAR develop a bad reputation.

Here are some of the things you have written that cross the line from a straightforward, dispassionate, objective analysis of the issues, into creating an unnecessarily personalized battleground:

  • There's a fricking citation needed tag in "Other Islands."
  • "Declining population" Oh man, the problems with... a- ju- just the problems, I mean, gosh, this hurts
  • I think there are other parts of this article where this short-ass section could be merged,

And then in summary, you basically attack the old writer, and go way off-topic into other FARs, with:

  • To put it simply, another outdated promotion from more than 10 years ago that doesn't deserve its FA status, kind of like two other articles I've nominated for review a film with the "THIS! IS! SPARTA!" meme and lots of blood and gore, and a game starring a thicc Mario where, if you're an alpha speedrunner, you could BLJ up the stairs. The original FA nominator still seems to be active, so I'm interested to hear from him.
    (note from me) By the way the nominator had a long stretch of inactivity, which is why some of their articles fell into disrepair, and your tone does not exactly motivate a fine FA writer like Ben MacDui to improve the article back to standard-- something he is quite capable of doing.
    @SandyGeorgia: Thank you for your comments. The sarcasm comments and the use of words like "ass," "suck," "effin," fricking," "F---ing," I understand. But where's the attack on the original FA nominator in this example? All I said was that the editor was still active and that I was interested to hear his comments. How does that come of as a personal attack? HumanxAnthro (talk) 15:22, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
    Try to think of it less literally as a "personal attack" as defined by Wikipedia, and more as unnecessary personalization. WP:FOC is good guidance. That is, stick to a dispassionate analysis of the article content and avoid statements that will alienate editors. Put yourself in the position of having spent the typical months it takes to write a Featured article, and then going away to enjoy real life for a few years, and coming back to find a) your work destroyed by "the encyclopedia anyone can edit", and b) FAR participants describing your past efforts in hurtful ways. It is not only the unnecessary use of curse words; it is also the overall hurtful and unnecessary tone, which does not encourage the very person who can improve the article back to FA standard to engage. Try to remember that the original author is probably as dismayed about finding their work destroyed over time as you seem to be.
    By the way, please read WP:LISTGAP regarding how to thread responses. And consider the FAR Coords who have to read through everything you write on a FAR, as to a) whether it is properly threaded, and b) whether it helps them determine consensus on a FAR. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:45, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Sarcasm is not helpful at FAC. If you could separate your passion from your commentary, it would be friendlier. These are examples of unnecessary sarcasm:

  • Fun fact: every section in the article's source starts with a hidden warning: "ATTENTION! PLEASE READ BEFORE EDITING! Please present potential changes to this section in the Discussion area prior to making them, as consensus has been reached on a number of issues that tend to be repeated here." Apparently there hasn't been consensus on how to keep its featured article quality more than 10 years after it was promoted.
  • I wouldn't even promote this article to "This is Sparta" status due to its many issues... That joke should tell you the current quality of this article.
  • but to put it simply, it is horribly incomplete (there's nothing about its f---ing E3 coverage, for crying out loud),
  • the prose of the "Iranian criticism" section sucks and is not organized well, the plot section is 12 words too long, and the reception section sucks because it's a quote-farm of 1% of all critical reviews of this movie.

Basically, two things are wrong with your FAR input.

  1. Real people wrote quality articles that may have deteriorated over time as happens on Wikipedia. Please remember that by denigrating people and articles, we don't encourage improvement. And remember there are real people behind those articles, and they have feelings.
  2. Please separate your passion, emotion from the commentary you write. If you read through all of the other FARs, you will find others dispassionately describing the content problems, without going emotive over them.

I hope this helps. As Femke points out, help is welcome at FAR, but not if it is done in a way that discourages improvement or gives FAR a bad rap. Please do not continue in this vein. @FAR coordinators: SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:52, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Continuation

See discussion at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review#FAR conduct. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:44, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

@SandyGeorgia: Now you're just making up bullshit accusations. None of what you interpreted is correct, and it's obvious. I learned what you told me. 👨x🐱 (talk) 23:57, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
It is not obvious, and I agree that comment was appropriate. Repeating PAs from an old FAR is completely unnecessary. Even if you were to disagree with SandyGeorgia, you could do so in a less confrontational manner. FemkeMilene (talk) 16:09, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
HA, your actual review work is good; it's the side commentary that put at risk the overall goals of FAR; I hope you can take that on board, as your review work is helpful and needed. Just, please, consider the editors who once labored to bring those articles to FA standard. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:26, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

For the Night

I was wondering if you could leave some comments for the peer review of "For the Night"? The Ultimate Boss (talk) 06:32, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of We're Back! A Dinosaur's Story (film)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article We're Back! A Dinosaur's Story (film) 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 Some Dude From North Carolina -- Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 15:00, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of We're Back! A Dinosaur's Story (film)

The article We're Back! A Dinosaur's Story (film) 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:We're Back! A Dinosaur's Story (film) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Some Dude From North Carolina -- Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 23:39, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of We're Back! A Dinosaur's Story (film)

The article We're Back! A Dinosaur's Story (film) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:We're Back! A Dinosaur's Story (film) 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 Some Dude From North Carolina -- Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 13:21, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the wings

I saw that you gave me some wings on my talk page. Thanks for that. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 18:54, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

AFter looking at your userpage I noticed the we are both autistic which is rather cool. Hope you have a good day! Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 18:56, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Plants vs. Zombies

So are you going to finish your review on the FAC nomination of Plants vs. Zombies, or not? Lazman321 (talk) 00:29, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

AfD

Reversed an AfD that looked like it was heading toward WP:SNOW– nice job! Virtual cookie for you– tell you the truth, I'm a little jealous you had the courage to stand up, i really didn't want to until you did :). Kudos to you! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 00:50, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

User:Theleekycauldron Thanks, although the fact that it was so easy to find sources for the topic just by searching the phrase may it easy. I've gone around on Afd looking for sources on Google of topics nominated for deletion, because I think some nominators don't take full steps to do the research. Sometimes I !vote Delete after finding little, but TikTok was a pretty strong keep me. 👨x🐱 (talk) 01:03, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
After your hard work I have withdrawn the nomination. Since many have opined it will still require formal closure by an editor who has not participated, but that seems, now, to be a simple closure FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 06:55, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:BugglesLennyTopPop.png

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:BugglesLennyTopPop.png. 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) 17:13, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Refs

Would you mind doing on Shoom what you did on Spiderland earlier this evening...ie bringing consistency to the formatting...would help a lot. Best Ceoil (talk) 04:02, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

The 1975 (2019 song)

Hi, sorry about pestering you with this but let me know if you feel there's anything more I can do in regard to your comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The 1975 (2019 song)/archive1. If they've been addressed, it would help me out if you could say as much at the nomination page. Thanks! — Bilorv (talk) 15:46, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

AFDs

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 21:27, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

In appreciation

The Reviewers Award The Reviewers Award
By the authority vested in me by myself it gives me great pleasure to present you with this award in recognition of the thorough, detailed and actionable reviews you have carried out at FAC. This work is very much appreciated. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:37, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

A request

Hello, apologies for the random message. I have come across your comments in various FA nominations and was wondering if you'd be willing to leave some feedback here. The article became a GA in January and I wish to take to FA but would like to get as much feedback on how to improve it further. I'd really appreciate your comments. Thank you. --Ashleyyoursmile! 14:17, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

AFD procedure: Edit summaries

Hello HumanxAnthro,

I was the editor that closed the previous bundled AFD - and incidentally made a slight mistake in that I didn't immediately remove the AFD tags from the relevant articles. Regardless, for those I did remove the articles from, it wasn't quite as obvious as it could have been, because you used blank edit summaries. Please read WP:AFDHOWTO, specifically this line:

Include in the edit summary
AfD: Nominated for deletion; see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NominationName.
replacing NominationName with the name of the page being nominated.

This isn't a suggestion, but rather a requirement. An AFD with improper notification can and will be overturned at WP:DRV if it turns out a watcher didn't realize an AFD was underway and the result was close, which leads to pointless bureaucratic extra discussions. I wouldn't have said anything if it was a one-time bit of forgetfulness, but your re-nominations also did not include an edit summary that hinted at deletion. This is bad, because it means that editors who have a page on their watchlist might not be alerted to the fact that the article is under AFD. Please keep this in mind for any future AFDs you file. You might want to consider making a dummy edit on your current AFDs with the mandated edit summary just to be safe as well. SnowFire (talk) 15:42, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Review request :)

Hi, sorry to bother you, HumanxAnthro. I've noticed your reviews elsewhere and I was just wondering if you were willing to look over the article One of the Boys (1989 TV series), as it's a current FAC of mine. So far it has two supports, one with no declaration as of yet, and an image review complete. I would truly appreciate if you could leave some comments if you had the time and I would be happy to address them. Thanks so much, Heartfox (talk) 23:44, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Raiders

Yo HumanxAnthro, sorry to harangue you, do you think you will get to review Raiders or not get the chance? I think I have 4 supports at the minute but there's no set amount I guess I need. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 20:58, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

@Darkwarriorblake: Sorry about that. I got into a heated argument at a AFD and was at work today, so I'll take care of it, don't worry. 👨x🐱 (talk) 21:51, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Shoot for the Stars, Aim for the Moon

Hey. I was wondering if you could leave some comments for the Shoot for the Stars, Aim for the Moon FAC? After months of work, I think its ready. Shoot for the Stars 💫 (talk) 23:02, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Raiders of the Lost Ark/archive2

Darkwarriorblake is still waiting for you to continue your assessment here. Not sure what the delay is, but I hope you haven't forgotten about this. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 16:27, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Request

Hi, I hope you're doing good. If you have any spare time, I would really appreciate any comments at my current FAC. Your reviews elsewhere are very thorough and I believe your comments would enhance the article. Thanks, Heartfox (talk) 08:56, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Small comment

See Special:Diff/1030421854 and Special:Diff/1030421948 for passing GA-articles. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 20:22, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Good Humor
I may be pathetic but your film AfD comments (especially on Absolute Zero (film)) crack me up. Keep it up HumanxAnthro! (which makes you a furry btw). Anonymous 7481 (talk) 16:42, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Vote given for an Afd

Recently you have given weak keep vote for the afd Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Naseer Sankranthi I have added some new references to the page which has references which were not available in the Google Search Results. So please go through it and if you feel to, do upgrade your vote from Weak Keep to Keep 😊😊 Sonal Mathew (talk) 21:00, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you.....😊 Sonal Mathew (talk) 21:43, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

"Beep boop boop beep" ~ The Shadow Demon

Hey, would'ya look at that? You single-handedly kept Mr. Game & Watch from being deleted! "Wow, incredible!" ~ Super Smash Bros. announcer

Story time: He's my main in Smash, and the reason why is because I thought it was funny how he was a stick figure for a character. He's the reason for my love for Nintendo. I tried to make an article for him a while back, but I was still very new and it didn't last long. Now its here to stay and I'm bringing it to GA! So please, if you find any more sources please send them my way. Panini!🥪 03:00, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

So far I fixed up the concept and creation section a bit. Panini!🥪 03:01, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Wow, you main the most annoying character in Smash Ultimate. Also, I want to thank him for saving the article. 180.194.130.165 (talk) 05:01, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
Well, not because he's annoying, because he's fun to use. Who's your main? Panini!🥪 15:35, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
Those sources I brought up in the Afd were the only ones I found, so.... if I come across any more, I'll let you know 👨x🐱 (talk) 12:10, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Super Ghouls 'n Ghosts, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Difficulty.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bucky O'Hare (NES video game), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Parallel universe.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Just thought I'd mention

Hi HumanAnthro, since you've been interested in some similar articles I've nominated at FAC, I thought I'd just mention that I've nominated another, Anthony Kohlmann, which unfortunately is near to being closed for lack of input. If you care to leave any comments, they'd be appreciated as always. Ergo Sum 21:07, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

  • Thanks for the response. I was in the middle of a surge of working on VG articles, but I'd love to take a look at that. I imagine since it's a figure from before the 20th century a lot of print sources will be used, so somebody else will have to source spotcheck, so I could only comment on the prose and formatting. 👨x🐱 (talk) 21:43, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Review scores

Hi there. I wanted to ask if you could please stop adding extra review scores to the review boxes? (As in here and here) Per Template:Video game reviews, only reviews whose comments are cited within the Reception text should be listed. Wikipedia is not a database. We only need to summarize a game's reception, not log it in its entirety. TarkusABtalk/contrib 02:21, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

  • (1) WP:DATABASE does not apply to scores of highly-professional reviews, and there's no such thing as an "extra" reliable source review in game articles.
  • (2) I was going to add content from those reviews in the prose before you abruptly removed them. What if some user wanted to add opinions from those reviews and want a quick-way to the source?

Add content from reviews to the prose next time instead of just making random removals. 👨x🐱 (talk) 02:26, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

1) Since when does WP:DATABASE not apply to highly-professional reviews? And there is a such thing as "extra" as I just referenced in the template doc. 2) The previous versions are still in the article history, so you can still go back and add from those reviews. However, the articles are already pretty full. I would advise against doing this.
It was not my job to peruse those sources and add complementary text, and I do not think it was needed in these cases anyways. Using too many scores makes it difficult for the reader to get a summary of critical reception, which is more in line Wikipedia's guidelines than capturing and summarizing every score out there. TarkusABtalk/contrib 02:49, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
Come on. That was obviously not "every" score I added to those articles, and you can tell the number of reviews I added was so little it would not veer into a WP:NOTDATABASE. There are way more reviews out there of those games that aren't coded into the template that I didn't add. I am VERY conservative with how I add scores to game articles. 👨x🐱 (talk) 11:57, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
Maybe I'm not explaining myself well. I'll make it brief: You added several scores to review tables on GA/FA articles without any prose expansion. This is against the template documentation, so I reverted. That's all. Perhaps expand prose first, then add the scores. TarkusABtalk/contrib 15:00, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
OK. You're explaining yourself very well, so I'll add prose in the future. Although I will say Ocarina of Time may not be deserving of the FA mark. It has had that bronze star since 2006, and it shows. Definitely would not be considered FA quality today. I was noticing issues not only with a lack of reviews represented in prose and in the template, but also cite formatting issues. Plus, I imagine there's more to include in the Development section than what there currently is. 👨x🐱 (talk) 23:30, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:HumanxAnthro/Archive_2&oldid=1094340619"