Jump to content

User talk:Sergecross73/Archive 46

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 40←Archive 44Archive 45Archive 46Archive 47Archive 48→Archive 50

EL VY

It seems the Wikipedia page for EL VY keeps getting redirected to Matt Berninger. While Matt is the singer, this is not accurate. I've tried to make edits, and give a full context update, but it continues to revert to the redirect. Can you please help? 24.212.170.149 (talk) 15:04, 22 June 2016 (UTC)SG

As mentioned above, there was a discussion and consensus that EL VY did not meet Wikipedia's standards for haviing its own article. Since its a viable search term, and is mentioned at Matt Berninger's article, it was decided to be redirected there. Restoring the article in its current state is not an option, as there is an active agreement doing so. You've got 3 options:
  1. Show that he does meet the guidelines for having its own article, and rewrite the article. (That would require finding coverage in lots of sources. WP:ALBUM/SOURCES would be helpful probably.)
  2. Choose a new redirect target. (You'd have to tell me what that would be.)
  3. Put the redirect up for deletion. (I wouldn't recommend that, I'm not sure a good policy-based argument could be put together for that. Sergecross73 msg me 15:16, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

You can also rewrite the article at Draft:EL VY. When you believe you've included enough sources to pass WP:GNG, it can be submitted to AFC for review. AFC will let you know any issues with article or if it needs more sourcing. Passing AFC should settle any issues from the older deletion discussion. -- ferret (talk) 15:22, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, that would probably be the best way to do it, were someone to take option 1. Sergecross73 msg me 15:25, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Breath of the Wild

One of the objectors complaint was based upon the use of the word multiple in front of the word Amiibo without figurings after it. He considered Amiibo to be fine but said that multiple Amiibo needed the word figurines after it. Dropping the word multiple seems to appease him, the other editor, and my self and leaves only 2 objectors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.88.62.140 (talk) 15:55, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

The main objection was not the use of the word "multiple", the main objection was the removal of the word "figurine". All 3 editors objected that, not to mention a few other editors "thanked" me for re-adding "figurines", so I do not believe your change reflects the majority of the editor's stance. I've started a discussion on the talk page to get a more clear consensus on this. Sergecross73 msg me 15:59, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Could you move this file?

Hi, could you please move the file File:Fallout 3 Logo.png to File:Van Buren Fallout 3 Logo.png? It's currently misleading because the actual Fallout 3 logo is different. Anarchyte (work | talk) 11:01, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Anarchyte - I think I have done what you have requested, but let me know if I messed it up. I don't do a whole lot with images on Wikipedia, and as such, I don't tend to do much file moving. I think it worked though. Sergecross73 msg me 12:36, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure that's correct. Thanks! Anarchyte (work | talk) 12:39, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Vandalism pt 13

Here's the 13th iteration of Serge's personal WP:AIV. Let me know if you like me to look into any instances that you feel may require warnings, blocks, or page protections. Sergecross73 msg me 16:23, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

  • I had been trying to hold off on that, as there was an IP or two, at least in the past, who were pretty prolific in editing/maintaining the page. But you're right, there's been a talk page discussion ongoing, but the IP has refused to participate, and just made the change anyways, so I've protected it. Sergecross73 msg me 15:14, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Sorry, I looked into this, just never responded. I agree his additions are bad, and he's being tiresome to editors...but I feel like he hasn't quite broken that final warning yet though. His edits since the final warning were more along the line of "sloppy" than "vandalism/disruptive" I think. He's on super thin ice though, for sure. Sergecross73 msg me 12:43, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Protected the 2K Games article, as that seems to be the place hit the most times, and it stops the problem without blocking them. (Still hard to tell if edits are in good faith or not. Or maybe I'm just in a forgiving mood today. Wait and let it pass. ;) ) Sergecross73 msg me 19:30, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Yeah, I often times give up on maintaining infoboxes - there's so many people doing it wrong I oftentimes forget what the right way is. I can protect some more if they're hitting up the same articles. Have they even acknowledged any of the concerns you or anyone else has had with their edits? Sergecross73 msg me 17:14, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Warnings from multiple editors at the original IP's talk page are unanswered. The editor definitely reads edit notes though, cause when they redo their edits they leave notes like "i don't know how to source you do it for me" or "but divisions before parents". It's still all unsourced, and I can't find this Take-Two annual report he's working off of supposedly. If they'll at least drop putting "of Parent" in the type field I'll just ignore it.... Type and parent are separate fields. -- ferret (talk) 17:19, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
@Mabalu: :-D — Smuckola(talk) 17:02, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
See also, edit patterns of 60.241.116.90 (talk · contribs). Obviously Falongen is now hiding behind IPS/anonymous editing to quack like a duck.... and almost got away with it too. (Edited to add - just noticed this IP has been blocked so obviously someone else spotted them...) Mabalu (talk) 11:01, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, that looks like him, with all the questionable redirects. I've blocked the first IP. I don't usually like to block IPs that aren't all that active, but the edits, while infrequent, are consistently his type of edits, so it appears to be an IP address that's just to him, and not a public library computer or something like that, so I doubt it'd affect anyone else but him. Sergecross73 msg me 12:39, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Same request for Toadies page. It's what made me notice him in the first place, and despite other editors also reverting his edits there, he keeps trying to make the same edits. That page was even protected for a day after I reported it to WP:AIV, but he's back to doing it again. This time he added a whole bunch of junk sources, but since multiple other editors were reverting him there too, it's clear there's no consensus for the genre edit he's pushing. Shelbystripes (talk) 19:14, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
  • He'd left that one alone for a bit, after a one-day protection and I added some additional sources. I'm worried he's going to return to pages where he tried before. Thanks for your help. Shelbystripes (talk) 16:53, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Hello again. I have two things I'd like to ask you about. First, the Undertale article gets vandalized by unregistered or newly registered users pretty much daily - do you think a temporary semi protection would be in order? Secondly, would you be able to close this requested move discussion and do the moves? (the target pages are redirects with history). Cheers--IDVtalk 17:54, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Protected Undertale long term. I don't know what it is, but that game seems to bring up issues, as I've been asked to help there in the past too. I'll look into the AA stuff too. Sergecross73 msg me 18:25, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Just checking if you forgot to do it, or if there was something else preventing you from closing/moving the AA articles (either way, no worries). Anarchyte already closed the discussion and put speedy deletion templates on the redirects, but it's been like 30 hours and they're still there... could you take a look at it?--IDVtalk 12:50, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
  • No problem, and thanks. The move seems to be correct, but the talk pages (and talk archives and GA review) haven't been moved. I have never seen the admin tools, but I recall hearing about an option to automatically move all sub-pages when moving an article or talk page, so maybe that can be used.--IDVtalk 13:02, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
  • I try! Haha. Mabalu - I've protected the page, though please fix it if I happened to protect a version with vandalism in it or something. I don't know anything about the subject, so it's hard to tell... Sergecross73 msg me 12:34, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks! I looked at the page history and went cross-eyed. The article is a bit of a steaming pile of something, and needs a major overhaul/redo, but it's not really an area I have much connection to/interest in. I mainly keep a tab on it since Malan Breton's PR got rather epically busted for conflict of interest editing. I wonder if some of the IP editing might be the PR, actually, or their successor, as if I were MB I wouldn't have wanted Jason Benz carrying on as my PR... Mabalu (talk) 13:11, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
  • I ended up protecting it before I saw you write this, as I had noticed the most recent vandalism was mere minutes ago. I feel its warranted, though they can repeal it if they want. Sergecross73 msg me 13:51, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Wow you are fast. That's some Sonic-level speed there, thanks! Satellizer el Bridget (Talk) 14:39, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Bahaha, yes, "gotta go fast". I don't spend all that much time at AN/ANI, but its on my watchlist, and I'm usually quick to jump in if I see someone who I commonly interact with out there, to see what's going on. That being said, you can always post this sort of thing on my talk page if you want to by-pass the "wildcard" that ANI can be sometimes. Sergecross73 msg me 14:53, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
One anonymous user is making edits continuously and does not provide a source for the supplied information. I would like him blocked or something on the Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo 3DS and Wii U page. I recently reverted the page back to the original edit. This edit was made:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Super_Smash_Bros._for_Nintendo_3DS_and_Wii_U&diff=next&oldid=724225162 as well as the others before it. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 00:09, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Page protected, IP given final warning. Thank you. Sergecross73 msg me 00:14, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
Your welcome. And thanks for that. I will report to you if I find anything else suspicious. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 00:20, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
@Sergecross73: Ferret was unclear about the subject, the reviews mentioned were comments from viewers i am not sure whether those would count as good sources of reviews for a film to be levied. If you too think so do look into article, then changing it to mixed or removing film received ? reviews sentence would be apt, I guess. Look into it. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.99.37.40 (talk) 17:09, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
I assume he's talking about MetaCritic's 29 out of 100 ratings score by professional reviewers, so "negative" would probably be an appropriate assessment. Sergecross73 msg me 17:17, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Replied at my talk page as well, but Rotten Tomato's critic reviews stand at 22% as well. These are not user reviews so they are appropriate (as well as typical and standard for film articles). -- ferret (talk) 17:19, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Thank you both for clearing it.59.99.37.40 (talk) 17:30, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
  • 104.179.150.100 (talk · contribs), I've been a little lenient on warnings here, but this is the guy who pops up periodically and adds "Year Video Game" to leads, i.e. "2009 video game". The release dates are usually in the same sentence already and its an atypical convention. It gets reverted by project members usually. Thoughts? -- ferret (talk) 14:13, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Blocked, deleted. I've been trying to protect places that fool repeatedly targets too. The guy is seemingly obsessed with the prospect of a Mario Galaxy 3, as if he's going to hoax it into existence or something...Sergecross73 msg me 14:46, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
2600:1017:B425:6DA7:6596:DA0E:2906:D392 (talk · contribs) and 70.199.66.200 (talk · contribs) same guy, first edit is Mario Kart 9 for E3. --The1337gamer (talk) 19:38, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Blocked, protected a few more common targets. Sergecross73 msg me 20:30, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
And again: 104.129.73.210 (talk · contribs) --The1337gamer (talk) 22:17, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
I haven't been keeping up much nor updating the LTA page but with E3 around I should've expected this guy to swing back around. Feel free to update my LTA page with IPs. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 22:34, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
  • I've reverted again because these edits are removing lots of sourced content with no real replacements, besides the massive departure from typical guideline ledes, typos and grammar. I won't push 3RR though, so someone else will have to take over if he won't even discuss on the article talk. -- ferret (talk) 15:36, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
  • I think it may be best for me to stay away from this one. If any disputes broke out on it, I feel like I could be targeted as being involved or biased. (I !voted to delete the article, I personally think the phrase/concept is stupid, and while I don't hold any real prejudices in it, a little digging would probably show that my interests are about 99% console/handheld and 1% PC. Your request has merit, but I don't think I should be the one to implement it. Sergecross73 msg me 15:52, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
OpOX1 (talk · contribs) is also him. His previous edits on Sega were restoring Tripple-ddd edits. His other edits on anime articles use the same syntax Tripple-ddd did by putting italic quotations inside wikilink brackets. --The1337gamer (talk) 16:31, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
91.113.101.136 (talk · contribs) Another. --The1337gamer (talk) 11:19, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
Two more: 178.190.246.67 (talk · contribs), Huppallo (talk · contribs). --The1337gamer (talk) 14:26, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
I had limited availability last weekend, but I believe I took care of all of these... Sergecross73 msg me 12:39, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
Another: 62.46.150.190 (talk · contribs) --The1337gamer (talk) 19:10, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
And another: 91.114.141.102 (talk · contribs) --The1337gamer (talk) 08:49, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
And another: OPOX2222 (talk · contribs) --The1337gamer (talk) 10:47, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
Haha, I've pondered the same thing myself in the past. Sure, no problem. Do you want it for a certain time period, or just indefinite? Sergecross73 msg me 02:25, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
Indefinite. There really is no valid reason for other users to edit it by default. It could be used without the user knowing, and it be slander or something. Wikipedia really needs to make it protected, with an option to make it open in the preferences. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 00:55, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
Sorry, was have an issue with the protection option yesterday, but I've applied it just now. You should be good to go. Sergecross73 msg me 12:29, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Breath of the Wild Sockpuppeting

@Sergecross73: Hey, I thought you'd like to know that I opened a sockpuppet investigation regarding an IP user you had to protect the Amiibo page from. (He also showed up on the Breath of the Wild page.) Since you've dealt with them before, I thought you'd like to take part in the investigation. -- Gestrid (talk) 00:10, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Gestrid. I've left a comment here, which is pretty much redundant to the response I was going to write here, so I'll just let you read it there. I appreciate your help. Sergecross73 msg me 12:33, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
I never like it when someone does what they did. I just got finished with an ANI-turned-SPI involving a rather annoying sockmaster/ suckpuppet. -- Gestrid (talk) 16:06, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Remember the BotW Vandal?

I was looking at the IP user Special:Contributions/76.119.224.157, searching for possible vandalism in other articles. While the IP hasn't been active since the 22nd, they are a suspected sockpuppet in Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/134.88.62.140/Archive. You said you would continue to block their more active IPs, and this is definitely one of them. Would you mind blocking them at least until the sockmaster's block expires? -- Gestrid (talk) 06:01, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi Gestrid. I appreciate the research and suggestion, but the blocking policy recommends not blocking IP addresses that aren't really actively being used. I'll block the moment it becomes active again, if the sockmaster is still active, but otherwise, it's probably best to just leave alone for now. (IP addresses are commonly reassigned, and this guy has a habit of starting and abandoning work at IP addresses, so chances are it wouldn't really do anything anyways. And any more disruption by pretty much any IP regarding amiibo or Zelda will just lead me to protect the pages anyways.) Thanks! Sergecross73 msg me 13:46, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Avenged Sevenfold

Could you swing by Avenged Sevenfold? The age old genre war is back. The archive is full of section after section on this topic. After it was returned to the status quo (Heavy metal), I made a talk page section and pinged the two editors involved, asking that it be left alone until a consensus is established. However they've continued reverting without joining the discussion. Thus far, I've not been involved other than the talk page message. A glance at contributions shows a lot of unsourced genre changes.... -- ferret (talk) 00:40, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

I gave them each a warning for now, instructing them to discuss on the talk page. I've noticed both editors making unconstructive genre edits/arguments in the past, so both probably needed it. Here's hoping they change... Sergecross73 msg me 15:05, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
Seems to have done the trick.... The last edit was to remove an unreliable source the "heavy metal" editor added to prove the genre, with an edit summary "There's already sources in the body for this".... which of course makes you want to go, "Then why were you changing it?" -- ferret (talk) 14:01, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Tekken 7's Bob & Master Raven

You forgot to add time release mark on them. Also, the female Raven, since she is dubbed Master Raven due to her rank as Master is the original Raven's superior. 139.192.118.153 (talk) 03:42, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

I think you've got me confused for someone else. I've cleared out some vandalism and enforced consensus from talk page discussions there, but I haven't been regularly updating the article with new content or anything. You may want to make that comment on the article talk page, and see if someone will alter that for you. Sergecross73 msg me 15:03, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Grading Skid Row

Hey Serge, if you have some free time these days, can you check if Skid Row fulfills the B-class criteria for albums? I'd normally post a request to WP:ALBUMS, but since no one ever checks there, I thought it would be more practical to ask someone. Thanks in advance.--Retrohead (talk) 19:10, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Sure, I suppose I could be a good person for that - being a writer of album articles, but have no real affinity for or against this band/album. Just so you are aware though - I play it pretty "fast and loose" with that whole WP:1.0 system. Personally, I don't feel most readers know about that sort of stuff, so I usually just clean up an article as good as I can, and I feel like that usually just happens to naturally place my articles into the B-range. So, it might not be real technical, and a pickier person could object, but regardless, I'll still read it over for you. (B-class isn't all that serious anyways, considering you can implement that change yourself even, unlike GA/FA.) Sergecross73 msg me 19:19, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Vic Viper

You're just a dick. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dasaten (talk • contribs) 20:12, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Rather than pointing the finger and playing the blame game, why not see what you did wrong. If you want to pursue this, I recommend starting a rough draft at Wikipedia's "Article's for Creation", and getting it approved by a reviewer, until you get a better grasp on how to write a proper article. No more name-calling though, Wikipedia has a policy against that. Sergecross73 msg me 20:21, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

It wasn't a personal attack. It was a statement based on observation. You took your time to undo tons of work that I did. There should indeed be a disambiguation page for Vic Viper, as there is a notable band with that name. Just because there aren't a bunch of articles about them to reference doesn't mean they aren't credibly notable. They are one of the most successful and quickest rising bands in the video game cover scene. There are tons of wikipedia articles with far less credibility, why don't you spend your time cleaning up those instead? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dasaten (talk • contribs) 20:40, 19 July 2016‎ (UTC)

I assume you understand "you're a dick" is not a constructive comment, so I'll pass on to your other points. You fundamentally misunderstand how the speedy deletion process works. I did not "single out" your article, someone else tagged it as an article that was so poorly written that it be deleted without discussion. I agreed with this nomination, and thus, deleted it. I was merely working my way through the list/database of articles tagged for speedy deletion, and came across it. You'd have to ask that other person as to why they "singled it out", though you should also know that other article's being in worse shape than yours is not a defense that works on Wikipedia.
If you're so intent that I'm being the bad guy here, then by all means, run your article by the article for creation system, and see what the reviewer says. I guaranteed it'd be rejected in its current form. Articles are supposed to be written around what third party sources say about a subject. You provided zero sources at all. That's an auto-fail. Sergecross73 msg me 20:52, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Is it bad taste to edit an article while it's under GA review when somebody else is working on the article?

Like if you see these points at Talk:Resonance_of_Fate/GA1, should I fix the points, and write on the talk page that I did it, or let the nominator do it? Catfrog (Edits 🐸 Talk) 04:17, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Catfrog - I don't think it'd be in bad taste, I think that's fine if you want to jump in. I guess it could be considered rude if you started steamrolling people and being difficult, but that goes for anywhere in Wikipedia I suppose. Yeah, just communicate what you're doing, and follow WP:BRD if there are any disputes, and you should be good. Sergecross73 msg me 12:35, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Tangle Teezer

I didn't list this as A7., but as G11. I agree is passes A7 DGG ( talk ) 22:11, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Gotcha. It survived a recent AFD too, FYI. Sergecross73 msg me 22:57, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

File moving

Hello Sergecross73, could you please move the following files for consistency with the rest of the "Pokémon lead art" files?

Thanks. I might just request the file mover right if I find any more. Anarchyte (work | talk) 09:12, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

  • I don't mind doing this for you, but just to confirm...is naming conventions/consistency in file names is something that is important/valued? Not doubting you, I am legitimately asking honestly, as I work very little in the image area of Wikipedia. :) Sergecross73 msg me 13:14, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
It's not valued as much as on other sites, like commons. Check out WP:FNC#6. Anarchyte (work | talk) 22:22, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Stifling Pokemon discussion

I note your attempts to stifle discussion on this topic, and your remark that "Unless there's a new development or source that literally and directly states the exact information you want to include, there is nothing more to discuss."

Indeed, there's more to discuss. You're attempting to block discussion by presuming ownership of this article, and I can't be blocked for trying to improve the discussion just because you don't like it. That's not permitted in Wikipedia, and I will vigorously defend any shady or sneaky attempts to bottle up this discussion in this manner. You're much better off focusing your efforts to improving the article rather than stifling discussion, especially when the discussion is supported by internationally known reliable sources. I think the best way to move forward on this is to open the Dispute Resolution process, so tread carefully. Santamoly (talk) 22:55, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Please read WP:IDHT and WP:STICK. It describes what we're going through right now. There is a consensus against you. You keep proposing the same info and sources that do not mesh with Wikipedia policies or guidelines. 4 separate editors have closed the discussion on the same grounds. It's as my final warning said - unless you have a new Wikipedia-standard reliable source, there's nothing left to discuss. (And Dispute Resolution will not take on a case that has a landslide consensus already against, and even if they did, your arguments, as they currently are, will not be convincing to experienced editors who understand the website.) Sergecross73 msg me 23:30, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Collapsible list

Do a collapsible list should be added in the template or infobox of an album-based article or should be removed? Because I didn't read anything in the Wikipedia guidelines if is appropriate to add a collapsible list in the template. I believe a collapsible list should only be used in the track listings, only if there are bonus tracks. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 14:36, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

I'm not sure about the exact guidelines, but yeah, I think the only time I usually personally add them is to shorten down bonus tracks, or other scenarios where an alternate tracklist that is only slightly different from the regular version exists. I don't really add or remove them anywhere else personally - I'm indifferent.
Is this about a particular scenario/conflict, or just a general question? Let me know if you have further questions if I didn't quite answer your question too. Sergecross73 msg me 20:12, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
It's was just a question. But yeah, I agreed that a collapsible list should belong to a track list, only if there are bonus tracks. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 17:06, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Deletion of Socfin

Hello Sergecross73,

You have deleted Socfin with the reasons given being A7: No credible indication of importance (individuals, animals, organizations, web content, events): G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion. According to this item it is quite important. Furthermore, the article was not advertising. Hence I ask you to restore the article. Kind regards, Sarcelles (talk) 12:33, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi there. If you would like to try again with creating the article through Wikipedia's "Articles for Creation" process, that would be fine, but the article in its current form, was completely unfit to have a Wikipedia article. It contained no sources, no formatting or structure, and seemed to be half in ...French? I'd recommend reading over User:Sergecross73/Why was my article deleted and then trying again at WP:AFC. Sergecross73 msg me 12:58, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi,

I have the following suggestion: A move to my user namespace, but with no right to move for non-administrators. Kind regards,Sarcelles (talk) 08:02, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

I honestly believe it'd be in your best interest to just start over - not only is it fundamentally flawed (you're supposed to write according to what sources say, yet no sources were in the article) but what was there was really quite minimal. It was just a handful of sentences one after the other - you didn't even really write in paragraph form. No infoboxes. No categories. No sections. No formatting. Sergecross73 msg me 12:37, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sergecross73/Archive_46&oldid=1143716149"