User talk:Boneless Pizza!/Archive 1

Archive 1

December 2022

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to SS Politician—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Materialscientist (talk) 11:47, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Rex

Can u ad a page for rex from toy story as he a major character Ethan169 (talk) 11:49, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Vandalism

I didnt do vadism i was updating Woody profile picture Ethan169 (talk) 11:54, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

You should have consent first at Talk:Woody (Toy Story) before changing image. Also, the image you uploaded is a copyright violation. GlatorNator (talk) 12:18, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Does Woody have a backstory or origin / Andy getting him for the 1st time / fresh out of the box any of these? Ethan169 (talk) 14:07, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Tekken images

I don't have problems with updating the pictures but the way he is doing was done icorrectly as they are nonfree images rather than free so they are gonna be deleted either way. I guess it's better to ask in the wikiproject for help.Tintor2 (talk) 22:47, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

GAR

Hi! You recently posted up a GAR request on an article; but you haven't left any info on what you think is wrong with the article - I've removed it for now, but if you have some comments we can open up a GAR for the article Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:33, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Reception

Sure. Still, if you plan to nominate to FA or something I suggest the reception section needs coverage of Leon's reception in the movies. Then again, Jill Valentine's article makes little mention of them. Tintor2 (talk) 13:55, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

FA? nope. I have zero knowledge about that + time consuming. GlatorNator (talk) 21:34, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

You think his relationship with Ada should be mentioned? Kinda feels like a major trait to his character especially since the staff mention them a lot in the creation section.Tintor2 (talk) 03:13, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

Maybe, Im not too familiar yet how to write decently at this website. I already reworded most at the reception, your help is appreciated. I think I have nothing to add more since I couldn't find anything now. GlatorNator (talk) 03:36, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

Re: Corrin (Fire Emblem)

I can't say I understand your edit summary when reverting the redirect there. Are you saying you think it is notable? My rationale for redirecting is that at the time I recreated the article, I was unaware TheGamer was a content farm type source. I should probably have known better since it was just a listicle, but without it there is really very little in the way of significant coverage. I am not sure what you are seeing there that proves notability for the article, and I created the list of characters in order to fold the article into it. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:38, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

My bad, after reading it throughout, I think youre right that most of it are listicles. Feel free to revert it. GlatorNator (talk) 12:40, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Okay, will do so. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:42, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Another possible AfD

I would also consider nominating Nemesis (Resident Evil) for deletion if you agree it is non-notable. I checked that article in the process of looking for possible sources for Tyrant, but, unlike Mr. X, he does not seem to have significant coverage from anywhere (That WP:VG/S does not describe as a "content farm"). Huge reception section, mostly just one sentence mentions. Strange due to his prominence, but nothing in the article seems to indicate anyone could find anything of use. I wouldn't worry about delisting it from Good Article status this time. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:58, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

I think he is barely notable. Nominating that article for afd might possibly fail. Regards. GlatorNator (talk) 09:51, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Hmm - what are the SIGCOV, secondary sources then? I could only find this, and it has no original opinions. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:39, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure, though; I am not yet very familiar with the notability policy. Sometimes I'm wrong. Maybe try to talk with the author, User:Kung Fu Man. GlatorNator (talk) 11:01, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

There's a book mention I can work into the article when I get free time, but I feel it's fine for notability. I don't see what would be gained from a AfD besides wasting everyone's time to be honest...--Kung Fu Man (talk) 03:04, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Ada Wong

Consensus is not needed to remove information that is irrelevant to the content of the article, is not encyclopedic information, is incorrect, is disorganized and placed under an unsuitable (sub)section, or contains grammatical errors. ภץאคгöร 21:58, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

And yet you readded listicles back at the reception section. 11 years but still has no idea what do, smh. GlatorNator (talk) 22:00, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

April 2023

Hello, I'm Actualcpscm. I noticed that you recently removed content from Quan Chi without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Simpling stating it is irrelevant in the edit summary is not a sufficient explanation. Actualcpscm (talk) 12:27, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mr. X (Resident Evil) has been accepted

Mr. X (Resident Evil), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

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

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 21% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

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

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

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

Thanks again, and happy editing!

ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:09, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Stryker

Hi again. Unfortunately it's looking like Stryker will wind up on the chopping block as I haven't been able to find anything relevant. However, I think we'll give him a stay of execution until these current MK AfDs (Baraka, Shinnok, etc.) have closed, as having numerous character discussions open at once will get a bit overwhelming. Take care. sixtynine ^{• whaddya want? •} 06:37, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

It's fine. There's no deadline anyway. Besides Stryker, Jade (Mortal Kombat) might also fail WP:GNG since none of the sources talk about her and the article was ref bombed with listicles, unlike Shao Kahn, which is a mess but has a lot of sources talking about him on google news. GlatorNator (talk) 11:27, 24 March 2023 (UTC) 

Stryker and Jade have been nominated. However, with the exception of Goro, I would wait until doing likewise with the others you mentioned as those might require some more detective work for sources, given their status in the series. Cheers. sixtynine ^{• whaddya want? •} 17:41, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

I've found a couple sources on Goro in the quick search I just did. If I found them that quickly, there's bound to be more. Plus, like the rest of the MK1 cast, he's a very popular character and perhaps even iconic. I'll be adding them to his article soon. MoonJet (talk) 03:39, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

I went ahead and pulled the trigger on Noob Saibot. Looking for viable MK character reception is an exercise in frustration these days. sixtynine ^{• whaddya want? •} 04:18, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Good. The saddest thing is the article about Raiden, which is the worst of all. But I am not sure if he is notable, which is why I haven't touched it yet. Jax looks like the next candidate for AFD, and then I think we're done with MK articles. Kenshi possibly barely passes notability. GlatorNator (talk) 04:43, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

I would probably disagree with Jax being merged as much as I did Goro. Jax has tons of sources talking about his MK11 ending, which make for a good controversy section. MoonJet (talk) 04:52, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Re: Mr. X (Resident Evil)

He does seem notable, unlike Tyrant (Resident Evil) in general.

1. Source 1
2. Source 2
3. Source 3

There are a lot of other articles with trivial coverage, but these seem like enough WP:SIGCOV to base an article on at the very least. Technically the last one is an interview with a dataminer, but the article paraphrases everything and puts a bit of interpretation in it. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:36, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

That said, I would likely throw out all the current Reception sources in the Tyrant article - they're entirely trivial. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:41, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

Unrelated topic, but do characters like Jax (Mortal Kombat) notable just because of his controversy? Which has 3 sources [1] [2] [3] GlatorNator (ᴛ) 05:13, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Mr. X GA

Please note, this in not a review of your GA nomination of the above mentioned article but rather some advice from one editor to another. Looking over it I can tell you that, although you cite things really well, there is a significant amount of information that is missing on the character such as the concept and creation section (how it was developed and designed), and so on. I would check google books for potential sources as there is quite a bit of info there that can be used. If you need help or advice on how to cite and what to cite feel free to message me. Paleface Jack (talk) 15:57, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

I think all of the sources on Google have already been implemented except for books, which I have no idea how to check, but if you do, I hope you cite it here so I can attempt to add it. Many thanks! GlatorNator (ᴛ) 21:59, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mr. X (Resident Evil)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Mr. X (Resident Evil) 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Damien Linnane -- Damien Linnane (talk) 01:42, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mr. X (Resident Evil)

The article Mr. X (Resident Evil) 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:Mr. X (Resident Evil) and Talk:Mr. X (Resident Evil)/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Damien Linnane -- Damien Linnane (talk) 02:41, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mr. X (Resident Evil)

The article Mr. X (Resident Evil) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Mr. X (Resident Evil) for comments about the article, and Talk:Mr. X (Resident Evil)/GA1 for the nomination. 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Damien Linnane -- Damien Linnane (talk) 12:23, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Re: Nightwolf

Withdrawing it really wasn't necessary. Not only did you not do anything out of process at all - it's been an entire year since the previous AfD - but it's only been 2 days and the only people who commented did not give actual arguments besides WP:LASTTIME.

So I recommend undoing the withdrawal personally, you lose literally nothing by letting it play out. If it's another "no consensus" then it should probably not be nominated in a while, but I've seen articles that had "no consensus" at least 5 times get deleted on the 6th. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:22, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Makes sense. Done Restoring. GlatorNator (ᴛ) 23:27, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Albert Wesker

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Albert Wesker 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Premeditated Chaos -- Premeditated Chaos (talk) 10:01, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

AfD

Looks like you tried to nominate Denis (YouTuber) by replacing the old deletion discussion with a new one. What you'll need to do is create a new nomination ending in "(2nd nomination)". I'd suggest installing WP:TW, which does this automatically when you nominate something for deletion with it. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 15:15, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Albert Wesker

The article Albert Wesker you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Albert Wesker 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Premeditated Chaos -- Premeditated Chaos (talk) 16:02, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

RE: Withdrawing AfDs

I would suggest reducing the amount of AfDs that you withdraw. Even in the worst-case scenario that you are totally wrong about article notability, having it run its full course and garner a ton of "keep" !votes where everyone agrees that "yes, this is notable" provides clear and obvious evidence of notability for the future that people can point to if its notability is questioned. This cannot happen if the AfD is stopped early on. Unless something is very clearly a WP:SNOW situation, I recommend against any withdrawals. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:53, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

On that suggestion I'd add a reduction in the amount of AfD nominations in the first place. Shut Up! Cartoons, StatMuse and MinutePhysics all easily meet the criteria on WP:SIGCOV, yet have all inexplicably been marked as lacking in such. Taku1101 (talk) 00:51, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure if I'd agree about the "easily meet" part (a lot of the sources brought up are press releases and/or routine announcements that don't nececessarily meet WP:CORPDEPTH), but the arguments for deletion are very brief and lack the source analysis that otherwise might prove the article is not notable. It needs more rigor put into the arguments, which don't prove in full why the current sources are bad. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 01:30, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know Zx. I thought you are only not able to withdraw once some people voted delete or merge. GreenishPickle! (🔔) 04:32, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

That is technically correct. This is more of an etiquette thing where sometimes it's better to let it play out. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:17, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

"The Baby (Resident Evil)" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect The Baby (Resident Evil) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 3 § The Baby (Resident Evil) until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 02:11, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Reverted edit on Sora (Kingdom Hearts)

Hi, could you please explain why you reverted this edit on the page for Sora (Kingdom Hearts)? As far as I can tell, there is no source in the article that backs up the claim that the character's prominence "increased significantly" after he was added to Smash Bros.

Thanks, Loytra (talk) 06:42, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Beebo the God of War

Hello a while ago I put out a request for a Peer Review here to which you said it wasnt good ennough. An additoinal 15,330 bytes have been added to the page. So feel free to say no but I was hoping you could take another look at the page. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 21:52, 6 January 2024 (UTC)