User talk:Haleth/Archive 2

Dragon age

Do you have also a plan of making Iron Bull?. 49.149.100.50 (talk) 03:27, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Maybe. I am planning to do Solas next. Maybe Leliana. It all depends on how many sources one can find out on the internet which could establish a particular character's notability. Are you interested in contributing? Haleth (talk) 07:06, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

I wouldn't want you to take this as an obligation, but if you're planning on expanding Dragon Age articles further a while back I was looking up sources, both potentially to split off any characters and for the sake of the Characters of Dragon Age: Inquisition article. One of them I did outright split (Cassandra), some of them I found enough stuff to conceivably consider splitting but never got around to (Varric, Sera, Iron Bull).

Anyway, hoarder that I am, you can see them here and, for Iron Bull specifically, here.

They're all pretty haphazardly formatted and organised, and some of them are more useful than others (I cast a wide net and some mentions might be relatively minor), but if any of them seem useful to you feel free to use them. – The Millionth One (talk) (contribs) 02:21, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

No, I don't see it as you obliging me at all. Thank you very much for sharing your sources with me. It will save me a lot of time in case I do decide to act on splitting off any more characters as standalone articles. Since you already have a head start on Iron Bull, I'll probably start on that next by picking up from where you left off. Maybe Sera as well down the track. Other then these two, I am not sure if there are any other characters from the Dragon Age series who warrant their own standalone articles. Characters like Leliana, Fenris, Shale, Cullen, and Isabela are popular with the fanbase, but I am unsure about notability. Haleth (talk) 16:11, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Loghain Mac Tir, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Patriot (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:11, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 4

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of Dragon Age characters, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Greg Ellis (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:27, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Cut and paste move at The Iron Bull

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Iron Bull a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into The Iron Bull. 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. Axem Titanium (talk) 22:17, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Edit help on fictional thing

do you think you can rescue this redirected article?, like Ness (character) and notable article Max Caulfield but redirected due to block evasion. 178.55.228.116 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 09:58, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

I have read the edit histories for Ness (character), and I don't see why the rationales provided for redirecting the article to the main Earthbound article were unreasonable. If anything, the Ness section on the Earthbound article could probably be expanded with more info. As for Max Caulfield, I am not familiar with the subject matter or the Life Is Strange series. Haleth ([[User

Disambiguation link notification for March 19

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of Mass Effect characters, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gary Carr (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

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

Orphaned non-free image File:Kaidan Romance.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Kaidan Romance.jpg. 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) 17:43, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 28

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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:55, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For your work on Mass Effect and Dragon Age characters. Keep up the good work! OceanHok (talk) 17:37, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 4

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of Mass Effect characters, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Big Brother (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 12:18, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:MELeviathan.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:MELeviathan.jpg. 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) 03:11, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:MassEffect3Omega.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:MassEffect3Omega.jpg. 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) 03:12, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:LegionMassEffect.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:LegionMassEffect.jpg. 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) 17:47, 13 April 2020 (UTC)talk:Haleth#top|talk]]) 16:59, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 20

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Goldar, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages The Wizard of Oz and Ninjor (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 15:28, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Red XIII

due to the popularity of the recent released game, do you think Red XIII is gonna be notable to have its own article?. 49.149.111.227 (talk) 08:26, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Have you encountered a lot of good coverage from reliable sources on the character, other then when SE announced that he isn't playable for at least the first part of the remake? Haleth (talk) 16:52, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 28

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Power Rangers Turbo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alpha 5 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:29, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 27

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 343 Guilty Spark, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Naturalism.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:12, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 3

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 343 Guilty Spark, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Telegraph.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:18, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello

On the National Cuisine page I get what you mean that there is a difference between official national cuisine and cuisines countries are known for having or part of their culture. Will keep this in mind. Side note, in your edit diffs you aren’t supposed to directly name another editor as you can get in trouble for that. Trust me I have gotten scolded for it. Anyway cheers and thanks for the effort to clean up the page. OyMosby (talk) 13:36, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Nishikiyama

Commenting here since I forgot to ping. With those sources about I pointed in the talk page, I'm pretty sure the media did large coverage in regards to Nishkiyama's reception without including reviews of his games. What might be more difficult than making a reception section is the creation. I haven't seen much about Nishiki's creation (similar to Majima's) so I don't know if there is such creation. Anyway, I hope you enjoy editing it.Tintor2 (talk) 22:21, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Nice work with Nishikiyama's article. It looks awesome.Tintor2 (talk) 18:54, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the compliment. Sorry, I forgot to get back to you on the talk page. You are right, I wasn't able to find much primary source stuff on design and concept for Nishikiyama, it's likely there's stuff out there in Japanese which never got translated but are waiting to be discovered, but there are quite a few reliable third party sources which go into detail on the whole pathos and psychoanalysis stuff so that should take care of the question of significant coverage. I am very certain the subject passes GNG, especially taking into account Japanese media outside of the games. If you think you can make any further improvements to the article in any way, please do! 19:31, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

No prob. Nice to see the Yakuza articles became more active in Wikipedia. Yakuza Kiwami has some sources that talk about the creation but sadly they are in Japanese so it'd be better to ask in the project about it. The only other characters that I think could get articles are Akiyama, Saeijima and Goda since they also start in multiple games.Tintor2 (talk) 21:16, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

I think Ryuji Goda has enough substantial discussion in terms of reception, but not sure if such an article will survive an AFD or an overzealous editor with a strict and narrow interpretation of WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. Saejima and Akiyama not so much since Yakuza 4 and 5 came out during a nadir period in popularity and sales for the franchise (at least outside of Japan), any usable analysis material is more likely locked behind the language barrier, and I don't see the remastered collection generating the sort of attention and publicity 0 and the two Kiwami games have. Haleth (talk) 18:31, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Found a Japanese interview about his 0 persona and posted it in the project. I can't use my computer right now so it could be neat if you also ask for a translation in the Japanese project Tintor2 (talk) 17:31, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Found it. I suppose it's a source that's nice to have somewhere down the line, but wouldn't be essential to prove notability if say it is nominated the article for an AFD. I guess I could ask a Japanese friend of mine for a favour and watch the video for me. Haleth (talk) 18:31, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Here.Tintor2 (talk) 20:16, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Just saw Goda. Nice work. Especially with all those Japanese sources. It kinda feels like the opposite of Majima who kinda lacks this type of information. Not to be sudden but if Ichiban Kasuga gets a lot of focus from the media, he might have potential to his own article in a similar fashion to Yagami who also got a lot of articles focused on his creation.Tintor2 (talk) 15:36, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the compliment. I was able to find enough info for the creative process behind Ryuji because of the publicity blitz for the mobile Yakuza game. I am pretty sure I can dig up more stuff about Majima on Famitsu/4gamer, but that would be really low on my priority list for now as I want to get other stuff done first, and I am a bit over interpreting Japanese expressions and turns of phrase for now. With Majima's section, it can be expanded with the Kotaku page about tattoos, which went into detail about Majima's hannya tattoo. https://kotaku.com/the-meaning-of-yakuzas-tattoos-1793074894

Ichiban Kasuga has already got a lot of media attention both in Japan and elsewhere since he was revealed. No surprise there since he is intended to replace Kiryu in a long running franchise. Quite a few interviews out there where they picked the developers' brains about him too. Once the game is released internationally and the reviews are published, it's only a matter of time. I'm certain there will be plenty of material we can work with. Haleth (talk) 17:38, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 14

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Akira Nishikiyama, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Akasaka and Minato Ward.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:09, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Zed (comics)

The article Zed (comics) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) requirement. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page here in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back through WP:ECHO or by leaving a note at User talk:Piotrus. Thank you.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:54, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 21

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

Bayek of Siwa

added a link pointing to Bloomberg

It's Over 9000!

added a link pointing to Razer

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:40, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Zed (comics) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Zed (comics) 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/Zed (comics) 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. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:47, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:KaitDiazGears.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:KaitDiazGears.jpg. 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) 17:47, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Kazuma Kiryu

The appearances section of Kiryu has been lacking information of most installments in the past months. As a result, I tried adding little by little, information about each game. However, I'm not confident with this and wonder if you could give it a look and revise anything that is incorrect (Some plottwists sure are hard to remember) especially something can be trimmed. Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 23:20, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Tintor, it looks fine to me as a summary. Not overly long. And anyway, the current version of the article is still at a very comfortable length. If you ask me, the List of Yakuza characters might need a good trim and some rewrites, and it's a lot to go through. Haleth (talk) 12:03, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

I see. By the way, I'm not sure if I'll play Like a Dragon at launch but if you feel like it, create Ichiban's article (I kinda did play Judgment at launch though when making Yagami's article). I haven't checked articles though about him yet. There was something similar a fellow user did with the protagonist of FFXV, Noctis, as his game was delayed a lot.Tintor2 (talk) 15:23, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

I prefer to buy physical games but it's hard for me to get a copy at my current location with the ongoing pandemic. But I do have access to Microsoft Gamepass; if it drops on the service soon after launch I'd be overjoyed lol. I am not aware that Y7/LAD was heavily delayed, or went through the kind of developmental hell FF Versus-XIII/FFXV did. There's quite a bit of character developmental material from what I've gleaned through, but not enough critical commentary on the character himself. I think I am only comfortable tackling a wikipedia article for Ichiban Kasuga well after the reviews are out since there are many auto-patrolling editors who are double tough on the creation of fictional character articles these days. Keep in mind that Noctis was in the public consciousness for nearly a decade before FFXV was finally released in late-2016, and standards on wikipedia were nowhere as strict back then. Haleth (talk) 15:54, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

No prob. I'll just be adding pre-release reception to Ichiban's character section from the list for now.Tintor2 (talk) 20:51, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

And...a standalone article I've just completed was hit with an AFD, where several reliable sources vetted by the Video Games Wikiproject are derided as "fan magazines". That's why I am reluctant to start an article unless I am certain I am absolutely prepared. Haleth (talk) 16:20, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

RM notification and all that

Hey! Thank you for your work in creating the disambiguation page at Kaidan; however, I believe the article originally located at that title is still the primary topic, since most of the other articles currently linked there are actually subordinate to it or are similarly tied to Japanese language and culture but are not as well-known even in Japan, so I've opened a move request.

On a loosely related note, when you move a page and create a disambiguation page out of the original title, it might be a good idea to follow the fifth bullet point at WP:POSTMOVE and either manually go through all the existing links and figure out where they should go, or just change them all to go to the original target article. Without moving a page right now to check, I am not sure if I can confirm this, but if I recall correctly once you move a page you are told you need to fix "double redirects", but I don't recall ever being specifically told to fix disambig links in such a situation. Ironically though, the bot will catch the double redirects automatically and fairly quickly, but the disambig links apparently still need to be fixed manually.

Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 10:30, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Morrigan Poster.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Morrigan Poster.jpg. 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) 17:40, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 22

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Lancer Assault Rifle, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page PDP.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:25, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

A video game barnstar for you!

		The Video Game Barnstar
		Usually when I come across an article about a fictional character or plot element in the back of the new pages queue, it's a poorly-sourced article of dubious notability being edit-warred back into existence. Your well-written articles about video game characters and features have been a welcome change of pace. signed, Rosguill talk 19:51, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

• +1 I've been working the NPP queue and some of the older game redirects that you removed after fixing the articles. 👍🏻 Atsme 💬 📧 16:09, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
  • Thank you. Haleth (talk) 21:18, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 3

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mission Vao, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Taris.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:33, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Autopatrolled

I suggest you apply to be autopatrolled if you haven't already. It makes things easier for someone who makes large amounts of articles by preventing your articles from being flagged._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 16:09, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, I've done that as per your suggestion. I don't really have a problem with NPP editors reviewing my pages (well, maybe one person, but I won't go there), but a recent post on the wiki talk project where 3 articles I've done have been called out came as a surprise to me, and I presume that got your attention too. Haleth (talk) 20:56, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

That is what made me post the message. I had problems with that too before I got autopatrolled and had my article on an indie game speedy deleted once. Especially when making articles on "niche" topics like indie games or game characters, etc. it's an issue._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 07:59, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Dragon Ball GT characters

While I agree with you on removing mentions to Dragon Ball GT and removing the original characters like Baby, Giru or the Shadow Dragons, I do not think it is a good idea to add such sections in the Dragon Ball GT article, since they are just a re-tell of the plot section. Since they belong to this continuity only, I am up for removing them (and also new characters in the films' articles such a Janemba, Tapion, etc.) Thoughts? --LoЯd ۞pεth 17:09, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Actually, the existing plot summary on the main GT article doesn't cover every significant or notable character in the TV series. If there are any repeats or redundant re-telling between the character entries and the plot summary, I think the former can be easily trimmed. What I've seen, which I interpret as a precedent, is that on many other TV show articles, the main and recurring cast of characters are listed on the main article; this is taking into account shows that also have comprehensive lists of episodes, and a separate list of characters article for the show/franchise. I think this is because topics on television shows, by their very nature, have more breadth and scope compared to movies. I don't think it benefits a reader who have to comb through a list of episodes just to locate a concise summary about a specific character or aspect of the show when they can be concisely described on the front page. Since the GT show is treated as its own continuity and I am trying to reduce the bloat on the main list of characters page, it just makes the most sense to me. So, I don't agree that they should be removed from the front page of the GT article, but no harm trimming some redundant info out.

You are more then welcome to clean up the character entries on the film articles along with their plot summaries though, as the original characters' entries seem to be a re-telling of their movie's specific plot section and they don't usually make any further notable appearances outside of said movies. I have to admit that I haven't watched the majority of them so I am not confident in tackling their plot summaries. Haleth (talk) 21:16, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Autopatrolled granted

Hi Haleth, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the autopatrolled right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. However, you should consider adding relevant wikiproject talk-page templates, stub-tags and categories to new articles that you create if you aren't already in the habit of doing so, since your articles will no longer be systematically checked by other editors (User:Evad37/rater and User:SD0001/StubSorter.js are useful scripts which can help). Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! — Wug·a·po·des​ 04:13, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

would you do byleth also?. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.35.124.111 (talk) 08:34, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

No. Haleth (talk) 08:36, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

I have removed the autopatrolled right from your account since, based on this conversation, you appear to have requested it expressly to avoid scrutiny of your creation by reviewers. – Joe (talk) 18:07, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

...and I'm glad I did so. Hijacking the title of a page about the capital of an African state for your new article about a cartoon character is just the kind of absurdity that NPP is there to catch. – Joe (talk) 18:52, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

@Joe Roe: We are discussing your actions on the ANI board. And no, I requested autopatrolled rights to alleviate the backlog for NPP users since I often see pages I create being reviewed months after they have been created. At least one admin and one NPP user have endorsed my ability to create clean or uncontroversial pages about mostly fictional works.Haleth (talk) 22:44, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Kraft Dinner is no longer considered a canadian national dish

I know it used to be, but more recent studies and articles (in the last decade) show people don't consider it to be emblematic anymore. I personally don't even remember the last time I ate it. Notice in these articles I found in 5 minutes that Kraft Dinner is never talked about:

• https://www.statista.com/statistics/441050/favorite-food-representing-canada/
• https://trip101.com/article/traditional-food-in-canada
• https://travelwithbender.com/travel-blog/guest-blog/5-national-cuisines-in-canada
• https://livelearn.ca/article/about-canada/what-is-canadian-cuisine/
• https://foodisinthehouse.com/these-are-the-food-items-considered-to-be-the-canadian-national-dish/

Safyrr (talk) 00:05, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

At least 2 of the sources you provided appear to be self-published opinion pieces (travelwithbender.com) and [trip101.com), two others are of dubious quality and likely to be unreliable (foodisinthehouse.com and statista.com). Livelearn.ca seems to be the only good source of the lot you cited, but it's just a general overview of Canadian regional cuisine and does not identify any specific dish to be a national dish which is the focus of the article. None of them fall under academic "studies" as you have claimed, and most importantly, none of them have explicitly refuted the verified claim that Kraft Dinner is officially or unofficially a national dish of Canada, made by at least 2 reliable sources within 2 separate time periods. Note that the Vernon Morning Star article was published in March 4, 2020, so that refutes your opinion that Kraft Dinner is no longer "emblematic" or culturally relevant. Your personal opinion about Kraft Dinner is irrelevant to Wikipedia and is WP:Original research. I certainly don't eat my national dish every day or week or month (not that it is relevant to Wikipedia), doesn't mean it isn't objectively considered to be my country's national dish. If you are really adamant that your opinion reflects a wide consensus among the Canadian population, do look for reliable sources which verify that Kraft Dinner is no longer popular (which should still warrant its inclusion in the article as a historical national dish, please refer to the entry for Dominica as an example where its people specifically voted for the deprecation of a former national dish.) Notability of a topic or subject matter is not temporary. Haleth (talk) 00:25, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Doctor Megala

The article Doctor Megala has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) requirement. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page here in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back through WP:ECHO or by leaving a note at User talk:Piotrus. Thank you.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:47, 18 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) 01:33, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Goten having his own article?

You do good work so far on Dragon Ball related projects. So I am wondering if we can possibly do an article centered on Goten some time? Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 19:12, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

@Jhenderson777:: Two years ago I made a proposal asking for consensus if Goten should get his own page again. You could see the lack of response contrasted with the enthusiastic one for the Broly split proposal just a month before. Anyway, the problem I find with Goten is that while he is undeniably popular both with Japanese and overseas fans, he doesn't seem to get much coverage on his own: usually he is being discussed with Gohan in the context of Goku's children, or with Trunks (who at least gets to share an article with his future self) as a pair, though sometimes the coverage may actually be about Gotenks who is probably a separate character to both Goten and Trunks for all intents and purposes.

I am however interested in doing a List of Dragon Ball Super characters, since the series has introduced a lot of new characters and elements into the franchise, and the current list has grown larger then the optimum prose size with the additional DBS info, even after trimming and splitting what I could. Although I feel that it is a lot of work for one person to go through, as I am a bit preoccupied with working on and fixing video game articles at the moment (many of which have been needlessly thrown into AfD's as well) and not particularly motivated to spend an extended amount of time look for sources especially with hundreds of episode reviews of Super to go through. Luckily for me, I found an old abandoned draft about Jiren with thoroughly cited primary sources, which just needed work on reception and development sections. Also on my to-do list is TeamFourStar, since their DB abridged series is actually quite influential and often discussed in the commentary I have encountered about Dragon Ball. Haleth (talk) 23:48, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Probably a good idea with the Super thing. If you want I will see if I can supply sources for Goten (or at least try) and maybe that can help create an article for the future. I am also trying to bring back Injustice League too if you can help probably. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 00:32, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

You can certainly try. Believe it or not, I've been on a (admittedly casual) lookout for sources on and off over the past 2 years, but from what I've seen I don't believe that the available coverage, though sustained, is significant enough (unless there are some in-depth sources hiding behind the Japanese language barrier, and in print media). From memory I only ever saw one source whose main topic isn't about Goten's status as Goku's son/Gohan's brother, or as a pair with Trunks, or about Gotenks who also don't get enough coverage in my opinion to warrant a standalone article. A Goten article cannot be predominantly about Gotenks as it would be WP:Undue. More importantly, I envision that a standalone article with whatever coverage that I can see now will probably be heavily scrutinized by editors who prefer deletion during AfD debates, so I'd rather devote my time to do something else more worthwhile, such as a "List of Dragon Ball Super characters" since coverage for recent fictional topics is much easier to find on the internet these days, though going through the sources themselves is time consuming.

If you're at it and since you brought the article back, may I suggest that you find more sources and/or reviews for Chi-Chi, who is also associated with Goten. I've done what I can to improve the article but I haven't found any further sources which are helpful so far.

I'll have a look at Injustice League when I have the time, I hope you aren't in a hurry though. Developmental info from secondary sources and sustained reception for any particular iteration of the group might be hard to pinpoint as most iterations don't often last very long comic book story arcs, since a lot of it was well before the internet age and would probably be confined in print form. Haleth (talk) 08:53, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

I am working on Cain / Abel DC improvements though I did look on google news and see news sources talking about Goten quite a bit...so here’s hoping. Also yes I am taking my time. BTW regarding Injustice League I got sources in discussion page and I feel that Forever Evil article should have sources too. The Super article seems like maybe a good idea too. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 17:19, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

I find the coverage for Forever Evil to be tricky because the scope is incredibly broad and a lot of times the villain characters operated autonomously. I observed that the reception for the individual characters and the storyline are covered in detail but not a whole lot about the organization as an entity in its own right. You should be able to find something, but it is tedious to have to go through so many individual articles and reviews. Haleth (talk) 06:31, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Bioware writer article

I was running into a bunch of good research so I went ahead and created an article for Mike Laidlaw at Bioware. I've seen you doing some excellent work on related articles, and wanted to give you the heads up in case you stumbled onto anything that might help expand it. Happy editing. Shooterwalker (talk) 17:13, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

• @Shooterwalker: Thank you very much! Mike Laidlaw is indeed on my to-do list, and yes I have already read most of the sources cited on the article you created. I don't tend to touch on BLP articles much, or at least think about creating them as they are governed by the strictest policies and rules on wikipedia. I think he is best known as the "face" of Dragon Age alongside David Gaider since its inception, and he fronted the media extensively between 2010 to 2015 from memory. But yes, this is a fantastic head start. Haleth (talk) 06:24, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
  • It's not usually my cup of tea either. But I found some sources and went for it. Glad you like it and keep it in mind if you stumble across anything good in the sources. Thanks again! Shooterwalker (talk) 14:02, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 26

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The cake is a lie, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Portal.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:17, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Autopatrolled right?

My apologies to requesting the autopatatrolled right. If i knew this involved taking away yours i wouldn’t have listened to you. Because i am usually ok with reviewers. I guess the admin thought we had an agenda or something with that one editor. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 18:35, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

• • @Jhenderson777: if you re-read your original request for autopatrol rights, it was worded in such a way that you specifically indicated that you were asked to do so by another editor. Which I am certain is what set the declining admin to investigate and opened the current can of worms. I think your work is trustworthy enough to skip the NPP queue, nothing more. Haleth (talk) 00:00, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
    • Aha I see! Oops and fair enough. My apologies. My wording implication was not what I was thinking. I hardly remember what I said but I promise you I didn’t mean it. Hope you had a happy thanksgiving. 😃 Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 00:15, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
      • You might want to bring up this point in the ANI discussion too. Haleth (talk) 00:17, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
        • Also, we have interacted before, as you can see from my archive page. We were...often not on the same page lol, but it was clear to me that even back then, you were more experienced and had a better grasp on wikipedia policy then I did, so I fail to see why you wouldn't be trusted enough to be eligible for autopatrol rights. Haleth (talk) 01:05, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
          • Yes I head of your name before. But I forgot a lot of what was going on now. That’s the cost of being an old veteran Wikiholic sonny! Joking aside...keep up the good work. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 01:17, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
            • All I can say now, is a quote an ex-boss of mine liked to use: "No good deed goes unpunished". Haleth (talk) 01:33, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

lol heard that one before. On a side note. Before all this happened. I did this and I am pretty sure that’s the example you were talking about on within the AFD page. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 01:45, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

• Looks good to me. On another note, I'd like to take a short break from editing and just follow the developments of the Administrator board discussion you started. My mood is somewhat soured, for obvious reasons. Haleth (talk) 02:58, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 20:33, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Question

Haleth, you removed information from an article without providing a reason, so I queried it. The second time around, you provide an actualy edit summary, so my question was answered. There's no need for your passive-agressive tone, so please drop it; it's unbecoming. -- JascaDucato (talk | contributions) 09:32, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

• @Jasca Ducato: Your claim that I removed information from an article without providing a reason was incorrect. If you check the edit summary I provided, I actually wrote "removed birth/death years for fictional characters", though I did not initially quote a section from WP:WAF. I understand that you disagree with my rationale in both instances, but I certainly was not being passive aggressive. You are probably aware that the article's quality issues have been raised by multiple editors over the years through talk page discussions and cleanup tags. Don't be surprised if another editor who operates in a much more aggressive or hardline manner on notability or manual of style issues does a bold mass removal of information, or even listing it for AfD and/or TNT. Haleth (talk) 09:40, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • "removed birth/death years for fictional characters" does not contain a reason for you actions, only a description of said action. Your edit summary in response to my (rightful) reversion to your original edit is where I took issue with your tone. For the purposes of clarification, now that I know why you removed the information, I have no problems with the content of your edit or the rationale behind it, only that you did not provide said rationale in the first instance and your subsequent wording ("the better question would be..." / "If you have an issue, suggest you raise it in the talk page"). Not everybody who edits on Wikipedia is intimately aware of every Manual of Style requirement, so providing a link to, or otherwise referencing, the MoS that you are using to explain your edit should be your first action. -- JascaDucato (talk | contributions) 10:53, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
    • Again, I did provide a reason. I think you are blowing the issue out of proportion here, and quite frankly, you seemed very defensive to begin with, so I reject your notion that I was being passive aggressive. You are not an IP editor, and it appears you have been actively editing for many years on Wikipedia, so I presumed that you are familiar with, or at least aware of, requirements outlined the MOS guideline for writing about fictional topics. Haleth (talk) 11:05, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:HieroglyphBayek.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:HieroglyphBayek.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) 18:36, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 22

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Shay Patrick Cormac, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gaelic.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:10, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Happy Yuletide!

Merry Yuletide to you! (And a happy new year!)

Characters

I still haven't finished Like a Dragon so it will take me more time to see if I can make an article for Kasuga. However, I have been wondering if Makoto Naegi from Danganropa might get an article considering this poll as well as the multiple adaptations his series has similar to the visual novel character I gave an article last year, Rintaro Okabe. Anyway, happy new year. Looking forward to more character creations. I think I did almost all major Clamp characters articles recently too, especially the Tsubasa: Reservoir Chronicle cast.Tintor2 (talk) 21:14, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

@Tintor2: Happy New Year! Sorry for not responding to you in time, I just noticed your message. I still haven't had access to Like A Dragon yet, so it may be a while before I attempt to write anything related to that game on Wikipedia. I also haven't played Danganronpa yet, but from an outsider's perspective, the most notable character from the series seems to be its mascot character/primary antagonist, Monokuma. I notice that the character still haven't had an article, so are you of the view that Makoto Naegi has in fact received more significant coverage compared to Monokuma? SteinsGate is still on my pile of shame for the PS3 and it's a real shame because I haven't been able to return to my actual home by a year now (where the PS console and most of my Japan-centric games are). I've mostly been busy going through article creations for the Assassin's Creed series lately, will start on Warcraft as well as DLC's for various games which got significant coverage but no one's bothered to create articles for them or write about their reception. Fantastic work on the Tsubasa: Reservoir Chronicle series by the way, something I barely know anything about; last time I followed something from Clamp was Cardcoptor Sakura many years ago. Haleth (talk) 12:20, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

I see. The weird thing about Clamp is that while Sakura might be their most known series, Tsubasa, X and others are more violent and adult. For example, Fuma Monou from X did some brutal actions in the narrative that seemed inspired by Devilman when he shattered a corpse into pieces. The Sakura and Syaoran versions from Tsubasa also get quite darker across the manga. Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 21:12, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

I agree, which is why their audience has remained rather niche over the years. But it's good that they stuck to their guns with their artistic integrity and chose the unconventional path for their IP's instead of relying on cliched or generic shojo manga tropes. You might find this article interesting as it's a nice summation of manga trends over the years. Haleth (talk) 09:16, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Good job

		The Original Barnstar
		It was a pleasant suprise to see you turn the redirect into a full fleshed article on Sackboy which looks good. Good job. (You may have seen me in the article history of Media Molecule which I rewrote some time ago).  Spy-cicle💥  Talk? 00:54, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

@Spy-cicle:: Thank you! And yes, the current version of the Media Molecule article is very helpful with sources for the developmental section of Sackboy, otherwise it would have been completely reliant on their self-published blog entry which detailed the process of how Sackboy was created. I left some sources regarding the Sackboy game for anyone interested in fleshing out the reception which is specific to that game, but otherwise the character was eminently notable at least as far back as 2012. Speaking of the game, a full fledged reception can be constructed with lots of positive reviews for both PS4 and PS5, and I also left a link there which contained lots of developemental info and which I found as part of my research. Haleth (talk) 09:16, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Yeah MM article got recently copy-edited as it goes (might be able to GAN if I can get time to expand their later history). I will also try if I get time to make some adjustments and improvements to the Sackboy article as well, maybe try fleshing out the reception yet (though do not know much about the new game yet) but there are some parts in the Concept and creation (like the second paragraph) which I'm not sure which part they are suppose to referencing as there is not one there. Regards  Spy-cicle💥  ^Talk? 15:12, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

@Spy-cicle: I've added in-line referencing to the second and third paragraphs for the Sackboy development section. It's essentially all information lifted from Media Molecule's old blog post, where they really went into detail about the character's creation process. Haleth (talk) 05:18, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Ah perfect, thanks once again.  Spy-cicle💥  ^Talk? 18:00, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Dragon Ball seasons

Hi there. As you have already seen in the DB anime navbox, the Dragon Ball (anime) seasons have been moved to Drafts due to the lack of sources. Do you have any idea where to look for sources for these seasons? --LoЯd ۞pεth 14:51, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

@Lord Opeth:: I don't have an answer for that at this stage, but I'll have a look when I get some free time. I suspect a lot of the relevant information would be from offline print sources since the original anime goes back to the early 1980's, and Z hogs most of the international media attention from the 90's onwards. Haleth (talk) 09:16, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

@Lord Opeth:: The following is what I could find so far. I can't find Anime News Network's review of Season 5 though:

Anime News Network: Season 1,Season 2, Season 3, Season 4

IGN: Season 1, Season 2, Season 3, Season 4, Season 5.

The issue is, the aforementioned sources would support articles for five seasons of the Western DVD release, as opposed to the original run of nine seasons. Haleth (talk) 11:05, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Hey, thank you very much for this. I actually think that this division into 5 seasons matches that of DBZ: Dragon Ball seasons and Dragon Ball Z seasons (the covers of the DVDs in the latter match those in the articles of the DBZ seasons). --LoЯd ۞pεth 20:45, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from List of Doraemon characters into Doraemon (character). While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was moved, attribution is not required. — Diannaa (talk) 16:36, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Glorfindel

Haleth, I know you're a fairly new editor, but this article isn't up to the standard required of the project: citations are lacking page numbers, or are missing altogether in several places, and the "popular" section is wholly uncited: most of that probably needs to be deleted, but we can have a look for sources first. It would, by the way, have been helpful to have discussed with me or other editors the question of whether this was worth resurrecting: my opinion was clearly stated in an edit comment, so it would have been polite to discuss it rather than just recreating the article. However, since we're here now, let's see if we can turn the sow's ear into something approaching a silk purse.

A few points to note:

- authors are formatted using |last= |first= with an |authorlink= if available.

- all Tolkien articles use British English.

- dates are Day Month Year, i.e. like 28 January 2021.

- pages are needed for all books and journals.

- we normally don't use {{ME-ref| ...}} in the text; instead, we put them at the end in Sources, and write a short-form ref in the text, with chapter number and chapter title (since so many editions of Lord of the Rings exist, page numbers are useless in its case; for other books, page numbers are fine).

- when introducing scholars for the first time, give their forename as well as surname, and say what they are (The Tolkien scholar, The film critic, ...), rather than just surprising readers with "Whittingham says ..." (who's he?).

I guess that's easily enough to be getting on with. If you're planning on any more resurrections, do consult. My view is that we have articles on pretty much everyone we ought to have, and of course there's a B-list (not to mention a C-list, D-list, and E-list) of thousands. Thanks. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:09, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

@Chiswick Chap: I am not fairly new, I've been on and off Wikipedia for years, though I have only recently started editing in the Middle-earth topic space of which I've been a reader of for a long time. I have perused a lot of articles all over the Middle-earth space and did notice the recent improvements in quality across the board, the vast majority of such efforts are from you. So first of all, I want to compliment you for an exceptionally outstanding effort. And as per WP:AGF, I'll assume that the editorial advice you have just provided are per the Manual of style developed by the consensus of the Middle-earth Wiki project, though I notice that it is barely active and the vast majority of the recent editing efforts are from you.

As for your opinion that we have articles on "everyone we ought to have" (and I noticed in one edit summary that you brought up the possibility of AfD over a topic that clearly meets notability standards on Wikipedia)...I am fairly taken aback by your comments. According to Wikipedia guidelines, specifically WP:PAGEDECIDE, whether articles regarding fictional elements should have standalone ones are on whether it meets the standards of WP:GNG, and that hinges on the existence of quality secondary content and has nothing to do with quality of article content which my understanding is what your focus is on. I subscribe the view shared by certain other editors that we are not on a WP:DEADLINE as far as Wikipedia is concerned, and the article can always be revisited at anytime later in time to cleanup content.

With all honesty, and no offence intended, I get the impression that you are approaching me with a WP:OWNERSHIP mindset besides the genuine advice to edit collaboratively and constructively. I may not be as skilled or knowledgeable about Wikiproject Middle East norms or as thoroughly detailed an editor as you are, I do bring a different perspective, and I think by now I have a fairly sound judgment on what topics may or may not meet WP:GNG based on available sources per WP:NEXIST. It is clear to me that articles can be boldly built from certain topics by any editor who is aware of quality secondary sources and willing to put some effort into the work (unlike certain ill-informed editors who went on a deletion drive because they simply disliked the quantity of articles and couldn't be bothered to do proper due diligence or WP:BEFORE), and I am not going to "resurrect" any topic without enough secondary sources to back it up. Also, I should point out that, as much respect as I do have for your work, you redirected Glorindel and Thranduil unilaterally by using your own judgment as I could not find records of any prior discussions you've had with other editors, or consulting their opinions about whether to redirect the aforementioned articles, so I am not sure why you took issue when I undid the redirects. To be fair, I understand if you faced time constraints at the time, and maybe you did not want articles being sent to AfD's out of ignorance by certain editors with an overzealous deletion agenda.

I hope you can see where I am coming from, and I am certainly interested in editing collaboratively. Haleth (talk) 00:42, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Yes I can, and my tone was certainly way off. I've been reflecting on the matter overnight, and I think I was quite heavily affected by the deletion drive. I edited some hundreds of Middle-earth articles and brought over 50 of them to GA, so I guess I breathed out when the tumult subsided and got metaphorically drunk in that ol' whisky bar and hoped those mem'ries wouldn't come 'round again. I don't exactly feel that I own those articles, let alone the project; they existed before me and will, I hope, still be there long after I'm dead and gone; I do however have a sort of affection and concern for them, rather like a schoolmaster meeting past pupils: after all, I spent a lot of time with them. It is evident from your efficient discovery of academic and web sources that you're of a wholly different cloth from the deletionists, and know quite well what a reliable secondary source is, which is a welcome change: thank you very much for the improvements. I should have noted that someone called Haleth (now there's a redlink...) might well have a deep and informed interest in the Edain, not to mention the Women in The Lord of the Rings (well, that last one I took from scratch to GA, and I did try quite hard to find anything worth saying on Goldberry, and failed where I see you've today succeeded, bravo).

On the redirections, the whole Middle-earth project was in the midst of an unprecedented crisis, which saw several hundred articles that had been considered very respectable and (to the enthusiasts who wrote them back in 2006 or thereabouts), and I found it necessary to make many decisions about what to let go by to deletion, what to rescue, and what to merge. A redirect in such circumstances actually is half a rescue, and a merger is three-quarters of one; and there were very few Middle-earth editors with any enthusiasm for such work at the time; Hog Farm to their credit arrived as a self-confessed deletionist, and quickly became a helpful reviewer and discussant at XfD, and Carcaroth helped me with the phoenix-like rebirth of the Tale of Aragorn and Arwen which passed through AfD (deleted), all the way back to a scholarly GA, and it could go further if people (hint) feel like collaborating on an FAC.

The early Tolkiendils, if I may call them that, saw citation to JRRT as quasi-biblical, so (if they added refs at all) they were more than content with primary sources. To stave off the deletionists, it quickly became obvious that I had not only to find scholarly secondary sources, but to emphasise that we had plenty of both primary (accurate reporting of JRRT) and secondary (notability) sources, so I structured these as separate lists in all the articles, together with an explanation of why the primary sources were in the articles at all. I'm afraid that that degree of caution will remain necessary, and would urge everyone to follow the practice on the project, i.e. we should I think treat it as a standard. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:02, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

@Chiswick Chap: thank you for your compliment. And yes, you spotted the little reference there with my user name. I accept that we didn't get off to a good start. While the majority of my edits on Wikipedia are in the fictional space, I don't actually like writing about plot summaries or in-universe stuff. I am much more interested in digging up sources that analyze the original source material and attempting to summarize/paraphrase them. Edain definitely could be expanded further. I actually think Women in the Silmarillion would definitely be viable topic, as the book's compilation of stories introduced and depicted many more female characters then the narratives of its predecessors, many of whom have some coverage on their own but probably better off together as an article.

It really is a shame about the indiscriminate culling of Tolkien topics. It is one of the few areas in modern fiction where academics from around the world have devoted extensive research efforts into. It really isn't that hard finding scholarly analyses for Tolkien-themed stuff on Google, unlike say for a video game character or somewhat obscure comic book characters, so I really don't understand why some of the editors who were involved in the deletion drives couldn't be bothered to put more effort into assessing whether the topic objectively meets notability guidelines or not. Some of the delete votes I've seen in AfD's make arguments which posit that certain topics or characters were eminently non-notable as they are relatively unimportant within the Middle earth narrative, irrespective as to whether secondary sources not mentioned in the contentious article have already devoted attention to the topic disproportionate to in-universe significance. One editor even suggested that the Silmarillion as a whole was irrelevant as it was less commercially successful then the Hobbit and LOTR book, and not personally overseen for final publication by Tolkien himself. Pretty sure WP:POPULARITY is not relevant to determine WP:PAGEDECIDE as there is plenty of academic discourse about the Silmarillion.

I became aware of the mass deletion drive, likely coordinated off-wiki by the same group of editors, after reviewing more article histories and some of the AfD archives. I do understand why you did what you had to, and I do sympathize. Had I been in the position to be much more active at editing a year ago, I would have gladly helped to either curate and improve the articles, or argue for the retention of some articles which clearly could be reworked and not deleted. Sadly, the Tolkien Wiki project did not move on with the times when the overall consensus on Wikipedia began to change overtime. Anyway, I haven't really seen your practice of separating primary and secondary sources elsewhere on Wikipedia, but it is a good practice nonetheless. I will try to emulate it for my next article in the Middle-earth space. With the Tale of Aragorn and Arwen article, do you think it is still lacking in content, or it just needs to be polished up in terms of prose? Haleth (talk) 01:55, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

• I endorse and applaud Haleth's action of restoring this content. While I'm here, here's some topical Tolkien tidbits FYI, which I happened to notice recently:

1. Pubs frequented by Tolkien and the Inklings such as The Eagle and Child and Lamb & Flag are closing.
2. There's a project to turn Tolkien's home into a literary centre. The Kickstarter closes in 22 days. I'd post the specific link but I find that it's blacklisted; tsk.

"...closed all the inns; and everything except Rules got shorter and shorter..."

— The Scouring of the Shire

Andrew🐉(talk) 11:05, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Sad to hear about the Bird and Baby, it's a famous old pub much loved by Oxford dons, students, Tolkiendils and tourists alike. Sad, too, that with that diverse a clientele and marketing opportunities they can't hold out till the end of the epidemic. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:19, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

There's hope for The Eagle and Child as it may continue under new management after a hiatus. But pubs are especially threatened during the pandemic. See Dog & Bull for one under threat on Wikipedia too... Andrew🐉(talk) 12:13, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Always sad to hear that the historical buildings or business entities which go back hundred of years are closing up one by one due to the pandemic. Haleth (talk) 01:55, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

@Chiswick Chap: @Andrew Davidson:. It appears that an editor took issue with my restoration of the Goldberry article. I've responded based on my interpretation of Wikipedia guidelines and policies (and a little bit of common sense), but I do wonder if there is any objective merit in their arguments which I may have overlooked. Haleth (talk) 06:40, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Not much merit, though I'd have left her with old Tom really. On the Tale of Aragorn and Arwen, Carcaroth went miles beyond what I thought necessary in academic minutiae, and the GA reviewer thought we'd done a pretty thorough job, not to mention astonished the AfD brigade who thought they'd seen the back of it a moment earlier. Women in The Silmarillion is clearly perfectly feasible, though of course Lúthien will steal the show. Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:18, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 31

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mr. Popo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dende.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:JawsofHakkon.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:JawsofHakkon.jpg. 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) 18:34, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

We should keep the Morshu page

He has been in meme culture for many years and has a special amount of staying power that even most Zelda characters don't have on the internet. Yes he's mainly here as a meme but to be fair, that's kinda the whole point.

To whom it may concern, I am not sure why you left this message on my talk page. The subject is currently at AfD, nominated by someone else; I suggested a redirect to preserve the article and its contents, but the emergent consensus seems to favour outright deletion. Haleth (talk) 01:10, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Android 16

Hey there. Just as heads up, it wasn't FighterZ that confirmed 16 is based on Gero's son. That information was stated years prior by Toriyama in a Q&A included with the 2014 release of Dragon Ball Full Color: Androids and Cell Arc Volume 3, a colorized re-release of the original manga. Kanzenshuu has a translation of the Q&A available. As the information is stated by the creator and included in at least one release of the manga, it should probably be included in the main summary for the character. I wasn't sure how to actually cite that, though, so I figured I'd pass that detail on to you since you're more involved in the curation of the article. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 00:32, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

@Cyberlink420: Thanks! Good find. I am not sure how I could have missed that bit. I think I'll cite both, as I don't believe that Dragon Ball Full Color actually has an English version. Haleth (talk) 01:10, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Cool, glad to be of help. I know the name "Gebo" for his son comes from the DBZ Kakarot art book, but I don't know if that counts, so probably best to leave it out. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 01:22, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Cyberlink420, I agree. I don't believe the name is ever used in either Kakarot or FighterZ, and it's really just trivial background info about Android 16 which is tangentially connected to a character which is never used in the story, but would be appropriate for a dedicated Fandom article. Haleth (talk) 06:56, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Top redirects

Hi Haleth, I've started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Middle-earth#Top redirects on whether some of these characters deserve articles of their own. Thoughts welcomed. Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:14, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Gondor

Haleth, I'm a bit flummoxed by the large amount of primary-cited text you've added about Minas Tirith and Dol Amroth. If you look at the "Fictional" section you'll see that the two cities now get more coverage than the rest of the country put together, which looks wrong to me (it's an article about the country, after all).

• I understand your concerns if, say, the text added is about the kingdom of Arnor or Minas Ithil. But both are still part of the fictional country's jurisdiction, so in my opinion is well within the scope of the Gondor article as the parent topic/subject. The Dol Amroth section also covers Prince Imrahil, who actually has a major presence in Gondor's war effort, and Tolkien did go into detail about his backstory even if some of it wasn't fully explored in RoTK but in Unfinished Tales. If you are concerned about a lack of balanced coverage in the fictional section, I suppose in-universe info about Ithilien and Osgiliath can be touched on a bit more. In Tolkien's actual writings, these are the aspects of Gondor, besides its Numenorean heritage and the line of Elendil for its Kings that got the most attention from him.

The Dol Amroth coverage I'd have thought bordering on WP:Undue and non-notable, unless there are to-be-added RS which actually discuss the city: you rightly point out that Tolkien doesn't visit (so why are we bothering).

• That's the same argument that some editors have used to justify their desire to have articles like Radagast deleted in the AfD which ultimately didn't go their way: he is a bit player and plot device within the universe. My response is, yes there are secondary sources which discuss Dol Amroth in multiple aspects and the information is verifiable. Currently, I don't have the time to go through the sources, analyze and then write up the out-of-universe bits about Dol Amroth, will get into it eventually. But per WP:NEXIST, that in my view justify the inclusion of Dol Amroth being discussed the Gondor article. Then again, notability isn't a concern here since we are not entertaining the idea of splitting Dol Amroth back into its own article. As for WP:Undue concerns, Dol Amroth is a bit unusual as the name refers to three related concepts in Tolkien's writings: the geographical location (roughly the same length as the other locations), the political entity (relationship between Princes of Dol Amroth and the rulers of Gondor which Tolkien spent a substantial amount of effort fleshing out), and the actual city (this is the aspect which was barely explored in Tolkien's writings). I did remove the Tolkien doesn't visit part as that would be an editor's own analysis and difficult to verify, but might add that back in once I could find a source which explicit spell it out. Haleth (talk) 03:47, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Minas Tirith is perhaps a notable topic, given the game interest in it, so we could conceivably move the "city" game refs with most of your text and the images to a separate article; but before we do that, let's consider whether the topic justifies it. My view (and that of the GA reviewer) was that only a brief account of the city was needed, whether in the Gondor article or anywhere else. If more is required from Tolkien, as opposed to the coverage of art (for which there are scholarly sources) or games (gamish sources), then we ought to have scholarship-on-Tolkien's-city sources, and really we don't have many. My feeling is that the article is being driven in the wrong direction - the Primary/Secondary ratio is now 71:28 which one might think was becoming unbalanced. After all, if most of the RS are not related to the Tolkien canon, then a lengthy account of the Tolkien version of the city would actually be irrelevant (you heard me say that here first).

• I would say that Minas Tirith is a notable topic. I did notice that you redirected it on your own initiative, not as part of the infamous mass deletion drive which I'd say is motivated by a desire to reduce the quantity of Tolkien-related articles to a number which matches these editors' own subjective expectations, rather then a fair and honest investigation as to whether each of these topics meets the WP:GNG guideline or whether it's material is verifiable. I don't have an opinion either way as to whether Minas Tirith should be split again, but as you might be aware, it is the primary setting for Gondor in the books' narrative with most of the other locations discussed briefly or only alluded to. I am of the view that splitting Minas Tirith out might make both articles less defensible at AfD's or merge discussions. The reason why secondary sources are prioritized, particularly for fictional articles, is due to the emphasis placed on GNG to test whether the existence of a standalone article is warranted (and which some editors take to an extreme as part of their POV pushing agenda). It is actually possible for an article assessed as GA to then be nominated for deletion by editors who scrutinize a lack of sufficient secondary sources to make a claim that the topic is notable, the belief being that notability and the standards of GA is not the same and does not overlap. Here's an example. I might have missed something, but I can't find any comments from the GA reviewer on the talk page or the review page that say only a brief account of the city is appropriate. If article page size is a concern, the prose size of the current article is within comfortable limits. The only video game source, and unrelated to Tolkien canon, I added is in the adaptation section...so I am not sure why you are talking about the discrepancy between non-Tolkien canon sources for Minas Tirith?

No, not pure size (as long as expansion doesn't continue), but the excessive material which doesn't contribute to encyclopedic understanding of the topic. You are correct that post-GA mods can be disastrous, for many reasons including the one you mention. As well as the GA review there were indeed deletionists editing the article before it reached GAN, and of course they could return a la Schwarzenegger. But I agree with you that the overlap of MT and Gondor is so large (we'd want the same images for both, etc) that resurrecting MT doesn't offer an easy or good solution here. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:46, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

So, a couple of questions: are you planning to add more? and, what reliable sources do you have in mind to justify the existing material? Then we can decide what to do. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:35, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

• No, I have no plans or desire to add any further primary-cited/in-universe material into that article, unless you believe that information about other Gondor locations like Ithilien or Osgiliath should be added (judiciously of course) to address WP:Undue concerns. I do intend to add more secondary sources, but it admittedly isn't a priority for me at this stage, as it is only relevant for AfD's; the current secondary sourcing adequately addresses notability concerns and I highly doubt that the article would be targeted it for deletion in its current state. I don't believe that the recent additions will affect its GA status in any way, though I suppose if it really does bother you, we can look into trimming or pruning the prose for in-universe descriptions about Minas Tirith or the divergent development stories about Dol Amroth published in Unfinished Tales. Information presented in the secondary sources about reception and analysis do require adequate context, and examples like a passing mention about Prince Imrahil's vambraces or a lack of explanation about Minas Tirith's splendour isn't helpful to the reader if we don't explain who he is or why Minas Tirith is analyzed as special by commentators in the first place.

All of these opinions are my own, of course. Let me know your thoughts. Haleth (talk) 03:47, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

I'm very glad to hear there won't be any more of it; and not at all pleased that you think the scholarly sources that would justify the material not a priority: I beg to differ. I think the current additions were not fully "judicious", and without scholarly sources that call out the added materials, they're basically just unnecessary (let's call it "fat") as they don't assist the reader in understanding the topic (let's call that "meat", as Tolkien did). We had the article in a "lean" state - many editors have on their pages the quote from Saint-Exupery, that perfection is attained not when there's nothing to add, but nothing to take away. There is now rather a lot to take away, and the main question for me is whether to do that in one reverting edit, or to attempt to tweak it with multiple small cuts down to the exact Saint-Exupery state, assuming that is greater than the GA state of the article (something I'm not convinced of with these additions).

Perhaps I'll have a go at the small cuts first (and thank you for starting on that task, it's appreciated, as will be any help in cutting the rest of it back); but frankly, if the materials don't assist in any identifiable way, I repeat my question, what's it all for? Your The purpose is currently not discernible - after all, Tolkien provided many thousands of words in his various drafts on Gondor, and we certainly aren't going to paraphrase it all into the article - we'd not mention all the mini-rivers UNLESS IT SERVES A USEFUL PURPOSE, i.e. that a scholar pointed out that Mini-River 123 was incredibly important because it was Gollum's birthplace and tralala. So, basically, I imagine you've gone into primary-mode - I suppose you liked the description and have used that primary fan-feeling to justify including a screed: forgetting that in the secondary world, the material is "noise" unless (as engineers say) it carries a "signal", which would, and the point seems to bear repeating, mean that a reliable secondary source explicitly calls out the material.

One other thing: all the added primary citations are formatted unlike the rest of the article. It'd be appreciated if you were to fix them, at least. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:46, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

You'll be surprised to know that some editors on Wikipedia...believe that if a source can be swapped out by using secondary sources instead of primary sources as support, it is still irrelevant for inclusion on Wikipedia because fancruft is fancruft no matter what form it takes or what critical material supports it. What's it all for? To improve coverage. As you already noted, the large number of views indicate that people do want to read about Minas Tirith. There is certainly more to explore when it comes to how Gondor's culture is formulated and analyzed by scholars, BUT said scholars still need primary material and context to work with. For e.g., I found an entire article where the writer wrote at length about plate armor in Middle-earth, starting with Imrahil's vambrace. But if you don't believe that anything I've added is of any potential value, even if an independent search yields material from secondary sources which can potentially be used, then I really have nothing to say and it certainly feels like I am walking on egg shells at this point with editing ME articles.

I'll look into the primary sourcing formatting when I have the time. Why it isn't a priority? Because I have real life commitments which I really should be getting to today. But I decided to stick around and try to pluck out the stuff I already know exists and insert it in after you've expressed your concerns. No one owns the article or any article, anyone can chip in if they are keen and want to contribute, instead of always taking the negative view that it isn't relevant/verifiable/useful unless proven otherwise. For me, it's a matter of prioritizing for me. The main priority is as long as the material is verifiable. I am not asking you to do the heavy lifting and cleaning up whatever, but as much as I do admire the work you are doing, its becoming increasingly clear to me that maybe I am better off doing something else or editing somewhere else on Wikipedia with my time. Haleth (talk) 10:10, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Everyone is a volunteer with real-life commitments, and of course editing must come second; that doesn't mean RS aren't a key priority within the scope of the article. The walking-on-eggshells feeling is directly related to the deletionist assault; we came perilously close to having nothing but articles on LOTR, Legolas (aka Heartthrob), and a certain film series; robust, substantial, undeniable scholarly sources are all that stand between a project with 50+ GAs and total devastation. Hence my admittedly and unapologetically one-pointed focus on sourcing, and alarm when sourced text is diluted. Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:16, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Primary sources can be counted as reliable, just not really independent. None of Tolkien's writings on Middle-earth are self-published, whether during his lifetime or posthumously. I merged content from the last versions of the Minas Tirith and Dol Amroth articles, which are full of primary source citations, without a prior heavy hand at editing. For the purposes of AfD or even merge proposals, it's just that primary sources usually don't make much of a case of notability for a standalone article according to prevalent Wikipedia consensus. My point with showing you that AfD result is that, it is actually possible for an article which may not be notable within the definiton of WP:GNG to attain GA status by a reviewer; even when an article is elevated to GA and existed as a stable version for 10 years with barely any post-GA mod, all it takes is an editor to nitpick the notability demonstrated by its sources and garner support from likeminded editors who show up at the right time during an AfD, for the article to disappear into a redirect or even a delete. The difference here is that I am not recreating either Minas Tirith or Dol Amroth, but simply merging what I feel is salvageable and maybe of interest to readers, followed by a quick fact check on Google to see if the primary source cited info could easily be verified by secondary sources, before I incorporated them into an article. Haleth (talk) 16:46, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

I'd say we violently agree that deletionism is a constant danger, and that good sourcing is the best defence (along with very clear writing that shouts notability to every newbie AfDer). That's all good; the thing is, those agreed facts scream in my ear that adding old wobbly primary-cited text is just plain dangerous. The goal is to make articles so strong that nobody will even think about trying to delete them. A GA mark helps a little, but the real deterrent is that every part of the article is visibly necessary and conspicuously well-sourced. Tolkien isn't just the primary source - itself a red rag to many bulls - but an anti-modernist author who is still violently disliked in some quarters; and worse in some people's eyes, he was a devout Christian. In short there are many simultaneous perils here - all the usual ones and then some. I do hope that much can readily be appreciated by all the Free Peoples of the West, as it were. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:18, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

How to search GBooks

https://www.google.co.uk/search?tbo=p&tbm=bks&q=mystra+Mystra&num=10 hope you find this helpful. Cheers In ictu oculi (talk) 13:34, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks In ictu oculi, but I already have done my due diligence before nominating the move proposal. Haleth (talk) 10:03, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

One to treasure

Hi Haleth, since you've been working hard on Women in LOTR, I wondered if you'd noticed this edit comment in the history? I read it occasionally rather in the manner of a French gourmet rolling a few drops of a delicious wine around his tongue: it is something to treasure, being treated to invective of that order. I'm not exactly sure *which* of the categories I'm supposed to belong to, mind you, but that's part of the pleasure; nor am I of the deletionist persuasion... I'm glad to see the article climbing onwards and upwards. Enjoy the weekend. Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:13, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

No that was a bit too far back, but its a good laugh regardless! Women get the blame for everything, or so the saying goes in some quarters. This person should have been an active AfD participant during the mass deletion drive if it bothered them that much then, maybe the few of us who actually care about adding value to this encyclopedia project would’ve had less of a mess to clean up or restore after the mob had their fun. I probably could fit into at least one of the despised categories, but I wonder if that person would be pleased with themselves that at least two of the active deletionist editors were open about being religiously conservative or sympathetic to Trump. Thank you and have a lovely weekend. Haleth (talk) 02:18, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ronnie Gardocki

Hi there. I think you closed this discussion a bit early. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:45, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Request

would you look at Yuri Kozukata and Claptrap and upload infobox image if you can? 49.151.173.220 (talk) 09:50, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

I could (not that I am familiar with the subject topics), but...why wouldn't you sign into an account and upload them yourself? Haleth (talk) 12:59, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Women's History Month initiative

Good work on Jennifer Hepler! :) She did a fair amount of work on tabletop RPGs as noted briefly in the article (and as listed more comprehensively here) so I added the tag for that WikiProject on the talk page, and a redirect for her maiden name Jennifer Brandes. I don't know if you were interested in improving bios on other women involved in tabletop RPGs, but I can give you a few suggestions if you want! BOZ (talk) 05:30, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi @BOZ:, thank you for your compliments. I am surprised that no one on Wikipedia has done an article about her after all these years, whereas the women who were later harassed as part of Gamergate are well documented on Wikipedia. Other then the listings on Amazon.com, I couldn't find much information on them and they seem to be kind of obscure. In other interview, she emphasized the importance of experience in playing tabletop roleplaying games as advice for writers who wanted to follow in her footsteps, so I suppose there is a relevance there. Other then sourcebooks and fictional elements discussed in these books, I don't actually know anything about the women who worked behind the scenes in the tabletop RPG industry, so will have to spend some time doing research on these individuals.

Since we are on the subject, do you happen to have access to any independent sources with coverage of half-orcs as a RPG race? Haleth (talk) 08:36, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

I'm afraid that I probably don't have anything useful for half-orcs or other D&D fictional elements, but I usually add them right away when I do find them! I've got a handful of drafts - Draft:Gaye O'Keefe and Draft:Julie Ann Dawson and User:Vermiculite/Samantha Henderson - on women who have had some kind of involvement in the RPG industry, who may or may not prove to be notable one day. There are a number of existing articles too, if you would be interested in seeing what you can do with them, and I can take a look through those when I get a chance. BOZ (talk) 13:48, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Of the trio, Julie Ann Dawson seems like the one with the most potential at the first glance, although a google search quickly reveals a pretty fitness model and actress instead in the foremost search results! But according to article history it was in mainspace before. What happened? Haleth (talk) 14:52, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

I draftified that one for Dawson after a PROD was placed on it, in the hopes that I will eventually get the sources to have it restored. BOZ (talk) 21:47, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Now, if you did want to take a crack at some bio articles with what I hope are more potential than what they currently show, I would suggest taking a look at Andria Hayday, Miranda Horner, Heike Kubasch, and Nicole Lindroos; hopefully there is some material out there to expand these! :) BOZ (talk) 05:15, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 11

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Turian, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Saint-Thurien.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:21, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Sexuality in The Lord of the Rings

Hi Haleth, you'll see that I've started an article to fill a rather glaring gap in the coverage. The article makes some of the most obvious points but there remain plenty of gaps (well, it's mostly gaps, like an Emmenthal cheese) and there's ample scope for development. I think there are quite a few Mythlore articles that'd be relevant, while on the love'n'marriage front I've only put in placeholders. The Women article is starting to look a bit more substantial, too. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:56, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello @Chiswick Chap:, I'll be on the look out for sources. Besides the obvious ones with Frodo and Sam, I do wonder if there's more substantial coverage which discuss some of the more sexual elements of Tolkien fan fiction. Great work as usual, by the way. I have reorganized a few things in the "Women of LOTR" article, hope you would be agreeable to it. Haleth (talk) 18:07, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Great, and thank you. Yes, there are certainly many sources, I haven't even started to look really. I've only glanced at the Women change but I'd already had it in my water that something of that sort was needed, so well spotted; I'll give it a tweak if need be. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:26, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 18

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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 18 March 2021 (UTC)