Welcome!

Hello, Electricmaster, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, like Jacks wine, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{ helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• Your first article
• Biographies of living persons
• How to write a great article
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  Netalarm 10:12, 27 July 2009 (UTC) reply

A tag has been placed on Jacks wine, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{ hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Netalarm 10:12, 27 July 2009 (UTC) reply

A tag has been placed on Jacks wine, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{ hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Netalarm 10:16, 27 July 2009 (UTC) reply

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from a page you have created yourself. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, you can place a {{ hangon}} tag on the page, under the existing speedy deletion tag (please do not remove the speedy deletion tag), and make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. Netalarm 10:17, 27 July 2009 (UTC) reply

Please stop removing speedy deletion notices from pages that you have created yourself, as you did with Jacks wine. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Kotiwalo ( talk) 10:22, 27 July 2009 (UTC) reply

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you remove a speedy deletion notice from a page you have created yourself, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Netalarm 10:26, 27 July 2009 (UTC) reply

Hi there, a couple of things about making articles about draftees like Saunders. Most other sports around the world are fairly strict on not making articles on new recruits until they have played in a fully professional league. We are generally a bit more lenient, but it is really important that you find some significant coverage in independent reliable sources. That means not just a brief mention in a match report, not just on the club website and definitely not from a forum or Facebook. Speaking of Facebook, did you get the photo of Saunders from Facebook? Do you really own the rights to it or know that it has been released into the public domain? You can't just copy photos from other websites. Regards, The-Pope ( talk) 14:34, 26 November 2012 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Josh Saunders (Australian footballer), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Victoria ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:04, 27 November 2012 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Graeme Schultz, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alan Quartermaine ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:24, 26 August 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited David Feldman (comedian), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Say Anything and The Burn ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:55, 13 September 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cowbell (instrument), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Junebug ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 12:28, 21 September 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi Electricmaster. Please don't add any more articles to Category:American men by occupation. As stated in the category header, that category should only contain other categories. Individual articles should be added to the appropriate subcategory, e.g. Arj Barker, Jerry Seinfeld and Marc Maron belong in Category:American male comedians. (I have fixed these three articles). Thanks. DH85868993 ( talk) 08:52, 13 May 2014 (UTC) reply

thank you. I thought I had put them under the relevant subcategory. Thanks for fixing my mistakes.

No worries. DH85868993 ( talk) 07:13, 14 May 2014 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alexander Cappelli, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hating Alison Ashley. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:14, 24 September 2014 (UTC) reply

There are only two acceptable date styles in Wikipedia articles. Today's date, for example, can be either "18 August 2015" or "August 18, 2015". The second is usually used in articles related to the United States. Afterwriting ( talk) 08:32, 18 August 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 14:12, 24 November 2015 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Valley girl may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• the term became more broadly applied to any woman or girl—primarily in the [[United States]] and [Canada]—who engendered the associated affects of [[wikt:ditz|ditziness]], [[wikt:airhead|

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 04:24, 1 March 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello, Electricmaster. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello, Electricmaster. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC) reply

Hello, Electricmaster. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC) reply

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{ NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 00:12, 19 November 2019 (UTC) reply

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Four color theorem a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. 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. Cheers, Polyamorph ( talk) 14:02, 3 February 2020 (UTC) reply

Youtuber/streamer katerinos video called "an update" has, of April 27th 2020, 422,000 dislikes. I feel like this should be added as it is a very heavily disliked video Koolaidjammers69 ( talk) 08:35, 27 April 2020 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Motivation (Sum 41 song), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page In Too Deep ( 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) 06:43, 1 July 2020 (UTC) reply

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) 02:26, 24 November 2020 (UTC) reply

Hi Electricmaster! I've reverted your edit to Tigran L. Petrosian but improved the article in this edit, with the edit summary: Reddit is not a reliable source because anyone can edit. Instead, sources published by respected publications with editorial fact-checking policies - such as The Guardian and specialist source ChessBase - can be used to determine which content we should talk about in this section. Let me know if you have any questions, about this content or about any other aspects of editing Wikipedia. Thanks! — Bilorv ( talk) 23:57, 30 November 2020 (UTC) reply

Hey there, I just wanted to let you know I have moved your edit to Eddie Izzard further down the article lead section. This is to reflect previous reverts of this statement.

Cheers,

AussieWikiDan ^{( talk)} 14:51, 22 December 2020 (UTC) reply

All good. I was honestly unsure where it would be best placed, so I appreciate your message and judgement. Electricmaster ( talk) 15:18, 22 December 2020 (UTC) reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Max Graham, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Radio 1 and British Canadians.

( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:07, 5 February 2021 (UTC) reply

Howdy - I removed most of your edit to Levy Rozman because it consisted of unsourced and almost completely negative material on Dewa_Kipas (see WP:ATP). Please ping me on reply if you would like to discuss this further. AviationFreak 💬 17:25, 22 March 2021 (UTC) reply

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

While the above notice does not indicate any particular editing issues, you have been inappropriately editing biographies of living persons. In this edit [1] to Onision, you inserted derogatory material about a living person "sourced" to a YouTube video. In this series of edits [2] to Levy Rozman, you similarly inserted derogatory material about a living person which was not supported by the cited reference at all. This is not acceptable and contrary to our biographies of living persons policy, which you should carefully review prior to further editing any biographical articles. Should you continue to inappropriately edit BLP articles, such as adding derogatory claims with unreliable or no sources, you will be subject to sanctions. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:46, 24 March 2021 (UTC) reply

While the Onision point has merit, the Rosman edits did have adequate sources. The issue, in fact, was a matter of tonality, which has since been noted.

No, it did not. The two sources you cite in the Rozman edit were a YouTube video [3], and an informational site about the minimum wage in Indonesia [4]. Neither of these references are sufficient to sustain an allegation that he cheated, and the second doesn't even say anything about that. Please carefully review what constitutes a reliable source. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 20:11, 24 March 2021 (UTC) reply

The fact that he cheated is axiomatic. His performance rating of 99% on online blitz games compared to his performance rating of less than 40% across of three games is all the proof you need. Chess.com predicted his Elo against Irene to be 1127, whereas his performance rating on his online blitz games was over 3000 (a superhuman rating in chess terms). To use a sports metaphor, it would be like if I claimed I could run as fast as Usain Bolt but then, when tested, could only run 100 metres in 35 seconds. How much more proof could you need? If you want a source for that, here you go: https://www.world-today-news.com/elos-fan-god-rating-drops-when-opposing-irene/

You may not base such allegations on your synthesis, no matter how correct you think it is. It absolutely must, no exceptions, be directly backed by a reliable reference. The one you suggest there is not even grammatically correct, so I would certainly question the "editorial control" portion of its reliability. If you put derogatory information about a living person into an article, you must, each and every time, back it up by citing a reliable source which directly confirms the claim. No exceptions. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 21:09, 24 March 2021 (UTC) reply

"His performance rating of 99% on online blitz games compared to his performance rating of less than 40% across of three games is all the proof you need."

Okay, so because I accidentally put in an errant "of" in there, you're going to completely ignore my valid criticism? I really fail to see how this in any way affects editorial control. If you pay any attention to any of the credible sources about the match, they all (correctly) show that Dewa's Elo rating has a dramatic drop-off that is essentially a smoking gun (as if it weren't proved enough with his ridiculous online performance ratings). So, again, please tell me how the source I provided (or any other source, for that matter) doesn't confirm the allegations, because I don't see it. If this isn't enough proof for you, you sorely lack even a rudimentary understanding of chess ratings. Speak to any reputable chess expert; they will concur with my point.

It does not matter how right you believe you are. It does not even matter how right you actually are. If a reliable published source does not directly say "He cheated", the article cannot say or imply that either. Period. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 01:05, 25 March 2021 (UTC) reply

Chess.com directly accused him of cheating. It doesn't get any more official than that. They then proceeded to lay the facts on the table. What they said was clear: his rating performance was consistent with a cheating player, and so they banned him. They then ran an analysis on the live game, which was far below his performance rating on the site. If you read the article, you don't have to read too hard between the lines to see that the chess.com team were vindicated in their assertion that he cheated: https://www.chess.com/news/view/most-watched-chess-stream-in-history-dewa-kipas

Indeed, the fact that chess.com banned him for cheating is in the article and isn't up for debate. Nobody except for you is contesting this. The fact that you would find this contentious at all is actually to turn a blind eye to the facts, which is the antithesis of what Wikipedia stands for. The article, even as it stands, still (rightfully) hints the ban was warranted, but I think it should be taken a step further to show the gulf in ratings between online and offline play. Indeed, one does not even need to say that he cheated; I only ask that the objective evidence (the rating gulfs) be made clear in the article, and that way readers can make up their own minds.

P.S. I have now updated the article. I have simply cited trustworthy sources and kept the tone as neutral as possible, letting the facts speak for themselves. If you have a problem with that, I encourage you to seek mediation. I have been editing Wikipedia for 16 years, and this is the first time I've ever run into this level of resistance for what should be an open-and-shut case.

What you have done now there is fine. There is, however, no "mediation", as this is just a warning. If you edit a BLP inappropriately again, you very likely will be sanctioned. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 01:42, 25 March 2021 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm Wham2001. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Tom Scott (entertainer), but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Personal information such as dates of birth must be supported by a reference to a reliable source. Please review the Wikipedia policy on writing about living people; I see I am not the first person to come here with concerns about your edits to biographical articles. Wham2001 ( talk) 10:45, 30 March 2021 (UTC) reply

{explain} ICGSE ( talk) 04:34, 1 April 2021 (UTC) reply

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Insomniac (Green Day album), disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Doc Strange ^Mailbox Logbook 01:39, 20 April 2021 (UTC) reply

Could you please let me know the change I made that you felt was stylistically inconsistent? Cheers.

So many problems with your edits on Mutemath. You violated WP:LQ If the punctuation is part of the album, but it into the italics, otherwise do not. Do not add formatting piped, like [[Rock Band|''Rock Band'']]. Do this instead: ''[[Rock Band]]''. Walter Görlitz ( talk) 02:23, 2 May 2021 (UTC) reply

Walter Görlitz, I find it ironic that your correcting sentence is itself grammatically incorrect. Guessing you meant "put it into", not "but it into". As for the piping, that was unintended, although I don't see why it's a big deal, since it doesn't affect the link or how the article is read. I don't appreciate the condescension, either, and I also don't see what the problem with putting a clarifying Oxford comma was. If the comma was italicized, I'm sorry, but to say there was "so many problems" is really inaccurate and unnecessary. You could have made the changes without being contemptible.

I was already on your talk page and I noticed this discussion. I hope you don't mind if I share my thoughts. Assuming good faith (AGF) is a fundamental principle on Wikipedia. I assume good faith on the part of Walter Görlitz. I find this editor's comment helpful and not condescending. I admit that I haven't examined your edit that Walter wrote about, but I think his comment is good because it said what he thought was wrong and also referenced a section of the Manual of Style, and it is written in an adult-to-adult manner.

Also, I noticed that after you criticized Walter's use of "but" for "put", you used the word "contemptible" where you meant "contemptuous". (I don't believe Walter was either contemptible or contemptuous, but contemptuous is more consistent with condescending.)

Also, I noticed that on your own talk page, you don't always sign and date your comments. It's a good idea to always sign and date your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You can sign comments retroactively using {{ Unsigned}}. Cheers! — Anomalocaris ( talk) 03:52, 3 September 2021 (UTC) reply

+1 on your comment on Walter Görlitz not being out of line. Electricmaster, if you're not capable of constructively interacting with other editors, maybe you should do something else instead of editing Wikipedia. Constructive, respectful interaction is required. Toddst1 ( talk) 03:58, 3 September 2021 (UTC) reply

"So many problems with your edits on Mutemath." How is this not seen as a hostile and tactless way to start a sentence? Moreover, he made it sound like I went in their and just vandalised the page or something. I thought—and still think—it was out of line to handle that as he did. To say "so many issues" was also just factually incorrect. I didn't start this bickering. Electricmaster ( talk) 04:01, 3 September 2021 (UTC) reply

I did mean contemptible, not contemptuous, but either word works for my meaning. I meant to say he was being a dick, not necessarily condescending. I was just trying to make a good-faith edit, and I thought he was being smarmy about it. That's just my read on it, though. Thanks for the sign suggestion. Electricmaster ( talk) 03:57, 3 September 2021 (UTC) reply

Maybe you should see Psychological projection. Toddst1 ( talk) 04:01, 3 September 2021 (UTC) reply

"Electricmaster, if you're not capable of constructively interacting with other editors, maybe you should do something else instead of editing Wikipedia." ... "Maybe you should see Psychological projection." Oh, the irony. Maybe you should see Hypocrisy. Electricmaster ( talk) 04:04, 3 September 2021 (UTC) reply

Gorlitz constructively engaged you above and you acted like a jerk. 3 different folks have told you so with varying degrees of decorum. You're not getting it. Toddst1 ( talk) 13:39, 3 September 2021 (UTC) reply

"3 different folks have told you so with varying degrees of decorum." Unsolicited engagement, mind you. I've made 6,600+ edits over the past 12 years, and do you know how many times I've taken the time to track down an editor and berate them for their edits? Not once. Why? Because there's a handy little field that lets you explain the edit (in the remote chance I deem it necessary). This might surprise you, but I use Wikipedia to improve the site, not for the social engagement. Once again, I didn't start this stupid fight; in fact, I would've been happy to just state my opinion and leave it at that. But, no, you guys have to keep picking at a wound that shouldn't have even been there in the first place. I'm sure there are plenty of people on the forums and Discord who are looking for free advice, so perhaps it would be in your interest to help the people who actually want and need it.

"if you're not capable of constructively interacting with other editors, maybe you should do something else instead of editing Wikipedia."

Maybe you should follow your own advice. Electricmaster ( talk) 20:46, 3 September 2021 (UTC) reply

Hi. Please do not use the Daily Mail as you did at Molly Meldrum. It is not a reliable source. See WP:DAILYMAIL. Kind regards, Robby.is.on ( talk) 08:44, 20 May 2021 (UTC) I am aware that it is a contentious source; indeed, I'm not a fan, either. However, this was a specific interview and not tabloidism. reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Lynn-Holly Johnson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page You Only Live Twice.

( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 05:56, 24 August 2021 (UTC) reply

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Please be aware that the visual editor's "add a citation" feature does not always work right and needs to be checked every time. In your edit of 06:21, 31 August 2021 of Toby Greene, you inserted a reference to a Herald Sun story that came completely messed up as

{{Cite web|last=readJuly 23|first=JON RALPH3 min|last2=newscorpau|first2=2017-6:08PM/* global newscorpau */ const coralComments =|last3=coralComments|first3=newscorpau coralcomments; const talkUrl =|last4=comments)</span>`; }); });|first4=`${coralComments talk}/api/v1/comments-count?ids=`; fetch then then innerHTML = `${data} comments`; document querySelector innerHTML += ` <span>}|date=2017-07-23|title=Greene blow costly, not decisive: Cameron|url=https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/teams/gws/leon-cameron-wants-to-fix-toby-greenes-ill-discipline-as-report-swung-momentum-tigers-way/news-story/79304521c86eec609a3479b5e359db42|access-date=2021-08-31|website=heraldsun|language=en}}

I fixed it to this markup:

{{Cite news |author=Jon Ralph |date=23 July 2017 |title=Leon Cameron wants to fix Toby Greene's ill discipline as report swung momentum Tigers' way |newspaper=Herald Sun |url=https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/teams/gws/leon-cameron-wants-to-fix-toby-greenes-ill-discipline-as-report-swung-momentum-tigers-way/news-story/79304521c86eec609a3479b5e359db42 |access-date=2021-08-31}}

So please, when you use "add a citation" be sure to inspect the results and fix by hand anything that isn't right. Cheers! — Anomalocaris ( talk) 03:21, 3 September 2021 (UTC) reply

Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! Toddst1 ( talk) 22:23, 3 September 2021 (UTC) reply

There you go. That's a much better way of making a suggestion in a positive way. I am happy to engage with civil requests for improvement. I don't hold grudges... I just don't want to deal with toxicity for trying to do the right thing. You'll catch more flies with honey. Electricmaster ( talk) 22:28, 3 September 2021 (UTC) reply

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Last.fm. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Doc Strange ^Mailbox Logbook 22:56, 21 September 2021 (UTC) reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Len Reynolds (illustrator), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Victoria.

( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:00, 28 September 2021 (UTC) reply

Hi. Please do not add uncited material to articles, as you did with this edit to Jeff Dunham, as this violates Wikipedia's Verifiability policy. As I'm sure you must now by now, given how long you've been editing here, Wikipedia requires that the material in its articles be accompanied by reliable, verifiable (usually secondary) sources explicitly cited in the text in the form of an inline citation. Thanks. Nightscream ( talk) 18:03, 12 October 2021 (UTC) reply

This is a simple currency conversion. I usually cite the conversion source. Sorry. Electricmaster ( talk) 19:32, 12 October 2021 (UTC) reply

Hello, Electricmaster,

Thank you for creating Len Reynolds (illustrator).

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Links should be in references, not in the body of the article. Thank you.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Whiteguru}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Whiteguru ( talk) 06:31, 20 October 2021 (UTC) reply

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{ NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 00:30, 23 November 2021 (UTC) reply

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2021 AFL Grand Final you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sportsfan77777 -- Sportsfan77777 ( talk) 05:21, 19 December 2021 (UTC) reply

The article 2021 AFL Grand Final you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:2021 AFL Grand Final for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sportsfan77777 -- Sportsfan77777 ( talk) 07:21, 19 December 2021 (UTC) reply

Electricmaster, just letting you know about the review again. Sportsfan77777 ( talk) 08:00, 18 January 2022 (UTC) reply

A tag has been placed on Tom Belton requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://tombelton.com/. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Fram ( talk) 10:53, 25 January 2022 (UTC) reply

A tag has been placed on 2021 Melbourne Demons season requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from http://demonwiki.org/2021. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Fram ( talk) 10:57, 25 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Hi Electricmaster! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at Mick Schumacher that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia – it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. TylerBurden ( talk) 12:39, 1 February 2022 (UTC) reply

The article 2021 AFL Grand Final you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:2021 AFL Grand Final for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sportsfan77777 -- Sportsfan77777 ( talk) 18:41, 23 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to 2022 AFL Women's best and fairest, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. 4TheWynne (talk • contribs) 13:33, 5 April 2022 (UTC) reply

Hello, Electricmaster,

Thank you for creating Yuri Gusev.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Layout of this article does not meet Wikipedia Manual of Style for pages.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Whiteguru}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Whiteguru ( talk) 21:11, 3 May 2022 (UTC) reply

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from 2002 Überlingen mid-air collision into Vitaly Kaloyev. 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. DanCherek ( talk) 05:51, 15 May 2022 (UTC) reply

Hello, Electricmaster

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Dr vulpes, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I've proposed an article that you started, Yuri Gusev, for deletion because it meets one or more of our deletion criteria, and I don't think that it is suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. The particular issue can be found in the notice that is now visible at the top of the article.

If you wish to contest the deletion:

1. Edit the page
2. Remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
3. Click the Publish changes button.

If you object to the article's deletion, please remember to explain why you think the article should be kept on the article's talk page and improve the page to address the issues raised in the deletion notice. Otherwise, it may be deleted later by other means.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Dr vulpes}}. And remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Dr vulpes ^{( 💬 • 📝)} 06:01, 7 July 2022 (UTC) reply

Yuri Gusev played a game of special significance, especially as it pertains to subverting computer analysis for many decades; moreover, there is precedent for the article in the Russian Wikipedia page.

His game in against E Auerbach is considered one of the best games played in the 1940s, and his positional queen sacrifice has received extensive online coverage. Electricmaster ( talk) 07:03, 7 July 2022 (UTC) reply

Hello, please don't remove ship templates from articles, as you did here to the lead of USS Bremerton (SSN-698). Thank you - wolf 10:47, 4 August 2022 (UTC) reply

There is a technical reason for this. As it currently stands, the template does not allow for an en dash to be automatically be inserted for multiple-word ship names.

For a technical explanation, please see this section: Dash#Attributive compounds

This isn't an isolated case, either. Consider Graf Zeppelin–class aircraft carriers.

While this is undoubtedly very esoteric, I understand your hesitation to revert to an automatic tag, but it's clear there needs to be some kind of rule that has exceptions. Your thoughts on this are welcomed.

Electricmaster ( talk) 14:17, 4 August 2022 (UTC) reply

Hyphens are used between the name and class on Wikipedia, not en-dashes. If you believe this is incorrect, then you need to take up the issue at WT:SHIPS, and propose the change there. Thanks. BilCat ( talk) 22:54, 5 August 2022 (UTC) reply

This isn't to do with ships; this is to do with attributive compounds. Please assess this and see if you agree. Electricmaster ( talk) 23:49, 5 August 2022 (UTC) reply

It does, because you're violating an existing naming convention with your changes and moves. I generally don't get involved in hyphen/en-dash disputes, as En-dash uses seem to be growing every year. This, however, is about a naming convention, and if it's now considered grammatically wrong, it needs to be updated. BilCat ( talk) 23:59, 5 August 2022 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John Cox (aviation expert) 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/John Cox (aviation expert) 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 until the discussion has finished.

Ovinus ( talk) 18:43, 25 August 2022 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Emma Stark (umpire) 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/Emma Stark (umpire) 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 until the discussion has finished.

  Velella   ^{Velella Talk}   18:29, 27 August 2022 (UTC) reply

Please do not add or change content, as you did at AFL Women's season seven, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. 4TheWynne (talk • contribs) 09:56, 28 August 2022 (UTC) reply

Your edit to Fast bowling has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. This is your third warning. — Diannaa ( talk) 23:45, 29 August 2022 (UTC) reply

What specific elements were copyrighted? All I copied was a quote and content I’d written myself for Thomson’s page Electricmaster ( talk) 04:43, 30 August 2022 (UTC) reply

I read the article which deals with this accent, and, accordingly, I didn't understand whether this accent was chiefly British or American. Listening to Katherine Hepburn and Cary Grant convinced me that this accent was predominantly British, to say nothing of Billie Burke. I'm a novice in phonetics, so could you help me with answering this question? Роман Сергеевич Сидоров ( talk) 07:47, 23 October 2022 (UTC) reply

Typically, the accent is a 50% blend of the two. Electricmaster ( talk) 09:54, 23 October 2022 (UTC) reply

Hello, Electricmaster. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Lombardy at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! Cheers, Baffle☿gab 02:30, 29 October 2022 (UTC)) reply

Just had a pretty rough skim through. From what I can see by the current stage, it looks in much better shape! Cheers! Electricmaster ( talk) 04:12, 25 October 2022 (UTC) reply

Thanks Electricmaster, I've now finished my c/e. I saw a lot of uncited and under-cited sub-sections so I've added templates where I thought they're needed. I hope they're useful for the article's development. Cheers and good luck with the article, Baffle☿gab 02:30, 29 October 2022 (UTC) reply

Awesome! Thanks! Electricmaster ( talk) 16:56, 30 October 2022 (UTC) reply

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{ NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 00:40, 29 November 2022 (UTC) reply

An article you recently created, Virtual duet, does not meet the standards of our notability guidelines. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources (see WP:RSP for a list of sources that have an existing consensus on their reliability). ( ?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed; verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia. I've moved your article to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can develop it with minimal disruption. When you feel the draft meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline, and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. –– FormalDude (talk) 04:50, 2 December 2022 (UTC) reply

all good. i made it part of the duet main article instead. looks good. cheers. Electricmaster ( talk) 10:24, 3 December 2022 (UTC) reply

Please do not use talk pages such as Talk:Geoffrey Gurrumul Yunupingu for general discussion of article topics. They are not to be used as a forum or chat room. See here for more information. Thank you. Graham 87 15:24, 6 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Hey @ Electricmaster, it has come up that your review of Southern Railway 1401 is being discussed at Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations. When conducting a review, you need to give specific feedback on what needs to be improved. Furthermore, the reviewer is expected to be responsive and timely with their recommendations. One sentence reviews are not acceptable and the review Talk:2021 AFL Grand Final/GA1 is a more appropriate indication of what a GA review involves. I understand this is your first review, but please read and familiarize yourself with Wikipedia:Good article criteria & Wikipedia:Good article nominations/Instructions. The page is going to require a second opinion unless you aim to give recommendations in line with GA criteria. If you have any questions, bring it up at Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations. I am not going to watch this comment so you'll have to WP:PING me if you want further response from me specifially. 🏵️ Etrius ( Us) 21:37, 8 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Hi. Sorry. If it’s the comment I’m thinking of, I don’t think it warrants a proper review until it as at least copyedited. My opinion is that such an article should only be nominated once this process has taken place. Indeed on the couple of instances I have ever nominated an article as such, I have made sure the complete article has been edited to my high standards. I realize this might sound capricious, but that’s just my takeaway. Besides, copyediting seemed to be the only thing that page needed that I could tell, although I would advise getting a train aficionado to check. Electricmaster ( talk) 23:30, 8 January 2023 (UTC) reply

My opinion is that such an article should only be nominated once this process has taken place. Elaborate for me, now you've peaked my interest enough for me to stick around. Trainsandotherthings, who I'd venture to say is an expert (or at least a frequent editor with multiple GAs) in this, has also observed that your review was too brief and stated 'This isn't even a real review'. If there are issues that should be addressed put the page on hold and specify what should be improved. Frankly, "technical copyedit" is useless without specifying what needs to be improved. I read the article and I don't think the prose is particularly bad, and a blanket statement won't do much good. even then I'm unsure why you didn't just quickfail it if the prose was supposedly so bad, why is the review still open?

I am not here to flog you, but a detailed breakdown of why you gave such a brief review is needed. I need to figure out where your understanding went wrong and would rather correct the behavior than have it become a serial issue. This review is going to need a second opinion if you're unable/unwilling to pick it back up. Even quickfails have more prose than 9 words. 🏵️ Etrius ( Us) 01:00, 9 January 2023 (UTC) reply

I appreciate the praise, and while I'd certainly consider myself a subject matter expert, I'm not the definitive authority. I'm just a concerned editor. I happened to see the review, and it's just not appropriate to say "this needs copyediting" while giving no examples of what you believe needs editing. Furthermore, it is rare a nomination is perfect and needs no fixing before promotion; the whole point of the review process is for the reviewer to make suggestions, unless the problems are of such magnitude that they cannot be rectified in a reasonable timeframe (generally 1 week). I'd suggest Electricmaster take a look at some other reviews before reviewing further. This isn't meant to be a firing squad, just friendly advice. Trainsandotherthings ( talk) 03:29, 9 January 2023 (UTC) reply

I suppose I am somewhat invested in this now. The reason I didn’t quick-fail it was simply because to do so would imply the article has some inherent flaw that makes it impossible to GA without. Secondly, while I could copyedit it myself, the main problem is that I will lose objectivity in my appraisal. As you know, there are about 500 articles in the GA queue at any one time. Again, I don’t want my feedback to come across as dismissive or frivolous. Think of it like an actor being told to learn an improved script before the producer and director take the time to audition them. This is all that is. I mean no offence to the writers of the article, nor you for providing your honest feedback.

As you can see, I’ve been around for more than 16 years and have more than 10k edits. I’m not saying this to come from a place of authority but rather express how high my standards are for a good article. When I see a GA from time to time that has punctuation errors, typos, wrong words, lack of citations, etc., I feel that it diminishes the GA badge. While I get that articles are dynamic and “alive”, this could and _should_ be mitigated by eliminating such issues before the GA status is given in the first instance. Sorry for the long-winded reply, but hopefully you can see I have put more thought into this than my original truncated reply suggests.

Electricmaster ( talk) 05:08, 9 January 2023 (UTC) Electricmaster ( talk) 05:08, 9 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Well, edit count isn't really a good metric, I've seen users with 200k ediors get banned for terrible editing/prose issues. Please read WP:IMPERFECT, Good articles are allowed to have issues. Good article is akin to a Driver's license, it just has to meet a minimum, and doesn't need every single possible issue ironed out. We aren't WP:FA after all.

More importantly, on a procedural end, don't leave reviews open like this. It just gums up the works. If you're going to fail it, fail it. If you're not going to fail it, either request a second opinion or place it on hold. It is the reviewer's responsibility to be timely and responsive. The review was opened on Jan 3rd and you haven't touched the page since. You are expected to give a full, detailed review if there are no quick-fail criteria. Additionally, you, as the reviewer, do have to power to make minor copy editing changes if you think it'll help move the review along. 🏵️ Etrius ( Us) 13:01, 9 January 2023 (UTC) reply

I have made the necessary edits and will signal my approval. Electricmaster ( talk) 17:23, 9 January 2023 (UTC) reply

And, yes, I realize there’s a typo in my response, but I can’t seem to edit on mobile… Electricmaster ( talk) 23:32, 8 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article AFL siren controversy you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Steelkamp -- Steelkamp ( talk) 15:21, 20 January 2023 (UTC) reply

The article AFL siren controversy you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:AFL siren controversy for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Steelkamp -- Steelkamp ( talk) 15:41, 20 January 2023 (UTC) reply

The article Viva la Vida or Death and All His Friends you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Viva la Vida or Death and All His Friends for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of DannyMusicEditor -- DannyMusicEditor ( talk) 12:26, 22 January 2023 (UTC) reply

An article you recently created, Electro Deluxe, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. ( ?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed ( verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Hitro talk 07:16, 14 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Is it just a matter of citations? Can you clarify what kind of citations are needed? Electricmaster ( talk) 07:22, 14 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by HitroMilanese was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of music-related topics). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Please see WP:NBAND and demonstrate notability accordingly.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Electro Deluxe and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Hitro talk 05:45, 16 February 2023 (UTC) reply

How can the band fail notification in English yet be perfectly fine in German and French? Electricmaster ( talk) 06:05, 16 February 2023 (UTC) reply

If you meant notability, different Wikipedias have different notability guidelines and policies. Perhaps some languages are more lenient on notability. Perhaps they did not get into deleting them yet. The fact that articles exist in other language Wikipedias does not necessarily justify them being in English Wikipedia. Carpimaps ( talk) 02:04, 23 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Hello, Electricmaster! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Hitro talk 05:45, 16 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Thank you for uploading File:Big v (remastered).png. However, it is currently missing information on its copyright and licensing status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can verify that it has an acceptable license status and a verifiable source. Please add this information by editing the image description page. You may refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Vladlen Manilov ✉ / 13:00, 14 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Your edit to List of Hey Hey It's Saturday episodes has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. This is now your 3rd copyright violation warning, albeit your first in over a year. Further copyright violations will result in a loss of editing privileges. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:30, 24 March 2023 (UTC) reply

I'm confused, this is merely a list of segments; I don't see how such arbitrary information is copyrightable? It's literally just a list of the segments in each show; moreover, it was merely ported over from the original Wiki article, which has been there for ages, unhindered. lol? Electricmaster ( talk) 20:56, 24 March 2023 (UTC) reply

In that case, I don't blame you for not identifying the copyvio issue. That having been said, when copying within Wikipedia, you are required to specify in an edit summary where the material came from (see WP:CWW). Based on the page history of Hey Hey It's Saturday, it looks like the episode list was copied in over a series of edits in 2021, and does appear to have been originally taken from either a TV guide or Tvdb, which makes those descriptions copyrighted, unfortunately. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:15, 24 March 2023 (UTC) reply

That's really annoying, then. I suppose the whole section is useless? How can one describes the episodes without breaching copyright, then? Electricmaster ( talk) 21:23, 24 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Unfortunately, the only route is to write our own descriptions, in principle based on watching the episodes themselves per MOS:PLOT. There will probably be a lot of similar phrases, which would be covered by the copyright provision protecting the repetition of phrases that convey information that cannot be naturally phrased in any other way ( WP:FACTSONLY gives an illustrative example), but our method can't be to copy the list directly. Which means a lot of tedious work for whoever wants to work on plot summaries, but that's unfortunately where the law leaves us. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:40, 24 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Hello, I want to say beforehand that your writing is quite excellent; your prose are of top-quality. However, I wish to comment that some of the sources you have cited may not be reliable. I see that you added content to the speedrunning article citing YouTube. However, unless the account operating the YouTube account is considered a reliable source, YouTube videos are generally not a reliable source. For example, this channel seems to be one-person team without any editorial oversight, which is needed for the source to be classified as being reliable. That being said, thank you for your contributions! Cheers, Carpimaps ( talk) 02:01, 23 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Thank you. I'd encourage you to look at the secondary sources from which the channel referred to. I think the YouTube source, in concert with the primary source, helps draw a solid picture of the situation. Happy to defend my position as you see fit. Electricmaster ( talk) 13:44, 23 April 2023 (UTC) reply

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Electricmaster ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))

---

Request reason:

Electricmaster ( talk) 12:47, 28 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Decline reason:

I see no block on this account directly, and you offer no explanation for your request. If you are unable to edit(you did successfully edit yesterday), please exactly follow the instructions that appear when you attempt to make an edit. 331dot ( talk) 12:52, 28 April 2023 (UTC) reply

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

331dot ( talk), it was an IP issue saying it was blocked (even when I was logged in). Requesting the unblock immediately fixed the issue. I had a personal assistant from another IP help me with some editing, so maybe that triggered it, but he is a custodian that is helping me develop a bot. Electricmaster ( talk) 16:13, 30 April 2023 (UTC) reply

On 3 May 2023, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Jock Zonfrillo, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Step hen 01:00, 3 May 2023 (UTC) reply

Hello, Electricmaster. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Virtual duet, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 05:02, 4 May 2023 (UTC) reply

Hello, Electricmaster. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, " Virtual duet".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:50, 2 June 2023 (UTC) reply

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Arthur Jones (footballer, born 2003) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Hey man im josh ( talk) 12:01, 9 June 2023 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page George Rawle, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A " bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 11:42, 27 June 2023 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your contributions to Brian McManus (YouTuber). Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it needs more sources to establish notability. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Lopifalko ( talk) 07:13, 15 July 2023 (UTC) reply

I'm trying to figure out how to best incorprate sources if they aren't directly required. Any suggestions? Electricmaster ( talk) 07:23, 15 July 2023 (UTC) reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited MythBusters (2017 season), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Oobleck.

( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:01, 17 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Hello, Electricmaster. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Electro Deluxe, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 06:05, 19 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Good article nominations | August 2023 Backlog Drive
August 2023 Backlog Drive: On 1 August, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year. ( t · c) buidhe 05:15, 30 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Hello, Electricmaster. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, " Electro Deluxe".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:47, 16 August 2023 (UTC) reply

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

( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:05, 1 September 2023 (UTC) reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited I Am Australian, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Brian Sutton.

( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:00, 9 September 2023 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your contributions to 2023 AFL Grand Final. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because there are a lot of blank empty headings, obviously the article will soon be in main space, but in its current state, isn't ready. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. ––– GMH MELBOURNE TALK 07:17, 14 September 2023 (UTC) reply

Fair enough. Cheers. Electricmaster ( talk) 11:31, 14 September 2023 (UTC) reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Essendon vs Kangaroos (2001 AFL season), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Anthony Hudson.

( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:40, 7 October 2023 (UTC) reply

An article you recently created, Gavin Dore, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. ( ?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed ( verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Utopes _{( talk / cont)} 06:41, 7 October 2023 (UTC) reply

In regards to specifics for improvement, having the entire article be based on one reference from AFLUA's own website is not enough WP:SIGCOV to establish the notability of the subject, especially when the same source is referred to 7 times. More sources seem to be needed here. Utopes _{( talk / cont)} 06:44, 7 October 2023 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Chicken parmesan, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A " bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 13:43, 15 October 2023 (UTC) reply

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by KylieTastic were:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

"Articles generally require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic" (see WP:42)

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Gavin Dore and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

KylieTastic ( talk) 13:43, 10 November 2023 (UTC) reply

There are plenty of other umpires who've umpired far fewer games and only have a single source; I can't see why this umpire in particular is being singled out as not being worthy. 300 games at VFL/AFL level in and of itself is worthy, imo. Electricmaster ( talk) 14:01, 10 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Good day, thanks for your contribution to Chicken Tikka Masala. I have undone it pending verification of the sources you quote. The Brown History article appears to be behind a paywall. Could you add the text supporting your claim in the WP citation? Also, do you have any evidence that the author Maryann Thomas is an authority on culinary history or that Brown History is recognised for editorial care? A quick web search did not reveal any other writings under her name regarding this field. The other ref appears to be from a commercial website of Texas food delivery company. On the face of it, this cannot be confirmed as a reliable source as per Wikipedia policy, do you have evidence to the contrary? Kind regards Guffydrawers ( talk) 06:52, 14 November 2023 (UTC) reply

I'm deciding not to contest this. Thanks. Electricmaster ( talk) 06:58, 14 November 2023 (UTC) reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Harold Lewis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Raison d'être.

( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:00, 17 November 2023 (UTC) reply

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

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

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{ NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 00:32, 28 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Tom Hawkins (footballer, born 1988) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 22:01, 6 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Hello, Electricmaster. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Brian McManus (YouTuber), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 08:05, 15 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Essendon vs Kangaroos (2001 AFL season) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Lee Vilenski -- Lee Vilenski ( talk) 22:40, 13 January 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Essendon vs Kangaroos (2001 AFL season) you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Essendon vs Kangaroos (2001 AFL season) for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Lee Vilenski -- Lee Vilenski ( talk) 00:01, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Hello, Electricmaster. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, " Brian McManus".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:08, 15 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Joel Selwood you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Lee Vilenski -- Lee Vilenski ( talk) 23:24, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Thank you. Electricmaster ( talk) 11:50, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Joel Selwood you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Joel Selwood for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Lee Vilenski -- Lee Vilenski ( talk) 15:41, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Steve Wright (DJ), may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A " bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 07:54, 14 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi, I noticed a few of your edits over at Bitcoin were reverted. I wanted to let you know that we have a consensus to tighten sourcing on the crypto articles in general and we are not using primary sources (blogs), contributor sources (forbes when it says contributor), or crypto-zine sources (coindesk, theblock, etc). Please keep editing and adding content to that genre. Thanks! Jtbobwaysf ( talk) 08:56, 22 February 2024 (UTC) reply

okay… but you’re also eliminating a lot of major sources. I think the part at the end is extremely negative in tone regarding its accusation as a Ponzi scheme, so my edits were to bring balance to the article where it was not balanced (in my view). Wikipedia is about being fair and rational, and there is no defence against bitcoin’s alleged Ponzi status despite it obviously not being a Ponzi scheme. Electricmaster ( talk) 09:52, 22 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Also, what source can I use to defend my edit with Saylor, since you seemed to disregard most of the popular sources for crypto content. Electricmaster ( talk) 09:53, 22 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Yes, we are aware that the policy on sourcing greatly reduces the available sources. You can use forbes, just please use staff writer pieces not contributors. You will not some forbes sources were just added today that I think restores much of your content. Sometimes i use google search to look for specific sources, such as fortune, ft, forbes, wsj. These are the ones that have the most coverage of bitcoin and sometimes you can find something that meets our sourcing requirements. Jtbobwaysf ( talk) 05:51, 23 February 2024 (UTC) reply

I think in cases like these—and this is just my opinion—I think using these dubious sources are okay so long as the "Better Source Needed" tag is used. I think this is much better than no sourcing while also compromising on source integrity. What do you think? Can you make this a point of discussion? Electricmaster ( talk) 06:19, 23 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Good article nominations | March 2024 Backlog Drive
March 2024 Backlog Drive: On 1 March, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here or ask questions here.
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year.

( t · c) buidhe 02:39, 23 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi, Electricmaster. I noticed you are active on our Bitcoin article. Are you familiar with Electrum? Do you know someone who is and would be willing to explain some things to me offline? Greg L ( talk) 18:33, 15 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Sure. Send me contact info. Electricmaster ( talk) 21:04, 15 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Hello, Electricmaster. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Gavin Dore, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 14:06, 11 April 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Baldwin Street you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Baldwin Street for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Pi.1415926535 -- Pi.1415926535 ( talk) 20:22, 15 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by GMH Melbourne was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Sources don't establish notability. See WP:GNG for the criteria or perhaps an article from a similar AFL umpire to see what is needed.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Gavin Dore and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

GMH Melbourne ( talk) 14:56, 26 April 2024 (UTC) reply