User talk:Chevvin/Archive 1

Welcome!
Hello, Chethin, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! --Animalparty! (talk) 22:46, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you! --Chethin (talk) 22:49, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Help me!
How do you create an article that goes to a different article? For example, Terrapene nelsoni goes to Spotted box turtle. Thank you. --Chethin (talk) 22:51, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Chethin (talk) 22:51, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi! Such a page is called a redirect, it is created by placing the following code (minus the quotation marks) on the page you'd like to serve as the redirect: " #REDIRECT Target page name ". For further guidance, see Help:Redirect. Cheers, Nick&#8288;—&#8288;Contact/Contribs 23:37, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Kingshowman
Chevvin, with all respect, I'm familiar with User:Kingshowman, and I can tell which accounts are his socks. For anyone familiar with his past editing at Sigmund Freud and other articles, it's quite obvious. Even his username helps act as a giveaway. I would politely ask that you refrain from encouraging this persistently disruptive nuisance by restoring any of his edits. I'd suggest that you consult with Bbb23, Randykitty and other admins who have past experience with Kingshowman. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 01:41, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
 * You still haven't answered my question: Why should their edits be reverted? They aren't vandalism or anything of the sort, and actually help improve the article. Just because they're an obvious sockpuppet doesn't necessarily mean that their edits weren't positive. --Chevvin (talk) 01:43, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Please, if you really care about that article, discuss the matter at the Sigmund Freud talk page, not here. The merits of the edit are open to debate, but Kingshowman is a deeply disruptive nuisance, and I think it's wrong to encourage that pest by restoring any of his edits. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk)
 * I, not once have complained about the sock getting blocked, but instead am complaining that you've been reverting, in my eyes, a perfectly valid edit. --Chevvin (talk) 01:51, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
 * It's not a "valid edit" in my opinion. An edit can't be called "valid" when it's part of a persistent pattern of disruption. Kingshowman is the sort of user who could be disrupting Wikipedia for years to come, and I don't think that years from now, when you look back, you will be happy saying to yourself, "I should never have given him any encouragement." The text added was "Freud theorized that, like Oedipus, male children unsciously desired to kill their father and have sex with their mother" - that gives a rather vulgarized and less than fully accurate explanation of Freud's views and it clearly isn't supported by a proper citation. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 01:57, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
 * WP:DENY is also a consideration here. Jim1138 (talk) 02:00, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
 * While I do agree that the definition wasn't worded in the best way possible, it does contain an accurate description of the Oedipus complex, and doesn't need a source, especially when it is summarizing another Wikipedia article. The truth is, I'm not here to encourage Kingshowman to make more edits. I'm here to help reinstate an edit that should have not been reverted simply on the grounds of sockpuppetry. --Chevvin (talk) 02:02, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Please see Talk:Sigmund Freud, Chevvin. I question the accuracy of your addition, and I certainly do not agree that it does not need a source. Wikipedia itself cannot be used as a source. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 06:28, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

@Chevvin: How much time have you spent investigating the history of the blocked user and the articles they frequent? In the future, please do not start a public brawl over a claim about a sockpuppet, particularly when the account you are supporting was created an hour earlier. If you think you have some insight into the case that contradicts the revert, the correct action would be to quietly ask at the reverting user's talk. Making a fuss encourages further disruption, and is extremely irritating for those editors who are trying to defend the encyclopedia. Wikipedia is a complex place. Johnuniq (talk) 10:32, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
 * How much time have you spent investigating this argument? In the future, please do not start another brawl over a claim about my motive, particularly when I specifically said "They aren't vandalism or anything of the sort, and actually help improve the article. Just because they're an obvious sockpuppet doesn't necessarily mean that their edits weren't positive." If you think you have some insight into my mind that contradicts exactly what I said, the correct action would be to double check my standpoint. Making more of a fuss about this encourages further disruption, and is extremely irritating for those editors who are trying to defend the encyclopedia. Wikipedia is a complex place. --Chevvin (talk) 01:22, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I know there are lots of forums where your reply would be fine, but things are done differently at Wikipedia. The reply is no problem to me, but it might be an idea to be more open to receiving advice while becoming used to Wikipedia's procedures. The issue of supporting socks is very divisive with some libertarian editors taking a hard line that any edit is good so long as it satisfies policies, with generally a larger number on the other side pointing to the extremely bad effects on the community of such support. The matter is not fully appreciated until one has encountered a banned user and their corrosive effects. An example of a major rollback can be seen here (search for "banned" and look at some of the diffs). Another major example was brought to the attention of the Arbitration Committee who resolved (permalink) that, within a certain topic, socks must not be supported. The issue is still highly contentious, but the general rule is that editors should cooperate with each other—where disagreements occur, calm discussion is best. Johnuniq (talk) 06:24, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Chevvin, just as a general note, I did not invoke WP:DENY in this edit. I wouldn't make an issue of this, except that you repeated here the claim that I was appealing to that essay. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 06:49, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh. Sorry for the misunderstanding, and I hope no hard feeling have come across. --Chevvin (talk) 22:18, 14 September 2015 (UTC)


 * FreeKnowledgeCreator, Jim1138 and Johnuniq, it's not surprising that Chevvin partly supported Kingshowman, or that he would partly support any WP:Sockpuppet; if I get even more evidence on Chevvin than I already have, you'll eventually see why. I would have left Chevvin to this account, but... Flyer22 (talk) 21:45, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * And what exactly is that supposed to mean? --Chevvin (talk) 22:18, 14 September 2015 (UTC)


 * You know what it means. Flyer22 (talk) 00:39, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Why must you treat me like I'm a horrid user? You have no solid evidence to show that I'm a sockpuppet, and I'm almost 100% sure that there's some policy about giving people the benefit of the doubt (I don't have the time to search for a link of it, as I'm trying to balance Wikipedia with other, more important activities) --Chevvin (talk) 01:22, 18 September 2015 (UTC)


 * The WP:Ping does not work after the fact. You know that. And that you pinged me after the fact is also indicative of the editor I suspect you of being. Your entire "01:22, 18 September 2015 (UTC)" reply adds to the evidence. And that you chose to wait a few days to make that latest reply without editing Wikipedia is more evidence; you were waiting to see what I would do. You can keep waiting then, because I will officially report you when I'm ready or if I ever feel like it. You know how I work on matters such as these, including very recently. Go about your business, and I will go about mine. I am not pursuing you at this time. Flyer22 (talk) 01:46, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Genius

 * Thank you! --Chevvin (talk) 02:17, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Lansdowne Bridge
I've deleted the redirect, so your sandbox can now be moved. However, it currently doesn't have any categories. Could you find some categories to apply to the new article and then move the page? I just don't want the new article to have no categories (since it hurts navigation if it doesn't have them), and you're now able to move the page. If you encounter any problems, leave a note at my talk. Nyttend (talk) 18:12, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I'll add some when I get on my home computer later today. --Chevvin (talk) 21:33, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Micromyrtus grandis
Thanks for this article Victuallers (talk) 12:02, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Lansdowne Bridge
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
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) 17:11, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Moson Kahni has been accepted
 Moson Kahni, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. . Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!  Onel 5969  TT me 20:42, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Moson_Kahni help desk] .
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

DYK for Ralph Harris (journalist)
Allen3 talk 12:22, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Rollback granted
Hi Chevvin. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=rights&user=&page=User%3AChevvin enabled] rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback: If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Biblio (talk) 22:02, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
 * Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
 * Rollback should never be used to edit war.
 * If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
 * Use common sense.

Pending changes reviewer granted
Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:
 * Reviewing, the guideline on reviewing
 * Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
 * Protection policy, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators. Widr (talk) 05:56, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Đoàn Thị Hương for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Đoàn Thị Hương 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 Articles for deletion/Đoàn Thị Hương until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 05:46, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Blossom (Milky Chance album)
How were you able to move your sandbox page into Blossom (Milky Chance album)? Who deleted it for you? I created that page as a redirect two months ago, and I also don't see why you couldn't have created the content over the top of the redirect instead of requesting or getting the page deleted.  Ss 112  17:21, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
 * If you check the deletion log, you'll find that I got your redirect deleted in order to make room for my article. — Chevvin 23:59, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Except your edit history doesn't say you ever requested for my redirect to be deleted, and what I was saying was I think that was unnecessary in the first place. Users' personal sandboxes being moved into the mainspace I very much disagree with, as the previous history of the page (in this case, something about a currency, and copypasting the content of Sadnecessary to use as a template) is now there for all users to see when it has little to do with what the actual current article is about. Even now, the article doesn't even really pass WP:NALBUMS (it has one source) and shouldn't have been moved into the mainspace as if it were "ready" anyway  Ss 112  01:00, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
 * My edit history doesn't say I requested for the article to be deleted because the edit in which I requested it was deleted along with the redirect. If you want to invoke NALBUMS on it, feel free to do so - nobody's stopping you. — Chevvin 01:29, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Please do not remove maintenance templates when you add one more source to an article. The notice says "additional citations". That doesn't mean one, nor necessarily two or three. Two sources announcing an album does not immediately establish third-party notability. I think it's up to editors besides the page's main contributor to judge when its references have been improved. Also, ordinarily I would "invoke" WP:NALBUMS on it, but since I get the feeling you think one more source apparently means the page's referencing/notability issues have been fixed, my redirect wouldn't last very long.  Ss 112  04:36, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Elsie Godwin
Hello Chevvin. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Elsie Godwin, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Article claims importance/significance of the subject. Thank you.  So Why  16:48, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Aspasia (soft drink)
Hello Chevvin. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Aspasia (soft drink), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 cannot be applied to products. Thank you.  So Why  16:50, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Alfred Pennyworth
Thanks for the hatnote fix. I was considering making a DAB page with the ship and the protagonist of 27, Memory Lane, but upon looking at the latter article, I decided to PROD it instead. When I went to change the hatnote, you had already done it. Thanks! Patar knight - chat/contributions 17:42, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Prod on Cité du Refuge
hello: I removed your prod on Cité du Refuge. It's a building by one of the most famous architects to have ever lived: Le Corbusier. I had no trouble finding nearly a dozen excellent sources to show notability. 96.127.244.11 (talk) 07:24, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Egypt Basketball Cup
Need I say more? Best, Nicnote  •  ask me a question  •  contributions  22:25, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
 * What's up? At the time of my CSD, the article was literally just "The Egypt Basketball Cup", and was continually removed by the creator.  If you're going to be passive aggressive, at least tell me why you're being passive aggressive. — Chevvin 23:41, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I was letting you know that they re-created the page... Nicnote  •  ask me a question  •  contributions  23:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
 * My bad. I didn't even notice that the page was deleted in the first place, so I assumed that it was still the original.  Once again, terribly sorry for the confusion. — Chevvin 23:44, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Don't worry. Jumping to conclusions is human kind's best attribute, also On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog. By that I mean, face-to-face things would be different, i.e. you would realise that you are speaking to a canine or something. At least we all have 20/20 hindsight right? Best, Nicnote  •  ask me a question  •  contributions  23:48, 20 April 2017 (UTC)


 * I also noticed the deletion/recreation... but then I also noticed Egyptian Basketball Super League and wondered if they're not intended to be the same? The author edited a bit on that article too, which is how I found it.  I initially noticed the Cup article because of citation issues (and a tag about those, I'm part of Wikiproject Citation Cleanup), so I deduplicated the citations.  Then suddenly the article was blanked, tagged for deletion, recreated and seems to now be in the same state as before the deletion (and before my fixes)...  It also wasn't created in draft or user space (I left the author a comment about this, but no answer so far, it's as if the editor talk page was never acknowledged despite the multiple warnings on it).  —░] PaleoNeonate █ ⏎ ? ERROR ░ 22:06, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Apollo Automobil logo.png
 Thanks for uploading File:Apollo Automobil logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:21, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Apollo Automobil logo.png
 Thanks for uploading File:Apollo Automobil logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:30, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

T. J. Ward
Could you add a temporary restriction to the T. J. Ward page to prevent the vandalism from occurring? I don't know how to add restrictions. Thanks!
 * I've already requested it at WP:RFPP, but it might take a bit for an admin to actually do it. Thanks for the help! — Chevvin 21:44, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Cool, thanks for telling me.

ANI Experiences survey
The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (led by the Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) is conducting a survey for en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.

The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:


 * https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/2017_AN/Incidents_Survey_Privacy_Statement

If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.


 * Sign up here to receive a link to a survey

Please be aware this survey will close Friday, Dec. 8 at 23:00 UTC.

Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 21:14, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Battle of Udgir
Thank you for helping out with my redirect request. I hoped an admin might visit but eventually realised I was in the wrong forum, so I've removed the original request. I'll keep an eye on the title and add the redirect if it gets unprotected. There should be a good chance, as the offending articles appeared five years ago and the protecting admin is inactive. Thanks again, Certes (talk) 19:35, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

A page you started (Northern spotted box turtle) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Northern spotted box turtle, Chethin!

Wikipedia editor Animalparty just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

"It might be prudent to combine both subspecies with Spotted box turtle, since all are stubs- the same info on one page would allow easier access for readers."

To reply, leave a comment on Animalparty's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

— Chevvin 02:02, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to WP:STiki!
Note: Having a username change after you start using STiki will reset your classification count. Please let us know about such changes on the talk page page to avoid confusion in issuing milestone awards. You can also request for your previous STiki contributions to be reassigned to your new account name.

July 2018
Hello, I'm Maattik. Ivans Klementjevs represented Poland (not Latvia) at the 1994 ICF Canoe Sprint World Championships. Reference: Reference. --Maattik (talk) 14:27, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that - I checked his page quickly - saw that he had competed in the Olympics solely for Latvia, and assumed that it was a mistake. — Chevvin 15:05, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

Precious
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:52, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

A year ago, you were recipient no. 1805 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:12, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

"moving info about the draft to a later section"
You do realize that per WP:LEAD, the lead is supposed to repeat key information that's included in the article below right? The fact that a player got drafted in the first round is notable, so stop removing it from the lead when you add the same info below. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 15:23, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I would argue that being drafted isn't key information about the player and better fits in the professional career section, not to mention that there has been a precedent of placing draft information in the beginning of the professional career section. — Chevvin 15:27, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

Death of Jeffrey Epstein
Hi. I've now removed the "Connections to public figures" section from Death of Jeffrey Epstein. You're welcome to join the discussion on the talk page. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:58, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Parkland College: Thanks
Thanks for the message on Parkland College. I glanced at the ESPN biography for one of the pitchers and did not see Parkland College. Perhaps he graduated from another college but a more thorough biography (or a look at the Wikipedia page) would have disclosed the attendance at Parkland. Sorry for the mistake and inconvenience. Donner60 (talk) 21:00, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Kyle Allen
Thanks, I was thoroughly entertained by reading your revision history on the Kyle Allen page regarding his newfound relationship to 49ers DE Nick Bosa :D RLove79 (talk) 01:11, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Health Issues of Red Meat
I edited the intro section of Impossible Foods's page because it was not neutral to start with. As-written it supposed health risks associated with red meat which are disputed--it is not settled science that red meat is bad - hence I changed it to supposed health impacts. The environmental impact of raising meat is certain, so in order to modify only the health "risks" section, I added the word "certain" to modify environmental.

Asserting that there is a sure health risk to red meat is not neutral, so reverting to the original would seem to defeat your stated purpose.

Dave 2601:540:C501:EA30:902D:EDDB:2276:1E9A (talk) 20:56, 8 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Upon further review I decided to restore the page previous to my edit, as the original sentence was not written in a neutral point of view. Thank you for your edit and I hope that you'll consider creating an account. Cheers. — Chevvin 21:02, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. Made an account! --DeeDubbleYou (talk) 21:21, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Chevvin
Have you read this page? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Military_stress_card#Military_stress_card
 * I have not, but if you wish to make changes to the article please do so via consensus instead of constant edit warring. — Chevvin 18:35, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

It is 2 vs 2. And those 2 are someone who posted an offtopic rant about average recruit quality in the US army and someone who posted the original article which was misinformation based on a misrepresented source and a unreliable source. Please read that page and check if I am correct, then it will be 3 vs 2.

Thank you.

Note
You can speedy-keep an AfD on the basis of withdrawal of nomination, iff there are no delete/redirect !votes through-out the entire discourse, till then. &#x222F; WBG converse 09:36, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:55, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 18:40, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

Articles for Creation: List of reviewers by subject notice
Hi, you are receiving this notice because you are listed as an active Articles for Creation reviewer.

Recently a list of reviewers by area of expertise was created. This notice is being sent out to alert you to the existence of that list, and to encourage you to add your name to it. If you or other reviewers come across articles in the queue where an acceptance/decline hinges on specialist knowledge, this list should serve to facilitate contact with a fellow reviewer.

To end on a positive note, the backlog has dropped below 1,500, so thanks for all of the hard work some of you have been putting into the AfC process!

Sent to all Articles for Creation reviewers as a one-time notice. To opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page. Regards, (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:35, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Corrections to the Cote d'Ivoire page
It seems to me this page should be renamed and have the majority of the references to "The Ivory Coast" removed, as this is disrespectful to the people and government of the nation, whose express wishes not to be called the Ivory Coast are even included in the article itself. Is there a reason to keep the article the way it is? I do not believe that Cote d'Ivoire is any less clear or searchable as a name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.190.63.19 (talk) 05:37, 25 July 2020 (UTC)


 * If you're interested in making those changes to the article, I would suggest that you do so by creating a proposal on the talk page. If editors come to the consensus that the article should be renamed, then the changes will be made.  Just as a note, the name-change proposal has been attempted multiple times in the past and has failed due to a variety of reasons, although the last official discussion was in 2012, so you might find some success.  — Chevvin 05:43, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Chris Gragg
I am thinking about moving the Chris Gragg article to WP:FAR and posted this section on the talk page. Any feedback you have would be much appreciated. Tonystewart14 (talk) 23:20, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I have nominated Chris Gragg for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Tonystewart14 (talk) 14:21, 27 July 2020 (UTC)