User talk:ChrisTheDude/Archive 28

Gills squad numbers
What's your thoughts on having the numbers in the squad list match those on the training gear? People seem to think they're gospel, but part of me doesn't wish to show any until they've been officially announced by the club. The same way someone training with us doesn't guarantee a signing. I don't want to remove them (and then re-sort alphabetically and periodically remove them again when someone gets excited) if it's better to keep them Frediculous biggs (talk) 21:18, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
 * - I've removed them, let's see how long it lasts :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:26, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Message
Umm, Chris? Sorry, this is my first time doing this so idk if I am even doing it correctly, but I am trying to figure out how to contact someone about a very likely violation of policy. Essentially, apparently someone made a draft page for the company I work in (which is pretty cool), it was rejected, but someone reached out to us saying they are a Wikipedia editor and they can get it published if we pay them $750. This has to be a violation of some sort, right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.134.108.34 (talk) 13:48, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
 * - nobody can guarantee to produce an article which will get published. In all honesty I would just ignore that correspondence -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:51, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Oh, really? I tried probing them a bit and it seems to be a "public relations and communications agency" (IDigitalAKKI) so I am not too sure on how you get an article approved but it does seem to me as though they might have a couple of "Wikipedia editor" accounts that they then use to then sell this sort of thing. And at $750 a pop I can imagine they are indeed making easy money to publish anyone willing to pay (which sounds like an easy business mode). Isn't that a possibility? 94.134.108.34 (talk) 14:01, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
 * paid editing is not against the rules, it is permitted under certain restrictions (more details at WP:PAID), but the issue is that no editor, however skilled, can guarantee to get an article published if the subject simply doesn't meet the requirements to have an article (contrary to what some people think, you can't create a Wikipedia article on literally anything, the subject has to meet certain notability requirements. For example, Harry Styles is notable, but the kid down the road from me who posts cover versions on YouTube and has about 12 subscribers isn't, and no amount of skilful editing could make an article on him "stick").  You could easily pay money to this person, who then creates an article, only for it to get deleted because the subject does not meet the requirements, and then your money has been totally wasted -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:20, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Ok, cool cool. For the record, I wasn't planning on actually paying them, hence why I am here and more likely to report them than anything. I might just for the fun of it probe them a bit more into how exactly they plan on ensuring that the article gets approved, but it's been great to learn from you about the process, so thanks! Also very interesting that paid editing is allowed (kinda makes me want to get into that, not gonna lie!).
 * And btw, I totally get the point about notoriety. The dude claimed that "We were make so many pages live. Miraboi, K.C. Venuopal and many more. You can check our previous work." So on the one hand I can say "who??? wtf is that?" but on the other hand I think notoriety always depends on context. For example, the draft that was submitted for our company got rejected, but given that we work in a very niche industry with companies all over the world, we would obviously argue that we definitely meet a notoriety standard by far haha. If you simply google "drone industry" or "drone market" I could almost guarantee that we are a top 5 result on anything related to the topic (much higher than Harry Styles would rank in a search for "famous singers", and he is on there).
 * But anyway, that's just the extra on why I think these guys reached out to us and plan on getting away with it. Either way we aren't paying them, and I thank you for the brief lessons on how Wikipedia editing works :) 94.134.108.34 (talk) 14:37, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Vandalism/page ownership
Hi, Chris - hope all is well... I don't know if you're into American football much, but it may be good to have an outsider's verdict on this. There was a NFL-run league involving European teams from 1991−2007 which began as the 'World League', then became the 'Europe' league, then just the 'Germany-Amsterdam' league :-) ...It did OK, sometimes, but lost money and the NFL shut it down in the end.

The issue is that this Toa person has deleted a lot of what was in the article, NFL Europe, from 2014 until last month. He's mostly got rid of prose, facts and references explaining about the league in Europe, and about the league competition itself, replacing it with stats tables and info on NFL U.S. boardroom decisions.

He is blatantly blocking any deviation from his version, and any challenging of it. I had contributed a lot to the History section myself, and certainly don't mind others editing it if it improves the article. But he's simply removed most of it and clearly set out to make the article more American, when that's quite an inappropriate and POV approach. The content that was deleted is not in related articles on Wikipedia, which are mostly brief AFAIK.

He's also removed many references, added errors, and added dubious/challengeable claims. The most obvious and prominent one is a misnamed section heading, "NFL Europe/Europa (1995-2007)", when the league was still named the "World League"/"WLAF" in 1995, 1996 and 1997. It may be 'neater', but it's just a misrepresentation of the history.

A Wikipedia article being bad isn't the end of the world, but his attitude is really unpleasant, dishonest, accusatory while doing the same things he accuses me of, and it borders on trying to bully his changes through and suppress debate. (Aggressive reverting seems common among NFL article editors, for some reason.)

Not sure what else he's done wrong elsewhere, he's had a few 1-day bans that I can see, some recent complaints on his user talk, and his edits are often on U.S. politics, 'correcting' Trump articles, and moving "2004 United States election voting controversies" to "2004 United States election conspiracy theories" this week (has got reverted since, apparently).

But the NFL Europe thing is really the bizarrest set of edits I've ever seen on here. It's a sad thing about this "late-era" Wikipedia, that there aren't enough users to watch out for all the cases like this one.

More importantly, it's the clearest case of WP:OWNERSHIP behaviour I've ever seen. E.g. Saying things like, "If you have specific examples of vital, league-relevant content that was removed, I'd be happy to consider re-adding it". He did add some useful stuff about this league (while deleting other useful stuff) ... But speaking frankly, there isn't any way this article can be a collaborative encyclopedia effort while he's still permitted to edit it.

I've outlined some of the vandalism and disruption here. Talk:NFL Europe

Thanks, Demokra (talk) 05:53, 16 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi Chris, could you PLEASE help with this? He's deleted the article cleanup tag again (third time) because I was offline working. It's just trolling at this point. Not what anyone joined Wikipedia for. - Demokra (talk) 03:10, 22 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi - sorry for the double-post. I have just read the page on WikiBullying, and I believe this is what Toa Nidhiki is doing. Namely 3 sections: "Asserting ownership", "Misrepresentation" (of my views), and "No-edit orders". I'm a bit busy but can give the examples of these if you like. It was mainly on the NFL Europe Talk page.


 * I was reluctant to use the word "bullying" before (am more concerned with the fate of the article), but on reading the WikiBullying page, this is 100% what I think is happening. I've never been treated so disrespectfully by any user here, have really never seen anyone act this way on Wikipedia, and I don't see how Toa can be allowed to keep editing as before. Someone else on his user talk raised issues with his "conduct" recently, but I don't know what it was about. - Demokra (talk) 06:03, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
 * , like I said I'd be happy to re-add information that would be important if there are actually examples you can give. I have tried to engage with you on the talk page numerous times, to no avail. The new version of the article doubles the number of citations, contains no unsourced information (as opposed to dozens of examples on the old one), and is in line with other league pages in terms of structure, like National Football League (which I reworked and was able to get listed as a "good article" almost a decade ago - wow!). I am confident this new version is vastly superior to the old one, which was deficient in a slew of ways. I am not trying to declare ownership of the page, but drive-by taggings don't actually benefit the article. I will ask you again to please engage on the talk page where we can hopefully resolve what complaints you have. Toa Nidhiki05 17:39, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

I wish to add two more sections of WikiBullying which are applicable to Toa – "POV railroading" (some of which I mentioned above), and "False accusations": namely his accusing me of "drive-by taggings" (here) and "refusing to engage" (in NFL Europe edit summary). I've been a contributor to the NFL Europe article for years and care about it, and I posted two detailed messages on the Talk page in the past two weekends. Toa's response was to dismiss my concerns, belittle my and others' "low-quality" contributions, and to further vandalize the article. I've also stated there and here that I've been at work. I've been working long hours and will be at work six days in a row this week, and it's not a job where I can idly edit Wikipedia.

Since Toa's third vandalistic removal of cleanup tags when I was away, I have realized that his behaviour probably qualifies as WikiBullying on five counts, and have stated that I think I am being bullied. His message above, softer in tone to try to avoid being banned, contains further lies about the article and false accusations about me. These are strong claims which I am not in the habit of ever making about a Wikipedia editor, and I have supporting evidence.

This whole time has been troubling and stressful and I just want it to be over. If you're unable to intervene, Chris, at the very least I would like an acknowledgement of the situation from you. Feel free to use anything I've written for whatever purpose. - Demokra (talk) 05:55, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Demokra, simply saying things you disagree with isn’t WikiBullying. You’re welcome to continue discussing at Talk:NFL Europe. Toa Nidhiki05 15:16, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Ted West for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ted West 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/Ted West 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. InvadingInvader (talk) 19:39, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 5
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mata (album), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Bhangra and Hypebeast.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

TFA
Thank you today for 1963–64 Gillingham F.C. season, introduced last year: "After my most recent FAC nomination, which was about one of the most catastrophic seasons in the history of my favourite football club, I needed to write about something more positive, hence this one. I don't personally remember this season, as it was [mumble] years before I was born, but it was enjoyable to write about and to take a peek into the heady days when floodlights were a new concept, goal average was used, and players were called things like Geoff and Brian :-)  Feedback as ever will be most gratefully received and swiftly acted upon."! -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:51, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

List of commelinid families
Thanks for reviewing. I don't think this creates any more work for you, but FWIW, in these two edits this morning, I subtracted some details about flowers that now strike me as too much for this modest list ... they'll be off-putting for the readership I'm targeting. Nothing new has been added. - Dank (push to talk) 13:50, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
 * No problem -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:40, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Again, no work for you (that I know of) ... but I'm planning to make the same change to the previous list you reviewed, and I'll also be getting rid of the double rows, to match the new format. Let me know if either is a problem or if you have suggestions. - Dank (push to talk) 18:58, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Request for review
Hey Chris, I know I have asked you for a favour for like a million times by now, but do you think you would have time to review an FAC of mine where a reviewer raised some prose concerns of the music video section? After major copy-edits, I would like to have an uninvolved reviewer go through the article. Given that I have asked them to re-review once, I think it's best that they be left alone now and someone else take a look. FrB.TG (talk) 16:22, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
 * sure - I'm about to log off for the day but will do my best to have a look tomorrow......... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:33, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Off-topic question
Can I ask you how you Brits are going to watch the World Cup matches? Many will be played when people are at school or at work or when students usually study or do their homework.

I and many other Italians are going to see just matches played in the week-end or in the late afternoon/evening. Dr Salvus 19:23, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
 * - I work from home so I will just put the games on while I work :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:06, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Lucky you! Unfortunately, I will be at school, so I can't not miss a lot of matches. I am wondering how people who can't be at home by 10:00 will see England v Iran.
 * I don't want to dare imagine what would happen if Italy had qualified either and if they had to play at 11:00 (we're one hour ahead). Dr Salvus 20:01, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Hopefully, I managed to see most of the matches. Couldn't obviously see the ones played prior to 12:00. <b style="font-family: Verdana; color: #6633FF;">Dr</b> <b style="font-family: Verdana; color: #6633FF;">Salvus</b> 22:39, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:05, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

Hey Chris!
I noticed that a user keeps deleting the 'results' section of FIFA Futsal World Cup. Another user reverted it multiple times, but I don't understand what the point is with it being uniform with other articles? Should we delete result section of all sports articles now? Did I miss some consensus lately? The user seems like a nice person and surely means no harm, it just seems a little confusing to me. I contact you here, because I don't think opening up something that the user already explained multiple times, will do any good. I will most likely be reverted also if i put it back. It's just super confusing to a reader now, that they can't see the year of the finals and who played who in a proper way. Speun (talk) 13:43, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #AAA; background-color: ivory; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; "> Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. 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 to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

FAC review request
Hey, Chris! Hope everything is going well. I wanted to request a potential review from you of my current FAC as it is one week in with no prose reviews and will probably be archived soon. Regards.--<b style="color:purple">N</b><b style="color:teal">Ø</b> 11:28, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
 * - sure thing! Might be tomorrow evening before I get a chance to be on WP for an uninterrupted length of time sufficient to do a proper FAC review but I will certainly aim to do so then if not sooner! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:40, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Promotion of Matangi (album)

 * Congrats on the FA! Aoba47 (talk) 16:47, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
 * - Thanks! BTW I wanted to finish off my review of that FAC on a David Bowie album, which I had earlier run out of steam on partway through, before I took a look at your current FAC, but now that I've finally finished that I will get onto yours.  It won't be this evening, though, as I have my son's school Christmas concert to attend :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:56, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Take as much time as you need. There is absolutely no rush with this. I can completely understand what you mean about losing steam with a review. I have been there before lol. And best of luck with your son's concert! That sounds really awesome and I am sure it will be great. Aoba47 (talk) 17:07, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Always precious
Ten years ago, you were found precious. That's what you are, always. Congrats to another FA! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:42, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Happy New Year, ChrisTheDude!
<div style="border: 3px solid #FFD700; background-color: #FFFAF0; padding:0.2em 0.4em; height:auto; min-height:173px; border-radius:1em; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75);" class="plainlinks">

Happy New Year! ChrisTheDude, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

— Moops  ⋠ T ⋡ 04:31, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

— Moops  ⋠ T ⋡ 04:31, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Lionel Messi
Hello ChrisTheDude

Out of curiosity, what do you think about that. Would you mind to eventually help reach (new) consensus? Cheers Dawid2009 (talk) 20:58, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

List of Saxifragales families
Thx for reviewing this. I just moved the second paragraph from the intro down into a new section, "Common characteristics", because that text felt too technical for the intro to me. (Also, that allows me to define the technical terms in my glossary section.) I also just wrote a new second paragraph for the intro with noteworthy and fun facts, stuff that is more likely to overlap with what my target readership already knows or is interested in knowing. Nothing else changed (except deleting a few now-redundant words from the table). If reviewers are okay with this, I plan to use this new approach in upcoming lists.

It feels a little weird to me that no one has reviewed List of Hot R&B Sides number ones of 1961 yet ... I'll go jump on that one. Hope this isn't a trend! - Dank (push to talk) 02:52, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello again
Hello. Apologies for the super random message. Just wanted to apologize for not review your recent FLCs and FACs as I am currently on a wikibreak. I hope you are doing well and best of luck with your nominations! Aoba47 (talk) 21:53, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
 * - hey, no problem. Hope to see you back whenever the time is right for you.... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:43, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I appreciate it, and thank you for the kind words. I just wanted to post a message about it as I always feel bad whenever I am not actively reviewing as I'd want to help other editors, especially given all the help that I have received on here. I hope you have a great rest of your week! Aoba47 (talk) 19:25, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

FAC Review
Hi there! I've had the pleasure of interacting with you on several FL discussions and I am currently in the process of trying to promote my first FA, John C. Young (college president). I have received feedback from one reviewer so far but without a couple more the nomination is in danger of being archived. I see that you recently nominated an FAC, and I imagine you are quite busy, but is there any way you would be willing and able to give me some feedback and comments on that nomination? PCN02WPS ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 20:25, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Request for feedback
Hi! I previously talked to you about finding sources for early football matches. I'm glad to report that I was able to find some more to fill out 1919 Copa del Rey Final and have nominated it for a GA. If you were willing to review it or give some quick feedback, as someone with high quality editing experience in the topic area, that would be super appreciated. Hope you have a good week :) — Ixtal ( T / C ) &#8258; Non nobis solum. 14:28, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mata (album)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Mata (album) 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 Ippantekina -- Ippantekina (talk) 08:43, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 16
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 1894–95 New Brompton F.C. season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Daily News.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mata (album)
The article Mata (album) 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:Mata (album) and Talk:Mata (album)/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Ippantekina -- Ippantekina (talk) 16:41, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mata (album)
The article Mata (album) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Mata (album) for comments about the article, and Talk:Mata (album)/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Ippantekina -- Ippantekina (talk) 17:20, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Mata (album)
BorgQueen (talk) 00:02, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

License tagging for File:LateNightLycettH.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:LateNightLycettH.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 08:30, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

List of descriptive plant species epithets (A–H)
Chris, could you do me a favo(u)r, and tell me if all the images are loading for you in that list? A couple of years ago several reviewers (including you) were having problems with getting all the images to load in long lists (and I've heard many people say this through the years) ... but I can't reproduce the problem myself so I need your feedback on this. It's important for my current list series. - Dank (push to talk) 03:24, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * - yes, all good here! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:46, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Btw, I see you got 3 immediate supports over at List of Top Selling R&B Singles number ones of 1966. If you think another review would help to clarify things, or if you have any difficulty getting it promoted, I'll be happy to review it of course. - Dank (push to talk) 14:52, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

License tagging for File:AlexMacDonald2023.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:AlexMacDonald2023.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 22:30, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

License tagging for File:ConorMasterson.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:ConorMasterson.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 22:30, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

License tagging for File:MaxEhmer.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:MaxEhmer.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 22:30, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

License tagging for File:GeorgeLapslie.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:GeorgeLapslie.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 22:31, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

License tagging for File:WillWright.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:WillWright.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 23:30, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

List of accolades received by Dune (2021 film) FLC
Hi there,

I was wondering if you could proofread List of accolades received by Dune (2021 film) for featured list promotion. I would greatly appreciate the feedback.
 * -- Birdienest81 talk  09:27, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
 * - sure, I'll try and do it today -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:15, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 19
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 1919–20 Gillingham F.C. season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Western Mail.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:26, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Help
I ask that this user User:Beemer69 stay away from the article I am working on by providing information with verified sources, the user in question he has endeavored to delete verified information and links to other articles by bmx athletes his intention is to template my article with the excuse of deleting it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Casey_(BMX) --Jusaset (talk) 19:32, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
 * - as far as I can see, all of the information which User:Beemer69 removed was sourced to highly unreliable sources and therefore they were within their rights to remove it. Do you have better sources available for this information? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 06:58, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

Therealgamer1234
Therealgamer1234 (talk) 21:54, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
 * in response to your email, unfortunately the article is not eligible for DYK. The eligibility requirements for DYK are that an Article has to have been either created, expanded fivefold, or promoted to Good Article within the past 10 days.  None of these apply to the TMSFE article.  Sorry about that -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:07, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Well the only reason why I did any of this is so that I can get TMSFE to be featured on the main page of wikipedia, I want this game to get more recognition via wikipedia, will it being featured on the main page do that? Therealgamer1234 (talk) 14:07, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

File:KingstonianAmateurCup.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:KingstonianAmateurCup.jpg, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Felix QW (talk) 20:00, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

File:LordKinnaird.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:LordKinnaird.jpg, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Felix QW (talk) 21:07, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Fred Griffiths (footballer)
By any change, you don't have more material on his period at Millwall? Seems he played a fair bit for the club, but there is no real prose for that. Regards. Govvy (talk) 10:18, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
 * - not in books, but I do have newspapers.com access, so I could see if there's anything about him in papers of the day.... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:29, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
 * k, cheers, it would be cool to expand the article, I was also wondering if we should be adding an imbed military infobox, like we have at Walter Tull. I was thinking it be a good article to maybe get to GA, but I just looked at Walter Tull just now and thought that was a GA, when it isn't. Maybe we can put Tull's article up for GA first, doesn't look it needs much done for that. Regards. Govvy (talk) 10:42, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Ilford and District Football League for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ilford and District Football League, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Articles for deletion/Ilford and District Football League until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Chatham Charity Cup 1905-06
Does anyone know anything about this competition. I think New Brompton took part or maybe eon it. Thai Brian 2A00:23C8:A11:2801:4927:5534:DCCD:87D1 (talk) 11:17, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

1919–20 Gillingham F.C. season at TFA?
Chris, this one was recently promoted at FAC, and I need another sports article for the October TFAs ... is this a good choice? - Dank (push to talk) 00:41, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
 * - seems as good as any :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:26, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Btw,, I'm not very good with F.C. blurbs, but I'll give it a shot if you'd rather not write the blurb. - Dank (push to talk) 14:51, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Feel free to edit the blurb, at WP:Today's featured article/October 3, 2023. - Dank (push to talk) 04:50, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't know what "finished bottom" means. Would "finished at the bottom" work? - Dank (push to talk) 13:22, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
 * In British English, if a team finishes 20th out of 20 (or 14th out of 14 or whatever) we would normally express that as "they finished bottom of the league". "Finished at the bottom" would not be the most common way to express it but would certainly work.  I changed it from the previous wording of "finished in the bottom" because (in British English at least) that means they finished somewhere among the bottom N teams, where N is (in that example) an unspecified number.  Hope that all makes sense...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:26, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Does "at the bottom" sound like "Well that's weird, probably some American wrote that" or would most Brits read that and understand it without noticing that it sounded a little off? I think "finished bottom" has some ambiguity for AmEng readers. We'd usually expect something else, such as "finished at the bottom" or "finished last". - Dank (push to talk) 13:37, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
 * how about just "finished in 22nd place out of 22 teams"? No ambiguity there.  Or is it too long-winded for a blurb.....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:48, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Works for me, thanks. - Dank (push to talk) 14:31, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I'd feel slightly safer with "6 goalkeepers" (instead of "six"), but I've been away from these issues for a while so I might be wrong. Thoughts? - Dank (push to talk) 15:40, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
 * - yeah, I think people would probably say it needs to be like that -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:50, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Just one more question. (I'm asking for extra feedback on blurbs this month). User:Dying changed some things here. Which version of the first sentence do you prefer (or another option, would you prefer if it only mentioned the part with "21 years")? I don't have a preference, I just want to get up to speed on these things. - Dank (push to talk) 21:03, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you today for the article, introduced: "I didn't plan to nominate any more Gillingham F.C. season articles, as I got the impression that people were a bit fed up of them, but then I found myself inexorably drawn into working on this one and now here we are..... So please enjoy reading about another rubbish season in the history of my favourite football team, one of the few highpoints of which was the performance of a player with a metal plate in his head."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:23, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Request for possible FAC feedback
Hello, Chris. I am planning to take 2020 Seattle Sounders FC season to FAC in the near future and would like some feedback from an experienced seasons editor like yourself before doing so. I modeled it based on your excellent series of Gillingham season articles, with some tweaks to fit the American setting (and all the disruptions of 2020). Any comments are much appreciated.  Sounder Bruce  07:05, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
 * - sure, I'll try and take a look tonight -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:26, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
 * - sorry for taking a while to get to this, I've had some terrible internet issues. The article looks excellent, and I would definitely say it's ready to be taken to FAC.  Not much more to add than that really :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 22:05, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
 * No worries, the need for this one to be at FAC is definitely not urgent (and it has a potential one ahead of it). Thanks for looking it over and for the confidence boost.  Sounder Bruce  22:08, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Talk:Epsom riot has an RFC
Talk:Epsom riot has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the |discussion page. Thank you. Polyamorph (talk) 14:18, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started
Hello, ChrisTheDude. Thank you for your work on 1912–13 Gillingham F.C. season. User:BeanieFan11, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with. Please remember to sign your reply with ~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

BeanieFan11 (talk) 02:58, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 31
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Danny Lloyd (footballer), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Daily Record.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:17, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Umbro Cup
Nice job expanding it. If you could add ~200+ more words it could be eligible for a Did you know, although the time is short (it counts a 7-day window). <sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 02:27, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
 * - I'll have a go...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:19, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Zack Kotwica for deletion
Hi! May I ask you to participate in discussion about deleting ex-EFL player article? Martinklavier (talk) 15:10, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

That's annoying...
I'd started preparing a list of points relating to 1981-82 Gillingham season, then it was suddenly promoted. Nothing major anyway, so congrats on another excellent piece! I have an FAC myself currently, but regretting it a bit as I haven't had time to look at the points made so far. That said, if you do have anything to add please do and I'll also try to find some time for your current FAC! Cheers &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 08:00, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
 * - sure, I'll endeavour to take a look over the weekend -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:04, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

William McCurdy
I was looking to write a new article for a William McCurdy who played for Tottenham as well as New Brompton, I didn't see anything on wikipedia, or an article in Category:Gillingham F.C. players either, according to Goodwin's book he was at New Brompton, moved to Spurs for a season then went back to New Brompton. I might write something a bit later. Govvy (talk) 09:57, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
 * - I have his Gills stats, don't have much beyond that. He played for Gills in 1902-03 and 1903-04 (26 league games in both, coincidentally), I don't have anything on him returning for a second spell..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:12, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
 * User:Govvy/William McCurdy, if you have anything to add it be much appreciated, cheers. Govvy (talk) 13:45, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Truly self-effacing
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gillingham_F.C.&curid=165278&diff=1178373042&oldid=1178352419 Well done on both accounts Kevin McE (talk) 07:48, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

FAC
Hi there, you participated in several FLCs that I nominated in the past and I was wondering if you can provide feedback for a FAC I opened at Featured article candidates/I Am the Best/archive1. More comments would be greatly appreciated. Thank you, ɴᴋᴏɴ21  ❯❯❯  talk  16:39, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
 * - sure, I'll do my best to take a look later this evening -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:10, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Peer review
Hey Chris (that's also my brother's name lol), I'm taking a break from the #1 Latin pop/tropical songs to work on List of best-selling Latin music artists and was wondering if you leave comments on its peer review. No worries if you cannot do it at the moment. Erick (talk) 18:53, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * - I will do my best to take a look! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:21, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

FAC review
If you have some time, could you look in on another sport article, Brooklyn Dodgers 1, Boston Braves 1 (26 innings), which is languishing a bit at FAC? Many thanks. Wehwalt (talk) 14:09, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Wives and girlfriends
I think we can take your argument a step further. We do not categorize women by the mere fact they dated a nobleman. Although we do have Royal mistresses categories, that I think we should really take a long look at. We categorize women because they are the wife, not just girlfriend, or a holder of an ffice where that marriage gives her title, and sometimes control and position. For example so eone married to a man who later became king of England is not placed in Queens of England just because her husband was queen of England. She is in the category because she was the queen consort of England. If she died or they divorced before he ascended to the throne, she does not go in it. Queens Consort of the United Kingdom includes Camilla, it does not include Diana. Diana does go in Princesses of Wales, since she actually help that title, as does Catherine. The same goes for categories for First Ladies and the like. First Ladies of the US is about those who functioned as the head hostess of the white house, the fact that most holders of this position were the wife of the president, does not mean it is categorizing by association. Biden's wife who died in the car accident and Trump's first 2 wives who divorced him long before he was president do not go in this category, among many others. I believe we also have some women in the category who were not a wife of the president, but the official hostess because the president had no wife, his wife had died or maybe even in a case his wife for other reasons did not function in this office.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:47, 10 November 2023 (UTC)


 * I am not convinced that we need wives of younger sons of peers at all. I am also less than convinced we need wives of Knights. Especially if that includes wives of modern knights.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:51, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Wives of Knights starts with Catherine Abbott, a British geneticist married to another geneticist who was knighted for his works in genetics. While current British knighthood may be an award that passes our very tight rules for which awards we categorize by having received, I do not think this justifies having a category for the Wives of people who were made Knights.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:55, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
 * On the other hand wives of Knights does not have listed Marguerite de Carrouges who is possibly at least in the 2020s the most easily named for most people person who is defined as a wife of a knight. She is categorized under French nobility which works. Despite its name wives of Knights is evidently limited to wives of British Knights, I have no idea why, other than Anglo-sphere centric article naming in Wikipedia.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:01, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #AAA; background-color: ivory; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; "> Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. 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 to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Comments on FA nomination of Education
Hello, I wanted to let you know that I have nominated the article Education for featured article status. So far, there has not been much response from reviewers. I saw that you recently reviewed a few education-related articles so I was wondering whether you are inclined to have a look at it. If you have the time, I would appreciate your comments. The nomination page can be found at Featured article candidates/Education/archive1. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:32, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

TFL notification
Hi, ChrisTheDude. I'm just posting to let you know that List of Most Played Juke Box Folk Records number ones of 1944 – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list for January 1, 2024. The TFL blurb can be seen here. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008  ( Talk ) 02:28, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Possible FA candidate
Hello Chris, I've been working on 2022–23 Notts County F.C. season with the aim of bringing it up to FA standard. As you can probably tell, I've used your Gillingham season articles as a template and before nominating I was hoping for some feedback about whether you think it's good to go or needs more work. Any comments much appreciated. Eric Idle&#39;s Cat (talk) 10:15, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
 * - wow, that looks great! I would say it's definitely ready for a run at FAC.  One quick point based on a skim through it: photo captions which are not complete sentences should not have full stops -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:54, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks Chris, much obliged. I've amended the photo captions and will hopefully be able to nominate for FAC in the next few days. Eric Idle&#39;s Cat (talk) 08:37, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

List of Bath City F.C. managers FLC
Hi Chris. Somehow I missed the message about this FLC until now. My apologies there. It looks like another user transcluded it yesterday, so I think this should be resolved. It doesn't do any harm to let it have a normal candidacy, though I'd feel better about the list's chances if the nominator had replied to you. Cheers. Giants2008 ( Talk ) 02:19, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Womack
Hello. Thanks for your best wishes, all is well here, and wishing you all the best for the year to come. Been out most of the day so missed all the excitement, but as to Womack: Joyce has 20 league apps for Torquay, but the post at Sep 22, 2010 at 10:29pm on this Torquay forum says that, in TUFC's official records, "Harry May's only appearance (v Coventry 7/9/29) has been wrongly attributed to Frank Womack. Womack was listed in the Friday's paper at right back with Cann at centre half, but there was a late change with May coming in at centre half and Cann moving to right back. So May needs adding in too, bringing the total to 963." ENFA agrees with that version. So presumably 20 and 511 was verifiable but probably untrue when written, but 19/510 is both verifiable and probably true now. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 16:43, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Happy New Year, ChrisTheDude!
<div style="border: 3px solid #FFD700; background-color: #FFFAF0; padding:0.2em 0.4em; height:auto; min-height:173px; border-radius:1em; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75);" class="plainlinks">

Happy New Year! ChrisTheDude, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 20:08, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 20:08, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

File:Margategraph.svg
Hi! Do you have any use for File:Margategraph.svg anymore? It seems to be superseded by File:Margategraph16.jpg, but I wanted to ask you before seeking its deletion. Best, <b style="font-family:Courier New;">House Blaster </b> (talk · he/him) 17:52, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
 * - nope, feel free to delete the former -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:28, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅; while I am here, same question about File:LeekTowngraph.svg?<span id="HouseBlaster:1705452525012:User_talkFTTCLNChrisTheDude" class="FTTCmt"> <b style="font-family:Courier New;">House Blaster </b> (talk · he/him) 00:48, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Hmmm, looks like there isn't a more up-to-date version of that. Can you leave it for a bit while I create a more up-to-date version? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:27, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Of course. Thanks for all your work with soccer/football articles!<span id="HouseBlaster:1705539412823:User_talkFTTCLNChrisTheDude" class="FTTCmt"> <b style="font-family:Courier New;">House Blaster </b> (talk · he/him) 00:56, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

"Kelechi Iheanacho (man city footballer" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kelechi_Iheanacho_(man_city_footballer&redirect=no Kelechi Iheanacho (man city footballer] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Utopes (talk / cont) 19:55, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

54th Academy Awards
Hi there,

Is it possible that you could proofread 54th Academy Awards for featured list promotion? I would appreciate the feedback.
 * -- Birdienest81 talk  08:01, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Timeline of the 1991 Atlantic hurricane season
Hi Chris! I've been seeing your name a lot at FLC. I and another editor nominated this timeline a few weeks ago and it's only attracted one review so far – I was wondering if you'd be willing to give it a look? Dylan 620 (he/him • talk • edits) 22:49, 22 February 2024 (UTC)