User talk:Figureskatingfan/Archive 19

DYK for Robert Jones (artilleryman)
— Maile (talk) 00:02, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Sarojini Nadar
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Upright spin
 Schwede 66  12:02, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

1000 Women in Religion article categories
Hello, Figureskatingfan,

I see you've created dozens of empty 1000 Women in Religion article categories and they have been assigned no parent categories and don't seem to be part of any WikiProject. Please do so or they could be tagged for CSD C1 deletion as empty categories. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 17:17, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
 * User:Liz, they're part of the 1000 Women in Religion wikiproject, but I failed to categorize them. At least I think that's what happened. Can you tell I don't know what the heck I'm doing? ;) Anyway, it's fixed now (I think); thanks for bringing it to my attention. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 21:15, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Hunegund of France
—valereee (talk) 00:02, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:57, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you today for Sesame Street research, introduced: "Hello, this is the third FAC for this article. I believe that it failed both times mostly due to lack of support. Reviewers, please do not be afraid of this article! It's about Sesame Street, for heaven's sake! ;)"! - "to not be afraid" was the bottom line of my card 1 of 4, DYK?... the last one from the same Main page ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:14, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination
Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Phyllis Le Cappelaine Burke at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with db-g7, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 03:42, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Minnie Lindsay Carpenter
 Schwede 66  12:03, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

1000 Women in Religion project categories
Just to let you know, I've nominated a few of the categories at Category:1000 Women in Religion articles by importance for deletion as they are not used by the WikiProject 1000 Women in Religion banner. -- WOSlinker (talk) 09:22, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
 * User:WOSlinker: Um, thanks? ;) Seriously, though, this was the first time I had created categories for a wikiproject, so do you have any recommendations for what we can do to save them? They're not on the banner because we're a young project--at least that's what I think. I'd appreciate your assistance in this manner. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 15:58, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
 * There are not that many projects that use the categories of the form XXX-Class PROJECT articles of XXX-importance‎ (these are the ones I nominated).  Most projects just use the Class and importance categories and don't use the combined categories. With your project having under 250 pages tagged at the moment, the separate categories will probably be enough for you for now.  If you need them in the future though, you can add the WPBannerMeta/hooks/qualimpintersect template into the banner. -- WOSlinker (talk) 16:08, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your quick response. I kinda thought this was the case. Thanks for your diligence and clean-up duties. ;) Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 16:12, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
 * If I can butt in, I've been going through a lot of WikiProjects this summer and the standard category set-up is to have page categories sorted by importance and then page categories sorted by quality without such a detailed breakdown. Picking a WikiProject at random, you'll see that Category:WikiProject Sweden articles is divided into Category:Sweden articles by importance and then Category:Sweden articles by quality without a cross-categorization. This is typical for most WikiProjects that have spent time assessing and tagging articles. It can be helpful when you are setting up a new system to see what long-standing WikiProjects have done so you're not reinventing the wheel.
 * Good luck with the project, I'm interested to see what comes from it. Liz Read! Talk! 19:14, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
 * There's a bot that generates the intersection counts. See User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/1000 Women in Religion for an example. -- WOSlinker (talk) 20:21, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the input and advice. I probably should've asked how to do it first instead of trying to do it myself, but I didn't know who to ask. I now know, so I'll return for any questions I have in the future. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 20:51, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Phyllis Le Cappelaine Burke
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:02, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

The Wiggles question
Hi! I noticed that you did the work on promoting The Wiggles to Featured Article. Similarly, I got Hi-5 (Australian band) to Featured Article this year. I just wanted to ask a question... all of the work you did on the page is so succint and well organised. However, the newest section on the 2013–present line-up has been overloaded by a range of different editors. It's too long and lacking the consistency of all your previously written materials. I was wondering your thoughts on this - would you ever look at tidying up that section, or would you have suggestions for someone interested in doing that? Thanks. SatDis (talk) 14:44, 27 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi User:SatDis, thanks for writing. Thanks for your kind words about my work on The Wiggles and congrats for getting Hi-5 to FA. The Wiggles was my very first FA ever, so I'm very proud of it and the work I've been able to do on through the years. One of the biggest challenges, and I'd bet that you'll experience the same challenge, is that it's hard to maintain its quality. There are a few reasons for that. First, its age as a FA, with the normal updates that need to happen with a band still performing and the normal link-rot that happens to most older FAs. Most importantly, I think, is the nature of articles that focus on kids topics. For The Wiggles, much of the updating is done by inexperienced editors, so I've had to consistently go back and fix stuff. The vandalism is consistent and ongoing, so you need to be diligent, and with our busy lives, that can be difficult. Most of the vandalism on The Wiggles is done at specific times, usually during Australian school holidays, and I suspect, in the case of the vandalism done by anonymous IPs, by bored children, teens, and young adults. I've also had to remain diligent for the bios of the group's members, for similar reasons. I suggest that you do the same for Hi-5 members. It also helps to enlist a team of vandalism watchers, which I've done with The Wiggles, although I could probably enlist more editors to help with it.


 * I've edited lots of articles about children's media and TV programming (Sesame Street, Blue's Clues), and I've found similar issues pop up. BC is especially demanding and challenging. This summer, on the recommendation of another editor, I've been updating and rewriting sections of it, which turned out to be a much bigger project than I anticipated. I'm not done with that yet, but things are getting busy for me IRL, so it'll take more time. I know that The Wiggles needs work, too, so if you want to tackle improving it, have at it, mate! ;) I just glanced at the Hi-5 article, and it looks really good. I have to admit, I tend to be protective of the kids focused articles I work on, for the above reasons, but I think you might be a perfect person to enlist for assistance. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 16:27, 28 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your response . I have definitely found trouble with the amount of monitoring these pages require, and I have had The Wiggles on my Watchlist for the very same reason. I do agree that a lot of my time on here is reverting vandalism. Ooh, Blue's Clues is an article I've loved reading previously, well done! Thanks for checking out Hi-5 - I also did The Wiggles discography and got it to a Featured List. I do have The Wiggles on my list of projects (just the new sections that you didn't write) - if I ever get the chance, I definitely will have a look at it! I mainly just wanted to see if you were aware for the future. :) I am definitely protective of the children's media articles, so please let me know if you ever need my watchful eye on any other pages, or help for any reviews or edits! All the best. SatDis (talk) 10:32, 1 September 2021 (UTC)


 * I just thought I'd add - for Hi-5 and Bluey (2018 TV series) and other articles I've done, I was encouraged to archive every URL used on the page during the FA process. I've just noticed that The Wiggles doesn't have 100% of links archived, so that might also be a job for the future too. SatDis (talk) 10:43, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
 * thank you! It's so great that there's at least one other person dedicated to the improvement and upkeep of these articles. I need to go back and do some updating of the Sesame Street articles, too, which I'll do in the near future. Whoever gets to The Wiggles first can take care of it, but there's really no hurry. And of course you're right archiving some of the older links. (I should probably do that for BC, too.)


 * I'd go ahead and add a to-do list to TW's talk page, but I'm not sure that's a good idea with all the vandalism and less experienced editors that the article attracts, so let's keep the discussion on our talk pages. If you want to look at the Sesame Street articles, that would be great and very helpful. I haven't read through the Hi-5 article yet, but it's structured well. You have an "Educational value" subsection, which is similar to the "Educational goals" sections in the BC and SS articles. Has there been any studies done on the group's efficacy? As far as I know, there hasn't been any done on TW, but I suspect that's because the ABC doesn't value research as much as Nickelodeon or Sesame Workshop. Anyway, thanks again. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 15:50, 1 September 2021 (UTC)


 * I couldn't help myself and just started with some small edits to the latest section of The Wiggles. I don't plan on doing a massive overhaul at the moment, but it will remain as one of those pages I'll keep checking in on and making small adjustments to. One day I'd like to go in and fix all the references. Yes - a private to-do list sounds good.
 * As for Hi-5, I based many of my sections on the Wiggles article - "education value" was definitely inspired by "educational theory". It was very difficult to find good sources and in my FA nomination, almost every reference I used was analysed for validity. No formal studies were done, but some university thesis were cited. I had to fight to include a lot of sources in my article! Sources would be my #1 area to improve TW article. SatDis (talk) 08:35, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I saw that, thanks! Ya know, I've come to the conclusion that many of the kids media articles suffer from the systemic bias that we all know exists here, some of the same challenges that editors that edit and create bios about women face. It seems like there's more scrutiny with them, in all areas: notability, validity, etc. There's also the fact that there are less reliable sources about these topics, sources that don't fit the definition of reliable in WP policies, which we have to use in order for these articles to be comprehensive, as you found with Hi-5. We have to leverage the policies that make it difficult to include them in WP that editors of male-focused articles don't seem to have to do, and one of the ways to do that is to use the community and collaborative nature of WP and to defend our choices as editors and writers, especially the sources we use. That seems to be your experience, too. This is something I've thought a lot about because I'm writing my M.A. thesis about it this year. Welcome to the club of fighting systemic bias on WP! I'm sorry that you had to go through so much trouble, but I'm sure you found that it was worth it, and that it made the article a better one, which is our goal, anyway--to make the articles we edit the best they could be. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 15:46, 5 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Hello again! I just wanted to let you know that I have finished looking through The Wiggles page. I have gone through all 163 references and ensured they're correctly formatted, as well as archived for the future. A lot of news articles are subscription only now, so the archive is there as an alternative for all of those sources. I've tried to tidy up some of the writing as I've gone, and I'll continue to do this in the future. You did such a wonderful job with the article originally, and I hope what I can do is continue to refine and monitor the page over the years so that it remains at a high quality, and avoids any criticism. With so many changes to the Wiggles now, I find it increasingly fascinating to work on the page and keep everything accurate. I hope you can have a look and see some of the changes I've made. Thanks for the support and Happy Holidays! SatDis (talk) 04:54, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * , thanks so much for your hard work in making sure this article remains high-quality. It's so wonderful that someone has taken on this huge task, as these days I don't always have the time to maintain it. I think that you've done a marvelous job. And happy holidays to you, too! Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 06:12, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Barnstar
Daniel Case: Ah, thank you! I will fan girl all over you like I did when Rosie complimented my presentation. I was very happy with it, and I'm so glad you liked it. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 23:08, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

October 2021
Just received a message that Henni and Yolo4 have done a significant expansion for Yuzuru Hanyu Olympics seasons and they are looking for a peer review person for it. Could you take a look and see if its possible for you? ErnestKrause (talk) 00:37, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
 * ErnestKrause, I'm busy right now but will do my best to get to it in a few days. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 03:26, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
 * If your still busy then that's ok. Yolo and co-nominator seem to have lost their peer review editor a few weeks ago. Is there any way to revive it at the peer review for Talk:Yuzuru Hanyu Olympic seasons? ErnestKrause (talk) 01:29, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
 * ErnestKrause, my regrets for ghosting you. Yah, it's been a little busy for me, but I have a few weeks break and will do my best to take a look at the PR. Thanks for your patience. I suggest, if you don't want to wait for me and you want more reviewers, that you ask some more folks for feedback. I've found that with PRs, that's the best way to ensure that they get done. Best, happy holidays. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 23:11, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * That was a nice peer review you did for them on Hanyu. Recently, I tried to expand the quad jump article though another editor seems unpleased. The unpleased editor appears not to know that the quad axel involves 4 and a half rotations, which places it closer to a quintuple jump that the other quads. Could you give this a look when you sign on? ErnestKrause (talk) 00:20, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
 * ErnestKrause, I'm so glad you were pleased with my PR. To be honest, I'm not interested in the quad article. I mean, yah the quad is important, especially at this time in figure skating history, but there was a time when even the double jump was controversial and revolutionary. Plus, there's nothing in the quad article that's not already in other articles about jumps. For example, it states in Axel jump that it adds a half-rotation and that it's basically a quint. I suppose the value of an article about quad jumps is the discussion about the burden it takes on a skater's body, but that's debatable because skaters are being trained more efficiently to handle it. In other words, I'm not motivated to help improve it, but since you asked, I'll do my best to take a look, although I can't promise that it will be any time soon.
 * While I'm here, how 'bout that weird Olympics? First there was Hanyu's disappointing results, which I'm bummed out about, although again being honest, I'm beyond thrilled about Nathan Chen. And then the ROC's women's drama. Yikes! The ice dance and pairs competitions were epic, though. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 06:08, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Nice comments. I noticed that Tara Lipinski has referred to the women's skating event this year at the Olympics as "heartbreaking", and many agree with her. Regarding the axel edit I mentioned above, I'll try your idea and place the edit in the Axel jump article in a new section called Statistics of axel jump performance. When you have the time maybe you could comment on enhancements. ErnestKrause (talk) 15:16, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Greg Page
Hello! I think your revert was a mistake. Greg will no longer be the youngest Wiggle to join, as there would be a new Wiggle in the yellow skivvy named Tsehay Hawkins, who is 15. Greg was 19 when he joined, so this is just to inform you that my information was indeed correct. Thanks you, and apologies for the inconvenience. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:244:8301:EB10:9969:1023:931F:4A4E (talk) 11:58, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
 * You're right, Greg is no longer the youngest-ever member of The Wiggles, which I didn't know about when I made the revert. I removed the mention of his age; it wasn't supported in Anthony's book, anyway. Thanks for the catch. I suggest that you create yourself an account, through. ;) Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk)

Sesame Street research
This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for December 27, 2021. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Today's featured article/December 27, 2021. Congratulations for your work!—Wehwalt (talk) 15:04, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

The Wiggles
Take a Look at User_talk:120.144.23.170 they are adding all kinds of stuff, do you know what they are doing? Jena  (talk) 01:00, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

it's not just this site it's wikidata too! https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/User_talk:120.144.23.170 Jena   (talk) 01:05, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
 * User:Jena Fi, erm, it looks like they're just adding unnecessary categories and other editors are going behind them and reverting it. No worries, all is well. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 03:12, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Ok Thanks! Jena  (talk) 16:19, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Presentations
Hi Christine. A friendly, FYI, that I often refer to the following sources (and include the links in the slidedecks) when I'm giving presentations. These below specifically come from a (virtual) lecture I did last year at California State University, Sacramento. Hope this might be helpful in your work. Like you, I'd like to learn more about research on Wikipedia's biography leads. --Rosiestep (talk) 21:47, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
 * https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Internet_cafe_bormak.jpg
 * https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Characterizing_Wikipedia_Reader_Behaviour/Robustness_across_languages
 * https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Insights/Community_Insights_2021_Report/Thriving_Movement#Community_and_Newcomer_Diversity
 * https://doi.org/10.1145/2145204.2145265
 * https://www.hastac.org/blogs/wadewitz/2013/07/26/wikipedias-gender-gap-and-complicated-reality-systemic-gender-bias
 * https://humaniki.wmcloud.org/search
 * https://books.google.com/books/about/Diccionario_biogr%C3%A1fico_geogr%C3%A1fico_e_hi.html?id=7EsuAAAAIAAJ
 * https://www.denelezh.org/gender-gap/
 * https://arxiv.org/abs/1502.02341
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Second_Sex
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in_Red


 * Thanks so much, Rosie! I saw this over on LZia's talk page, but there's something wonky going on with it (your additions don't appear when you go into source edit and respond), so I appreciate that you recreated your list of sources here. Some of these sources may prove helpful with my thesis. One of my professors last semester said that a study about the retention of student editors participating in Wiki-Ed projects would be an interesting future PhD project. I think this topic would also be a good one. Of course, that depends upon if I even get into a PhD program next year. ;) Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 22:07, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Ice dance scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 12 February 2022. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Today's featured article/February 2022, or to make more comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/February 2022. I suggest that you watchlist Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:39, 15 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Thank you today for the article about an Olympic discipline, writing this close to Olympiapark ;) - You introduced: "This article is about Ice dance, a discipline of the sport of figure skating. Ice dance is also one of the least familiar disciplines, so it's important that a high-quality article exists. We have less than two years to improve as many figure skating articles as possible before the 2022 Olympics, the only time many people pay attention to the sport."! - happy 2022, - see, it began near Olympiapark ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:18, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Ah you're welcome, User:Gerda Arendt, you're such a good egg, as my mom would say. It's been fun and I'm proud that at least this article is where it's at, especially with the ice dance competitions happening yesterday and today. I'm bummed out, though, that I didn't fully accomplish my goal! There's still much work to do, but I'm happy that people can watch figure skating during the Olympics and have better information than they had in 2018. Hopefully, we can do it by 2026. ;) Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 16:48, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * That sounds like a good plan ;) - ... only that it will take five years until it can be TFA again unless rules change. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:37, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Oh I realize that. Hopefully, there will be more figure skating FAs by that time. Like ISU Judging System, History of figure skating, and the main Figure skating article. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 19:06, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Valentine's Day edition, with spring flowers and plenty of music --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:17, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
 * stand and sing --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:55, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Alysa Liu revert
Hello! Regarding the revert on Alysa Liu...I totally understand your thinking, but doesn't Instagram qualify under WP:SPS in this case since she's sharing news about herself from an official account? Her post seems to meet the five criteria under "Self-published or questionable sources as sources on themselves." Or am I misunderstanding something? My thought was to use her own announcement for now and then add a secondary source citation when one becomes available. Thoughts? I appreciate your input! Beginning (talk) 17:32, 9 April 2022 (UTC)


 * @Beginning: Well, this is neither here nor there, as they say, since the post has been confirmed by news outlets by now, which I've added. My changes include removing the Instagram ref; I suggest that you look at WP:INSTAGRAM, one stricter interpretation of WP:SPS. I tend to be somewhat conservative about this policy, but I think that it's the correct interpretation. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 19:05, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

Emmy Awards for Sesame Street discrepancy
Hi there,

I noticed that at the leading intro noted that Sesame Street won 11 Emmy Awards despite the fact that it has won way more. If it indeed won only 11 Emmys, that would go against the claim that the show is the most awarded children's show in Emmy history as Reading Rainbow has accumulated 20 Emmys noted here. The webpage that AndyFielding is citing to justify it winning only 11 awards (which is here) is actually only referring to the PRIMETIME Emmy Awards, which are under the jurisdiction of the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences (aka Television Academy) headqaurtered in North Hollywood, California. The other 178 awards were dervied from DAYTIME Emmy Awards, which are handled by the NATIONAL Academy of Television Arts and Sciences based in New York City. On that same website Andy used to justify only 11 Emmys, the website notes "This database contains information for Emmy nominations and awards presented by the Television Academy (formerly the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences) for prime-time television programming. It does not contain information for Sports, News & Documentary, Daytime, and other awards given by the National Academy of Television Arts & Sciences (NATAS) in New York." According to Guinness World Records from 2010, the show received 122 Daytime Emmy Awards (source). Also this article from Canadian newspaper Toronto Star indicates "Sesame Street has become one of the best known and regarded children’s educational shows on television, winning 167 Emmy Awards over its long tenure." The Parade article and several others indicate 189 Emmys.
 * -- Birdienest81 talk  07:48, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

The latest edit on Yuzuru Hanyu
Hi! Regarding the latest edit on Hanyu, I have explained on the user's talk page on why it should be removed, including that both statements aren't necessarily true and can be seen as not neutral. The user obviously has read my message since she has changed her references to suit her view, but she keeps adding it in and I have spent all of my revert quota for the last 24 hour. So, maybe you can help? - Yolo4A4Lo (talk) 09:28, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Need your opinion
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Yuzuru Hanyu § "The Greatest" or "one of the greatest men's singles skater"?. Yolo4A4Lo (talk) 15:52, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Good Article counter missed one
Thanks for promoting Union Automobile Company to Good Article. That makes a total of 217 Good Articles I have done. As you can see in the Good Article counter Lambert Gas and Gasoline Engine Company is not counted. Something was missed somewhere. I'm not sure what. Can you look over your closing steps on the review of this article to make sure you got them all.Thanks.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 09:44, 12 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Oops, sorry about that. I failed to add it to the GA list, but have just done so now. Thanks for pointing it out to me. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 18:25, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
 * O.K. Thanks for adding it to the GA list. Hope to see you soon. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 18:31, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

Judith Resnik
I nominated the next of the women astronaut biographies, Judith Resnik, for featured at Featured article candidates/Judith Resnik/archive1. You may find it an interesting read. Hawkeye7  (discuss)  22:54, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

Rosemary Radford Ruether/sandbox
Hello, Figureskatingfan,

An editor tagged this page for deletion but neglected to notify you of the tagging. It was deleted as a test page but clearly you are an experienced editor so I just wanted to inquire about your creating a sandbox page in the main space of the project. What were you going to do with this page? Is this work that can be done in User or Draft space? Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 02:35, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, it was a sandbox for members of the 1000 Women in Religion Wikiproject that needed to be put in user space, which I obviously need to do now. Thanks for the notification. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 16:32, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

Sally Ride
I have the article on Sally Ride up for review at Featured article candidates/Sally Ride/archive1. Ride was the third woman to fly in space. This article is the second in a series I have written on women astronauts. As usual, I am in need of reviewers. If you could take a look, it would be greatly appreciated. Hawkeye7  (discuss)  19:23, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Julie Billiart
Hello! Your submission of Julie Billiart at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you,  Sennecaster  ( Chat ) 05:38, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 6.0 system
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 6.0 system 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 Hawkeye7 -- Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:41, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 6.0 system
The article 6.0 system 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:6.0 system for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hawkeye7 -- Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:01, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 6.0 system
The article 6.0 system you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:6.0 system for comments about the article. 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 Legobot, on behalf of Hawkeye7 -- Hawkeye7 (talk) 07:03, 29 July 2022 (UTC)