User talk:Soulbust/Archive 12

2023 archive.

Please do QPQ credits promptly
Please note that as per RfC on excessively late supply of QPQ credits, there is a one-week deadline to supply a QPQ. Template:Did you know nominations/Argentina–Netherlands football rivalry could be rejected if not done promptly. Flibirigit (talk) 12:09, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Category:Female YouTubers has been nominated for deletion
Category:Female YouTubers has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. DecafPotato (talk) 03:41, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Collection of the Centre Pompidou


A tag has been placed on Category:Collection of the Centre Pompidou indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 03:00, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

January music
Thank you for DYK reviewing! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:15, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

thank you
thanks a lot for taking the time to greatly improving the quality of my draft article as you did at Draft:Battle of Lusail. I hope you can take charge of that page now and appeal an administrator to make the page official 2001:8F8:173D:AEA6:F10E:7585:374E:E519 (talk) 09:01, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

"Kristen Klessig" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Kristen Klessig and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 21:28, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Argentina–Netherlands football rivalry
BorgQueen (talk) 00:02, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Temu flag fixes
Hi, I have posted Talk:Temu (company) to ask for fixes to the page about Temu (company), the most downloaded app in the United States the last few months. These tiny fixes address the last issues needed to remove the flag. . I have a conflict of interest as an employee of Temu and I would very much appreciate it if you might have time to take a look. Since you are a member of the WikiProject for Internet Culture, I thought you might possibly be interested in this internet cultural moment. , |CNBC. This page is in need of careful expansion in compliance with Wikipedia policy (and there is plenty of press coverage) but getting rid of the last tiny policy violations is a good place to start.

Thanks in advance for your consideration! Snowy2000 (talk) 02:19, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:NFL RB stats start
Template:NFL RB stats start has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 12:30, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Quarterback (TV series)
Hello! Your submission of Quarterback (TV series) 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 for contributing to Did You Know! CMD (talk) 15:30, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Glimmer (She-Ra)
BorgQueen (talk) 00:03, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Category:Japanese Breakfast has been nominated for deletion
Category:Japanese Breakfast has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 21:03, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Light the Beam
BorgQueen (talk) 00:03, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Be Sweet
BorgQueen (talk) 12:03, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Darren Korb for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Darren Korb 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/Darren Korb 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. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:54, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Bastion (Overwatch) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bastion (Overwatch) 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/Bastion (Overwatch) 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. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:28, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Highway Blossoms for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Highway Blossoms 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/Highway Blossoms 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. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 00:09, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Spurs wins losses
You missed the spurs wins total and losses total in the update. 47.12.220.168 (talk) 05:28, 13 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Fixed it now. Thanks for the heads up. Soulbust (talk) 05:31, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Quarterback (TV series)
-- RoySmith (talk) 00:02, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Barbara Kennedy
Aoidh (talk) 00:02, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination
Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Sleep in the NBA 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 III 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) 13:51, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Blue bloods in college basketball
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 00:03, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Cosplay images and reception
The main problem with them is their overusage: Niemti was a propagator for a love of it back when he was here in a wide away of articles, alongside block quotes, and it makes it harder to gauge a reception section's actual size due to them being "fluffed up" to look bigger. It doesn't help either that in reality any character with an article here is probably going to have some degree of cosplay. And in a lot of those cases, the article itself isn't even discussing cosplay as a factor: if you noticed I left it in articles that cited it.

If you feel it should belong in Mercy's article, maybe add a reception source citing it? Because I know I'm not the only editor Niemti made gunshy about their overusage.-- Kung Fu Man (talk) 20:48, 14 May 2023 (UTC)


 * @Kung Fu Man I don't know the lore about editors' feelings/attitudes/response to cosplay image usage at all, and definitely not in-depth. (I don't know who Niemti is, for example). But I opened up a discussion about this over at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games. I am fully unaware to whether these cosplay images are okay for inclusion or not, just figured they were as long as it made some sort of sense to include them (which is why I only ever added them to the Reception section of articles). I like the articles having a visual appeal to them, so I would support including them but yeah I opened up the discussion on WP:VG to just gauge how others feel about it and have a constructive discussion about it that I could at least point back to when seeing what images would be cool to add.
 * Also, yes I did notice you left it in the articles that cited cosplay. I figure that's probably what others will add to that discussion, that we need a specific citation on cosplay. But then I guess it'll just become a matter of will the inclusion of a cosplay mention in the prose be considered as "fluff" in and of itself by other editors. Soulbust (talk) 20:55, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I can get that. I think if reception from a third party reliable source is mentioning cosplay as a significant factor for a character it should be fine, it's definitely more of a problem on the fighting game end of things where the editor I mentioned tended to carpetbomb everything with them (Niemti was an editor also known as "SNAAAAKE", and a big reason too why 'listicles' are seen with scorn, sometimes even when the list entry is actually saying something). It's led to a real problem of trying to figure out *which* character articles are truly notable once the dust clears (see the mass mergings/AfDs in the fighting game end of the project for example).--Kung Fu Man (talk) 21:05, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

DYK for List of all-time WNBA win–loss records
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Mercy (Overwatch) and D. Va
I added all of unused reliable sources on their talk page (reflist). Best of luck (no rush). GlatorNator (ᴛ) 00:39, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Sombra (Overwatch) and Overwatch (alternate reality game)
I've split the ARG content off Sombra into its own article per a discussion on the character article's talk page. I know you're busy, but I figured I'd mention it your way as Sombra herself needs a reception section and I know that franchise is up your alley. Figured you might be one of the best people to ping that way in case you were able to help with it.-- Kung Fu Man (talk) 06:14, 23 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Yeah I'll see if I can get around to it today or tomorrow. There probably should be ample enough sourcing on Sombra's reception. Soulbust (talk) 20:36, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
 * + if you're into Overwatch, theres more: Doomfist and Hanzo (Overwatch) (will be GA delisted soon for lacking any updates). GlatorNator  (ᴛ) 15:06, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I'll see if I can get around to those. I like to move around on Wikipedia, and I've spent a lot of time recently on video game articles. Right now I'm prioritizing improving Pharah, then Kiriko, and then incorporating the references you found for Brigitte. So after all that, I'll see if I'm up for Doomfist and Hanzo improvements. Soulbust (talk) 01:24, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * If i were you, you should work on Hanzo and doomfist first before brigette, moira abd others since theyre GA before being deslisted GlatorNator  (ᴛ) 10:19, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Streamy Awards Hosts
Template:Streamy Awards Hosts has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. -- wooden superman  07:59, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

Noisy Pixel
Hello! Noticed you mention in a post before that a discussion should be had on the use of this as a source. One was posted, but without much response if you're interested in checking it out.

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Sources DarkeruTomoe (talk) 15:49, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Re: Overwatch Articles
To better explain, receptions towards gameplay tend to be highly relative, especially in today's time of games seeing frequent patches, and especially given Blizzard will, routinely, completely overhaul a character or gameplay element. Trust me I played enough Diablo 3 and Heroes of the Storm to be familiar with that. And that's a good point in itself: say you wanted to write an article on Junkrat. You discuss his gameplay. But that only factors into Overwatch: how's that factor into Heroes of the Storm?

Additionally gameplay unless in certain cases, does not convey to the reader why this character is significant as a fictional character. Does the gameplay result in discussions outside of the scope of the game? If not, then no. Akuma from Street Fighter for example, some discussion of his gameplay is warranted: he's designed to be difficult to fight and it's factored into how his character is perceived as a tour de force. But there's still discussion about him as a character and his design surrounding that. You want the reader to understand with a reception section if they didn't see this character as a gameplay element why does it matter to them and why is it notable? Find sources discussing that aspect, because otherwise we're going to hit a standstill and I'm going to have to AfD the articles that aren't proving notability. Please try to work with me on this.-- Kung Fu Man (talk) 04:00, 29 May 2023 (UTC)


 * If I wanted to discuss the gameplay for Junkrat, but it only factors into his Overwatch context and not HoTS, then I would clarify that distinction in the prose of the article.
 * The section that we have gone back and forth on in the Kiriko article: "Though her inclusion through Overwatch 2's battle pass reward system was criticized by players, CJ Wheeler of Rock Paper Shotgun noted that players seemed to like the actual character in gameplay. Ollie Toms of Rock Paper Shotgun had praised the character's gameplay, saying more than any others, Kiriko helped revitalize Overwatch, making it 'feel fresh and new again'."
 * About that section, with consideration on what you said about how gameplay relates to a character's significance: I think that gameplay reception matters for Kiriko because: she is heavily associated with the early access launch of OW2, and with the negative reception directed toward the game's battle pass. This is in large part because of her role as the first character made available through that battle pass. As such, Kiriko is in a unique position with the battle pass, as reception (at least OW2's early access launch-era reception) of the battle pass oddly but legitimately ties in with reception of Kiriko.
 * The Wheeler source is citing how fans, despite being displeased with Kiriko's availability via the battle pass, still generally were favorable of her gameplay. That's an important note to include in the article.
 * The Toms source provides an example of how video game media writers as opposed to fans received her gameplay. And it isn't just an "I like it" type of commentary, it's discussion on how Kiriko was able to revitalize the game (for the sake of this discussion, we're considering OW and OW2 as one game, pretty much) - at least in the eyes of the media writer being cited.
 * I think fictional characters (of video games) should have reception sections that are able to discuss both how fans and vg media journalists feel about the character's gameplay. Not entirely that, as we should aim to include other areas of critical discussion (such as characterization), but how people feel about the gameplay is reception to me, and reception that should be mentioned. That's why I find it valid to include such commentary about Kiriko in the article.
 * Yes that reception relating to gameplay will be relative to a reviewer, which is why a lot of should try to be compiled or have common sentiments sort of summarized in a couple sentences or so. But that relativity is fine, there's nothing wrong with it - As long as we present and are transparent with it in the prose. Like yes, some characters will have their gameplay completely reworked and that could massively impact their role in their game's meta. We should just provide that context when including reception on gameplay that may not be current (as is the case with ongoing games like Overwatch). But imo that doesn't make the reception any less valid. And in many cases, overhauls or reworks are themselves major enough to a point where the reception (whether positive or poor), either from the fan base or media, should be included in an article.
 * I disagree, perhaps even strongly, with your take on the section we're discussing on Kiriko. But believe me, I am trying to collaborate and my aim is to improve that article. Soulbust (talk) 04:31, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm relaying this as someone that has worked on a lot of fighting game articles, and brief reactions to a character's gameplay aren't enough to really warrant as reception, especially not alone. A lot of standalone characters will have articles commenting on how fans reacted to their gameplay especially in the scope of esports. But unless it's something *exceptionally* notable, it's not worth citing, and loses any importance outside of the game. I made a point to mention on Hanzo's page that it's an example of gameplay being probably notable enough for discussion in relation to a character: it led to memes and the term "Hanzo main". Mercy is another example of that sort of thing, where it led to discussion about players being a healer role and how her character and design played into that (which again, relates it to her character). It's to the same end as the people mentioning shipping: yeah shipping can lead to notability, but only if there's discussion as to *what aspects of those characters* make people want to support them. Is there any real weight to wanting to pair Pharah with Mercy outside of "witty ship name?" That's the question you need to answer when citing that material and trying to find sources to support.
 * You need to illustrate how they're important as a fictional character, that needs to be step one. If there's nothing discussing them in that context, they're not notable.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 04:41, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * To better build upon the point about the shipping conversation, if you look at Tifa Lockhart's talk page, you can see people wanting to bring up the italian senate event where porn of the character was played in front of the senate. While it was a viral event, it was hard to cite in the article until pretty much yesterday because it was not discussed as a topic about the character itself. TheGamer's article worked in that regard to tie it to her and explain why Tifa's character mattered in reflection of it, and that's why it was finally cited. Get what I'm going for?--Kung Fu Man (talk) 04:46, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * As far as I'm aware, actually all the article needs to do is pass GNG. There's referencing available, it's from sources established as reliable. The sources include coverage of a significant and an independent nature.
 * I think a hero shooter's characters shouldn't be necessarily treated like fighting game characters. Especially a Blizzard game, like we've both noted, is just so constantly updated and changed.
 * Your point about the Tifa article (as it relates to this), I feel could have WP:OTHERSTUFFDOESNTEXIST applied to it before yesterday. Yeah, it wasn't previously included, but that seems specific to that article. I actually would've agreed since her appearance in the porn was coincidental. The information about the surge in her popularity does a good job in relating to the character. But that is a problem for that article and the previous exclusion of such information I don't think really should be used as precedent to exclude the reception information on the Kiriko one.
 * I don't really know what "exceptionally" notable may truly entail, because that seems subjective. When I'm including information, I think it should just clear notability (and either it does or doesn't) and be relevant to the article. Like I said, how players and media feel about a character's gameplay seems like an important thing to at least briefly include/mention in the reception section. Do you agree with that? Especially, in the scope of the Kiriko article, we're talking about general players' reception. (Because I understand that esports players may have a much more niche perception of characters' gameplays that aren't representative of a game's playerbase, and including such information may lead the article/section to become unfocused if it isn't carefully used in the prose).
 * I believe you are asking perhaps rhetorically (and maybe even support inclusion of the information?), but in the case it was a legitimate question, and in the case you don't support inclusion:
 * Is there weight to the PharMercy ship for example? Based off sourcing, yes. Its an incredibly popular ship and it causes players to deliberately pair up and play as the two characters, and conveniently their gameplay designs also lend themselves to the pairing being effective in gameplay. The Red Bull source on the Pharah article provides good coverage on the pairing's in-game impact, for example. Some characters just have more propensity to being ship material in the game's fandom. And that's okay. And I don't think that the shipping really leads to notability. At least in this case; I think shipping is an aspect of notability, but Mercy and Pharah's notability is independent of such shipping. It's also worth noting that fan depictions of characters are particularly prone to being referenced, alluded, or nodded to by Blizzard themselves, making the more popularly noted fan depictions not just notable, but also relevant to include in the proper articles.
 * As for the "Hanzo main" information, I haven't checked out the Hanzo article yet, so I can not address that at the moment. Soulbust (talk) 05:09, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't think you quite understand what I'm getting at: it doesn't matter what type of game this is, I'm giving you an example of what would work to prove notability and what counts towards notability in the context of a fictional article. That has nothing to do with GA class or not either. If that information wouldn't hold up a character in one genre that's not going to magically change in another.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 05:33, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I get what you're saying. I stated that I didn't see how the Tifa example is an applicable one because it is entirely specific to that article.
 * Your mention of GA-class confuses me. I didn't mention anything about GAs.
 * I'm looking at the two RPS sources to see if I can tweak their usage in the prose. This is the full text on Kiriko in the Toms review:
 * "My favourite is Kiriko. She's the new Support character, and with her teleport ability and potent healing primary attack she makes a fantastic pocket healer (a healer who devotes all their energy to following and healing one particular ally). But she's also a great flanker, with a wall-climb ability and a secondary attack which throws kunai that deal extreme headshot damage. I had a lot of fun figuring out unexpected ways to flank the enemy team before dashing back and providing much-needed healing to my frontline. More than any of the other heroes, Kiriko made me feel the excitement of having Overwatch 2 feel fresh and new again."
 * I think in that paragraph, there exists something worthy of inclusion in the Kiriko article. I still think it's the fresh feeling Kiriko provides (in the pov of the reviewer) to the game, but is there anything there you think is able to be included in the article?
 * The fan enjoyment of the character is important because it is used in direct contrast to their negative feelings of the battle pass, which as I mentioned before, I think she is uniquely but legitimately tied to. (Her reception therefore has some valid overlap with the initial reception of the battle pass). I don't know, I can't really see it being cool to just exclude that positive fan reception. I'll try and find further sourcing that can help solidify that as a general point in the article. Soulbust (talk) 05:47, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry, misread GNG as GA, it's reaching 2 AM on my end. Let's do a breakdown though. The battle pass itself is reception towards the game, feelings towards it are discussing that aspect of that game and reception towards it. In this case, players are upset about a game element, and the character being involved with it. But that's not a feeling towards the character itself. You need to draw that line of separation when looking for sources. Same with her gampelay discussion, he's giving thoughts on it but any of those elements can be removed in an update, and it doesn't provide notability towards the character itself. The design commentary on the other hand does. Do you follow?
 * The Tifa example was more in relation to outside events may or may not provide notable discussion towards a character. The ship itself by itself means nothing. Websites pointing it out means nothing. It's like briefly someone drew a sketch of a character. But if you can get an article saying what aspects of the character lends themselves to a discussion as to why that's important to them that's another matter. Fan arts like cosplay are plentiful; you have to show why they're significant to the character in the context of them in regards to fans. People enjoying a yuri lemon fanfic isn't enough for that by itself.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 05:57, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * It's late for me also, so I understand.
 * For the reception on the battle pass, I am trying to include the transparency of that in the prose. Which is why I worded it as "Though her inclusion through Overwatch 2's battle pass reward system was criticized by players, [...] players seemed to like the actual character in gameplay." Do you think this would be better without that clarification, so that we only have something like "Writing for RPS, CJ Wheeler noted that fans received Kiriko positively in-game upon launch."?
 * (I think the battle pass info is ''maybe' more vital in this case. There is a lot of sourcing citing the lamenting of her inclusion on the battle pass, because of her strength as a support character, and even the amount of time that it would take to unlock Kiriko for free via the battle pass 2)
 * For the other source, you mention the design commentary on the other hand does provide notability toward the character. What exactly in the sourcing do you consider design commentary, so I can be fully clear on that.
 * Also, while the gameplay elements can be removed in an update, this specific sourcing is valuable because it provides critical reception discussion on the character's initial release version, which is along with the current version of a character, of considerable importance. But I do get your sentiment about the potential (and often actual) temporariness of gameplay being a concern. Perhaps the fact that it was commentary on her initial gameplay should be clarified in the prose. Would that help, in your opinion? Soulbust (talk) 06:18, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * In the case of Pharah, I would say cosplaying has a unique place because of her armor. Sourcing available often includes mentioning of functional wings, for example.
 * This is why I have included the mentioning of cosplay on the Pharah article, but have opted to exclude such information on Kiriko, Winston, Soldier though sourcing exists for cosplay of those characters too. I'm wondering if this official cosplay for Sombra would be apt to include though? Soulbust (talk) 06:25, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I really think with limited exceptions gameplay just doesn't add anything to the understanding of these characters for reception. As for the design commentary, that very first one that spoke about Kiriko "being made in a lab"? That's at least talking about her design. It's definitely *weak*, but it's talking about her a way you can use. And those are the sources that should be making the brunt of the article.
 * I strongly feel you shouldn't worry about gameplay unless you can prove in some fashion there was a real world reaction to it beyond the context of Overwatch.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 06:24, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * It could be (probably is) because I'm kinda tired, but I really am missing where the "made in a lab" design commentary is. Could you link me that source here. Soulbust (talk) 06:31, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * The very first sentence here was what I was talking about though I misread it and looking closer it's really talking about her gameplay more. The second discussing her youthful energy? That's about her character. But that'd probably get slapped for being trivial.
 * And trust me I know this stuff can be frustrating, I've tried before to make articles work only to not have the sources available. Plenty of times you assume there's discussion you find out there isn't to boot.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 06:37, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Ah thanks. I would say the lab comment is 50/50. It does mention gameplay aspects b/c it mentions Kiriko appeasing support players, but commenting on her ninja/fox elements is more about her character design.
 * Youthful energy could be slapped with that, but the comment also exapnds on that calling her personable. I think it'd be ticky-tack to call it trivial, since it's legit valid commentary on her as a character, even if brief. It would be better used as a supplemental source though. Hopefully I can find it.
 * And yeah, out of all the topic areas I edit it regularly, the VG side of Wikipedia can be a bit more frustrating than others. It's ultimately all good though. Soulbust (talk) 06:48, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I'll take over work on Egyptian birb lady. If you think you can Kiriko in a decent state I'll revisit it in a week and we'll see what we can do. Her and Sombra are the only other two I'm worried about.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 11:47, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Would be interesting if Pharah and Rugal would be your next candidate for GA :P. GlatorNator  (ᴛ) 11:52, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * To be fair this is the first time I've fixed up an article as it's getting deleted: usually people are deleting articles as I've made them. Sorry you're stuck in another spot having to withdrawl a AfD nom though man.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 11:55, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Its fine, thou I feel sorry to Soulbust for working all of the Overwatch articles. Glad you were interested on helping him on Pharah, am not familiar with Overwatch. GlatorNator  (ᴛ) 11:58, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm a Team Fortress 2 man personally. Would love to do an article on Heavy Weapons Guy someday.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 12:01, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I am not too concerned about Sombra (as far as redirecting it goes; it seems to me based on what has been able to sustain as stand-alones that Sombra clears that.) I am a little concerned about Kiriko, but I have a lot of reference ideas that I'll be getting to today or tomorrow.
 * Thank you for your edits on Pharah, I've made only slight tweaks to the structure but the actual content you were able to add is very helpful and appreciated.
 * No worries on the amount of work I've done by the way, GlatorNator. All things considered, I think it's worked out alright. Soulbust (talk) 20:33, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Maria Zhang
Hello, Soulbust. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Maria Zhang, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

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

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 01:02, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Re: Google Books
Don't url link the books unless we can link back to a preview my dude, it does nothing but bulk up the references section! o_o-- Kung Fu Man (talk) 08:18, 31 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Well this is why I had the Art of Overwatch book in a sources subsection under references. It should probably be changed to "sources cited" or "bibliography" and really I shouldn't have included anything other than that Art of Overwatch book in it, because I had only cited one page of the other books. But with the Art of book being cited via multiple of its pages, it can be included in a Bibliography section that includes a URL to the whole book, so that when that citation is navigated to in the article, readers can click on the URL linking them to the whole book, where they can search for the pages sourced (or any page for that matter). Rather than having to go through the middle-step of having to search up the book on a separate tab or something.
 * Would you be okay with me re-adding the Art of book under a bibliography subsection of the References? Soulbust (talk) 08:24, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't do it. I get the idea, but unless the book has a preview we can link to it doesn't do anything for the reader, and it makes it harder for other editors in turn (it really did for me trying to work on those sections), especially if the book is only cited once. It would probably be better suited for larger articles that are going to cite a lot of book material, where a bibliography section at a glance informs them more.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 08:31, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

CS1 error on Pharah
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Pharah, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:Qwerfjkl/Botpreload&editintro=User:Qwerfjkl/boteditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:Qwerfjkl&preloadtitle=Qwerfjkl%20(bot)%20–%20Qwerfjkl_(bot)&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 08:29, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
 * A "missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ([//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pharah&action=edit&minor=minor&summary=Fixing+reference+error+raised+by+%5B%5BUser%3AQwerfjkl%20(bot)%7CQwerfjkl%20(bot)%5D%5D Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:Qwerfjkl%20(bot)/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F1157835438%7CPharah%5D%5D Ask for help])
 * Already fixed this too.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 08:31, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Clothing companies established in 2020


A tag has been placed on Category:Clothing companies established in 2020 indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:14, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Planning ahead
So being frank with what I've got cooking in the back of my head, I would like to try and do a Good Topic going for the Overwatch cast. Given I can pretty much crank out one of these articles for GAN in a few days time, I should be able to get the whole cast good on that.

That said too I honestly expect Doomfist if it survives AfD to get hit with a GAR. So yeah. That'll probably complicate that. Not saying you're wrong just observing, frankly I'd probably rewrite the thing in the same style of the others if it does, but the reception section is going to be much smaller than its counterparts I feel.-- Kung Fu Man (talk) 10:40, 6 June 2023 (UTC)


 * I always thought of the characters as being a plausible good topic so that checks out. I don't think we necessarily need to crank them out or anything, but by no means do I wanna lag on that goal.
 * Right now I have honestly just been feeling a little burnt out because of offline stuff + I'm not really used to editing this much tbh. Might need to take a day to recalibrate my sleep schedule.
 * I tend to pay a little bit more attention to the ones I've created because they'd pop up on my watchlist more frequently and all that. Obviously D.Va, Mercy, and Tracer (and likely soon, Pharah) are already GAs with no GARs on the horizon like Doomfist. I think the work you've put in on Widowmaker and Zarya have been helpful and would lead to likely successful GANs, and I'll continue to do the tweaks I've been doing where I can to help out with those.
 * Kiriko is in a solid place I think, but needs to have the merge discussion settle (I think a GAN is 50/50 at this point just because of the article's stability being in question from that standpoint). Brigitte needs work and that'll probably be the one I try to set my focus on next
 * There is a grouping after that, that I consider Mei, Soldier, Symmetra, and Sombra in. This is like a grouping of articles that I definitely see the GA possibility there, but they currently are a good amount of work away from that. I'll see where I can help out with Mei, Soldier, and Symmetra. I figure those can be made into real possible GA candidates given the already included sourcing be a good start for those and there being likely ample sourcing out there for them. For Sombra, I feel like I've done what I can tbh. The character just isn't too interesting to me to get me over the slight-burnout hump I've been feeling.
 * Hanzo and Doomfist are current GAs that definitely need updating and then additional restructuring. And then there's Wrecking Ball, which I feel like along with Doomfist might be the two would smaller reception sections than the rest of the cast.
 * Hopefully in a few days, I feel a little more energized to edit VG characters in-depth again. I also want to re-visit D.Va (I have a peer review open for it, and I know the article needs info on her HOTS gameplay). Mercy too, as I'm gonna try and restructure some things around there.
 * I'd say my priorities would be Brig, then Mercy and D.Va, then Soldier and Mei? IIRC, you also mentioned Bastion potentially being able to stand-alone again, and I would like to help out with that article down the road. Soulbust (talk) 11:08, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Dude, Zarya's already up for GAN. Widow will be later today once I finish it, I ain't worried about either, and appreciate the help.
 * Wrecking Ball I still feel iffy on. Like with all the others you can point out some real world impact they're having but...he's not really got much beyond "I'm a hamster that isn't named Boo". I'm leaving him to last and then if it doesn't work going to suggest we merge again.
 * I am keeping an eye out for subjects that could be spun out too. Ashe and Moira are definitely up there for different reasons, just need to build the sourcing. Baptiste may be too, that article you found and the backlash over his bisexuality are definitely up there to help him. A lot of the others it's harder until I see what congeals. Things definitely tapered off after a certain point in terms of reaction. But get some rest if you need it too. I'm not going to burn down the house. Too much.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 11:20, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Soldier: 76 article was written entirely by Haleth and it already looks good, just a little bit addition and update then could be nominated for GAN. GlatorNator  (ᴛ) 11:22, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Didn't notice you tagged Zarya for the GAN, but yeah that's great to hear. I'm not worried about Widowmaker either, and I think those two will be pretty quickly accepted as GAs.
 * I've thought about making an Ashe one for quite some time now (as well as a Cassidy and Reaper one). I actually think those 3 would have a good chance at making it as stand-alones. But I think it'd probably be effective to work on the ones we currently have up first. Good point about Baptiste also. Moira and Bastion can perhaps be brought back (maybe Genji too?) from the redirect status they currently have. I think that might be the extent of it though. I think a lot of the other characters probably would end up like Winston.
 * And I generally agree about Wrecking Ball. But to be fair, I just haven't looked into him too much to be definitive about it.
 * @GlatorNator Soldier's definitely in a solid spot too. You're right, just needs some updating and some solid finishing touches. Maybe a little bit of section restructuring. But the info that's there is good. I think these 2 sources: 12 would go crazy in regards to helping out that article. Soulbust (talk) 11:35, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Feel free to work sources you find into here: User:Kung_Fu_Man/sandbox. It'd be good to have one-stop shopping for all the sources we can work into things. Even if a character doesn't work out in the long run, we can still get a good idea of what we have to work with.
 * I'll start working on Soldier 76 after Widowmaker.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 12:06, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Soul, do you use Discord?--Kung Fu Man (talk) 13:43, 6 June 2023 (UTC)


 * I'm assuming you're talking about this server? I haven't used that Soulbust (talk) 13:50, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Nah, I mean more about being able to properly coordinate so we're not editing over each other XD Here's my discord: Kung Fu Man#6039--Kung Fu Man (talk) 13:52, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Sleep in the NBA
BorgQueen (talk) 00:02, 9 June 2023 (UTC) GalliumBot (talk • contribs) (he/it) 03:27, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Congratulations on the article. It seems many people read it. Bruxton (talk) 15:22, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

Barnstar

 * Thank you I appreciate that! @Pbritti Soulbust (talk) 03:47, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

Hellboy film
you added a release date for the film. what is your source? Jstewart2007 (talk) 17:44, 14 June 2023 (UTC)


 * @Jstewart2007 I didn’t do that. My edit on that page was only wikilinking to Adeline Rudolph. Soulbust (talk) 20:32, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Transgender work group articles


A tag has been placed on Category:Transgender work group articles indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 08:34, 20 June 2023 (UTC)


 * @Liz Should I just add articles to these categories now or wait till somebody implements the sandbox changes into the actual template's parameters. (See discussion here).
 * Because I'm thinking these cats will end up being pretty filled up soon. Soulbust (talk) 08:36, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:LGBT in Canada work group articles


A tag has been placed on Category:LGBT in Canada work group articles indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 08:34, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:LGBT in the United States work group articles


A tag has been placed on Category:LGBT in the United States work group articles indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 08:34, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Squirrels on college campuses
Hello! Your submission of Squirrels on college campuses 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 for contributing to Did You Know! gobonobo + c 04:09, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Gwen Stacy (Spider-Verse)
Hello! Your submission of Gwen Stacy (Spider-Verse) 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 for contributing to Did You Know! -- Tamzin  [ cetacean needed ] (she&#124;they&#124;xe) 19:30, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:LGBT in the United States work group


A tag has been placed on Category:LGBT in the United States work group indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 06:54, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Squirrels on college campuses
Z1720 (talk) 00:03, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Music of Spider-Verse
Hello! Your submission of Music of Spider-Verse 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 for contributing to Did You Know! Pamzeis (talk) 15:54, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

CCI Notice
Hello, Soulbust. This message is being sent to inform you that a request for a contributor copyright investigation has been filed at Contributor copyright investigations concerning your contributions to Wikipedia in relation to Wikipedia's copyrights policy. The listing can be found here. Thank you. Pamzeis (talk) 06:43, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Widowmaker (Overwatch)
—Kusma (talk) 12:03, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Bigface for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bigface 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/Bigface 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.  HighKing++ 14:14, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Music of Spider-Verse for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Music of Spider-Verse 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/Music of Spider-Verse 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. InfiniteNexus (talk) 01:57, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Protect trans kids
RoySmith (talk) 00:03, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Protect trans kids for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Protect trans kids 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/Protect trans kids 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. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 06:59, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Burning Out or Lighting a Candle
I said what I have to say at that AfD, for now. But I want to see if you and I can form any ideas with respect to what's happening over there. Maybe it’s just a rant, maybe a record that can be raised in the future.

Although I think it’s good to ping editors whose conduct is mentioned in discussions, I don’t think their input at this point would be of value. Also, not that it's an excuse, but I'm not pinged when HighKing invokes my name on talk pages either. And I don't think I'm canvassing, as we’re both on the same side of this vote and you can do what you think is best. If I’m doing wrong someone can ANI me and I’ll take whatever I get.

Here's what I see:
 * Overall, in the AfD discussion HighKing went after every keep comment, often repeating the same arguments. That's discouraged by WP:BLUDGEON. I don’t like to throw that accusation around - people should be able to vote and comment without being accused of disruptive editing - but it’s at least arguable both the volume and the tenor of the comments crossed a line.
 * HighKing mischaracterized my argument about ORGIND/SIRS, saying it's “novel” (it isn't, and I have the receipts).
 * At the NCORP talk page exactly FIVE editors commented on the ORGIND issue - HighKing, JoelleJay, North8000, Whatamidoing, and myself. HighKing and JoelleJay had already weighed in on the AfD. North8000 expressed opposition to my reading. Whatamidoing gave what I saw as measured but mildly favorable comments. But HighKing came back to the AfD claiming that my reading was “rejected” (they later told StarMississipi it was “overturned … entirely”). This wasn’t an RfC, it was just a small handful of editors arguing over a few days. Bringing it back to the AfD like a trophy was exactly the “elite interpretation” risk I warned about (actually, by the time he suggested taking it to Talk:NCORP he had already begun the thread, I think based on OakTree's comments).
 * The comment directed at both of us, asking “why can't the Keep !votes point to a single source” doesn’t match what we did. You did a thorough source analysis. I gave my three. I didn't agree with everything you said. But I recognize that you made the argument. I've seen a pattern of treating non-responses to the "show me one paragraph" challenge as not making the argument at all, but that's a strawman. Very hard to AGF on this one, but HighKing was pretty fired up already so maybe that’s some kind of excuse.

I genuinely believe HighKing thinks they are doing the right thing (see which I take at face value). But the methods strike me as unreasonable.

Are you planning to keep at this? You have put in a ton of work on this article, but it's exhausting fighting the battle. Right now I suggest you save a copy of the page source, in case it's suddenly deleted. Then perhaps you can recreate it if there are ever two really, truly, indisputably independent and in-depth news articles! Oblivy (talk) 05:12, 25 August 2023 (UTC)


 * I don't know, I don't really like AfDs and have unfortunately had to deal with a lot this year, more than in the past few years. But that's also bc I've been editing more recently, so maybe that's why. Idk, but this one especially has become something I don't enjoy at all, which is just acronym after acronym about policies and guidelines that can be read to strictest degree, even if that strictest end of the spectrum ends up getting something of legitimate merit deleted (which imo runs counter to the spirit of the policies and guidelines on Wikipedia, which is why I think the "ignore all rules" thing has real weight here).
 * I don't mind that others have discussed to delete it, it just boggles my mind that it's been relisted four times when each time it looks like a pretty logical no consensus (the very first week it even looked like it could have leaned keep, but each of the three re-listings after that came after pretty even divides on what to do with the article).
 * Aside from that I'm unsure as to what ideas we can form as to what's happening with the AfD; I agree, you and I both pointed to sources we believe meet the criteria for ncorp and gng. I do plan on editing the article going forward, though my levels of being "very busy" offline fluctuate on and off. If the article is kept, I probably will take a bit of a break from it but at some point I do want to see about how I can incorporate these sources into the article: (1 2 3 4 5)
 * In the message from HighKing to Star Mississippi that you linked (above), the article is called or at least implied to be "blatantly promotional", and I just think that's disheartening to me personally because I was just trying to make an article about something interesting to me, but have no concern about being promotional bc I fully understand Wikipedia's policy to keep articles in a neutral state. Soulbust (talk) 01:25, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I participate in more AfD's than I should. Literally every day valuable articles are nominated for absolutely no good reason, and I take that risk to heart. I'm involved in an AfD now for Beijing Arbitration Commission, which I'm pretty sure got nominated because some IP editor 13 years ago dropped a notability tag on the article. Never mind the Economist article, or the journal articles in the citations that are entirely about the organization, it could get deleted unless people are on the ball.
 * There seems to be a tendency among some corporate-deletionists (there, I said it) to call anything about a company promotional. Sure, everything written about a company serves to inform the public about availability of goods and services. But when editors with long and varied edit histories are accused of creating a promotional article (or even - gasp - being a COI editor) it might appear aimed at discrediting the article rather than something based on genuine concerns about its neutrality.
 * If you are interested, there's a discussion at the NCORP talk page (you know, where my arguments got destroyed!) about modifying the standard to recognize the difference between PR and "earned media". And maybe we need to work to make Ignore All Rules respectable again.
 * Try not to get discouraged. Wikipedia needs editors with your spirit. Oblivy (talk) 03:51, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Bigface
Hello! Your submission of Bigface 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 for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 20:31, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

Annual punting yards leaders
Hey Soulbust. I wanted to reach out because I at List of National Football League annual punting yards leaders. We don't typically keep an up to date listing for the current year, but instead we would normally wait until the season ended. I'm not necessarily opposed to including it, but if you want to do this moving forward we should talk at WT:NFL about doing it with all relevant pages so we can keep things consistent. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:06, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:List of Apex Legends characters
Hello, Soulbust. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:List of Apex Legends characters, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

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

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 10:06, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Bastion
I'm admittedly on the verge of burnout, but I was wondering if you'd be up for compiling the sources you found for Bastion. I'm not expecting much but we might be able to assemble something if we go two prong (one focusing on discussion about him as a character, the other on discussion about just how overwhelmingly negative and disliked he was at launch and how it affected the game afterward).

Realistically I don't see too many other characters getting spun out from that list if ever, sources just run out after a point. But it wouldn't hurt to at least try that one. Kung Fu Man (talk) 00:37, 8 November 2023 (UTC)


 * I'll see what I can do, but I'll try to get to it sometime before Monday. Definitely try to not burn yourself out though. Soulbust (talk) 05:21, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Italian writers of young adult literature


A tag has been placed on Category:Italian writers of young adult literature indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 01:09, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Steven Tananbaum
Hi Soulbust, I am working on updating the page of Florida resident Steven Tananbaum. I noticed that you are a member of WikiProject Florida and have interest in editing a variety of subjects including BLPs. I was hoping you'd be able to review my edit request on the article talk page and the related discussion. I'm happy to discuss any of the points and would appreciate assistance with implementing the edits. Thank you very much, Alexandra at L Strategies (talk) 22:51, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 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) 00:41, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Studio Élan
Hello, Soulbust. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Studio Élan, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

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

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 03:05, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:25, 11 December 2023 (UTC)