User talk:Spinixster

 Before leaving a comment...
 * Please [ add a new section] to start a new conversation. Otherwise, please continue at the appropriate section.
 * Please sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ) so I know who I'm talking to.
 * I may be inactive from time to time, so please be patient when waiting for a response.
 * If you need assistance, the Teahouse would be a better place to ask, as I am not always able to answer your questions.
 * If I seem agressive, I'm sorry; English is my second language and it is hard for me to show my emotions via text.
 * I'd prefer genuine conversation over user talk templates.

Welcome!
Hi Spinixster! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Happy editing! Marquardtika (talk) 03:50, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Huntsville, Alabama
I had to revert your edit at Huntsville, Alabama, in order to revert a previous edit by an IP. I would restore your edit, but I'm not exactly sure what it was. Thanks! Magnolia677 (talk) 10:36, 4 March 2023 (UTC)


 * @Magnolia677 It's okay, I just removed some double spaces. You don't need to remove them per MOS:DOUBLESPACE - just found out today. Hope this clears things up. Spinixster (talk) 12:40, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Question
In this edit, you were "resorting refs" according to which guideline? Thank you - w o lf  08:39, 7 March 2023 (UTC)


 * @Thewolfchild Ah, I just saw that the refs weren't in order (ex. [23][2][45]) so I resorted it. Please do revert if that isn't needed, I just found it odd that they're out of order. Spinixster   (chat!)  08:54, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
 * The thing is, the community kinds of frowns on superfluous edits like those, that make no real demonstrable improvement to the article. These pages are on the watchlists of other editors, some are watched by many, many editors. When changes show up on these lists, some editors will take the time and effort to check these changes, and if it turns out they weren't really necessary, then that is time wasted that could've been used to work on articles. When you're talking about people with limited time, and time that they are volunteering... then perhaps you can see what I'm trying to convey. (There was an acquaintance of mine who made similar types of edits, was asked to stop, but unfortuantely he didn't, and now he's blocked.) Anyway, I won't revert your edit, nor will I ask you too. But I will ask that when making any edits going forward, that they are worthwhile and actually improve an article, or contribute to a process, or otherwise help maintain the project. Thank you for your understanding. - w o lf  09:24, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 12
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Steven Spielberg, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Classic FM. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Leeds 13
Hello, I'm Arnhemcr. I noticed that you recently made an edit to Leeds 13 in which your edit summary did not appear to describe the change you made. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks.<!-- Template:uw-mislead1 --

Citation Bot
Please do not run on so many categories at once. AManWithNoPlan (talk) 12:46, 24 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Stella, can you do something to that bot so that it inserts a space before "|s2cid"? It's a dratted nuisance that it always shoves this totally pointless datum in without respecting the formatting of whatever article it is that is being unwillingly targeted. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:52, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
 * @Chiswick Chap Unfortunately I can't do that, as the bot is automated. You can revert the edit or report a bug at the bot's talk page though. Spinixster   (chat!)  13:55, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Someone must know how to add a space character in the bot's script, surely. No good doing one revert, I need to do 10,000 of the things. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:07, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
 * @Chiswick Chap You can suggest that in User talk:Citation bot, maybe someone will see the suggestion and implement it? Spinixster   (chat!)  14:11, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks, done that. Who knows, it might even happen. Then again... Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:15, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
 * You are now blocked from using the bot. AManWithNoPlan (talk) 12:40, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
 * That's weird, I didn't even run it on that many categories. Spinixster   (chat!)  13:41, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
 * More than one, is too many. AManWithNoPlan (talk) 16:10, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I will unblock you, if you agree to control yourself. The problem is that the bot only has some much cpu/memory/etc to go around and your blocked others.  AManWithNoPlan (talk) 18:28, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree on that. I'm just doing my job of combating link rot, so it'd be appreciated if you unblock me. Spinixster   (chat!)  01:06, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
 * unblocked. perhaps a regex search would be better than random categories. Also, BrownHairedGirl is doing a lot of that already FYI.   AManWithNoPlan (talk) 12:38, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Hope you don't mind me asking, but what's a regex search? I've never heard of that before, I just put bare link categories. Spinixster   (chat!)  13:54, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
 * it is a way to search for specific things within the source of a page. For example, you can search for http and more complicated things.  I am not the best person to teach such things. AManWithNoPlan (talk) 18:01, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Quit mis-using Citation Bot
This is a clear WP:COSMETICBOT violation. This is problematic as |publication-date (but not the non-hyphenated version) is a valid alias in cite book, so your edit created double parameters for publishing date. And why was this edit made a second time at USS Marmora (1862) when it had been reverted before? Please be more careful with this; citation bot runs can create a mess if they're not properly done or monitored. Hog Farm Talk 13:18, 6 April 2023 (UTC)


 * @Hog Farm Thanks for letting me know. Citation bot is an automated process, so I don't know what it does. You can report on the bot's talk page about the double parameters, though, and I'm sure it'll get fixed sometime. Spinixster   (chat!)  13:48, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
 * There's still a certain point where, per the bot policy, if you're editing with a bot, that the editor needs to take responsibility for their edits, besides just passing the buck. Even the text at User:Citation bot includes the information Editors who activate this bot should carefully check the results to make sure that they are as expected. Are you checking these edits to make sure they're proper?  Because if you're not verifying that what you're doing isn't breaking things, then that might be considered bot misuse. Hog Farm Talk 14:33, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
 * @Hog Farm I actually do check the edits, but as I'm not familiar with technical things, I sometimes miss something, especially if it isn't apparent. I'll check it more carefully next time. Spinixster   (chat!)  14:39, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for checking on such things - I've had experiences in the past where people were making breaking edits with Citation Bot and weren't checking. It can be very helpful, but if it's not used properly, it can make a big mess. Hog Farm Talk 14:42, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Please review and update Battle of Akora Khattak
Please review this article as it is completely wrong with wrong result in info box. The source says that Budh Singh repulsed the attack and after victory, he did not pursue the retreating Afghans. Below is information from the source that is on the article itself. Here is the source link, page 161. . Also there were only 4000, not 4000+ and the Sikh causality was only 500, not 500 to 700. This is what the source says:

The Battle of Akora, 21 December, 1826 Akora was an important place 18 km from Attock across River Indus. It was inhabited mostly by Khatak Afghans. Najaf Khan was their chief. When the Sikhs captured Peshawar, he had fled into the hills. At this time Budh Singh Sandhanwalia, was stationed at Akora with ‘’’about 4,000 men’’’. The Sayyid organized his forces and got ready for a night assault. The Sayyid's forces consisted of Hindustanis, the Kandharis, Yusafzais and Khataks. The Ghazis were led by Allahbakhsh Khan and the assault was delivered in the early hours of the morning of 21 December, 1826, when the Sikhs lay fast asleep in the intense cold. In the first onslaught many Sikhs were killed. ‘’’Budh Singh immediately organised his troops in battle array and fell upon the Ghazis, and repulsed them. They left the field and retired into the hills. Budh Singh had won his spurs, but did not follow up his victory.’’’ About 500 Sikhs were killed in all, while the Sayyid lost 36 Hindustanis and 46 Kandharis, including Maulvi Baqar Ali of Patna and their commander Allahbakhsh Khan. The Sayyid shifted his headquarters to Sitana at the foot of Mahaban mountains on the western side of the Indus in the heart of Yusafzais.

please can you make the fix and update based on the resource? Thank you. 2600:1016:B016:A225:BD39:DD1B:A57:69D2 (talk) 12:16, 30 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Hello, I only edited the article to convert the references to full citations, so I am not really experienced with this. If you have an edit suggestion, please put it on the page's talk page instead of a random editor's. Spinixster   (chat!)  13:08, 30 April 2023 (UTC)


 * FYI: Sockpuppet investigations/HaughtonBrit. Abecedare (talk) 20:16, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Nath – Zewar Ya Zanjeer
Please Move Nath – Zewar Ya Zanjeer article to Nath (TV series) becuase the show changing its name from today. 2405:204:578C:B70F:0:0:1EBA:A8AD (talk) 06:09, 10 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Please participate in the move discussion instead of commenting on a random person's (who has not edited the article, even) talk page. Spinixster   (chat!)  06:41, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Ok Thanks.
 * I asked you because you moved the ali baba (TV series) article (You did not edit that article also so)
 * Thanks for reply... 2405:204:578C:B70F:0:0:1EBA:A8AD (talk) 06:48, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Leeds 13
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Leeds 13. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted. Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Arnhemcr (talk) 10:41, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.


 * @Arnhemcr They were not unconstructive, see MOS:APOSTROPHE. Spinixster   (chat!)  13:11, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I think you should check out the Manual of Style before warning me about abiding by the MOS. Spinixster   (chat!)  13:14, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this, and this is the second time I've had to get in touch about your edits on Leeds 13. This time you replaced one apostrophe in the title field of a citation with a non-ASCII character. The article has another four apostrophes in citation titles, but you didn't change those. A theme running through the MOS is the need for consistency within articles. Please explain how your edit improved the consistency (or any other aspect) of that article. Arnhemcr (talk) 20:09, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Apologies, I read the edit history the wrong way round. You replaced the non-ASCII character with an apostrophe. I've now repeated that edit myself. Arnhemcr (talk) 02:36, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
 * It's okay, mistakes happen. Spinixster   (chat!)  02:39, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

ReFill
Hi Spinixster, in this edit to Mount Piper Power Station you tried to put the names of two authors into one set of author fields:  instead of. Please try to be more careful in the future. Thanks. XAM2175 (T) 10:02, 1 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Whoops, sorry about that. Didn't notice. Spinixster   (chat!)  10:03, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Rate limiting AfD
Please stop nominating articles for deletion. You are doing so at an unsustainable rate that prevents those of us who look at sources from appropriately responding to them. Please pick ~20 of your recent nominations, ideally ones where no one has commented, and withdraw them without prejudice, so that we can give each one appropriate review. Jclemens (talk) 23:00, 30 June 2023 (UTC)


 * @Jclemens I'm sorry, but I'm very confused. I've only nominated 9 articles for deletion yesterday, not over 20, I don't usually do AfDs that often unless the article is obviously not notable. Can you explain what I've done wrong? Spinixster   (chat!)  09:01, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I noticed the discussion on the AN, so I would like to clarify again that I have not touched AfDs for a long time before yesterday, so I am not a "prolific nominator," as you have said. I am still very confused as to what you're saying, though. Spinixster   (chat!)  09:07, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
 * What I saw is a lot of new DELSORTs, the most recent series were from you, and I missed that much of the total were also from Pokelego999, who is also nominating many similar articles at once. Obviously, I should have addressed him too, and asked that of the total, 20 be closed. In general, 9 articles in a similar vein or topic would be borderline high, but it's problematic to get good discussions with so many similar articles running at once, especially over a holiday weekend. Jclemens (talk) 19:49, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Deprodding of Adam Ross (CSI: NY)
I have removed the tag from Adam Ross (CSI: NY), which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think this article should be deleted, please do not add back to the page. Instead, feel free to list it at Articles for deletion. Thanks! Ducky Submarine (talk) 20:53, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Add full bibliographic details?
Hi Spinixster, Thanks for your edit here. This is only an easy fix for people who have access to the particular database in question. Since you evidently do, can you please add full bibliographic details (author, publication, date) to the reference? (And ideally change the link to something that points directly to the article, rather than points to a search page that points to the article.) I spent a considerable amount of time trying to find this article in other databases to correct it myself, but I was unsuccessful. Thanks, JBL (talk) 17:15, 26 August 2023 (UTC)


 * @JayBeeEll I based my search off of previews, so I cannot access the articles themselves. I don't have a subscription to NOLA, so it's not easy to find more information. Spinixster   (chat!)  01:15, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks, what you did find was already a big improvement. I'll try looking again some time now that I know the article title.  Happy editing, JBL (talk) 22:10, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for participating in the August 2023 GAN backlog drive
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:08, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Etiquette I've picked up over time
I'm not an admin and have zero official authority to tell you what to do. Here's some information to use or not use as you see fit: Through hard-earned experience I have learned that repeating the same argument over and over at people just makes them angry. 1) Once someone has said they they find your argument unconvincing, don't reply at all unless it's to say something that you haven't already said. 2) Consider not repeating arguments you already made in the same thread even if you're replying to different people.

This sort of thing isn't supposed to matter around here, but Jc37 has been a Wikieditori since 2006 and has a lot of recognition around here. I don't mean that they'll sic the dogs on you if you annoy them, but if someone else gets mad at you and tries to drag you to ANI or whatnot six months from now, Jc37 might remember having a negative opinion of you, not remember that technically you didn't do anything wrong, and it could have consequences.

Not offended if you delete this. Also not offended that you pick apart almost all the sources I cite. The way I see it, that's exactly what you're supposed to do, and it proves you're awake and thinking about what I said. Darkfrog24 (talk) 00:15, 21 September 2023 (UTC)


 * @Darkfrog24 Thanks for the advice. I'm not very good at picking up social cues, so that is very helpful. Spinixster   (chat!)  08:59, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Okay. I'll feel free to say some more. Before you tell someone one of the non-obscure policies, like WP:N, check how many years they've been on the site. I've used that one myself. I don't remember which policy it was, but it turned out they'd been here since 2009. It's like in The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe: "Do not cite the deep magic to me, Witch. I was there when it was written!" Darkfrog24 (talk) 00:16, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
 * @Darkfrog24 That's really useful, but I think checking the year that they began actively editing instead would be better. For example, one of the conversations I had on top was with a user who joined a long time ago but only started editing in recent years. Spinixster   (chat!)  09:28, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Great use of core concept. Darkfrog24 (talk) 11:31, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Gomer Pyle AfD
Would you mind changing your most recent edit to strike through and restate, so as not to confuse other editors who read my comments? Changing the original subject like this is not the best etiquette. I hope that’s OK with you! — Jacona (talk) 12:33, 22 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Okay, sorry about that. Spinixster   (chat!)  13:33, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Strike Force Five
 Schwede 66  00:02, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

A Barnstar For You!

 * Thank you so much! Spinixster   (chat!)  01:03, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

AfD on Clarice Starling
Hello Spinixster -- I note you say you did a "quick Google search" on Clarice Starling. Academic sources on fictional characters are not usually available on the web, it's much better to search at the WP:Wikipedia Library. You need to bear in mind that the top-level Ebsco search doesn't actually cover the underlying publishers' databases (and doesn't cover Proquest at all); I always get a lot better results searching directly. Project Muse is quite good for film & television, for example. Regards, Espresso Addict (talk) 07:05, 8 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the advice! Spinixster   (chat!)  07:08, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Recent AfDs
Hello. I wanted to reach out and see if I can help provide some guidance here. I'll start by being clear, the quantity of recent AfDs that you've put forth, given how frequently the articles are kept, is starting to border on disruptive. I appreciate your other contributions to Wikipedia, and I don't doubt your good faith on this, but I am concerned about how your methods are affecting other editors' time and focus.

Please understand, it's easy to nominate an article for deletion. But it can take time to provide sources. For some context, one of the best Wikipedia researchers I've run into,, says he can take up to three hours finding sources for a single AfD discussion sometimes.

Here's one specific thought. Based on other discussions I've had with you or seen others have with you in AfD, you might reconsider what you consider to be "plot summary". Understand that most fictional elements can only be examined with a lens of plot, they don't exist outside of it. Academic sources and many of the better reviews of fictional works will generally tie their analysis deeply to the underlying artifact (text, film, audio etc). In other words, the best secondary sources will generally have substantial coverage of plot. You might find some of the "oppose" comments in this recent RFC enlightening on this matter as well:

More generally, you might consider withdrawing AfDs once sources are provided. I would also recommend slowing the pace at which you nominate articles for deletion, as reading this talk page I can see I am not the first one expressing a similar concern.

I truly hope this helps. &mdash;siro&chi;o 09:18, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the words. Though I don't know if I entirely agree with the plot summary sentiment here, some sources may only be plot summaries with no commentary whatsoever. And if there is, it also depends on if it's just a brief commentary or substantial. At least that's what I think. Spinixster   (chat!)  09:23, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
 * A long time ago, I found a large number of articles I thought needed to be deleted, and started nominating them for deletion. My actions weren't too popular. An old admin, User:Kudpung suggested that I consider as an alternative, boldly redirecting the articles. I did, and in most cases, the redirects remain to this day. With these fictional characters, that might be a great approach as well. My complete advice is to pick around maybe two or three a day, redirect them, and wait. If someone reverses your action, wait a while (remember, we have WP:TIME) then open a discussion on the article talk page. If a mutually satisfactory outcome cannot be gained there, consider moving on with an AfD. This approach, while it may seem longer, saves a ton of time project-wide, because instead of going through all these arguments at AfD, in all likelihood most of the redirects will stand, or a discussion with just a couple of editors will determine whether a stand-alone article is needed, instead of being researched ad-nauseum on AfD. You are in no way obligated to try this approach, but I think that if you do, you will come to appreciate it as a much less contentious way that achieves better results. — Jacona (talk) 16:37, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I did do so in the past, but I got reverted en-masse by another editor (they did not even bother to tell me, and I only found out months later), causing me to go back and nominate them all for deletion. The pages have very low view count, so I doubt anyone would participate in the talk discussion. But I will do that in the future, thank you. Spinixster   (chat!)  07:35, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
 * If someone reverts your edits then you should get a notice (the little bell symbol). People who revert bold edits including redirects, tend to assume that the original bold editor/redirector will either will receive a notification and/or will have watchlisted the articles.
 * You should try going to the talk page of the relevant wikiproject, or on the top-level article, eg the television series for fictional television characters. I did this for your recent redirects on CSI: Miami characters. If you get no response there then cautiously proceeding to redirect a few at a time, starting with the least notable, is a more collegiate approach. Regards, Espresso Addict (talk) 04:05, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I did not get a notice because it was a manual revert. Spinixster   (chat!)  06:35, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Hello, Spinixster,
 * One message I'm seeing here is simply "Slow down". In many cases of the articles you are nominating, they have existed on Wikipedia for a decade or longer and there is no rush to delete them. Siroxo is correct in that it is MUCH more time-consuming for an editor to argue for Keeping an article, looking for new, additional sources, than for an editor to simply type "Delete per nom". So please try to ration your nominations and not flood AFD with a lot of similar articles nominated for deletion over a short period of time. It does only take minutes to file a nomination and much more time for editors to give an article and its sourcing a proper and thorough evaluation. Thank you for taking into consideration the time and effort of your fellow editors. Liz Read! Talk! 02:26, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

Deletions sorting
I have no idea why you keep adding characters from TV series like Law and Order to the Science fiction and fantasy deletion sorting page. This is in no way either science fiction or fantasy. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:48, 24 October 2023 (UTC)


 * @Necrothesp, I saw that other deletion sortings for characters added that sorting page as well. Is that not true? Spinixster   (chat!)  13:58, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
 * No, Fictional elements is the correct page for all characters from films and TV series. Only add Science fiction and fantasy for characters from actual science fiction and fantasy. Thanks. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:02, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Okay, I won't do that again. Spinixster   (chat!)  14:03, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Nomination statement GAR
Hi Spinixster. Thanks for your recent activity nominating articles at GAR :). Really appreciated, given how much of a backlog we have. One request.

Would you be able to give slightly more information in your nomination statements? Doesn't have to be much, but as a closer it's nice to see a strong case made. For instance, in the Cliff Burton article, you state that some of the sources are self-published or primary. While that can certainly be a problem, there are instances where these type of sources are allowed. For instance, WP:ABOUTSELF for self-published if the "publisher" is the person in question. In Tropical cyclone rainfall forecasting, it would be nice to see examples of poor prose you'd like other to chime in on.

Thanks again! —Femke 🐦 (talk) 15:19, 5 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Sure, I will explain in the GARs. Spinixster   (chat!)  01:05, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Spinixter, when nominating GARs, you must always follow the GAR instructions and notify relevant WikiProjects using the template. You have not done so for many of your nominations. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 06:53, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Alright. Spinixster   (chat!)  08:37, 23 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) 01:00, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

In appreciation

 * Thank you! Spinixster   (chat!)  06:35, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
you are a cat lover

Harukkaaario (talk) 15:10, 18 December 2023 (UTC) 


 * Thank you! And yes, I do love cats. Spinixster   (chat!)  01:02, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

A trout for you!

 * XD yes I do. Spinixster   (chat!)  04:14, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Green Knight GAR actioned
Hi Spinixster, I believe I've actioned everything that could possibly be needed here. Are we waiting for anything else to be done before the GAR is closed as Keep? Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:33, 7 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I'll archive it now. Spinixster   (chat!)  10:04, 7 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Many thanks! Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:21, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Geogaddi GAN
I'm done with the review. Is there anything else I should do? — Davest3r08 > : )  (talk) 01:43, 8 March 2024 (UTC)


 * I'll reply to you shortly. Spinixster   (chat!)  01:45, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Stefon
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Stefon you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Sammi Brie -- Sammi Brie (talk) 06:43, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Stefon
The article Stefon 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:Stefon and Talk:Stefon/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Sammi Brie -- Sammi Brie (talk) 07:23, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Stefon
The article Stefon you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Stefon for comments about the article, and Talk:Stefon/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Sammi Brie -- Sammi Brie (talk) 17:42, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

It Sticks Out Half a Mile GA review
Hi there Spinixster, thanks for reviewing the article I nominated so promptly. With regards to the newspaper resources you found for the ISOHAM series, I have not used Discord before, and I do not have access to The Wikipedia Library until another month. However, you can contact me via email. Lotsw73 (talk) 12:44, 28 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Thanks for sending the newspaper clippings through, I'm surprised that they even existed! I'll see what I can add from the clippings to the article shortly. Cheers, Lotsw73 (talk) 23:30, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Reception in list discussion
Hello ! The question if the reception of Lucifer Morningstar (Hazbin Hotel) belongs into List of Hazbin Hotel and Helluva Boss characters has already been discussed here, with my understanding of the preliminiary consensus being that it does. If you would like to discuss further, I believe that is the best place. Daranios (talk) 10:01, 5 April 2024 (UTC)


 * @Daranios I've already started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Lists, which I expect will have more people who know about lists to form a consensus. Feel free to join and give your opinion. Spinixster   (trout me!)  10:04, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing me there. Always good to get additional opinions. I am not sure I can contribute more, as I am very much in line with the reply you have gotten by there. The discussion I had linked would in my view be the corresponding one suggested for content questions to resolve at the article level. Daranios (talk) 14:26, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

DYK for Stefon
&spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 00:02, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Adele
Hello Stella, excuse me, why removed the cover version from Adele's song Set Fire? I think 30 million views presents very reliable topic. Is it related to the fact you call yourself The Idiot? No insult:D AdVony (talk) 15:12, 13 June 2024 (UTC)


 * @AdVony Notability is not based on popularity. See WP:COVERSONG for more detail. Spinixster   (trout me!)  15:25, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I mean it is, since recorded in the different genre in a different language from the original. I suspect you being disgraced by the rock music. Why the other cover version has been maintained? What extras does it have? AdVony (talk) 15:40, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I believe rock music deserves the same attention like pop, rap, rnb.. AdVony (talk) 15:57, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
 * The guidelines write nothing about rock/metal covers are forbidden. AdVony (talk) 16:25, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Don't you mind if I re-work the paragraph and add details about lyrics meaning and re-upload it please? Btw. how can I treat you seriously, if you are having such a nickname? :D AdVony (talk) 18:53, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Whatever cover version it is, rock, pop, etc. if it's not covered by reliable sources or notable per the guidelines at WP:NSONG (again, WP:COVERSONG), it should not be included. Spinixster   (trout me!)  01:48, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @AdVony, you can treat her like any other editor; with respect that is expected as a fellow wikipedia editor. Do not try to make a personal attack on her character over a nickname that she has given herself. She is giving you advice about the information and policies to help convey the information. Cowboygilbert  -  (talk) ♥  01:57, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I am sorry for being steered by emotions, however I would like to know a specific rule why the cover has been removed, since I cannot see it under the link. AdVony (talk) 06:17, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
 * She had told you that the cover should be covered by reliable sources in order to be notable enough to be an addition to the article. The source that you used was to a youtube video, please look at WP:RSPYT for more information on using youtube a source. Cowboygilbert  -  (talk) ♥  06:40, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Than you for constructive remarks. I really appreciate it. I am sure we can find a compromise. AdVony (talk) 11:38, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
 * We can only find a compromise if you are able to find a reliable source about the cover of the song. Cowboygilbert  -  (talk) ♥  19:21, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Your recent Prod
Hello, I saw your proD on The Minx. Would you consider redirect the page to Mia Park (where it's listed) with that source for example? (she's the lead actress and the only blue possible target on the page). Up to you. Best, - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank)  08:47, 16 June 2024 (UTC)


 * ✅ No idea why I didn't think of that. Spinixster   (trout me!)  09:01, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot! - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank)  09:55, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Your Teahouse question
Did you find an answer to this question? I saw it in the archives and it was unanswered. I'm going to investigate a possible solution if you haven't found one.— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  21:06, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * No one has responded but I asked here.— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  21:54, 12 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Use of unreliable sources is a potential reason for reassessment, but it would need to be article-by-article, using the process outlined here for GAs and here for FAs. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:14, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Spinixster gave us a general idea of which articles but not a complete list.— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  22:46, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Hey -- wow, that was nearly a year ago. I was kinda worried back then that GARing an article with such tiny problems can cause problems, and I don't want to pull myself into drama again. The articles can (mostly) be found at Template:Nigel Kneale. Spinixster   (trout me!)  04:11, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I'm way behind. Well, people can decide what to do independently of what you want to do.— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  15:45, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I think Quatermass II would need a FAR, that's all. I've already GARed the articles that need it. Spinixster   (trout me!)  00:43, 14 July 2024 (UTC)