User talk:Thebiguglyalien/Archive 1

A belated welcome!


Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Thebiguglyalien. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:
 * Introduction
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * How to write a great article
 * Editor's index to Wikipedia

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes ( ~ ); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Questions, or place helpme on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! MPS1992 (talk) 16:29, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Irreligion in Estonia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Springer. 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) 06:08, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

"Gestalt shift" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Gestalt shift and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 24 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. signed,Rosguill talk 19:51, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Allsides.com as a reference
Hi Thebiguglyalien. I noticed that you recently used allsides.com as a reference in Pew Research Center political typology. Please note that the general consensus as expressed at WP:RSN is that it does not meet the reliable sourcing criteria for such information. I've gone ahead and removed it. If you disagree, let's discuss it. You may want to check WP:RSP and WP:RSN to help determine if a source is reliable. Thanks.--Hipal (talk) 16:38, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 11
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Public policy of the United States, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Naturalization Act.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Freedom of religion in Hungary
Are you able to do Interwiki?Xx236 (talk) 13:23, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
For creating Esperanto in the Soviet Union, well-written and interesting article.

(t &#183; c)  buidhe  21:24, 27 May 2022 (UTC) 

Human rights in Hungary
Funny, I was actually planning on creating that article myself, and have been in the process of putting it together for months&mdash;however, you've done such a good job of it that I'm not sure how much I could add at this point. An excellent article that was long overdue for creation. Keep up the good work! Kurtis (talk) 01:17, 8 June 2022 (UTC)


 * It covers a lot of topics, but each section is still pretty sparse. I'm sure there's still more to be said about most of the topics. But thank you! Thebiguglyalien (talk) 01:56, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

July 2022
Hello. I have noticed that you edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 04:03, 21 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Would it be acceptable/beneficial if I tagged most of my edits as "expansion" or "rewrite", assuming that's what I'm doing? I had moved away from that because it felt redundant. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 05:04, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that would be far better than an empty edit summary. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 06:11, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Education for Economic Security Act
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:02, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

A Vital Barnstar for you!

 * Well, you did it again at Secularism and congrats on your second successful expansion. At this rate you would quickly burn my barnstar budget if I give one for each article expanded :) CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 14:41, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Right, 10 days later, and you have expanded six articles to 30 kB, including the one with the smallest page size, Nutrition. That's just insane. Massive thanks to you for your gigantean effort. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 10:45, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Agreed, remarkable effort on the 30kb drive, your edits are not only great in quantity but of very good quality, thank you!! Fbrh47 (talk) 15:29, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Invitation
Hi ,

You have been invited, along with the other participants in Wikiproject Vital Articles, to start editing the Technology page and add references. Our goal is, by September 3rd, to have the article at least to B-class, but what would be generally preferable is to improve this article to the extent that it gets to GA-status. I may post a notice to the community bulletin board, but it is not definite. I hope to see the Technology article improved! We're also looking for assistance on our GA drive. 𝙷𝚎𝚕𝚕𝚘𝚑𝚎𝚊𝚛𝚝  ⋅𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔⋅ 02:43, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Invitation

To request my attention, find my talk page and I will respond within 24 hours. 𝙷𝚎𝚕𝚕𝚘𝚑𝚎𝚊𝚛𝚝  ⋅𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔⋅ 02:43, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Political ideologies in the United States
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Political ideologies in the United States you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Xx78900 -- Xx78900 (talk) 19:20, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Vital GA Drive
The first ever Vital GA Drive by the WikiProject Vital Articles has begun. The drive aims to improve Coffee and Land to good article status within 45 days, from 1 September to 15 October 2022. The Vital GA Drive is WikiProject Vital Articles's first step at achieving its ambitious goal: all Vital articles achieving good article status by 2032.

You've received this message because your name is on WikiProject Vital Articles and WikiProject Vital Articles/30 kB drive. If your name only appear at the 30 kB drive page, you won't receive any more future messages from the WikiProject. If you don't want to receive such messages anymore, you can remove the template at the project's member list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:30, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 14
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Human behavior, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mental disability.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:07, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Help with Seattle Mayor Jenny Durkan article
Hi. I see you’re a member of the Politics WikiProject - I’ve made a number of proposals to update the article about Jenny Durkan, the former mayor of Seattle. Talk:Jenny Durkan I have a conflict of interest because I have a personal (unpaid) connection to Durkan. Do you have time for an independent review? Thanks!.1920sportsfan (talk) 17:53, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

"Medication of children" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Medication of children and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 September 18 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. MB 06:42, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Jane Pierce
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Jane Pierce you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Unexpectedlydian -- Unexpectedlydian (talk) 12:20, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

USA barnstar for you, for your excellent work
wow! excellent work on the article that I created, namely History of the United States government. you truly enriched and expanded the article. your idea to structure it by presidnetial administration was very ambitious, but you really implemented it in a highly skillful way. I like the scope and content that you added. well done indeed. thanks for your work! please enjoy this barnstar, as a token of thanks. keep it up!

thanks! --Sm8900 (talk) 14:59, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Caroline Harrison
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Caroline Harrison you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of SusunW -- SusunW (talk) 13:40, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Citing a chapter
see here, the sixth example. Sorry to have confused you. --Quisqualis (talk) 21:46, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Politics in The Simpsons
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Politics in The Simpsons you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Nineteen Ninety-Four guy -- Nineteen Ninety-Four guy (talk) 15:20, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Wedding of Grover Cleveland and Frances Folsom
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 3
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Politics in The Simpsons, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages CBC, Deadline and Vanity Fair.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Ian Smith userbox
Hello, Thebiguglyalien. I would like to hear your opinion on this particular userbox – User:Katangais/Userboxes/Ian Smith. I am really puzzled that it survived two MfD nominations so far (here and here; I was the nominator in the second one, and it was closed as no consensus). Ian Smith was the leader and personification of Rhodesia, an unrecognized white racist ethnostate, so having a userbox stating support for him is highly inflammatory and divisive, IMHO. Not to mention that it fails WP:NORACISTS, and is a clear violation of WP:UBCR. —  Sundostund  mppria  (talk / contribs) 09:54, 4 November 2022 (UTC)


 * My personal opinion? Advocating for political beliefs of any sort on Wikipedia is rude, inappropriate, and disruptive, and pages that do so should be deleted. Doubly so for ones that discriminate on the basis of race (or any other immutable trait), even if it's only implied. I would vote to delete in a third MfD.
 * My "professional" opinion? Previous consensus seems to lean toward keeping polemic content except in egregious cases, so that's something that has to be respected. I chose to nominate some userboxes that I've come across lately, but I only did so because I felt they met this standard of egregiousness. There might be a case to be made that Smith is associated with white nationalism, but it's not as clear cut as, for example, a userbox supporting Nazis. I wouldn't nominate a userbox for deletion for supporting a politician unless it was someone that's widely agreed by reliable sources to have committed genocide, such as Hitler or Pol Pot. Userboxes that are critical of living persons, however, should be nominated for deletion on sight.
 * Thebiguglyalien (talk) 14:43, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Thebiguglyalien (talk) 14:43, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Apologies
Hey Alien, my apologies for going AWOL mid-review, my IRL life got so hectic I didn't have a second to even think about editing. Never meant to leave you hanging the way I did. Delighted that FormalDude took over, it was a very worthy article. Xx78900 (talk) 15:07, 9 November 2022 (UTC)


 * No worries, it all got addressed in the end. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 16:16, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 10
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 20th century in the United States, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page United States in World War II.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

Wikimedia CEE Spring 2022 prize
Dear Thebiguglyalien,

Congratulations! You won the third prize in the main category as well as the first prize in the Esperanto subcategory of Wikimedia CEE Spring 2022. In order to claim your voucher worth a total of €75, please contact Manfred Werner.

Best regards.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:05, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Politics in The Simpsons
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 00:03, 17 November 2022 (UTC) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 08:22, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 20
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bess Truman, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Medicare.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

DYK for 2021 in China
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 00:03, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

DYK Barnstar
Btw I've listed the article on the project page too. BorgQueen (talk) 01:09, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

Btw...
If there's another year article you'd like to work on and could use a helping hand, let me know. BorgQueen (talk) 13:58, 25 November 2022 (UTC)


 * My goal right now is to work on the 2000s and 2010s years. They're high priority given their recency, but they've been abandoned since they're no longer the current year. I've done a bunch of work on 2001 that I'm really happy with, but it could use another pair of eyes for a quality check. The hope is to do the same thing for the rest of that decade. My main concern is scope and comprehensiveness. What should be included? I've tried to add the most significant examples of: scientific developments, spaceflight events, developments in wars and conflicts, international incidents, acts of violence, accidents and natural disasters, economic events, and changes in heads of government. I can't help but wonder if I'm missing some major category, though I know that pop culture and entertainment generally aren't included. I'd like to put the year articles through the featured list process, but I want to address this comprehensiveness issue first. In case you can't tell, I've given this a lot of thought, but WikiProject Years just doesn't seem to be equipped to address these things. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 15:24, 25 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Yes I wish the project was more active; but at least it hasn't died off yet like some of the other projects I've participated in. The scope thing was certainly what made me hesitate to work on the general year articles. I felt it was easier to pick and focus on some topic by year or country by year; just couldn't decide which. But I agree that the comparatively recent year articles are of major importance nevertheless. Now I'll go and check out 2001. BorgQueen (talk) 15:47, 25 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Overall very nicely done! I think we could use some more pictures of events for each month though. What say you? BorgQueen (talk) 15:55, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I was thinking the same thing for images. I haven't gotten to that yet because I'm not sure how they would be formatted given the mass of sidebars on year articles. Which of course brings up the debate about image collages on year articles (which is currently consuming about 90% of the WikiProject's energy). And I've been working on a few year in country articles as well (Botswana and China), but given the incredible number of those that need to be done, I was hoping for something more organized. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 16:04, 25 November 2022 (UTC)


 * I personally feel the collages look nice but I see why some would disagree. Botswana is an interesting choice. Any particular reason to pick the country? BorgQueen (talk) 16:10, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I wanted to work on an underrepresented country, so I looked at the sub-Saharan countries that use English (to make it easier to find sources), and from there I just picked one. Another thing I noticed after I started working on that was since it only has a few million people, it's not as difficult to cover the country comprehensively (as compared to, say, the US or China). Besides years, I've also been doing work on Botswana government articles. But systemic bias is a whole separate thing that also needs a more collective organized approach (an assimilation, if you will). But I suspect that a lot of these country in year articles for smaller countries would be really easy to put together, it's just a matter of finding motivated editors. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 16:31, 25 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Ah, yes, motivated editors... and there are very few of them when it comes to years I'd say. I used to be an active admin on ITN many years ago and that's how I got to the year articles as I was working on the current events. Prior to that, I had regarded years to be a sort of mere disambiguation pages. As you must know 2022 gets daily inputs, in fact too many of them, because it's the current year we're living in but the 2000s are mostly unloved as they're neither current nor the classic antiquity yet, so to speak. BorgQueen (talk) 16:58, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Yep, that's why it's probably going to be my focus for year articles for the time being. So to more briefly answer your original message, I'm finishing up on 2001 and I'm probably going to start working on 2002 soon. I'm thinking about nominating 2001 as a featured list candidate, partially with the hope that if it goes well, it might bring more attention to the years articles from experienced editors. Though I suspect those users are reluctant to take on year articles as well, as I asked for feedback on Wikipedia talk:Featured lists a few days ago with no response. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 18:28, 25 November 2022 (UTC)


 * They probably have no idea as it's unprecedented. My stance on 2001 is that I'd like more prose like 1346, and more images to accompany that, and if I were you I'd tackle the GA candidacy first as it's an easier hurdle. BorgQueen (talk) 18:42, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
 * That lack of precedent is another reason I wanted to try to push this forward; if it works out, it would carve a much easier path for future year articles to be expanded. As for prose/GA, I had thought about that, but that gets into the distinction between stand-alone lists and other articles and where year articles stand in that regard. I know stand alone lists aren't allowed in GA. Those sort of questions are why I wanted feedback from the WikiProject and from the Featured List community (and why I appreciate your interest here). Thebiguglyalien (talk) 18:51, 25 November 2022 (UTC)


 * It's unprecedented for FL but we have a precedent for GA, and that's 1346, which I admire much. I see no definite reason why year articles have to be stand-alone lists. I think they're far more interesting as a combination of prose and lists, like 1346 is. BorgQueen (talk) 19:03, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Regardless of what changes are made, it's going to take a lot of work-- a lot more than one or two people can do. There are already thousands of year articles, all but a few of which are low quality lists. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 20:25, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:31, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Bess Truman
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Bess Truman 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 Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 02:03, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

December 2022
—  Red-tailed hawk (nest) 20:12, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Caroline Harrison
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:03, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

2001
I've made a few formatting fixes, minor copyedits, and added a few more images. I'm aware of your issue with the image display so please let me know if you have any other problems or concerns. BorgQueen (talk) 06:32, 29 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Nice work so far, but I see quite a few citation urls have not been archived. You don't want to see dead links one day after all that hard work. I'm going to add archive-url links manually as the Internet Archive bot isn't functioning well these days. BorgQueen (talk) 06:09, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, citation maintenance is one of those habits I know I need to work on. In the meantime, I'm trying to figure out what else is worth adding as prose. Political developments would be an obvious one, but I worry that a politics section would just be a list of changes in state leaders. Other than that, I'm wondering if enough happens in a single year to warrant sections on science, religion, economics, or culture. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 12:34, 30 November 2022 (UTC)


 * I suppose you could certainly write a science section, yes, which will include spaceflight and astronomy stuff. BorgQueen (talk) 12:51, 30 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi! Thanks as usual, for the nice work. I've removed a few citations in the lead as per WP:LEDE. Those remarks concerning 9/11 aren't particularly controversial or challengeable, and they're cited in the relevant section. The separate Economy section is a great idea btw. BorgQueen (talk) 13:58, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree that the citations probably aren't critical, especially since the article now has prose talking about these things as well. I cited the 9/11 aspects specifically because I predicted a challenge at some point from conspiracy theorists or POV pushers questioning the events of 9/11 and the invasion of Afghanistan, given the controversial nature of the topic. For the other sections, I'm mostly trying to build a skeleton of an article right now with the critical aspects so that they can be expanded afterward (I imagine there's more to be said about the economy than Enron). I'm still debating whether a culture section is feasible (which might include literature, art, music, sports, fashion, movies, video games, and the internet). I think this sort of thing is really important given that it's probably what most people actually experienced and remember from 2001, but I also don't know how we'd decide what to put in it or how to avoid making it Anglocentric. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 14:33, 1 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the latest input. I'm not an American citizen but was using CompuServe at that time, in another country. Makes me nostalgic. BorgQueen (talk) 18:25, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Hmm, I'll do my (close to) best to globalize the Culture section. Give me some time. BorgQueen (talk) 19:37, 1 December 2022 (UTC)


 * The tricky part is figuring out the criteria for what would go in such a section. For the sports section, for example, I intentionally did not add any annual sporting events (those would be better suited for 2001 in sports or 2001 in country articles). I tried to limit it to things that were unprecedented or otherwise one of the most notable moments in a particular sport's history. Media is even more difficult because there aren't many examples of anything "unprecedented" on a global scale. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 19:49, 1 December 2022 (UTC)


 * I'm a bit under the weather so I'll be slow... but I'll get to it eventually. BorgQueen (talk) 06:08, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
 * No worries! WP:VOLUNTEER, WP:NODEADLINE, and so on. I've just been adding content for the past few days, but it might still need some cleanup. I think we're getting to the point now where we can decide what topics should have the most focus in a year article and expand those areas. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 06:59, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
 * How is the layout of the images now, on your screen? The prose sections are getting nicely fleshed out so I was wondering if it had solved the problem. BorgQueen (talk) 07:19, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
 * The sidebars currently extend down to the culture section on my screen, so there isn't any image stacking below that. As a style preference, however, I'm not sure if there should be left-aligned images in a bulleted list, since it can make the list's formatting a little awkward. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 16:01, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
 * That's true. I'll right-align them all. BorgQueen (talk) 16:07, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
 * At this point, I'm trying to figure out what still needs to be added. I think we've pretty much covered all of the incident and event type subjects, but I don't know if the article says enough about broad trends throughout the year. I like the information in the Population section that talks about the year overall instead of just individual moments. I also think the culture section could use more in this area; I like how the paragraph on music turned out, but I think the article needs more from other aspects of culture. Fashion/style is the main area that I think that section could benefit from, but I don't know whether it's possible to summarize global fashion in a given year. I was also unable to find any data on the best-selling cars globally in 2001, which seems like it would be relevant. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 18:01, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I'll see what I can do about that. Meanwhile, I'd like to add this one incident that happened in Argentina: December 2001 riots in Argentina... but it's unsourced. If you could find a source for it, that'd be great. The broadcast video would be a nice addition I think. But I can understand if you aren't into it. BorgQueen (talk) 19:27, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I had previously added that event as well as the president's subsequent resignation, but it (along with several other major political events) seems to have been removed. The citation should still be in the page history somewhere. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 20:39, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes, I've found it. It was removed by User:Deb for being too domestic. Maybe it is. BorgQueen (talk) 20:59, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Actually it got me thinking... since we have prose sections now, we don't need that many entries in the list. It feels repetitive. How about we trim the list a bit? BorgQueen (talk) 21:13, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, this seems to be the time where we need to answer some of these formatting and content questions. How much redundancy should be considered acceptable between the prose and the timeline (especially since a lot of the prose is currently just sorting the timeline entries by subject)? I think some trimming would help with that. Normally, I'd look to see what the precedent is, but it seems 1929 is the only precedent for the expansion of a modern era year article. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:29, 4 December 2022 (UTC)


 * The Population section needs to be either expanded or merged if you want the article to pass the FA hurdle; they generally don't smile upon choppy sections. BorgQueen (talk) 06:54, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I feel like this sort of information is important to describe what the world was like in a given year at the broadest level, but I agree that it (like a lot of the things I added) needs to be incorporated into the article a little more. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 07:10, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Re prose sections, I would be very careful with these as all content still needs to be referenced, and we have to take care to avoid unconscious bias or putting too much weight on certain events. As with the collages, the content needs to be discussed on the article's Talk page and/or at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Years. Deb (talk) 09:13, 5 December 2022 (UTC)


 * I agree; 2001 is particularly prone to bias and undue weight because of 9/11. Thanks for your input. BorgQueen (talk) 09:17, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
 * , I made three different attempts in the last month to open discussions about how to change year articles moving forward on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Years, including one specifically about this. With the exception of BorgQueen, there was zero interest in a discussion on how to format or expand year articles going forward. I would love if more people could look over the article to look for gaps and ensure a global perspective (or better yet, to add content), but the WikiProject is essentially dead when we're talking about anything outside of 2022 and image placement. My hope is that we can get 2001 to GA status (which would naturally include referencing and balance concerns) and let that be an example to nudge users to expand other years, but I'm not optimistic. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 14:54, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Nobel Prizes section in 2001
I think it should have a table like the one in the same section in 2022. What say you? BorgQueen (talk) 11:24, 5 December 2022 (UTC)


 * I wouldn't object to it. Either way is fine with me. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 14:56, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

I see the template has been added but guess the GA review process hasn't started yet? Let me know when it has. BorgQueen (talk) 11:39, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Article size
Have you read Article size. Thanks to your expansion of 2001, the readable prose size of that article has now exceeded the size where splitting of the article is recommended. What do you propose to do about this? Deb (talk) 19:06, 12 December 2022 (UTC)


 * The readable prose size of 2001 is approximately 24 kB, which is well under the threshold for splitting. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 19:15, 12 December 2022 (UTC)


 * You're right, I was reading it as 56KB. Deb (talk) 19:59, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

AN
Hey, tbua, re: Administrators%27_noticeboard. The IP has made zero edits other than to that dispute. That's not the MO of some new editor who is here to contribute productively. So, yeah, when someone like that starts potstirring, we do tend to assume they're quite likely someone who has been blocked who is trolling editors they don't like. It's not that CIVIL is being thrown out the window, it's that it's not a suicide pact.

As an aside, your talk is getting quite long, and you might want to set up automatic archiving. There's an easy copy-paste at Help:Archiving (plain and simple). Valereee (talk) 19:00, 16 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I certainly agree that the user was problematic at best. I go by the rule that there are no exceptions to WP:CIVIL and that it's the responsibility of the community to speak up consistently when policies are violated. I understand that there are users that disagree with such both of these philosophies. And yes, talk page archival is on my short-term to-do list, I'll look into it today. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 19:28, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I believe CIVIL is actually the most important of the WP:FIVEPILLARS. Without it, we can't get anything done. But that person was trolling.
 * If anything I'm more likely than most to put my oar in on the side of problematic-but-well-intentioned newer editors. This was not a well-intentioned newer editor. And as incivility goes, this was actually pretty mild. I agree that we need to be willing to call out incivility, and I agree that we should have no exceptions when dealing with a well-intentioned editor. But that person was trolling us. We don't need to smile and offer them tea. If you'd brought that complaint about someone being uncivil to a new editor who had been making well-intentioned mistakes, you'd likely have gotten support. That person was not making well-intentioned mistakes. Valereee (talk) 19:38, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
 * That makes sense. I maintain that it could have been handled better, but like I said, I just wanted to make sure it got properly looked at, and now I'm satisfied that it has been. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 19:46, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Political ideologies in the United States
The article Political ideologies in the United States you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Political ideologies in the United States for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Xx78900 -- Xx78900 (talk) 08:02, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Wedding of Grover Cleveland and Frances Folsom
The article Wedding of Grover Cleveland and Frances Folsom you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Wedding of Grover Cleveland and Frances Folsom for comments about the article, and Talk:Wedding of Grover Cleveland and Frances Folsom/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Nineteen Ninety-Four guy -- Nineteen Ninety-Four guy (talk) 16:23, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Education policy of the United States
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Education policy of the United States 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 Ovinus -- Ovinus (talk) 05:40, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Dictatorship
The article Dictatorship you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Dictatorship for comments about the article, and Talk:Dictatorship/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Grnrchst -- Grnrchst (talk) 16:03, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2023 WikiCup!
Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2023 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page ready for you to take part. Any questions on the scoring, rules or anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: and. Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:16, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Lou Henry Hoover
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Lou Henry Hoover 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 Unexpectedlydian -- Unexpectedlydian (talk) 23:22, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Thebiguglyalien!


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

BorgQueen (talk) 18:36, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

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

Your GA nomination of Jane Pierce
The article Jane Pierce 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:Jane Pierce for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Unexpectedlydian -- Unexpectedlydian (talk) 15:00, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Jane Pierce
The article Jane Pierce you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Jane Pierce for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Unexpectedlydian -- Unexpectedlydian (talk) 13:21, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Helen Herron Taft
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Helen Herron Taft 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 Mujinga -- Mujinga (talk) 02:20, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Helen Herron Taft
The article Helen Herron Taft 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:Helen Herron Taft and Talk:Helen Herron Taft/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Mujinga -- Mujinga (talk) 11:20, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Bess Truman
-- RoySmith (talk) 12:03, 7 January 2023 (UTC) GalliumBot (talk • contribs) (he/it) 03:27, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mary Arthur McElroy
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Mary Arthur McElroy 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 Shearonink -- Shearonink (talk) 21:01, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Year articles
After seeing this thread, I'm genuinely curious at how a year article can become a GA/FA. How do we know that the year article is comprehensive enough in the first place? CactiStaccingCrane 16:55, 15 January 2023 (UTC)


 * The short answer would be the same way as any other article. I think it's similar to vital articles in a way, where it's a broad overlook rather than coverage of a specific person or event. Unfortunately, there's a lot of disagreement at WP:WikiProject Years about how to go forward on year articles, which means that they're probably going to be stagnant for the foreseeable future. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 17:02, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Here's what I meant. For example, I want 2022 to become a good article. In theory, we can make a comprehensive article since everything in 2022 had happened, but where should we start first? What would determine whether an event is worthy enough to be mentioned in 2022? How should we mention these events (list? prose? list + prose?) and how can we make sure that we are not tripping any WP:Systematic bias, and thus, neutral in coverage? CactiStaccingCrane 17:08, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
 * And that would be why there's a lot of disagreement. Different users have answered those questions in different ways (myself included), and consensus has not developed. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 17:15, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Caroline Harrison
The article Caroline Harrison 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:Caroline Harrison for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of SusunW -- SusunW (talk) 19:20, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Caroline Harrison
The article Caroline Harrison you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Caroline Harrison for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. SusunW (talk) 17:53, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Updating Adam Pritzker
Hi TBUA. I am looking to make some updates to the Adam Pritzker article; my COI keeps me from doing that directly. I'd appreciate your help with the pending open edit request, entitled Update roles, based on your interest in social and political science. Thank you in advance for considering these changes and improvements. DCBPI (talk) 14:49, 19 January 2023 (UTC)