User talk:Vibrantzin

Welcome!
  Hello, Vibrantzin!  Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

  Getting Started

Tutorial Learn everything you need to know to get started. Introduction to contributing • Editing

• Referencing

• Images

• Tables

• Policies and guidelines

• Talk pages

• Navigating

• Manual of Style

The Teahouse Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

The Task Center Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.

Tips 
 * Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
 * It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
 * If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article's talk page. Be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
 * Always use edit summaries to explain your changes.
 * When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
 * If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
 * Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Happy editing! Cheers, 48JCL (talk) 22:40, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Good Article Advice
Hi there! Firstly, welcome to Wikipedia! It's always great to see new faces around here. I'm the nominator of the Pikachu article you're currently reviewing. I noticed you were very new when you took on the article, and that you seem very keen on reviewing Good Articles. I respect the effort, but given your newness, I do just want to let you know about some tips that may or may not be helpful to you.

Firstly, remember to do a source spotcheck. It verifies a lot of stuff I'm forgetting off the top of my head, such as how much is plagiarized or copied from another source. I'd also suggest making sure source verification is stable via picking a random selection of sources and making sure they verify what they are being cited to. Additionally, always make sure the sources being scrutinized are reliable. In the case of video game characters, there are a lot of older sources lying around from the ye olden days that are often times missed in the process of improving it (Most of the time it's me who's missing them. I can be very blind sometimes.) Otherwise, the rest is simple. Make sure the article follows the six good article criteria, that all info cited is accurate, and that all that is written is written an easily understandable and effective manner.

This shouldn't be an issue for an article like Pikachu, but do always make sure the subject meets the good article criteria. While this isn't the case with every article, typically those not meeting the guideline run afoul of some of the above criteria. If they fail criteria, it doesn't mean they are instantly non-notable (For instance, I reviewed Sans (Undertale) a few months ago, and failed it for lacking coverage. It is currently a good article with a pretty spiffy Reception section) so use your better judgement when looking over these articles about how well they stack up against the criteria. If an article feels weak in multiple areas or weak to such an extent that notability doesn't seem likely, you can fail it and leave comments for the nominator about how to improve the article for their next nomination. Which does remind me, always make sure to leave comments for the nom. If they're passing or failing, you're likely to give a lot of them anyway, but if you find them failing, make sure to say why you failed the nomination and how the nominator can improve them going forward. Sorry for dumping so much at once. I probably missed a few things, but those are just some general comments from my history of reviewing these things. Let me know if you have questions or I can clarify anything!

I will also note that if you feel you need to get the opinions of another editor, or if feel you need to step back for a bit due to the article's size and scope, both are options available to you. I'd encourage them only if you're feeling highly unsure about the review, or if you feel overwhelmed by it. I don't mean to dissuade you from reviewing Pikachu, but given how new you are, I do just want to make sure you aren't overwhelming yourself too quickly, as well as just so that you are aware of the ability to do these things.

In any case, good luck with the review! If you need further elaboration on the points above, these, or some variation of these statements, should be available on the good article instructions page, which should be easily accessible by a simple Google search. If you already knew all of this, then my apologies, but I do just want to make sure that you're well-equipped going forward. Forgive me if I wasted your time by accident. In any case, I eagerly await to see how you'll pick apart my work. Remember to be as in-depth and picky as you feel necessary, since the more you point out, the better the final product becomes. Best regards and happy editing, Pokelego999. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 00:06, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Quick Response
 * Oh wow, thank you very much for your comment! Reading that was very helpful! I am very impressed by your dedication at Wikipedia, as I have noted that you are an excellent member of the community. Your comments are very helpful, and I will keep them on mind. Happy editing (and totally not plagiarizing!), Vibrantzin. Vibrantzin (talk) 00:15, 23 May 2024 (UTC)