User talk:Masem

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Dune[edit]

I'm getting very, very tired of having every edit I contribute to this site reverted by someone who thinks it contains "unnecessary" detail. If you people are going to treat me with such disrespect, never again ask me to contribute money to this site. I will NOT help pay for a site whose senior members repeatedly disrespect me. Finance your site yourselves. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Continental46 (talkcontribs) 16:16, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm stumbling upon this comment because I've made one Wikipedia entry in my life, it was very well sourced and relevant, and the same editor you're complaining about undid it based on silly reasoning. It happened years ago and it still irritates me. I haven't contributed or donated since. Muiy (talk) 10:35, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Wall E[edit]

Why exactly is it too much detail. The reason Auto closes the holo dectetor is alse a false statment. TheManTheyCallAdam (talk) 14:19, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CyberConnect2[edit]

I know CC2 is still operating. The Gematsu news article/source clearly stated that its Montreal-based studio/branch of CC2 is shutting its doors by the end of July 2023. -Prince Silversaddle (talk) 19:29, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How to proceed[edit]

Hi, I'm asking for your advice regarding this discussion you've been involved with. It has been two days with no further comments, and from the little experience I have with NORN, I don't expect any more editors to comment. One of the two editors involved in the dispute has apparently backed off, and the other is clearly acting in bad faith. Should I just remove the material again and reference the NORN discussion? Throast {{ping}} me! (talk | contribs) 11:49, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would do that, the discussion clearly has weight in your favor. Make sure to add a talk page section (if not already) to discuss why you did it and see if they use that. Masem (t) 12:37, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Will do. Thanks! Throast {{ping}} me! (talk | contribs) 13:06, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve won[edit]

It was inevitable UltimateGamer9000 (talk) 07:10, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Masem: Just letting you know about Talk:Second generation of video game consoles#The 1992 debacle as a courtesy since it seems to be what this is about. It might not matter now since the OP's victory lap turned out to be a bit premature. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:16, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This guy has been making this same edit for 3 years. His IPs are an easy to follow history, but even though its public, I'm not gonna connect the dots right now as it's not necessary. The last residential IP is still under a pblock from the article. -- ferret (talk) 00:38, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Spacechem logo.png[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Spacechem logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:22, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 26 April 2023[edit]

Disambiguation link notification for May 1[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mystery Science Theater 3000, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page WTOP.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:40, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 8 May 2023[edit]

Disambiguation link notification for May 8[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Esports, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gran Turismo.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:30, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Top-chef-season-2.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Top-chef-season-2.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:48, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Top-chef-season-3.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Top-chef-season-3.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:49, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Top-chef-season-4.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Top-chef-season-4.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:50, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Masem, I noticed on the Bostock v. Clayton County Wikipedia page you do not recommend Gerald Bostock has his own page. I think he meets the notability standard as I have found a great deal of research on his story. Could you let me know why you reverted my edit? Thank you. Serenewilliams (talk) 16:45, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

STOP REVERTING THE RHYTHM HEAVEN ARTICLR[edit]

IT WAS NOT A GAME GUIDE SO STOP GrEgOrYiSnTaRoBoT (talk) 12:14, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 22 May 2023[edit]

Video game console emulator[edit]

If there's an issue with the sources then why don't you let me know or help out? I can't keep trying to genuinely improve the article and add sources when it's getting reverted by you for doubting sources.

Now it's back to the old version which is messier and doesn't even have one source. Sintlepond (talk) 13:16, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Two source issues: that Techwiki is not a reliable source, and we should not use primary sources (like Nintendo's policy) to support these facts. The other factor is that we avoid having sources in the ledes, see WP:LEDECITE). I also think your wording is more clunky and adds too many details in the lede (eg we don't need to explain one-click cheat codes at that point). Some of the other sources are better later in the article. Masem (t) 13:33, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I'll try make another revision changing the Techwiki and Nintendo sources. Also I think you're mistaken about the too many details: I actually saw that problem and decreased it, e.g. I removed ' greater performance, clearer quality, click cheat codes' from the first paragraph. --Sintlepond (talk) 13:38, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed the Nintendo source with a reliable third-party one so hope that's sorted. I have checked the others and they're not primary. I've removed the Techwiki source and put a 'citation needed' for now - keep in mind that sentence about ROM/ISO files was already there before I started editing. --Sintlepond (talk) 14:03, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have no opinion on whether this should be on the frontpage, but your rationale appears to be faulty. Presidential assent is when the bill became law; you must have conflated the content of the draft bill in March with what was on the statute book in March in coming to the conclusion that assent largely ‘maintain[s] the status quo’. ‘[A]dopted in March’ means approved by parliament in March, but the text approved did not enter law because Museveni returned it for reconsideration: see Article 91 of the Constitution of Uganda. Only now is the death penalty on the statute book.

Since I don’t care about the front page, I only ask that you should be more careful. But if you care about the frontpage, you may, if possible, wish to reopen the discussion, which appears to have been closed only on the basis of that faulty rationale. Docentation (talk) 19:21, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We happy few[edit]

we happy few is a survival horror game and is shown in the articles 46.70.111.21 (talk) 15:30, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

About the reversion[edit]

You said "in judgment" is standard, but the court uses "in the judgment". So I'm a little confused. Can you explain? Slovebz (talk) 17:25, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I know the slip opinions say "in the judgement" but "in judgement" is clear when used as a partial phrase in the infobox. It doesn't change anything about the writing. Masem (t) 21:19, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion[edit]

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

TheNewLayoutReallySucks (talk) 02:22, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 5 June 2023[edit]

Hey champ[edit]

Do you have a Discord account? - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 20:56, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 19 June 2023[edit]

Klete Keller[edit]

Hi, the lead on Klete Keller was vandalized yet again :( not sure if anything can be done. 129.222.222.20 (talk) 20:17, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, not by this block evader, certainly. Wes sideman (talk) 14:16, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Activision Blizzard[edit]

Hi Masem, just checking in. Do you have any thoughts regarding the proposed trim to the Workplace misconduct lawsuit subsection? As we discussed initially, all of the information is included in the breakaway article, so this is just a matter of keeping the main points on the page for reference, and leaving the details to the separate article. I look forward to your input. Sh-abkcomms (talk) 22:02, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sh-abkcomms: can you provide a version of your draft with the struck text removed? (but keeping the references within the struct text?), or if you want to edit that directly, I would support that as a fair cutback from the COI issue. Masem (t) 17:35, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've added a clean version of the text to the draft as you requested. Thanks again. Sh-abkcomms (talk) 14:33, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Exploration video games has been nominated for renaming[edit]

Category:Exploration video games has been nominated for renaming. 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. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ () 21:05, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'd have preferred you followed BRD[edit]

soibangla (talk) 02:50, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Right, those that want to restore boldly added material the was removed should be discussing it. The reason I reverted is that there was no need to break out the information already present in the article to its own section and add original research. I am watching for legal sources to describe to what degree the fake client material was used/not used in the decision as to properly cite that but we can't reach that conclusion ourselves. --Masem (t) 02:56, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 3 July 2023[edit]

Hyper Light Drifter GA Nomination[edit]

Hey, just wanted to mention that I'm planning to nominate the page for GA. Is there anything you'd recommend improving before I submit? --FlyingKangeroo (talk) 22:47, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 17 July 2023[edit]

Your revert[edit]

Don't revert it if it's wrong. Willbb234 14:02, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Ghost Trick Phantom Detective screenshot.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Ghost Trick Phantom Detective screenshot.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:10, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

They are rebranding their logo as X[edit]

I think the picture might be useful to explain it. יאצקין52 (talk) 18:48, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That picture doesn't help. Calling the change of Twitter to X as the "death of twitter" is a subjective matter so that picture is not really appropriate at this point. Masem (t) 18:50, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

FAC Mentor[edit]

Hi Masem. I would like to bring October 1 to FAC and saw that you're willing to mentor folks on film articles on the FAC mentor page. I've requested a peer review for the article and would be very grateful if you could take a look. Best, voorts (talk/contributions) 18:53, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

pathfinder source[edit]

hey what should i cite? i have reddit post from the community manager and tweets from the official owlcat account about the subject as well. would those work? S silth (talk) 12:42, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We would need a third party, non forum source for inclusion. Neither of those would work. Masem (t) 13:29, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
genuine question why is that not ok here, but some other pages use tweets or reddit posts (from certain people) as citations? (example i will give is the owl house page which cites both the above sites) i would like to understand the difference as while i am guessing there is one i don't see it and i want to understand it so i don't make the same mistakes. S silth (talk) 13:54, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Masem. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Squid Game: The Challenge".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 18:05, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

  • A "bare URL and 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. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 01:47, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Video game[edit]

I have left a couple of discussion on Talk:List of best-selling video game franchises and wondering if you would like to get involved P+T Fan Of Lion King 🦁 (talk) 22:33, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

E3[edit]

I think I read that statement wrong for E3. I do apologize. I also need to look at Wikipedia:Good faith. If I read the statement better, I probably would have said the statement better. Cwater1 (talk) 14:14, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 1 August 2023[edit]

Bad logic[edit]

Convictions are nothing like what we talked about yesterday. When someone is convicted, there are clear consequences. Say the target article is a living voice actor and the crimes she committed carry a minimum eight-year prison sentence. Right there, we know we won't be hearing her in anything new (except maybe documentaries) until at least 2032. If the mandatory minimum is swift execution, that's the end of her career trajectory and everything else, definitively.

In Lack's case, she wasn't even part of it, consensually or otherwise. The settlement only affects descendants she never met and a company she hadn't heard of. The suit involved the relatively famous eponymous cells that affected her over 70 years ago, but there's absolutely nothing even suggesting their future use is or will be affected at all by whatever explicitly private agreement was reached the other day.

Anyway, I know I've been quite like a badger with you lately. I don't mean it in a malicious way, we've just run in the same circle so long that I can't help but notice you seem a bit "off" lately, relative to who I'm beginning to remember as "Classic Masem". Maybe it's a broader social problem or something entirely else pull-asides like these can't (and shouldn't try to) solve. But I'll lay off now and quietly hope you find your own way back toward those much clearer elucidations of the reasons you believe things are appropriate to blurb. Take care and have fun! InedibleHulk (talk) 19:33, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Very few convictions have any long term effects beyond the person convicted, and do not change the past. Sure, something like Rodney King would be an exception in that case causing the infamous riots. But to take the most predominant example right now, being Trump, that should he actually be convicted, there is not going to be change of anything he did while president, and it won't eliminate him from running for the 2024 election. While there will be some fallout (and that's not considering possible violence from the MAGA side) it really doesn't have an effect. But we do want to report that, hey, he was found guilty, and explain why his conviction at least matters.
I'm not saying we shouldn't post convictions, but it is that we're not posting them because of the impact on the future, simply as closure. Same with the Hernietta nom I made, its closure on the past. Masem (t) 01:10, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing can change the past, of course, so I'm glad that's not a criterion. I wonder why you mention it. I do get what you're saying about convictions having a limited impact. There are also the convict's friends and family to consider, plus the lawyers, guards and cellmates (among others). Next to a natural disaster or general election, it pales in comparison. But next to a public reminder that a dead person once lived (which may be all the family in your nom gained), it...whatever the opposite of "pales" is. I'm not at liberty to discuss what's-his-name, but am glad this response of yours makes more sense than the last one. Cheers to freedom, from prison, incomprehensibility and bodysnatchers! InedibleHulk (talk) 16:46, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Speaking of fallout, it's live from New York! InedibleHulk (talk) 21:05, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your revert on WP:Notability[edit]

Hello, I removed that sentence fragment based on the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Notability#Confusing_passage. I'd admit the discussion was shallow, but I saw one !vote for removal. If you disagree, feel free to contribute there. Cheers, Ca talk to me! 00:07, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Video games in the United States- Metaverse[edit]

I never mentioned that Metaverse is fully connected to the US game market. The reason I included the Metaverse title was because it showed the growth of the industry and how tech companies are trying to break into the industry. I mentined mostly American tech companies. I can change the language I used there if you want, but it is not fair to ignore the metaverse topic, considering the large investments made in the US game market because of the metaverse. Ryan York (talk) 21:19, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

For one, the metaverse as a concept has not really taken off to dedicate a whole section to it. Now, that said, the inclusion of non tradition players in the video game market like Apple and Google (via mobile gaming) and Meta (for VR) makes sense but should be positioned simply as other important companies. Masem (t) 21:57, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ninth generation of video game consoles Cloud Gaming[edit]

It was written in a way to show how both used cloud gaming as tool for sales and revenue generation in the 9th gen. The remove of the first sentence makes it sounds as if just Microsoft has used cloud gaming while PlayStation has been doing it longer it just wasn't a main talking point or a compelling feature as it was a part of the stand-alone service PlayStation now GonzoBlue (talk) 22:20, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sources all point to the fact that MS had starting pushing cloud gaming far sooner than Sony. Sony has a solution but they aren't heavily marketing it. Masem (t) 22:32, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I reworded it to show how Sony didn't start pushing it till 2022 with its revamp of plus, but I kept the mention of both companies in the first sentence to show how both are using it. As Without mentioning Sony in the first sentence, it makes the part about Sony in the last 2 sentences feel out of place and makes it easier to miss that both of them are currently using cloud gaming as a marketing push for their console. GonzoBlue (talk) 22:36, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 13[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Video games in the United Kingdom, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 3D video game.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 15 August 2023[edit]

Guitar Hero and Rock Band – list vs. table[edit]

Hello Masem. I see that you reverted my list edits on Guitar Hero and Rock band, and while you didn't keep it on Guitar Hero, you did on Rock Band.

The way I see it, using a table means that there are a lot of "No" choices, and just a few with "Yes". For Guitar Hero, most of the "Yes" goes to four systems: PS2, PS3, Xbox 360, and Wii. Other platforms get four or less "Yes", and some only get one.

For Rock Band, again, the dominant platforms are: PS2, PS3, Xbox 360, and Wii. Everything else only shows up once or twice.

I get that the list format can take some time to get used to, but I think it's the best format for Rock Band. Guitar Hero has a little more variance in terms of platform availability, but a list format should work there, too. What do you think? LABcrabs (talk) 17:50, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Did we ever get a consensus on a limit on the number of words that can be copied?[edit]

This seems excessive, but? [1]. Doug Weller talk 11:29, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There's no hard limit on words, but what should be quoted should be enough to get the point across in the speaker's POV without excessive fluffery, which that really long quote on that page is definitely out of scope. Two or three sentences in that case seem sufficient. Masem (t) 12:39, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Doug Weller talk 13:22, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary[edit]

Precious
Nine years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:01, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

remove an addition[edit]

hello,

I think that you've removed one of the additions on this page Blockchain , as you said it's a promotional addition, may I know the reason that you specify this addition as a promotional? Noha Mokhtar (talk) 09:41, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

First, it was added to a section about general impacts of blockchain that had nothing to do with specific conferences. Second, it used the conference page itself as a source (primary work), and looked like it used language directly from the conference's page as the addition. It basically looked like trying to advertise the conference on Wikipedia, which is promotion and just not allowed. Masem (t) 13:14, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 August 2023[edit]

Orphaned non-free image File:Supergiant games logo.png[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Supergiant games logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:40, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Award[edit]

The Original Barnstar
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia (u t c m l ) 🔒 ALL IN 🧿 18:50, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 16 September 2023[edit]

Cities Skylines 2[edit]

Hey, recently you reverted my cities skylines 2 info. How exactly is it too much detail? What, should I put them into subcategories? I thought Wikipedia was for, you know, providing information. And also, you said I didn't use "encyclopaedic writing", please tell me how this is not like, ok. Also you reverted the grammar improvements I made. Please elaborate why you did this?in addition you stated I used too many 1st party sources, I don't see how this is bad.SK55555 (talk) 13:19, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the issues:
  • On language, you have added this sentence " Now, you still indirectly need milestones to unlock services,..." which is not how we write gameplay per MOS:VG. It would be more appropriate to say "Players need to indirectly unlock services..."
  • On detail, this same section is far too detailed on what a tech tree is (when the link to technology tree explains the basics, and we only need to explain how the player moves along it, which is via achieving certain milestones in game. It doesn't need to anywhere as long as you added.
  • And we try to avoid using primary sources, particularly for commercial releases, since they are not independent sources. There is coverage of C:S II's features from third-party sources and we should use how they summarize the features for our articles.
Masem (t) 00:40, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for OSIRIS-REx[edit]

On 25 September 2023, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article OSIRIS-REx, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:42, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Loot box[edit]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Loot box, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

  • A "bare URL and 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. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 12:26, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mentoring request for "Borderline (Madonna song)"[edit]

Hello, how are you? I recently re-expanded all articles related to singer Madonna's first album with more relevant, previously missing information. I'd like to take "Borderline", my favorite song from said albun, to FA status. It would be my first FAC, so I'm looking for a mentor who can assist me :) If you're interested, please let me know Thanks in advance! Christian (talk) 13:49, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Clarifying the Continuation of the Atari 2600 Series with the Introduction of the 2600+[edit]

Dear Masem, I recently made edits to the Atari 2600 page to reflect the continuation of the Atari 2600 series with the introduction of the 2600+ model in 2023. These edits were based on official sources, specifically from the Atari company itself and the developer's statements. The primary basis for this edit is the official announcement by Atari: "The legendary console that started it all - the grandfather of living room arcade gaming - is back and better than ever! With over 40 million units sold globally" This statement from Atari clearly indicates that the 2600+ is a continuation of the original Atari 2600 series. I understand the importance of maintaining the accuracy and integrity of Wikipedia. Therefore, I want to open this discussion to ensure that all perspectives are considered. The intention is not to mislead or provide false information but to accurately represent the evolution and continuation of the Atari 2600 series. Given that the 2600+ is described as an "updated version of the iconic Atari 2600," it seems fitting to consider it within the same lineage, much like how updated or "slim" variants of other consoles are still considered part of their respective series. I welcome feedback and insights from the community. If there are additional sources or perspectives that should be considered, please share them. Together, let's ensure that the Atari 2600 page accurately reflects the rich history and ongoing legacy of this iconic gaming console. Sources:

[1]https://discord.com/channels/866714430208213002/866715614687789056/1143534227820916897 [2]https://atari.com/products/atari-2600-plus?_pos=1&_fid=6a6b44687&_ss=c [3]https://forums.atariage.com/topic/354609-atariage-atari/ ItIsNERD (talk) 15:11, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RfC for ITN entries[edit]

Hello. I hope you are doing well. It seems there is some discussion going on regarding adding blurbs to recent deaths, and another discussion to include non-human recent deaths. Do you think if it would be a good idea to start a formal discussion, or an RfC to change MOS of ITN entries with regards to the archive bot? The proposed changes in my head are not actually visible, and they would be inside the invisible html comments. That way, nothing visible is actually changed from what it is currently, but it would make it pretty straight forward to the bot to distinguish entries from events/news blurbs, recent deaths, and ongoing events. I am thinking adding invisible comments similar to:

  • *<!--OE Mar 09 2022--> [[Russian invasion of Ukraine]] (OE for "ongoing event", or CE for "current event")
  • *<!--RD--> <blurb if required> [[Dianne Feinstein]]
  • *<!--RD--> {{nowrap|[[M. S. Swaminathan]]}}

Kindly let me know what you think. —usernamekiran (talk) 15:00, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there is a need to worry about tagging RD blurbs as RDs here. Tagging being blurbs and RDs would be nice , and even if the ITN stuff changes the bot you have should still be working. The goal is just to be able to search the changes on the ITN template, and thus having the diff between blurb and RD is not essential. But thats why if we can link to the mist-recent diff at ITNC associated with the template change should be good. Masem (t) 15:06, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 3[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Moody v. NetChoice, LLC, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page WFLA.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 3 October 2023[edit]

Image review[edit]

Any chance you will be able to dig in for a detailed file by file image review regarding Wikipedia:Media_copyright_questions#FUR_issues_at_Campbell's_Soup_Cans.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:51, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for reengaging.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:45, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to Baroness Joanna Shields page[edit]

My name is Laura and I work for Joanna Shields, Baroness Shields, a baron, businessperson, and former British politician. The page about her was recently tagged for COI and advert issues due to some poor edits made years ago. I posted here regarding my desire to address the substance of the tags with a re-write or heavy trims, to remove the promotional content. I was hoping you might be willing to chime in on the proposed trims and/or the suggestion for a rewrite. Let me know. Best regards.~~~~ LauTad89 (talk) 14:48, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Jon Fosse[edit]

On 7 October 2023, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Jon Fosse, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Schwede66 19:04, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding levels of notability for the films page.[edit]

I have been trying to get this on here for a good few weeks and that was probably the best the page had been written. There are other examples of YouTube videos being included as sources such as for YouTubers coryxkenshin markiplier and penguinz0. And secondly all of the videos included on the page have atleast over a million views. 2603:6000:B800:EB4:5D85:A65F:224D:E373 (talk) 04:07, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Davidson/Bobby Charlton[edit]

At which point does Andrew’s behavior begin to become less simply annoying and more genuinely disruptive? It’s a constant parade from him of misrepresentation, blatant disregard for guidelines (including the classic “but it’s got massive readership!!!”), bad faith arguments, and in general very few positive contributions to ITNC.

When would be appropriate to bring it to ANI or similar and try to get a TBAN? The Kip 17:39, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 23 October 2023[edit]

Invitation to Cornell study on Wikipedia discussions[edit]

Hello Masem,

I’m reaching out as part of a Cornell University academic study investigating the potential for user-facing tools to help improve discussion quality within Wikipedia discussion spaces (such as talk pages, noticeboards, etc.). We chose to reach out to you because you have been highly active on various discussion pages.

The study centers around a prototype tool, ConvoWizard, which is designed to warn Wikipedia editors when a discussion they are replying to is getting tense and at risk of derailing into personal attacks or incivility. More information about ConvoWizard and the study can be found at our research project page on meta-wiki.

If this sounds like it might be interesting to you, you can use this link to sign up and install ConvoWizard. Of course, if you are not interested, feel free to ignore this message.

If you have any questions or thoughts about the study, our team is happy to discuss! You may direct such comments to me or to my collaborator, Cristian_at_CornellNLP.

Thank you for your consideration.

--- Jonathan at CornellNLP (talk) 17:41, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Masem,

There have been a handful of times that I have removed something saaying SCOTUS "certified" a case (where it granted certiorari), and it seems that you were the one who wrote that in each instance. Note that certification is a different procedure than certiorari, and I don't think grants of certiorari by SCOTUS are referred to as certification. If you can find some source saying that is correct terminology, I would be interested to see it. I would suggest instead "granted review", "agreed to hear", etc. SilverLocust 💬 18:07, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's probably my fault, I thought I might have seen it in a few places, but can't find anything. Masem (t) 00:17, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Former logo image gallery[edit]

Hi Masem. Do you think the first three logos (the red and yellow ones) in Beijing Guoan F.C.#Crest history are simple enough to be {{PD-ineligible-USonly}} for local use on Wikipedia? Otherwise, I can't see how they can be kept as non-free per WP:NFC#cite_note-4 or WP:NFG. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:43, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would lean on them being too complex to qualify for TOO in the US or in China, and agree that maybe only one can be kept, since the key part of the logo remains constant on all four them. Masem (t) 00:04, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for taking a look at this. All four are currently being used in a gallery which makes even less sense for a single logo. So, any ideas on which of the four probably should be kept and where (if possible) it can be inserted into the body of the article. The most recent of the four (the green one) is not too different from the current logo; so, I think that one is probably not needed at all. So, that leaves one of the three red and yellow logos, at least it does in my opinion. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:58, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding sources for the film (this is not a spam attempt if this was seen on the films talk page I am making sure the word is known and spread.)[edit]

Hey alright so this is probably going to be the last attempt to get this mentioned on the page (Unless for example a article gets published on AV club or something.) There is a 2 articles that mentions the video I'm trying to put in (If it appears black you have to scroll down.) https://chattymatters.com/9761/previous-articles-videos/the-rise-of-the-video-essay/ and another one https://thesciencesurvey.com/arts-entertainment/2020/06/19/bored-try-watching-some-youtube-video-essays/ Both mention the creator of the video. Now I understand TV tropes is user generated however I have found examples of it being used on other pages (https://en.m.wiki.x.io/wiki/List_of_films_and_TV_programs_containing_corporal_punishment_scenes The TV tropes source is on the third reference link.) And the cult following it has received is also mentioned here (https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/VindicatedByHistory/AnimatedFilms Click on "dreamworks animation." And it will show you it.) (https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Trivia/SchaffrillasProductions When you find the words "Sleeper hit." It will mention the video.) The creator is mentioned on both IMDB and ironically av club (https://www.avclub.com/tv/reviews/schaffrillas-productions-2015) (https://m.imdb.com/title/tt15028658/) here are the memes it has received aswell https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Memes/Megamind 2603:6000:B800:EB4:7DEA:F575:1ACB:A534 (talk) 16:19, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Final statement for now.[edit]

Read this and it will give you a idea of what I tried to make the page like https://en.m.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Megamind&oldid=1180201171 2603:6000:B800:EB4:7DEA:F575:1ACB:A534 (talk) 21:24, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Richard Roundtree[edit]

On 29 October 2023, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Richard Roundtree, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 22:33, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Vimeo request[edit]

Hi, I've posted an edit request over on Talk:Vimeo and see that you've typically responded to past requests about the article. If you're available, I'd welcome your feedback. Cheers! BINK Robin (talk) 21:17, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

When you have a moment, could you head over to this article (it’s Dutch Survivor) and weigh in on the never-ending rigamarole with the colors on the voting table. Thank you! Bgsu98 (Talk) 17:28, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 6 November 2023[edit]

You've got mail![edit]

Hello, Masem. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 22:39, 12 November 2023 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

BangJan1999 22:39, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Could you please confirm you've seen my email? BangJan1999 16:27, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, I got it. I'm taking it into consideration. Masem (t) 01:29, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there, Masem[edit]

Hello there. I noticed that this IP appears to have been blocked indef. It appears to be unintentional as this page states, and I quote, “IP addresses should almost never be indefinitely blocked.”, especially when the IPs get reassigned to different users. Also, the IP[v6] address mentioned in the block reason (the one beginning with 2603:6000) is blocked 366 days, so the same length could also be applied to the former as well. -GeniusWorkbench4622 14:59, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
For your valued contribution to the Five Nights at Freddy's (franchise) Article. ^w^ Keagen J. Cole (talk) 19:22, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Page number request[edit]

Hello. I noticed that in this edit in Pong you added the book source, but not the page numbers. Could you please add page number? Thank you! 深鸣 (talk) 04:23, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I can't, I have it as an electronic book, so the best I can do is narrow it to the chapter. Masem (t) 05:19, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Thank you for your reply. 深鸣 (talk) 05:24, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
BTW, could you please send the electronic book to me via email? I want to translate this article into Chinese, so I need to verify every source. Thanks! 深鸣 (talk) 10:41, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 November 2023[edit]

FAC mentor[edit]

Hello Masem! I was looking through the FAC mentors list and apparently you are the only one with a specific interest in video games. I've just opened a PR for OneShot, currently a GA, to possibly make it my first FA. Any kind of help would be appreciated! Skyshifter talk 19:47, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I can help, let me know what you are looking for. Masem (t) 01:35, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know exactly how it works... I guess for now, any kind of comment regarding the state of OneShot, if it's too far from FAC or what can be done to improve it, would be helpful. I guess in particular, I know FAC has very high standards for sources, so I would like to know if the article has high-quality sources. It also uses some primary sources and interviews that FAC reviewers might not like, but I'm not sure. Skyshifter talk 19:37, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Gotcha. So here's a few things to start:
  • You should make sure to get a copyedit of the prose done. That can be requested at WP:GOCE
  • You do have a lot of "proseline", which are sentences that go "On (date), (something happened). One of these in a paragraph is fine, but your release section has multiple instances of this.
  • In your reception section, I don't think you need to repeat the work associated with each reviewer - identifying who they write for on the first time is good, but not on subsequent ones.
  • I do think you are okay on where the primary sources come in, but I'd suggest preparing for trying to replace them if possible, that could come up at FAC.
  • You may want to spruce up the non-free image rationals for the gameplay. for example, on the second one, you should indicate that the dark atmosphere was an element picked up by reviewers. The more you can explain why you need the image in those rationals, the better.
Everything else seems to be ready to go for FAC, but I can say that having that copyedit done first is going to help with FAC. Masem (t) 20:40, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding the third point I really wanted to follow what articles like Viva Piñata: Trouble in Paradise did, but I think I'm gonna remove it since it doesn't seem to be very common indeed. I will ask for a copyedit at GOCE and try to sort the other stuff out. Thank you for your comments! Skyshifter talk 22:04, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Copyedit done!
  • I've tried to fix a few of these proseline sentences
  • Removed work for each repetition
  • Will try to look for replacements or at least already form an argument to keep these primary sources.
  • Added more info to the rationales.
Thank you for your help so far! Should I close the PR and go with FAC already or should I still get some opinions there? Skyshifter talk 18:47, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would let the PR play out for its time period (30 days? Can't recall) and then move to the FAC, rather than jumping the gun. Masem (t) 01:37, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've opened the FAC at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/OneShot/archive1, feel free to participate! Skyshiftertalk 03:30, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

PUBG Global Championship[edit]

Can you create a page for PUBG Global Championship. like this https://liquipedia.net/pubg/PUBG_Global_Championship — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2400:56A0:8A3:43A:EF58:2328:DBC9:197A (talk) 18:32, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 4 December 2023[edit]

Console war[edit]

Hi. So you know, the UK & Ireland and Europe were all split Nindendo/Sega across secondary schools and colleges in late 80s/early 90s. There was rivalry way way way beyond US & Canada. --Dock Mock (talk) 23:02, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The point is that most sources that talk about the console war between Nintendo and Sega frame it around the US market, not the international one. Masem (t) 03:45, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Do you want to go along with 'international (mainly North American)' or something similar? I think it's good to reflect just how far-reaching the rivalry was, with people like me myself jumping on the Sega bandwagon. Dock Mock (talk) 20:09, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Norman Lear[edit]

On 6 December 2023, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Norman Lear, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Ad Orientem (talk) 23:43, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Editor's Barnstar
I was surprised to find you were the main contributor behind Mandatory Fun. I've been using this article as a point of reference for my endeavors in writing about music, such as how to structure them and how to present the information. So thanks for that article! Panini! 🥪 06:11, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Masem. You recently reverted one of my edits on the page 2023 in video games. I added the New York Game Awards to the sub-section "Major awards", and you removed it on the grounds that they weren't significant enough. However, the New York Game Awards have been included on every "20xx in video games" page since 2013, and I see no reason why they should be excluded here. If you have no further argument, I'll soon be re-adding it. Thank you. ThanatosApprentice (talk) 23:53, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I talked to the user that added those on the previous years (after the fact) and that we agreed that they shouldn't have been added, they just haven't been removed. the NY Critics awards are very minor relative to the 5 on there now. Masem (t) 00:28, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Forbes Contributor[edit]

Hi, Masem.

You recently reverted my edit where I used Forbes Contributor as a source. Would it be acceptable to repost the edit citing the youtuber's video as a source, as I am talking about findings he claims on the topic, not ascribing any validity to them. Domedusa (talk) 17:50, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not unless the YouTube is considered an expert and a reliable source, which i don't think qualifies here. Masem (t) 20:17, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Surely when discussing criticism of a topic, I can use a high-profile individual's criticism as a source for them criticising it? So long as I am not saying their criticism is correct. Domedusa (talk) 20:25, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Certainly if the person was high profile, but this HOUNGOUNGAGNE doesn't seem to be a high profile individual. Masem (t) 20:51, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rock Band 3 Rewind DLC[edit]

Hey Masem. You recently reverted an edit I made last night on the Rock Band 3 Setlist page. I only added that one category on the table for the Rock Band 3 setlist because the export has been expired since 2020, and it helps newcomers who don't have the patience to sift through the list of downloadable content for the Rock Band series due to it having repeated entries and over 2000+ entries, especially since Rock Band's database on Rewind DLC has not been updated since 2020. It might not be necessary for people who already exported the setlist, but it is necessary for newcomers and latecomers who missed out on the export period, and want to see what songs are still available as DLC if they missed their chance with the export period or just got started on the series as of Rock Band 4. Would like to hear a reply on why you believe it is unnecessary. Thanks 2601:647:8100:B7B0:30F9:1FCE:CDF1:2BD7 (talk) 20:14, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Brain Age primary source[edit]

Hello! Could you please clarify your reversion of my edit on Brain Age? Of course the source given was academic, but not secondary (at least, for the methodology and results of the study). Guidelines such as WP:SCHOLARSHIP advise "extreme caution" when citing primary sources, and to me it seems like directly citing a study that has (seemingly) not been discussed in any reliable secondary sources over the past decade is somewhat undue. Do you think my reasoning is off-base? ~Bluecrystal004 (talk · contribs) 00:29, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

For that specific article, that article is secondary to the game of Brain Age, since it is discussing the impact of the game from a scientific study. Further, the inclusion is written in a very careful phrase to not imply the study is wholly inclusive or true. If we were talking an article about brain improvement, that article would then be primary to that topic, and we'd definitely want to see it discussed more in further scholarly articles to see it included. Masem (t) 00:40, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Adminship Anniversary![edit]

The Signpost: 24 December 2023[edit]

Warcraft revenue[edit]

Hi! Thanks for adding Warcraft to the highest grossing franchise page but are sure the $17 billion video game revenue figure from The Motley Fool [2] isn't just a case of WP:CITOGENESIS? They probably got the figure from the earlier version of the page which had the inflated figures. I think we should use this source [3] since it almost predates the article itself. Timur9008 (talk) 17:02, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

^ I went ahead and added this source instead [4] Timur9008 (talk) 08:32, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 10 January 2024[edit]

On 20 January 2024, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Smart Lander for Investigating Moon, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 03:54, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to List of free Epic Games Store games. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because Undeletion requested at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2024 January 24, with a plausible list of sources presented. Restoring and moving to draft as the original deleting admin.. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. RoySmith (talk) 18:20, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

D.I.C.E. Award winners[edit]

Hello, I am reaching out to you for to please reconsider the categories for winners of the D.I.C.E. Awards. I also like to address the following categories: Category:Award-winning video games, Category:BAFTA winners (video games), Category:Golden Joystick Award winners, Category:Game Developers Choice Award winners, Category:New York Game Award winners. The British Academy Game Awards winners is the big I have to point out. Now I understand how some of them may be irrelevant, and I may have gotten carried away with creating categories for each category. I am hoping we can find a reasonable compromise. MR.RockGamer17 (talk) 20:24, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MR.RockGamer17, The issue with all those categories is that outside of GOTY, are they defining? Do people go, "Oh, this game was the winner of the DICE award for technical achievement?" And realistically, no, that doesn't happen. That's where the consensus on WT:VG fell at. — Masem (t) 01:10, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am not disagreeing with you on that. I just don't understand why British Academy Game Award for Technical Achievement gets its own category for winners and the D.I.C.E. Award for Outstanding Technical Achievement can't. It seems like a double-standard to me. MR.RockGamer17 (talk) 04:14, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
MR.RockGamer17, I don't think the BAFTA ones should get that either (save for GotY). — Masem (t) 04:46, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So, are you going to put the winners' categories for "Debut Game", "Game Beyond Entertainment", "Game Design", "Multiplayer", and "Technical Achievement" up for deletion? Also, will you undelete the categories for "D.I.C.E. Award winners" and "D.I.C.E. Award for Game of the Year winners"? MR.RockGamer17 (talk) 04:58, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Ingenuity (helicopter)[edit]

On 26 January 2024, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Ingenuity (helicopter), which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 10:39, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 28[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Lucia v. Securities and Exchange Commission, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Seventh Amendment.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:49, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 January 2024[edit]

Shortdescs for TV episode articles[edit]

Do you have any thoughts regarding the claims that there's an existing consensus that's in use on many TV episode articles regarding the formatting of the short description? Unless anyone else chimes in or those claims are substantiated, I'm inclined to disregard them. Thanks for your help! DonIago (talk) 16:10, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

  • A "bare URL and 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. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 21:16, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 13 February 2024[edit]

SNGs[edit]

Do you have a link I can look at? Polygnotus (talk) 16:07, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The broad support of SNGs have been extensively discussed at WT:N, but I would point to the RFC that affirmed the current wording of the SNG section, on Wikipedia talk: Notability/Archive 72 (see Request for Comment on the Subject-specific notability guidelines (SNG)) Masem (t) 16:16, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
An RFC with 39 people isn't broad consensus in this context and can't overrule WP:GNG (of course). If an article does not meet WP:GNG, you don't have sources to base an article on. People who enjoy writing about a specific topic may create (and edit) their own preferred list of rules, but if an article does not meet WP:GNG it should still be deleted, no matter what the SNG says. Polygnotus (talk) 16:25, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll give an example, lets say we have a scholar who won a highly prestigious academic honor, but no reliable sources have covered it in any significant way (other than perhaps to list their name), then you can't write an article because there are no sources to base the article on (no matter what Wikipedia:Notability_(academics)#Criteria says). Polygnotus (talk) 16:27, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know where you're getting this, but this is how SNGs have been treated for years. You are not required to meet the GNG as long as an SNG is met, but we do want to make sure SNGs are agreed on by the community. The most recent change was at NSPORT, which is documented here Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Sports notability, which had a huge amount of participation outside sports-interested editors. — Masem (t) 16:31, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Don't you see how that does not make sense? If there is no significant coverage in reliable sources, how can I write an article about someone? WP:5P2 does not allow unreliable sources. Without making stuff up and without unreliable sources it should be impossible to write an article about someone who has not received significant coverage in reliable sources, right? Polygnotus (talk) 16:56, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would really read the NSPORTS discussion I pointed to, as that SNG was specifically modified to deal with requiring at least one piece of significant coverage alongside one of the other criteria.
NPROF is unique because it was made before we had a WP:N, and as such, has its own allowances that do not require it to meet the GNG in any way. Again, I would urge you to review the WT:N archives to see where there has been long discussion that a topic need only meet an SNG without having to meet the GNG to have an article, though this is still presumed notability and can be challenged at a later time. The talk archives cover this over and over multiple times. — Masem (t) 17:02, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You are asking me to read a short novel about a topic I don't really care much about (I don't watch sports and when I sport the media does not report on it), and I doubt that reading it would help me. Can't you just reply to what I wrote instead? I understand that some people don't like WP:GNG because their favorite subject does not meet the criteria and that they have created SNGs and pretend that those overrule GNG. I can even imagine that the original goal of the SNGs might've been to list common outcomes of debates in order to save everyone time (per AGF). It is sad to see that groups of people who like sports act so unsportsmanlike. Allowing fancruft for certain hobbies but not others is not very egalitarian, right? Polygnotus (talk) 17:28, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Again, this is why something like NSPORTS was re-evaluated by a community RFC, so that the community as a whole agreed with the changes.
I can't easily point to any single discussion that gets to the point, but you need to understand that the idea that topics may either meet the GNG or a community-approved SNG to be considered notable has been in place for years. And that one cannot just create an SNG to be used this way without going through a community RFC to affirm it is appropriate. There's been pages and pages of debate and RFCs on these concepts. — Masem (t) 17:45, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of biggest box-office bombs[edit]

I see you reverted this edit [5] saying "too soon". Actually, I don't believe they will ever manage to distribute it outside Italy (4 years have passed), so maybe it's not "too soon"...

They only recovered 1% of the expenses on that movie, and it wasn't a homemade production, they had international stars acting... so I believe it could be listed, or maybe mentioned outside the list.

Please reply here because my IP will likely change.

--85.159.196.157 (talk) 12:17, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Even if that is the final numbers, the value is also way too low to be included on that list, which has a minimum loss of around $95m to be included. — Masem (t) 13:06, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 2 March 2024[edit]

Happy First Edit Day![edit]

ITN recognition for 96th Academy Awards[edit]

On 11 March 2024, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 96th Academy Awards, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Smurrayinchester 15:55, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sweet Baby Inc-article is full of pseudo-facts, Wiki-mods use one-sided sourcing[edit]

Hi,

I asked a Wikipedia-mod to direct me to a Wikipedia-admin, so here I am. The topic is the article about the currently ongoing situation with the consultant company "Sweet Baby Inc".

The currently published Wikipedia-article creates the illusion that SBI is a victim and its critics are harassers (and all the other worst things that I don't wanna spell out). In discussion with mods, it became clear that they're not willing to include important facts and information due to the given reason that social media posts and similar are not accepted as sources on Wikipedia.

So, there's two issues with that: For one, when the entire traditional news media has decided to one-sidedly support SBI, ignoring what's actually happening and what happened to begin with, and the side of critics can only point to the original tweets and such of SBI employees and CEOs (where stuff like "I want to erase all white leads from gaming"), then this naturally leads to one-sided Wikipedia-article that certainly tells a story, just not one based in reality. For two, even if there's absolutely no way to incorporate social media posts as a source (which I personally find weird in a day and age where social media is where official news is being reported), then shouldn't the entire article be taken down for the time being? If there are not enough sources to give a complete picture of the situation, then rather than misrepresenting the situation, Wikipedia should go for the "wait and see"-approach, shouldn't it? The result as of now is that the people defending SBI are using Wikipedia's authority to even strengthen their position; I don't think Wikipedia exists to work as someone's ammunition in a strongly contended debate.

I hope you can bring about some positive change to the situation, either allowing sources that give a full picture of the situation OR removing the article entirely until reputable sources decide to include everything.

For full disclosure, I'm a member of the Steam group and all it does is list games with SBI's involvement. Without any judgement on the Steam page. As for WHY people join, it's to oppose "forced" diversity. This is in contrast to "natural" diversity. So the people criticizing SBI are not against diversity per se, as the currently sourced articles claim, but is only against the amateurish inclusion of ideology in video games and other media, resulting in worse games and movies. A popular example is an npc that you meet right after leaving the space ship in the beginning of Mass Effect Andromeda and the first thing this character tells you, a total stranger, "btw I'm trans". This is "forced" diversity. It adds nothing, it only makes the game feel less immersive, like someone put that in just to force it down people's throats. An example of "natural" diversity would be Olivier from "Trails in the Sky", who is bisexual and constantly hits on both female and male characters, but it never feels forced, because it's befitting his character as an easy-going, charming bard. So again, we are FOR diversity, but against forced diversity based on ideology. And nothing about the group has to do with altright, racism, bigotry or any of the terrible claims they make. Yes, there's a lot of unhinged idiots flinging around insults, too, but that's what happens when one side basically controls the entire industry and for years has pushed big game publishers to abide by their "consultation". And really, any bigger group (the Steam group alone has over 200k followers now) has a sizeable number of idiots. So please update the SBI entry to make clear that there is no organized harassment against the company going on, that it's a wider anti-DEI movement with "anti-forced diversity driven by ideology" at its core. Thx 2003:D8:8F3C:E000:B8F6:2724:3492:FC17 (talk) 20:39, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics[edit]

You have recently edited a page related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

  • adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
  • comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
  • follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
  • comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
  • refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

(I'm sure you're already aware of how it all works, just making sure every editor on the Talk:Sweet Baby Inc. page who hasn't received the alert gets an opportunity to see it; and based on the system log you haven't previously been alerted on this topic). SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 00:34, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion[edit]


This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard regarding state of Sweet Baby Inc. article. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The thread is "Sweet Baby Inc.".The discussion is about the topic Sweet Baby Inc..

This notification was issued considering your recent contributions to the related talk page.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

--Moon darker (talk) 06:23, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for mentor for FAC.[edit]

Greetings,

I am looking for a mentor to try to push the Wii Sports Resort article to FA status. Would you agree to help me ? Maxime12346 (talk) 09:47, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum : Please disregard my last inquiry, somee events will not allow to give the time required. Maxime12346 (talk) 08:28, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding my reverted edit i did on the halflife game wiki[edit]

You said i need a source i wanted to add the source but i couldnt because the visual editor didnt let me and the source editor is hard Totallynotmwa (talk) 16:16, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry but i have to correct something and ask a question[edit]

https://vault.fbi.gov/gamergate

if you're talkinga bout evidence out in the open. why don't you mention SPJ Airplay? Why not mention Deep Freeze?

https://reason.com/2015/08/18/bomb-threat-disrupts-spj-airplay-gamer/

Why is it you ascribe a lot of this to "right wing" conspiricy theories when what's out in the open is different from what you assert? Let's say you're right. at what point do we disbelieve people saying the sky is blue because of how left or right leaning they are?


"

WP:N does not apply to sections, only whole articles. During GamerGate pt1 we saw a lot of this notion that if one 'side' of a dispute attacked journalism, that means Wikipedia could then not use journalists as a source. Since then, the same attacks have become extremely common in all kinds of political discourse (think of people who say 'Lamestream media'). But buying into that notion is untenable, one cannot silence critical sources just by making attacks on any journalist who writes something one disapproves of. MrOllie (talk) 23:20, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You are making an assumption that journalists are colliding with SBI here, but we first off don't work that way, and more importantly it is likely journalists, previously burned on "it's about ethics in video game journalism" from GG, are making a stance again from another vector out of the 4chan/8chan/Kiwi Farms venues that fester far right concepts, implicitly making SBI the side they trust to start with. And there is little I can see in both reliable and unreliable sources that suggest the larger picture is much different than what the RSes are saying. The counter narrative, that SBI was specifically formed to force diversity into games, has been shown clearly to be quotes taken out of context and what SBI actually does verified independently by game devs. It's really hard to find any type of appropriate lining here for the opposite side since unlike GG, all of what's been covered is out in the open.

MisteOsoTruth (talk) 11:11, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SBI-talk page still protected, meanwhile BBC calls for "FINAL PURGE"[edit]

Hey Masem,

surely you're still trying your hardest to protect the SBI-article from displaying key information like who started with the harassment and such. That's sarcasm, ofc, because we both know you and the other admins have gone through no effort to change the article to actually reflect reality.

Maybe this latest development from today is at long last worthy of being added to the article: A BBC-journalist calling for a "final purge" against gamers in the context of the SBI-debate. The following website exists since 2014 and makes an effort to report only on facts, so maybe this is source enough: https://boundingintocomics.com/2024/03/26/bbc-gaming-presenter-jules-hardy-calls-for-current-sweet-baby-inc-discourse-to-end-with-a-final-purge-of-ideological-opponents-from-the-medium/

If this is yet again dismissed as "not reliable" and such, I guess I'll give up. Then I have to accept that Wikipedia exists in a different reality from the real one. Which is a bummer, as I've always trusted Wikipedia, but here I know it's in the wrong. Whatever. Pls take a look at the source, and if you dislike it, try to find one yourself. The call for a "final purge" by a BBC-journalist is too serious to be ignored. Have a good day. 2003:D8:8F17:F000:2A30:6B9F:C8DD:9679 (talk) 22:55, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Eli Noyes[edit]

On 29 March 2024, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Eli Noyes, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. PFHLai (talk) 13:46, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 March 2024[edit]

Nomination of Where is Kate? for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Where is Kate? 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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Where is Kate? (3rd nomination) 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.

IgnatiusofLondon (he/him☎️) 11:46, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edelman Family Foundation[edit]

Hello @Masem

I am reaching out to you because of your previous participation in one of the discussions regarding the reliability and neutrality of HuffPost/Pink News/ProPublica as sources used on Wikipedia.

Currently, there is an ongoing issue with the Edelman Family Foundation section in the Joseph Edelman Wikipedia article. The section appears to be biased and lacks a balanced representation of the foundation's activities, as it primarily focuses on a single controversial donation while neglecting to mention the organization's numerous other significant contributions to various causes.

I would like to invite you to participate in the discussion on the BLP Noticeboard to address the concerns surrounding the section's neutrality and explore ways to improve its content. Llama Tierna (talk) 18:09, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

NEO: The World Ends with You[edit]

I put (stylized as NEO: The World Ends with You) is that okay? as that is the official way to stylize the name? StarStorm10 (talk) 13:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of biggest box-office bombs[edit]

I think we're getting trolled on that talk page. Instead of responding, I would start removing general questions like this one as disruptive spam that wastes the community's time. This IP in particular has posted at least 8 other similar threads since August 2023. There are a few other repeat offenders! My 2¢ --GoneIn60 (talk) 06:02, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Still interested?[edit]

Are you still interested on working on a stand-alone page for the British Royal family and the media? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:24, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Peter Higgs[edit]

On 9 April 2024, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Peter Higgs, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 20:24, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

KlimaSeniorinnen[edit]

Please don't undo the changes I've made on this page. It's a lot of work to make the page legally accurate, and cut out the fluff, if you read. If you have specific suggestions, please put them on the talk page. BarrySpinno (talk) 12:19, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BarrySpinno, the problem is that we are not supposed to be legal experts per WP:NOR, thus we have to use what third-parties say about the case rather than our interpretation of the case. Further, we never quote in any depth of the full decision - that could either be a copyright problem if there is copyright involved, or otherwise it is better just to place the entire decision at Wikisource and link it there. We then would need to use third-party sources to identify what are the key outcomes of those decisions. — Masem (t) 12:21, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You simply needed to ask for proper references - I've put them in from the press release. Please don't delete the facts and judgment section again.
There is no copyright issue on a section of a judgment - that's fair use. In any case, the ECHR is entirely open source, it's a public court. This has been established for a long time on Wikipedia. Hope that helps. BarrySpinno (talk) 12:30, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We should also be avoiding press releases from the involved parties since those can distort facts to whichever party it is.
Even if the ruling is not copyrighed, its not appropriate to include that much text in articles. We summarize sources, and per NOR, requires the use of third-parties to hit the highlights for us. — Masem (t) 12:34, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your behaviour is not impressive, or mature. Please do something else. BarrySpinno (talk) 12:40, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
BarrySpinno, no personal attacks. I'm also following policies on how we are to edit these type of articles. — Masem (t) 15:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ITN post[edit]

I saw this morning (my time) that you had raised an issue with me posting an O. J. Simpson blurb to ITN. I now have a chance to respond but the page was archived an hour ago. It's not that I was ignoring you but simply didn't know that you had raised an issue. WP:ITN/C is not on my watchlist (WT:DYK is and that brings my watchlist beyond what's easily manageable) but you obviously can't know that. For future reference, if you'd like to discuss an ITN admin action, please give me a ping.

The way I deal with ITN is that every now and then, I go to the page and look from the bottom up whether there's something that requires action. Schwede66 01:14, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Social game (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a disambiguation page which either

  • disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic);
  • disambiguates zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
  • is an orphaned redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" that does not target a disambiguation page or page that has a disambiguation-like function.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

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. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:31, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On the Console Wars section that I added that explained the Super FX portion[edit]

If I just change the wording of the Super FX section, and just do the regular sourcing (I was going to originally, but the page for the sales of Star Fox on Argonaut Game's page got deleted, so I just used the Wikipedia article listing the best-selling SNES games to cover that), can it come back? The Miracle Girls (talk) 22:59, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If anyone else wants to tell me if I can, please do. The Miracle Girls (talk) 17:52, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You need to make sure to have sources that frame the SuperFX as part of the console war. That said, I have found a source and will be adding that — Masem (t) 03:57, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks then Masem! The Miracle Girls (talk) 11:01, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted edit[edit]

Hello Masem, I'd like you to know that there's no hard feelings on my end. Loyalty-heart (talk) 16:52, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ITN[edit]

Hi there Masem. I'm taking this offline, as my intent is not to single you out at ITN. We all know it needs improvement. However, your ITN-related comments sometimes conflate what's codified at WP:ITN, versus your personal preferences for ITN, and the reality of what the community actually has decided to post at ITN. Particularly, fame and popularity fall under ITN's sui generis allowance. I assume you disagree with past postings like Betty White, Carrie Fisher and now OJ, but the fact is that an uninvolved admin decided there was consensus to post them.

My past replies to you were probably around the nuance that your comments sometimes come off that !voters and posters are somehow violating the existing WP:ITNRDBLURB, as opposed to framing it as an actual improvement you are seeking for ITN. I'd like to see "sui generis" give way to more objective criteria, but I haven't found a way to achieve consensus for it. Per WP:PROPOSAL:

Most commonly, a new policy or guideline documents existing practices, rather than proposing a change to what experienced editors already choose to do.

People seem to like their "free pass" to blurb "their" RD. —Bagumba (talk) 06:03, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 25 April 2024[edit]

Disambiguation link notification for April 28[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Moyle v. United States, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Medicare.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Switch Successor[edit]

The successor to the Nintendo Switch was officially announced by Nintendo themselves and trusted media sources are posting about it. Why wait for the console to be unveiled with its official name and physical design when we have concrete proof that Nintendo even has a ninth-generation console on the horizon. Galefuun (talk) 00:28, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What do we know beyond "they are working on one", Galefuun? See WP:CRYSTAL, bullet 5. -- ferret (talk) 00:33, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How do we know it will be in Gen9?
We do talk about this news on the Switch page, where it makes sense and not CRYSTAL. Masem (t) 00:36, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We know it will be Gen 9 because the launch of the PS5 and Xbox Series X signaled the start. The idea that Nintendo's new console will be another gen 8 console is redundant especially since the 8th generation already ended. Galefuun (talk) 00:43, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's not how it works. We have to wait to see if the media sources consider this to compete with those consoles, or if its a wholly new competitive market. I suspect it will be Gen9, but that is against WP:NOT#CRYSTAL. — Masem (t) 00:46, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Quick question[edit]

Hey I noticed you reverted my post on the administrators noticeboard. I'm just wondering what exactly the reason for it was. I am realizing that I did forget to notify the editors on their talk page, so if that is the reason then my bad. Gaismagorm (talk) 14:04, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Was unintentional, likely I misclicked on my watchlist. Restored. Masem (t) 14:07, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ah ok no problem, have a great day! Gaismagorm (talk) 14:08, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I also this time made sure to actually notify the editors. Gaismagorm (talk) 14:15, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 16 May 2024[edit]