User talk:Premeditated Chaos

♠ New messages to the bottom please. I will reply here without pinging unless asked otherwise. ♠ Please link to articles you're asking about by enclosing the title in [[brackets]]. ♠ For undeletion requests, provide 3-4 reliable sources that indicate notability. ♠ Less is more. Walls of text and piles of links will be ignored. ♠ Please don't template the regulars. I don't mind criticism but being templated is a bad way to start a conversation. ♠ This talk page is watched by a few friendly talk page stalkers who may respond to messages when I'm not around.

Promotion of List of Alexander McQueen collections

Congratulations, Premeditated Chaos! The list you nominated, List of Alexander McQueen collections, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best lists on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured list. Keep up the great work! Cheers, PresN (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Six years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:00, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks very kindly, Gerda! Cheers! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:22, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Thank you today for The Dance of the Twisted Bull, introduced: "In 2000, Alexander McQueen ditched Givenchy to sell his label to the Gucci Group, who were far more appreciative of his subversive talents. To prove his worth, his first collection under Gucci would need to make some serious profit, so for his nineteenth collection McQueen tamped down on the theatrics and went commercial. The Dance of the Twisted Bull is a searing-hot exploration of bullfighting, flamenco, and sexuality that reportedly drove sales up 400%."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:06, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Gerda! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 18:00, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

3000 miles to Graceland writer: Richard Recco

Hello. My name is Rich Recco. I am writing you because it appears that you may have changed my recent edit to the 3000 miles to Graceland page. I made an edit about writer credit. I can prove that I wrote the original screenplay by myself in 1998 and I had no writing partners on the script. My edits to the wikipedia page are completely truthful. The director tried to take credit for my script after making minimal changes but he was told he would lose arbitration because he didnt change enough to warrant a co writer credit. I only later agreed to give him co writer credit because he told me that he wouldn't direct the project and after I saw how bad the changes he made were I didnt want the blame. If you need proof that I wrote the full complete script first by myself I can provide it for you in this link below from the copywriter office when I registered the script in 1998 under my name: Richard Recco.

I would appreciate it if the edit I made to the wikipedia page remained. Thank you for your consideration.

https://publicrecords.copyright.gov/detailed-record/10071564?query=Richard%20recco&field_type=Keyword&records_per_page=10&page_number=3&date_field=representative_date Richardrecco (talk) 02:10, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi Richard, a couple things to address here.

1. Technically speaking the username policy (relevant bit linked here: Wikipedia:REALNAME) says I should block you until you verify your identity to the Volunteer Response Team. We have this policy to prevent people from impersonating or harassing real people. I believe you're acting in good faith and I don't wish to scare you by blocking you, so please send an email to info-en@wikimedia.org letting them know you are the real Richard Recco and would like to verify your identity (don't send scans of any ID or anything - they'll let you know how to verify).
2. Wikipedia reflects what's verifiable in reliable sources. By reliable I mean things like newspapers, books, magazines, etc. I'm not commenting one way or another about the truth of your story, but unfortunately, if it hasn't been reported by a reliable source, we can't put it in an article. I'm sure you can see why, right? Otherwise someone could just say whatever they wanted about you and put it on Wikipedia and you'd just have to live with that. We don't work that way.
3. I did check before reverting you the first time and I can't find any reliable source that reports anything but you and Mr. Lichtenstein as some form of co-writers.
4. A copyright registration doesn't prove what you said. It just means you registered the copyright in your name. For all anyone can glean from that, you guys co-wrote the script together in 1998 and put it solely in your name for whatever reason.

♠PMC♠ (talk) 14:28, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Hello PMC,

I reached out to wikipedia and received a response by Geoffrey Lane. He suggested that I forward a 3rd party source article that can back my claims. So I sent him an article from the LA Times from Robert W. Welkos who interviewed me a week before the movie came out which reveals my process for coming up with the original idea and writing the original screenplay process.

(I would be happy to forward you the article if you would like to see it for yourself. Please forward an email to send it if You'd like)

Please also look at the credits of the film which I received first position writers credit, and Lichtenstein shares last position.

Geoffrey Lane also said to recommend a suggestion to have it edited. My suggestion would be : "Richard Recco wrote the original screenplay on spec and later shared credit with Lichtenstein after changes were made to the final shooting script"

Thank you for your time.

Rich Richardrecco (talk) 00:17, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

"I reached out to wikipedia and received a response by Geoffrey Lane. He suggested that I forward a 3rd party source article that can back my claims."

This is exactly what I said you needed. If you have a link to this LA Times article, please post it here so it can be used in the article. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:34, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Hello PMC,

LA TIMES ARTICLE is here : https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2001-feb-23-ca-28999-story.html

COPYRIGHT: https://publicrecords.copyright.gov/detailed-record/10071564?query=Richard%20recco&field_type=Keyword&records_per_page=10&page_number=3&date_field=representative_date

Thanks for your consideration,

Rich Richardrecco (talk) 02:11, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

I've changed it to say that you wrote the original script and Dennis has the co-writing credit on the final product. Thanks for finding that LA Times source, that's exactly what was needed :) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:31, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

IP user possibly circumventing partial block

Back in September, you partially blocked User talk:MauriceHoward for only removing whitespaces and not making substantial changes to articles.

I believe they are still doing this, just under an IP now, User talk:146.113.128.115. They've started to move category tags around while deleting white spaces, but not changing the categories, so it looks less obvious.

You can see here that MauriceHoward was doing all the edits to this page, and now it is just this IP. I would bet it's the same person.

Cheers 71.11.5.2 (talk) 15:41, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

I think it is likely to be the same person. However, from a review of his last bunch of edits, it looks like they fall on the acceptable end of the end of the cosmetic spectrum. He's no longer just adding spaces. He's adding appropriate categories and reorganizing categories to be alphabetical (which isn't essential but does make things more editor-friendly). It's also not at such a volume that it's disruptive. At this point I don't think anything needs to be done, unless he reverts to the previous whitespace-only behavior. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 20:09, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Birds (Alexander McQueen collection)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Birds (Alexander McQueen collection) 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 Tkbrett -- Tkbrett (talk) 21:41, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

The Dance of the Twisted Bull scheduled for TFA

This is to let you know that the The Dance of the Twisted Bull article has been scheduled as today's featured article for July 12, 2023. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page blurb, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 12, 2023, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so. If you wish to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article, you can do so at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/July 2023.

I suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks and congratulations Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:04, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Birds (Alexander McQueen collection)

The article The Birds (Alexander McQueen collection) 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:The Birds (Alexander McQueen collection) and Talk:The Birds (Alexander McQueen collection)/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Tkbrett -- Tkbrett (talk) 14:41, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Taxi Driver (Alexander McQueen collection)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Taxi Driver (Alexander McQueen collection) 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 Vaticidalprophet -- Vaticidalprophet (talk) 19:23, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Taxi Driver (Alexander McQueen collection)

The article Taxi Driver (Alexander McQueen collection) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Taxi Driver (Alexander McQueen collection) for comments about the article, and Talk:Taxi Driver (Alexander McQueen collection)/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 Vaticidalprophet -- Vaticidalprophet (talk) 21:43, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Birds (Alexander McQueen collection)

The article The Birds (Alexander McQueen collection) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Birds (Alexander McQueen collection) for comments about the article, and Talk:The Birds (Alexander McQueen collection)/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 Tkbrett -- Tkbrett (talk) 23:42, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

IP Sockpuppet

Hi, Premeditated Chaos,

I was deleting an expired draft by User:Feetfeet 341 and was looking into your block of this account. After your block, they were identified as a sockpuppet of User:Pow!333 who has continued to sock. When I was looking into articles that Feetfeet 341 edited, I came across User:24.93.30.47 who was making very similar edits. They received a block for 3 months for disruptive editing but, as an IP editor, no connection was made to Pow!333. But since you seem familiar with the sockmaster and sockpuppet, I was just suggesting that you also keep an eye out for any IP accounts that might be drawn to disruptive edits around children's literature. Just wanted to give you a head's up in case you have any content like that on your Watchlist.

I hope you are well and enjoying this start of summer. Thank you! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:27, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Liz, I'm not sure if I do but I will keep an eye out. Cheers and hope your summer is also going well! :) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 21:01, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

"Convicted felon" in the lead

I don't personally have a problem with including the term in the opening line of a BLP, if it's appropriate. I started a discussion at the BLP noticeboard in order to get more inout from the community. Feel free to weigh in, thanks. Wes sideman (talk) 12:35, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

Do you specifically feel that the usage at the Skilling article was inappropriate? If so, how? And why would you not state as much in your edit summary rather than making a specific, inaccurate claim about the outcome of a discussion? ♠PMC♠ (talk) 13:54, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

My personal feelings are irrelevant. Wes sideman (talk) 14:44, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

Of course they are relevant. Otherwise it suggests you are simply wandering around removing the phrase to make a point, which you surely know is frowned upon. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 14:56, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

I have addressed this at the BLP noticeboard. Wes sideman (talk) 17:52, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

Promotion of Neptune (Alexander McQueen collection)

Congratulations, Premeditated Chaos! The article you nominated, Neptune (Alexander McQueen collection), has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:05, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

Saw the discussion over at Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations...

Just wanted to say I appreciated your comments about how GA isn't supposed to be...to paraphrase you - so "onerous". I've been waiting on a 2nd GAN since March I think? - on Robert Todd Lincoln - but ((shrug)). I don't have a problem with the new sort order or whatever kind of order the noms are sorted into on the main page. We'll all get our articles reviewed/passed/failed eventually. So anyway, thanks. Shearonink (talk) 01:01, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

My frustration mostly stems from people acting like the backlog is a huge mystery. It isn't. We're ratcheting up standards, publicly shaming people for posting "inadequate" reviews, and the sort order no longer prioritizes older nominations. Hence, backlog. It's literally that simple. The next step is either to accept the reality we've created and stop complaining about it, or to make some changes in order to ease the backlog. Unfortunately, the GAN community seems unwilling to do either, and I'm just tired of it. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:22, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Lol yeah I don't quite understand why my GAN goes up&down on the list... And I do think some GA regulars are somewhat peremptory in their GA assessments and in their behavior towards others. Keep on keepin' on, I get the being tired of the constant whatever, runs me down too. I dropped one article from my Watchlist because another editor was there to RIGHTGREATWRONGS and I just got tired of fighting all the time. Shearonink (talk) 03:27, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

The sort order is now based on review to nomination ratio, and also prioritizes people with no GAs. The thinking was that this would incentivize people to do more reviews to increase their ratio and their place in the rankings. Unfortunately, the rationale behind the ranking is pretty opaque (evidenced by this conversation), so it doesn't really work. On top of that, the higher your actual number of both reviews and nominations, the harder it is to change your review ratio - doing just one more review is phenomenally impactful if your ratio is 1:2; less so if your ratio is 125:126. It also has some technical issues in that it doesn't count GAs which have been promoted to FA - my numbers look far better than they ought to because many of my GAs have gone to FA.

The long and short of it is that it was a good idea but it has had unforseen limitations and side effects, and I think we need to go back to sorting by date. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 05:20, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) The sort order situation is interesting to me, because of the whole divide-by-zero element -- it definitely doesn't seem to me from the RfC that 'prioritizing people who've never interacted with the process before' was actually the intended outcome, but it's hard for me to decide personally which is better between that and the intention of 'prioritizing experienced nominators who are net positives in backlog reduction'. There are strong arguments for either.

I find just how big the impact was interesting as well, because it never intuitively seemed to me that people prioritized reviews by ranking in the first place outside backlog drives. By how interesting the article is, yes. By someone's own intuitive sense of how big a backlog contributor they are, yes. Ranking? Not sure, and my impression in turn was that they tended to work at both the back and front while ignoring the middle, rather than that they worked from the back entirely. It seems a lot of people pay way more attention to the raw sort than I do, though. Vaticidalprophet 06:28, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

it definitely doesn't seem to me from the RfC - I couldn't point you to where it was, but I'm sure I recall some discussion at the proposal drive mentioning the benefit of pushing brand-new people to the top. I actually agree with that aspect of the new sorting. First-time noms are likely to have a higher fail rate, so it's better to fail them quickly rather than making them wait 6 months for a review that's like "actually this sucks, dumbass, here's your quickfail". I could support a list that was like, "first-time noms by date, then everybody else by nom date". ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:01, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

I think the stats that someone posted somewhere in the morass of WT:GAN were a 50% failure rate for new nominators post-rearranging, which is...shocking, really, especially when you consider people are afraid of failing non-quickfails (when probably another quarter or so of nominations should). Inasmuch as this is a benefit, it occurs to me that many nominators who now fall to the very bottom of the new sort order (people with 0 reviews and >0 GAs) are also people who could benefit(?) from it. Vaticidalprophet 07:09, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Interestingly, I just looked - there's 681 nominations currently and 192 instances of the string "(0 reviews," on the page. Almost 30% of nominations are by people who have never done a review. Better than I thought, but boy that's a shameful number. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:16, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

I have 114 reviews & 8 GAs. Regarding the "0 reviews" there are some who have no reviews but quite a few GAs - I'm not sure taking a look at "0 reviews" by itself is a meaningful/pertinent data point? But anyway, thx folks for responding to my query. Shearonink (talk) 20:44, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Until we as a community agree to deprioritize/blacklist nominations by people with dozens of GAs who refuse to ever review, nothing will change and those nominators will continue freeloading off the work of others. If everyone acted like they did, nothing would ever get reviewed, but from my experience they simply don't give a damn. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 00:43, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

The Ghost (Pakistani TV series)

You deleted the article after a discussion. I have concerns about it as it meet the Wikipedia's criteria of notability. Please, restore the article. 39.34.175.42 (talk) 06:59, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

What does the BIG BLUE BOX at the top of the page say about requests for undeletion? ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:39, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

please, restore the article. I want to restart the article. I have concerns about it and will improve it as well. Thanks 39.34.175.42 (talk) 11:39, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Big blue box, or don't bother posting here again. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 18:09, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Are you talking about the big blue box of Add topic? please, explain the big blue box. I am unable to understand what you want to deliver. 59.103.221.236 (talk) 07:52, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Scroll to the top of the page. There is a BIG BLUE BOX with directions in it. Read them. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 08:34, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

To undelete the article, i have provide the following references. Although, they provide not much coverage of the subject but a reference gives a review about the series. The notability is further proved by the notable award win of the series which includes Lux Style Award for Best TV Actress.

• https://web.archive.org/web/20221007010126/http://faysalqureshi.weebly.com/dramas.html
• https://web.archive.org/web/20211119133046/https://reviewit.pk/dramas-based-on-foreign-novels/
• https://web.archive.org/web/20221202053618/https://mag.dunya.com.pk/demo.php/showbiz/2958/2021-02-14
• https://web.archive.org/web/20221021185019/https://www.fashioncentral.pk/fashion_events/9th-lux-style-awards-2010/
• https://web.archive.org/web/20210424042514/https://www.masala.com/underrated-pakistani-shows-that-are-lead-by-strong-female-characters-319564.html
• https://www.dawn.com/news/860213/firstperson-seriously-sania-saeed
• https://www.dawn.com/news/579516/awards-fever-saving-grace-and-salvation-2

59.103.221.12 (talk) 11:51, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

• Weebly is a fansite for the actor Faysal Qureshi, which is not reliable for the purpose of establishing notability or supporting facts.
• Reviewit.pk appears to be a blog that permits people to submit articles, it isn't reliable
• Dunya may be reliable, I can't tell, but only trivially mentions The Ghost so it isn't significant coverate for the purpose of establishing notability
• Awards don't automatically grant notability, there has to be significant coverage about the thing getting the award for it to establish notability
• I'd be willing to accept Masala as reliable, but it's hardly a review or significant coverage - it's barely a paragraph, and ironically it says "the show did not receive much attention"
• Trivial mention in an interview. Nope.
• Same as the other comment about awards.

None of the sources are reliable or significant in a way that establishes a claim to notability. I'm not undeleting it and further messages without significant coverage will be ignored. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 19:05, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

False titles

Hey there. I hope all is well with you. In your GA review of the Kinks' 1965 US tour, you suggested changing "The English rock band" to simply "English rock band". I said I'd change it but get back to you if I could figure out why some FAs keep the definite article (e.g. Sgt. Pepper, "Hey Jude", "Something", all of which write "the English rock band"). Anyways, after a similar thing came up at OK Computer, currently being discussed on the talk page, I have read a bit more about the issue of false titles. Popcornfud has an essay about it, and in flipping through a copy of Garner's Modern English Usage (pp. 816–817), it sounds like the idea of dropping definite or indefinite articles came out of newspapers and magazines, but the use of false titles in formal English is by no means a requirement. Tkbrett (✉) 14:47, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Huh, I never realized it was an issue of so much dispute! I learned something today. I personally agree with Safire's comments quoted in that article about how it feels stilted, but if it's proper in BrEng then it is what it is. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 18:56, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

I remember this coming up extensively at the GAN for Prehistoric religion, where I used a lot of false titles that were pointed out as not-really-proper in the BrEng the article leans to. I've watched out a little more for them since, and I've been inclined to agree now that false titles can read a little awkwardly when overused. I think ideally you'd switch between them in the same article dependent on context, but that would probably cause an engvar cataclysm... Vaticidalprophet 09:36, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

Four Award

		Four Award
		Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Neptune (Alexander McQueen collection). — Bilorv (talk) 17:44, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Congrats on making onto the leaderboard! — Bilorv (talk) 17:44, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Oh damn that's exciting! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 19:41, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Irere (Alexander McQueen collection)

On 9 July 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Irere (Alexander McQueen collection), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the only known copies of the oyster dress designed by Alexander McQueen for his collection Irere are owned by the Metropolitan Museum of Art and Kim Kardashian? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Irere (Alexander McQueen collection). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Irere (Alexander McQueen collection)), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Aoidh (talk) 00:02, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Oyster dress

On 9 July 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Oyster dress, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the only known copies of the oyster dress designed by Alexander McQueen for his collection Irere are owned by the Metropolitan Museum of Art and Kim Kardashian? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Irere (Alexander McQueen collection). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Oyster dress), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Aoidh (talk) 00:02, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 18,219 views (759.1 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of July 2023 – nice work!

GalliumBot (talk • contribs) (he/it) 03:27, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Oyster dress

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Oyster dress 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 Theleekycauldron -- Theleekycauldron (talk) 21:43, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Promotion of Taxi Driver (Alexander McQueen collection)

Congratulations, Premeditated Chaos! The article you nominated, Taxi Driver (Alexander McQueen collection), has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 12:05, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: Bit Meddler

Hello Premeditated Chaos. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Bit Meddler, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Recognition by a notable film festival is a credible claim of significance. Thank you. BangJan1999 22:09, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Four Award

		Four Award
		Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Taxi Driver (Alexander McQueen collection). — Bilorv (talk) 10:31, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Fantastic DYK hook by the way. An interesting read even to someone with no subject knowledge. — Bilorv (talk) 10:31, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks so much Bilorv! I'm glad you enjoyed it :) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 19:09, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

New fashion article

Hi PMC; hope you're well! I know fashion is an area of interest of yours, so I thought you might be interested to know that I dipped my own toes into it today, writing Tamás Király inspired by a recent Articles of Interest episode (if you're not already a fan of that podcast, you should absolutely check it out). Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 06:38, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

I love Articles of Interest! Avery Trufelman has a voice like butter, I would listen to her forever. The article looks good! Nice work. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 14:07, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! I've been meaning to turn Articles of Interest into an article and DYK it; I might get to that after DYKing Király, and would be happy to collab if you're looking for something to write! DYK ... that the podcast Articles of Interest devoted an entire season to preppy fashion? is the only hook that immediately comes to mind, but I'm sure there are others. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 20:28, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

I appreciate the ask, but I am a notoriously flaky collaborator and I'm sort of wrapped up in McQueen right now. I know you'll do great work on it though :) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 20:52, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Checking The GA for New York Biltmore Hotel

I have been reviewing New York Biltmore Hotel for good article status. I will do some final checks but I wonder if you can give it a look. Please let me know if you see any issues I may have missed when you get time. I would appreciate your help on my first GA review. I will read through much more thoroughly tonight and tomorrow as well. Bruxton (talk) 01:54, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Ah, you picked a good one for your first go. Epic's articles are always crisp, well-researched, and thorough. There's very little chance of significant issues. I'll try to have a look over it tomorrow. Offhand, I suggest doing Ctrl+F for "contain" and if there's more than a few hits, give him a friendly poke about overusing it; it's his pet word the way "even" tends to be mine. (It's slightly off-GACR in that it's not a fail if he declines to do anything about it, but it does read a little nicer.) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:24, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip. I am familiar with Epic from his many DYK contributions. I have found issues about three or four times in DYK reviews and they were minor. Bruxton (talk) 02:35, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

@Bruxton, had a look at the GA comments and it all looks good to me. As a pedantic note, because I am pedantic about this particular thing, compliance with all of the MOS is not actually required by the GACR. The only MOS that a GA must comply with are lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation, per criteria 1b. Everything else is nice to point out, but technically optional for GA rating. There's also no requirement for infoboxes to be filled out to any level of completeness. I don't oppose pointing these things out at GA reviews, but when I do, I try to note that they're outside the GACR, so if the nom doesn't want to do them for whatever reason, it's not technically a failure criteria.

But overall - a solid review. No notes. Go forth and confidently do some more :) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 20:47, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

I very much appreciate your time. I do plan to review more, I enjoyed the process. Bruxton (talk) 20:51, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Gerald Boudreaux page

I am planning on creating a page for the Louisiana State Senator Gerald Boudreaux and got a notice saying you deleted a page that was for him. Could I get some info on that before I start creating the page. Ktkvtsh (talk) 22:37, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, it was created by a user named Billy Hathorn who was a serial copyright violator (the page linked in the deletion reason is his CCI). We got to the point where we just started preemptively deleting anything he created where he still had a large percentage of authorship, because his issues were so pervasive. No prejudice against any normal editor like yourself creating a new, clean version. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:46, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the information. I will go ahead and get started on the page. I appreciate your prompt reply. Ktkvtsh (talk) 23:36, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Eternal Blue DYK

Thanks again for your help at GA, I really appreciate it! I see you left a message if you could be of any help with FA, but would you mind helping me with something a little different? If I'm going to get the Four Award, the article has to go to DYK; only thing is, despite 35+ GAs and two FAs, I've never done it before. Do you have any recommendations of content that would be good to focus on as a DYK submission?

P.S. Like the band, I see you're also from the Vancouver metro area. Did this nomination perhaps strike a personal (pale) chord with you? Are you maybe even a fan of them? Just curious since I noticed that, I had to ask. dannymusiceditor ^oops 00:10, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Funny enough, I just grabbed the article because it was in the severe-backlog zone and I wanted the points :) My music taste is embarrassingly basic, sad to report I'd never heard of them before I took the review. I didn't even notice they were from Vancouver until I was reading the article.

DYK is really easy in comparison, just try to highlight something neat about the article. The riff-fest quote might be fun, something like:

• ...that Spiritbox album Eternal Blue has been described as metalcore, post-metal, progressive metal, alternative metal, and "nu-metal-meets-djent riff-fest"?

Or maybe something about the inspiration? I bet it's unusual for a metal album to be inspired by airy 80s rock. You could maybe do a hook based on Constance being dedicated to a couple of grandmothers, but that might be better for an article about the song itself (if it has enough coverage to merit one). ♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:40, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Constance probably has enough for one, but unfortunately probably not a good one, if I'm being honest. Shame, because it and Secret Garden are the best tracks on it (though they're all incredible). I like that DYK idea. Cheers!

Allow me to also do some musical evangelizing if you will. If you normally aren't that type, Courtney really does have the singing voice of an angel. "Secret Garden" was the first song I heard from them, and it has a killer bassline through the verses as well. If you're looking for something more spacey, Constance is one of the most musically moving pieces of metal I've listened to. Trust me when I say it's truly groundbreaking work in the metal scene Spiritbox have done. :) dannymusiceditor ^oops 00:51, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

I think I will have to trust you on this one, because I am a total pedestrian and metal is unfortunately not my jam, lol ♠PMC♠ (talk) 01:17, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Oh, she doesn't scream in those at all haha. But I getcha, it's not for everyone. dannymusiceditor ^oops 01:29, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Eye (Alexander McQueen collection)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Eye (Alexander McQueen collection) 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 Simongraham -- Simongraham (talk) 14:21, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Irere (Alexander McQueen collection)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Irere (Alexander McQueen collection) 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 Simongraham -- Simongraham (talk) 14:22, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Irere (Alexander McQueen collection)

The article Irere (Alexander McQueen collection) 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:Irere (Alexander McQueen collection) and Talk:Irere (Alexander McQueen collection)/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Simongraham -- Simongraham (talk) 12:20, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 15

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Birds (Alexander McQueen collection), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Telegraph.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Irere (Alexander McQueen collection)

The article Irere (Alexander McQueen collection) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Irere (Alexander McQueen collection) for comments about the article, and Talk:Irere (Alexander McQueen collection)/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", 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 at 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 Simongraham -- Simongraham (talk) 23:42, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Eye (Alexander McQueen collection)

The article Eye (Alexander McQueen collection) 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:Eye (Alexander McQueen collection) and Talk:Eye (Alexander McQueen collection)/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Simongraham -- Simongraham (talk) 17:21, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Eye (Alexander McQueen collection)

The article Eye (Alexander McQueen collection) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Eye (Alexander McQueen collection) for comments about the article, and Talk:Eye (Alexander McQueen collection)/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", 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 at 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 Simongraham -- Simongraham (talk) 10:43, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Evdokia Kozhevnikova

Hello! Your submission of Evdokia Kozhevnikova at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Chidgk1 (talk) 08:28, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Shipwreck dress still from maybury.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Shipwreck dress still from maybury.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) 17:25, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Eye (Alexander McQueen collection)

On 24 August 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Eye (Alexander McQueen collection), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in 1999, British designer Alexander McQueen staged an Eye in the middle of a New York hurricane? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Eye (Alexander McQueen collection). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Eye (Alexander McQueen collection)), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 12:02, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Oyster dress

The article Oyster dress you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Oyster dress for comments about the article, and Talk:Oyster dress/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", 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 at 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 Theleekycauldron -- Theleekycauldron (talk) 21:52, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Promotion of The Birds (Alexander McQueen collection)

Congratulations, Premeditated Chaos! The article you nominated, The Birds (Alexander McQueen collection), has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:06, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2023).

Administrator changes

• Pppery
• Theleekycauldron

• Dwheeler
• G.A.S
• Royalbroil
• Ssd

CheckUser changes

Bradv

Oversighter changes

Bradv

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, TFAs will be automatically semi-protected the day before it is on the main page and through the day after.
• A discussion at WP:VPP about revision deletion and oversight for dead names found that [s]ysops can choose to use revdel if, in their view, it's the right tool for this situation, and they need not default to oversight. But oversight could well be right where there's a particularly high risk to the person. Use your judgment.

Technical news

• Special:Contributions now shows the user's local edit count and the account's creation date. (T324166)

Arbitration

• The SmallCat dispute case has closed. As part of the final decision, editors participating in XfD have been reminded to be careful about forming local consensus which may or may not reflect the broader community consensus. Regular closers of XfD forums were also encouraged to note when broader community discussion, or changes to policies and guidelines, would be helpful.

Miscellaneous

• Tech tip: The "Browse history interactively" banner shown at the top of Special:Diff can be used to easily look through a history, assemble composite diffs, or find out what archive something wound up in.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:22, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

I’ve enjoyed the Alexander McQueen articles

Hi, just wanted to say that I’ve enjoyed reading the Alexander McQueen articles. I know nothing about the topic, but you’ve made it very interesting to read about. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 03:14, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much! It's comments like this that make me want to keep writing them. I'm glad you're enjoying :) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 04:39, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Jack the Ripper Stalks His Victims

On 5 September 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Jack the Ripper Stalks His Victims, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the clothing tags for Alexander McQueen's first collection, Jack the Ripper Stalks His Victims (garment pictured), had McQueen's own hair encased inside? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jack The Ripper Stalks His Victims. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Jack the Ripper Stalks His Victims), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

RoySmith (talk) 00:02, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for participating in the August 2023 GAN backlog drive

		The Multiple Good Article Reviewer's Barnstar
		We really appreciate that you reviewed a large number of GANs during the drive. Due in part to your efforts, the backlog of unreviewed nominations was reduced by 440 articles, an astonishing 69 percent.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:13, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Four Award

		Four Award
		Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on The Birds (Alexander McQueen collection). — Bilorv (talk) 21:46, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Some questions about GAN

I had some concerns regarding one particular article that recently passed, as outlined in a comment there from the first time it was nominated that afaik was never addressed. Maybe I just have much higher expectations for GA than what the actual criteria prescribe, but I would have thought a total lack of non-hyperlocal and non-news sourcing and large swathes of text extrapolated from primary statistics and routine trivial mentions would have some impact on an article's status? Is NPOV not impacted by having multiple large quote blocks from non-independent biased sources promoting the subject? JoelleJay (talk) 21:10, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

It's possible that the reviewer never saw your talk page comment, if they started the review from the GAN page and for some reason never went to the article talk page (although that's not best practice).

GA doesn't assess notability, and any effort to include a notability assessment in the GACR has been shot down. If you feel the sourcing doesn't adequately support notability, take the article to AfD. (I see that it closed no consensus last time, but perhaps with some months having passed, a consensus might form). I don't agree that a student newspaper can't be independent, but I agree they don't constitute very good reliable sources, especially for bolstering a claim to notability.

If you feel the article otherwise doesn't meet the GACR, you could always take it to GAR. Personally, I would have failed it at GAN on the basis that the majority of the body is assembled from quotes (I did as much at Talk:Rachel Amber/GA1), which does not, in my opinion, constitute good encyclopedic writing. It is fixable if the author is wiling to paraphrase them into encyclopedic prose - you could also try bringing that up to them on their talk page and seeing what they say. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:35, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi PMC, thanks for the response. Regarding student newspapers' reporting on their own university, we've had very strong consensus that they are not independent (as documented at WP:RSSM). Anyway, I know GA doesn't assess notability, and I'm not trying to get the article deleted right now. What I'm more curious about is how GA status can be attained when so much text is cobbled together and extrapolated from trivial and/or primary and/or non-independent mentions, since that would seem to conflict with WP:PROPORTION and NOTNEWS? I've made suggestions to the nom and other NFL project members in the past regarding use of trivial mentions and bare stats as the bases of articles, and the extensive use of quote blocks, and they categorically do not agree that that is an issue, so I suspect they wouldn't be receptive. Also, is it typical for GAN reviewers to be directly solicited from projects the nominators are themselves heavily involved in, or for the same reviewer to review all or most of one nominator's nominations at one time? I tried to search the GAN archives for this after noticing this activity on so many pages on my watchlist lately, but couldn't find anything that seemed relevant. In this case it's around 16 gridiron player GAs passed since ~Aug 18 by this reviewer/nom pair. JoelleJay (talk) 02:32, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

GA is ultimately subjective. Reviewer roulette has always been a bit of an issue there. You might get someone like me, who won't pass anything under 800 words because there's almost no way it can be broad. You might get another reviewer who disagrees and will pass the article. Personally, like I said, I wouldn't have passed Vehmeier - I don't think assembling a body from quotes is encyclopedic writing, but GACR doesn't mandate following MOS:QUOTE. It might be worth having a discussion about that at WT:GAN, to be honest, because I think it's flatly incompatible with good writing but that's another animal.

There's no prohibition at GAN (or FAC for that matter) against soliciting reviews from people. I have been both the solicitor and the solicitee at both GAN and FAC. There's plenty of reasons to do it - sometimes it's the only way to get a review in a timely manner, maybe you want a reviewer that knows about the topic, and sometimes you just like working with a specific person. There is an expectation that the reviewer should provide appropriate criticism and not rubber-stamp anything, regardless of their relationship with the nominator. If you suspect that rubber-stamping of articles that don't meet the GACR is what's going on, you could take it to WT:GAN for input. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 21:09, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks PMC, I appreciate your looking into this and explaining the practical standards, since I know there's a lot more nuance and latitude to GA reviewing than the criteria let on. JoelleJay (talk) 02:37, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

FYI: https://wiki.alquds.edu/?query=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Fred_Vehmeier JoelleJay (talk) 17:42, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Quote DYKs are common, I've done a few. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 18:13, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Oh I know those are fine, I just thought it was kind of timely considering the discussion at GAN about quotes kind of veered into copyright questions, and DYK seems to be even more of a stickler about copyright. JoelleJay (talk) 22:57, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

The single quote is not a copyright issue, though, and I remain unconvinced that the overquoting is either. It's just poor writing. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:37, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Yeah I don't think overquoting is a copyright problem either (and of course not the single quote), but I wanted to know your thoughts on it given the GAN discussion. JoelleJay (talk) 23:45, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure what thoughts you want me to give, to be honest. The article passed GAN, so it meets the DYK criteria. The quote hook is not a problem, copyright-wise or DYK-wise. If you think the article doesn't meet the GACR, open a GAR; I personally don't have the appetite. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 01:48, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Chido Nwangwu speedy deletion nomination

FYI, I think Nwangwu may be notable. He’s prominent in the large Nigerian diaspora in the US. His news site, UsAfricaonline is one of the few reliable sources of news for Nigeria. AfD may be more appropriate. —A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 04:16, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi PMC -- Independently of the above, I declined this; I think our understanding of what falls under G11 is somewhat different. I don't think notability is currently demonstrated in the article, but this isn't an area in which I edit so I will leave you to decide whether AfD is the way to go. Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 07:52, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

Yes, clearly. G11 doesn't assess notability, it assesses promotionalism, and I don't see how you can read that article as anything other than a resume promoting the man. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:46, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

This is from WP:G11:

• ”If a subject is notable and the content could plausibly be replaced with text written from a neutral point of view, this is preferable to deletion.”

—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 04:08, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, I'm aware of what it says and don't require it to be quoted to me. It doesn't say it cannot be used on notable subjects (and in any case EA didn't believe he was notable anyway), just that rewriting may be preferred - and nobody opposing deletion has bothered to do so. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 18:13, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Evdokia Kozhevnikova

On 17 September 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Evdokia Kozhevnikova, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that although she never finished her dissertation, the fieldwork of Soviet ethnologist Evdokia Kozhevnikova (pictured) provides a valuable record of the culture and the language of the Georgian province of Svaneti? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Evdokia Kozhevnikova. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Evdokia Kozhevnikova), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

—Kusma (talk) 12:02, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Fonseca Island

I have recreated the page with more citations and details translated from German Wikipedia. Goustien (talk) 21:04, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

It looks much better now. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 05:00, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

At long last

		The Copyright Barnstar
		Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/ItsLassieTime is now history. Scorpions1325 and I may have been the editors who cleaned the final article, but we stood on the shoulders of giants. Thank you for all your hard work. — SamX [talk · contribs] 03:38, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Gabriella Baldacchino (actress)

Hello, during Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gabriella Baldacchino (Actress), the article got moved from Gabriella Baldacchino (Actress) to Gabriella Baldacchino (actress). Could you please also delete that? thanks. Wikishovel (talk) 06:34, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Oh shit yeah my bad, XfDcloser is supposed to catch those. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:01, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Mottin charentais / Charentais Mottin

Hi,

Some years ago now, you moved "Mottin charentais" to "Charentais Mottin" with the edit summary "correct name per fr.wiki". The French article is at fr:Mottin charentais, and shows a cheese with a printed wrapper reading "le MOTTIN CHARENTAIS". Adjectives normally follow nouns in French. I think the article should be at "Mottin charentais". Would you mind moving it back?

Best wishes, Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 15:41, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Huh, yeah, I'm not sure what my logic was there. I double checked fr.wiki and that article hasn't been moved either so it's not like I was following a name that's now been changed... anyway, I've reversed it. Sorry about that. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:21, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 06:59, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Promotion of Irere (Alexander McQueen collection)

Congratulations, Premeditated Chaos! The article you nominated, Irere (Alexander McQueen collection), has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:05, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

• Congratulations on the promotion! Aoba47 (talk) 00:48, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

  Thanks Aoba! Eye will be up next, and then I have to put my nose to the grindstone and get some more in the pipeline! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 01:02, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

  I am looking forward to seeing more of your future work. I do not have much in my pipeline either so I can understand that lol. Aoba47 (talk) 01:58, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

  Let me know next time you go to FAC and I'll be happy to chime in :) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:01, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

  Thank you! I will let you know. Hope you are having a good start to your October. I kind of hate that is already this far into the year lol. Aoba47 (talk) 02:27, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

  Ah, I love October (blanket weather <3), but it definitely feels like this year has gone by in a blink. Hope you're having a good one as well :) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:39, 2 October 2023 (UTC)