User talk:Crestfalling/Archive 1

Archive 1

Welcome!

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

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

Learn more about editing

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

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

Get help at the Teahouse

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

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Valorrr ^{(lets chat)} 22:53, 11 November 2025 (UTC)

The Executioner and Her Way of Life

Thanks for the review. I haven't done nominations in a while but if there is so much information of an adaptation, I recommend splitting it. I did that with Vinland Saga (TV series), D.Gray-man (TV series), X (TV series) and recently Heavenly Delusion as they are all based on a printed material. Also I recommend avoiding short paragraphs composed of a single sentence. Think of Wikipedia as a formal letter and give each paragraph a theme. If there is also information of characters' creation, I would also consider splitting the article in a character list. Happy holidays Tintor2 (talk) 13:28, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice! Most of my sources are from online interviews, so this is probably the most extensive coverage it can get. I'm not sure if the adaptation is unique enough on its own to qualify for a content split (same for the characters, unfortunately there's really not much info), but I'll take a look at those examples and consider it. I'll work on the paragraphing stuff. Happy holidays. Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 18:31, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2026!

Hello Crestfalling, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2026. Happy editing, Abishe (talk) 09:26, 25 December 2025 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Abishe (talk) 09:26, 25 December 2025 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Crestfalling!

Happy New Year!

Crestfalling,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Volten001 ^☎ 03:03, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

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

Volten001 ^☎ 03:03, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

Hope You're Happy, Lemon

Thanks for amending the synopsis for the article. I've always felt that the synopsis I put wasn't a good representation of the series, since I'm a reader of the series. Many thanks. SimonLagann (talk) 22:54, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

No problem, I really enjoy the series and wanted to improve the article a bit. Thanks for creating the article, and happy editing. Best, Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 23:14, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

the yuri award

	the yuri award
	congrats on getting sakura trick to ga (i really love that anime) and i look forward to your other anime/manga projects as i see in your user page :3 Skyshiftertalk 18:32, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

that's a banger of a first GA to have btw Skyshiftertalk 18:32, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you, very cute award! I enjoyed the anime too - it made me a bit sad to see the article so bare, and by the time I finished, I figured I might as well nominate it for GA. I hope to continue improving coverage of yuri articles in the future, I do have quite a few lined up :) Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 20:36, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for your work on Girls' Last Tour! I am glad nothing went to waste, and look forward to seeing more great work from you! GGOTCC 19:35, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you very much! I'm also happy that the article got to GA in the end, and appreciate the words of encouragement. Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 19:56, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Writing large sections based on a limited number of sources

Good morning. I appreciate your good faith intentions, but creating massive sections with supposedly in-depth explorations of the show's themes based on a cursory preview on ANN and a couple of reviews of the first episode clearly violates WP:UNDUE. I wouldn't mind if you wrote a long analytical section based on multiple sources after the show ended, but as it is, it just looks like you're over-quoting a couple of previews from just the first episode. You're not going to rewrite this section after every new episode, are you? Solaire the knight (talk) 05:41, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for reaching out. I created a discussion on the article's talk page, since I think it might be better placed there so that other people can also give opinions. I'll respond to your reply over there in a moment. Best, Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 05:45, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

FAC

Hello again. Thank you for the ping in your current FAC. I am glad that you have brought this article through the FAC process. I wanted to apologize, as I will not be able to do a review at this time. I also wanted to wish you luck on the nomination. I hope that you are having a wonderful weekend so far! Aoba47 (talk) 02:07, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

No worries! You already gave useful feedback, and your advice to seek FAC mentorship was what eventually gave me the confidence to nominate the article. I hope your weekend is going great too. Best, Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 02:19, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

I am glad that I could give you confidence! And thank you for the kind words! Aoba47 (talk) 23:08, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

January 2026 GOCE drive award

		The Cleanup Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to Crestfalling for copy edits totaling over 12,000 words (including bonus and rollover words) during the GOCE January 2026 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Dhtwiki (talk) 03:02, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Sakura Trick

Hello! Your submission of Sakura Trick 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! Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:29, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

please fix your script (and the broken articles it has touched)

For example, this reference was broken at this edit. As I write this, there are about a dozen broken articles listed in Category:CS1 errors: redundant parameter; you may not have been responsible for all of them but you were the responsible editor of the mainspace articles that I checked.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 22:48, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi. I've stopped using AWB and am checking right now. Thank you. Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 22:48, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Shouldn't Anime News Network not be italicized in the reference though? The article itself isn't. I disagree with mass changing of the website and publisher parameters like this. Skyshiftertalk 02:06, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi. The citation style uses italicization as a way to mark that it's a website (work) being referred to; for example, the article for BBC News marks itself as a website in the template. This italicization is distinct from how it would normally be referred to in prose.

The reason I'm doing this is to bring articles into compliance with the documentation for citation style 1, which states that "On websites, in most cases 'work' is the name of the website" and "if the work title as given by the site/publication would be exactly or substantially the same as the name of the publisher, do not use the 'publisher' parameter" [emphasis added]. As such, it's not a matter of preferred style, but rather direct advice for how to use citations correctly.

That being said, I understand that mass changes shouldn't be done if there's any doubt. Please let me know what you think of my above reasoning. I promise I won't make any more AWB changes until a reply, and I also promise that if you still disagree, then I'll seek consensus before making any changes. Thank you! Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 02:15, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

I believe a consensus is needed simply because using |publisher= for non-italicized websites is very, very common, and widespread through multiple FAs even. Even if policy says otherwise, the matter of fact is that, in practice, this is not followed, even for our highest quality articles. So yes, I think this needs discussion. Skyshiftertalk 02:26, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

In fact the documentation for CS1 is not a policy, as it reads on the top of the page: "It is not one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, and may reflect varying levels of consensus". Skyshiftertalk 02:29, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

I've opened a project discussion seeking wider feedback if you're interested in commenting. I tried my best to clearly and accurately convey your points; if you feel that I didn't do so, you have permission to edit that part of my comment. Again, thank you for bringing this up, and I apologize if I seemed a bit curt earlier; I understand your points, and didn't mean to accidentally come off as dismissive by pointing to a how-to-page. Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 04:39, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

Alright, I'll do that then. I wanted to make animanga articles more consistent since it seems to vary a lot within and across articles, but I understand your point that the preferred format isn't that clear. Thank you for the feedback, and I'm really sorry if this caused any trouble. Hopefully some comments from others can help determine if it's a change worth making. Best, Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 02:33, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

February 2026 GOCE blitz award

		The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to Crestfalling for copy edits totaling over 4,000 words (including rollover words) during the GOCE February 2026 Copy Editing Blitz. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! GoldRomean (talk) 00:37, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

Welcome to the drive!

Welcome, welcome, welcome Crestfalling! I'm glad that you are joining the March 2026 drive! Please, have a cup of WikiTea, and go cite some articles.

Fix a random page lacking sources

Cielquiparle (talk) 10:57, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

a Hi from ACM!

Got notified to say a hi to my new mentor, so did I. Cheers! ACMehta (talk) 21:34, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Apologies for the incredibly late reply, but hello! It's great to have you here, and feel free to reach out at any time if you have questions. Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 00:37, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

Use of Template:No plot

Hi! when you add a "No plot" tag please follow the instructions at Template:No plot, i.e. "Create a section called "Plot" and place "No plot|March 2026" in it.", eg. this way. My best, Cavarrone 10:39, 26 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for the information. I wasn't really sure how to do this, since animanga articles typically use either "Synopsis", "Plot", or "Premise" depending on whether a series is in-progress, complete, or part of a larger franchise, but I'll make sure to create a separate section regardless from now on, since it can anyways be edited. Best regards as well, Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 17:30, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

March 2026 GOCE drive award

		The Minor Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to Crestfalling for copy edits totaling between 1 and 3,999 words (including bonus and rollover words) during the GOCE March 2026 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! GoldRomean (talk) 23:06, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

CGDCT

Hello! As the author of articles about yuri/bishoujo/moe all-female titles, I thought you might be interested in the development of the CGDCT article and related discussions like this. I won't attempt to remove it or undermine the significance of the term itself, but the current state of the page is very disappointing to me, as most of the sources are either indirect or superficial "top 10 CGDCT anime" lists, with the primary source being the Game Rant page. I also think trying to define it as a separate genre is as questionable as singling out battle shonen or idol anime as separate genres, since it's more like Western fan slang for phenomena that actually exist within larger genres or media. My initial attempts to address this were canceled, so I want to bring more people with an interest in the topic and a unique perspective to the table. Solaire the knight (talk) 02:04, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi! I appreciate the notification; I haven't actually watched that many CGDCT shows, but it's certainly a common term and deserves to have a more complete article. (Personally, I've always considered it to be a specific style of the slice-of-life genre, but of course that's up to what reliable sources say.) Anyways, I'll take a look and see what I can do. Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 03:04, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply! I'm also inclined to think it's a form of slice-of-life anime, but hearing different opinions is definitely more useful than simply debating the dichotomy. Solaire the knight (talk) 03:12, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

February 2026 GAN Backlog Drive

		The Minor Barnstar
		This award is given to Crestfalling for accumulating at least 3 points in the February 2026 GAN Backlog Drive. Your dedicated reviews contributed to the successful reduction of the backlog and helped improve the quality of articles. Here's our token of appreciation. Thank you for your time and efforts, and hopefully we'll see you soon again! Fade258 (talk) 07:07, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

March 2026 WikiProject Unreferenced articles backlog drive – award

		Citation Barnstar
		This award is given in recognition to Crestfalling for collecting more than 5 points during the WikiProject Unreferenced articles's March 2026 backlog drive. Your contributions played a crucial role in sourcing over 8362 unsourced articles during the drive. Thank you so much for participating and helping to reduce the backlog! – DreamRimmer ■ 16:37, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted

Hi Crestfalling, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the new page reviewer user right to your account. This means you now have access to the page curation tools and can start patrolling pages from the new pages feed. If you asked for this at requests for permissions, please check back there to see if your access is time-limited or if there are other comments.

This is a good time to re-acquaint yourself with the guidance at Wikipedia:New pages patrol. Before you get started, please take the time to:

• Add Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers to your watchlist to follow NPP-related discussions
• If you use Twinkle, configure it to log your CSDs and PRODs
• If you can read any languages other than English, add yourself to the list of reviewers with language proficiencies

You can find a list of other useful links and tools for patrollers at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Resources. If you are ever unsure what to do, ask your fellow patrollers or just leave the page for someone else to review – you're not alone! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:47, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Question for Natalie link changes

Hello, I noticed you've been changing all links to Natalie (website) to specific editorial departments. I am curious if this really is necessary since Comic Natalie and Music Natalie do not have their own articles, and they both redirect to Natalie (website) anyway. lullabying (talk) 04:05, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

Hi. The main reason I'm making the change is to conform with how reliable sources treat the site, since they virtually always cite the individual Natalie websites rather than citing Natalie directly (examples in Special:Permalink/1355957425). Additionally, this also improves consistency: Citoid, the tool used by Mediawiki's referencing software, automatically retrieves the metadata given by the websites when filling out citation parameters, and that metadata for Natalie websites includes the full name for the website= parameter. Using a site's own provided English-language title is, in most cases, preferable since a website is being cited as a published work (see MOS:ITALICWEBSITE for this).

While they both redirect to Natalie (website), it affects how they display to readers and editors, which is one of the main purposes of citation templates. The wikilinks are secondary (usually I leave them alone: if it's already wikilinked, I keep it that way, and otherwise I don't actively link unlinked parameters). Additionally, if Comic Natalie, for example, ever receives enough significant coverage to merit its own article (I'm actually quite sure it has enough, but I haven't gotten around to drafting it yet), then the links will have to be disambiguated anyway. That being said, if you think the edits to [[Natalie (website)|Natalie]] links aren't necessary, I'll pause them for the time being until there's greater consensus, and focus my efforts on ensuring accurate transliteration of parameters that are already there (e.g. コミックナタリ-> Comic Natalie). I hope this helps, and thank you for the inquiry. Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 04:35, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

I think it'd be better to wait on it until they've actually been drafted. Comic Natalie doesn't even redirect to a section on the main Natalie (website) article, so it doesn't really make much of a difference for now. lullabying (talk) 05:37, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

Got it, I understand that perspective. Just as a point of clarification, do you think it would be fine to convert parameters such as "website=コミックナタリー" (which is just Komikku Natarī) to "website=Comic Natalie"? Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 05:41, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

Better revert your edits as it seems a WP:COSMETICBOT on articles that clearly WP:NOTBROKEN and if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Also a violation MOS:NOPIPE imo. ꕥ 𝙳.𝟷𝟾𝚝𝚑 ꕥ ^{→𝙼𝚎𝚜𝚜𝚊𝚐𝚎 𝚖𝚎←} 14:56, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for the inquiry, but I'd like to gently point out that this may not be a correct interpretation of the policies and guidelines. WP:COSMETICBOT notes that "changes considered substantive affect something visible to readers and consumers of Wikipedia", and the rendering of links from Natalie -> Comic Natalie is a clearly visible change. Neither WP:NOTBROKEN or MOS:NOPIPE are relevant, since they both discourage changing a redirect to a piped link, whereas I'm changing a piped link to a more specific redirect. In fact, WP:NOTBROKEN notes that linking to a more specific redirect may be preferable for accuracy, while MOS:NOPIPE notes that a redirected term is preferable over a piped one when it is accurately used, so they're actually saying the opposite.

WP:AINTBROKE is an essay, and the last sentence is "On the other hand, if something is slightly broken in a way that you care about, and fixing it improves the encyclopedia a little, then feel free to fix it." Linking to individual Natalie websites is common practice and in line with convention for a published work's title, which a website is per WP:ITALICWEBCITE. You're of course free to revert for an individual article, but I think it's a bit much to revert en masse, especially given almost 4000 articles use this convention for Comic Natalie alone, and less than 1/5th of those are from my edits.

Of course, I'm not perfect and I'll readily admit to having made mistakes on occasion, so if you can clearly explain how policies and guidelines apply here, I'm open to hear them. For now, I'll simply start a discussion. Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 16:21, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. One major detail to consider is that all of these individual Natalie websites are under the parent domain: 'natalie.mu', right? The specific department (Comic, Eiga, etc.) is already completely transparent to the reader and metadata scrapers via the URL parameter. Using mass automated tools to change Natalie to a specific redirect doesn't add any new functional information that the URL hasn't already provided. It simply creates immense watchlist clutter for zero technical gain. I am completely fine with using this style for new articles, but mass-sweeping existing, perfectly functional citations across thousands of pages (which you already did) is unnecessary. And yes, it is too much to revert en masse. ꕥ 𝙳.𝟷𝟾𝚝𝚑 ꕥ ^{→𝙼𝚎𝚜𝚜𝚊𝚐𝚎 𝚖𝚎←} 18:05, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Although they share the parent domain, reliable English-language sources generally treat them as separate websites because they share no relation other than being owned by the same company; additionally, for people using mobile devices, which constitute most of Wikipedia's readers, the URL isn't transparent in citations and it's cumbersome to navigate to a new page to check it. Furthermore, while any citation with a valid URL is functional, some are more informative than others, and WP:CITE encourages improving its reader-facing aspects when possible. Finally, MOS:NOTBROKEN also notes that specific redirects are useful because they indicate an article is wanted, which is the main purpose of a {{R from possibilities}}.

I apologize for the watchlist clutter; I try and work in long sessions so that people don't have to clear watchlists multiple times. The problem is that many of the Natalie citation styles are on older pages, and editors are gradually standardizing them manually, which can easily take 30 seconds or more on articles with multiple Natalie citations. You can imagine how much time this takes across thousands of articles. As such, I figured I would spend a few hours on my day off to take care of things once and for all, and save time for other editors in the future. That being said, if you'd prefer I not do this, I completely understand and I'm fine with striking the task for now. I hope this helps clarify things. Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 18:28, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for finishing reviewing a GAN

I would like to thank you for finishing reviewing Fuuto PI: The Portrait of Kamen Rider Skull. I had started to review the GAN, but I got busy. I appreciate you covering for me. Keep up the good work. Z. Patterson (talk) 01:18, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

No problem, and thank you very much. Kamakou also helped with the GAN, and I'm grateful that she and I were able to finish the review since the article was in great shape. Glad to see you're back :) Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 03:00, 28 May 2026 (UTC)