User talk:MatthewHoobin/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Nomination of Creepy Company for deletion [result: page deleted]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Creepy Company, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Creepy Company until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:03, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Psychicpebbles

Hello, MatthewHoobin. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Psychicpebbles".

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. If 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!} 19:00, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Correct namespace for userboxes that have nothing to do with building an encyclopedia

When creating userboxes, please note that most should be in user space, not template space, per WP:UBM. I went ahead and moved {{UBX-nes}}, {{UBX-nintendoswitch}}, and {{UBX-nintendoswitchlite}}. I'm not sure what other userboxes you have created; please move those as well. Thanks! – voidxor 16:17, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Watermen (occupation)

I would be grateful to know why this reproduction of 140 year old painting was removed. I thought it was beautiful and worth more than thousand words.110.142.177.138 (talk) 00:29, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

@110.142.177.138: My apologies. At the time I removed the image, I didn't realize that the rowing race the painting depicts (the Doggett's Coat and Badge) has as its participants apprentice watermen. I've re-added the painting to the article, now with a caption explaining its relevance to the topic of watermen. —Matthew - (talk) 02:28, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, MatthewHoobin

Thank you for creating Apps (film).

User:Jupitus Smart, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Good work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Jupitus Smart}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Jupitus Smart 02:54, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Chris Chan draft

I noticed you went ahead and created a Chris Chan draft page, and just thought I'd share some thoughts about it.

While I am of the opinion that Chris Chan could certainly meet wp:PERP, the incest allegations are new enough that you will likely face opposition in the form of wp:NOTNEWS. Additionally, you may find opposition in the form of WP:BIODEL, as Chris can be legitimately argued to be a marginally interesting or notable character.

I think it may be wise to have some rebuttals to those points I just raised, and perhaps seek consensus (best way to do so imo would be to contest a deletion; that tends to get uninvolved eyeballs on the page) when the draft comes up for review.

Good luck,

69.172.145.94 (talk) 05:40, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

In light of recent developments involving Isabella Loretta Janke, who apparently blew the story of incest (the whole WP:PERP rationale), I think it's best that we not create a mainspace page for Chris Chan for now - not until the dust settles. It seems Janke herself is a profoundly disturbed individual, and as the investigation continues by various media outlets, the facts may change dramatically - which conflicts with our WP:NOTNEWS. Best, 69.172.145.94 (talk) 15:57, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

ANI notice and copying warning

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from one or more pages into another page. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. Nil Einne (talk) 12:45, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Chris Chan. Thank you. Nil Einne (talk) 12:45, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

To follow up, I mentioned you because I noticed in the edit history of Draft:Chris Chan you said you took the text from some other draft. Please note as the template above outlines, when you copy content within Wikipedia you need to ensure you properly attribute where you took the content from to comply with our licence terms. Failing to do so is likely a copyright violation if there are other contributors to the text you copied. But also since attribution a deleted page is useless, if the article or draft you took the content from was deleted, you really should get it undeleted before trying to do anything. We need the contribution history or a list of contributors. Anyway, now that you've done it, assuming your draft is kept, you will need to work with some admin (I'm not an admin) to find where you copied the text from and undelete the contribution history or otherwise make a list of contributors available. It may be that the draft is going to be deleted soon enough that this isn't worth the effort, I don't know. But if it still exists a week from now and it hasn't been dealt with you should get on to it. Nil Einne (talk) 12:45, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

@Nil Einne: Thank you for bringing this to my attention. (Redacted) is an archived copy of the draft from which I took most of the content. I'm not able to access the history of contributors. In any case, it looks like the draft article has been deleted again and salted for good measure. —Matthew - (talk) 22:59, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Since the draft you created has been deleted, it's no longer a problem. As I said, in future if you need to reintroduce deleted content, you should work for it to be undeleted first. This is particularly important since putting aside the necessary attribution to our fellow contributors, you may not be aware of the full reasoning behind the deleted. You may therefore be reintroducing content which had good reasons for deletion. As I understand it, in this case some draft was suppressed so there was therefore a strong risk you were reintroducing suppressed content. I have no idea if that includes the version you linked to but I've removed your link just in case and will ask for it to be suppressed. Please don't link to it again. As I said, if the content is to be reintroduced here, it will need to be undeleted here rather than copied and pasted from some other backup. The alternative it so start a clean draft without relying on any content which was deleted. I do not think either are a good idea at this time since there seems to be something close to consensus there is no way the sources justify an article. Nil Einne (talk) 23:08, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Darby Jones

On 8 August 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Darby Jones, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that film critic Danny Peary described Darby Jones (pictured) as having been "even more typecast than the typical black actor", limited to roles in jungle-themed films? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Darby Jones. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Darby Jones), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:02, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of L.A. Wars

The article L.A. Wars has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non notable film, fails WP:NFILM

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DonaldD23 talk to me 12:19, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Junk (film)

On 15 September 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Junk (film), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the cast and crew of the zombie film Junk, which made use of real meat for its gore effects, were sometimes unable to stomach meat for dinner after spending hours filming? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Junk (film). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Junk (film)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:04, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Changing the name of a decade section on horror film

Dear Matthew I have a request for you can you change the name of the 1970s–1980s section into the 1970s and 1980s section on horror film the decade sections need to look better like this.
1890s–1910s
1920s
1930s
1940s
1950s
1960s
1970s and 1980s
1990s
2000s
2010s
See you can't tell the difference all you have to do for horror film is change the name 1970s–1980s into 1970s and 1980s will you do it? Grapple wyz (talk) 22:56, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

It's a request for you to edit horror film you can either change it into a 1970s and 1980s section or you can split them into a 1970s and a 1980s section like this.
1890s–1910s
1920s
1930s
1940s
1950s
1960s
1970s
1980s
1990s
2000s
2010s
Which ever is on your mind. Grapple wyz (talk) 23:05, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Judging by your article and picture I have to say you're a fan of horror films especially 70s and 80s movies that's why I'm making a request for you can you either change the 1970s–1980s section into the 1970s and 1980s section or split the 1970s–1980s section into the 1970s section and the 1980s section? Grapple wyz (talk) 23:13, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Will you go to horror film's talk page and talk to them about splitting the 1970s–1980s section into a 1970s section and a 1980s section? Grapple wyz (talk) 00:16, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

@Grapple wyz: I've split the section in two. —Matthew - (talk) 00:20, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

This was a sockpuppet of a LTA please don't make proxy edits on their behalf. - MrOllie (talk) 01:51, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

@MrOllie: I was not aware of that. Thank you for letting me know. —Matthew - (talk) 02:35, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

"Ninja film" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Ninja film. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 16#Ninja film until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 16:21, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Psychicpebbles

Hello, MatthewHoobin. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Psychicpebbles".

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. If 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. ✗plicit 10:31, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, MatthewHoobin

Thank you for creating Mono No Aware (album).

User:Dan arndt, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Please not Bandcamp is not an acceptable or reliable source - it should be replaced with a suitable independent source.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Dan arndt}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Dan arndt (talk) 07:14, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

"The Rake (creepypasta)" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect The Rake (creepypasta). The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 December 17#The Rake (creepypasta) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Softlavender (talk) 06:18, 17 December 2021 (UTC)