User talk:Premeditated Chaos/Archive 25

♠ 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.

Happy Nineteenth First Edit Day!

Hey, Premeditated Chaos. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Chris Troutman (talk) 16:19, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

Why was my page on Nicolas Pascarel deleted? I want to recreate the page

I want to recreate the page asd (talk) 18:48, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Read the blue banner at the top of the page and follow the directions before you post here again. Also, your signature needs to be changed; your username is not clear from it at all. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 20:20, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Hola

Hey PMC, good job with the orphaned articles! I'm back from my break so looking forward to getting the rest networked up SITH (talk) 21:05, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Yoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo! What a blast from the past. Good to see you back! You should hop on the Discord sometime :) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:24, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Illusion of Kate Moss

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Illusion of Kate Moss 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 LunaEatsTuna -- LunaEatsTuna (talk) 04:03, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Illusion of Kate Moss

The article Illusion of Kate Moss you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Illusion of Kate Moss for comments about the article, and Talk:Illusion of Kate Moss/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 LunaEatsTuna -- LunaEatsTuna (talk) 06:44, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Happy holidays!

Hello Premeditated Chaos: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 03:17, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 03:17, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Alexander McQueen

Please note that a one-off element of a runway show that is not an actual object available anywhere else should not be considered a well-known design of a fashion designer. The image projection also something created by other people, even if it is his idea. There are numerous such elements in his shows, some of them better-known (for example, the robot spray painting, the glass box), don't clatter the lead with them. There are many other things that he actually designed and better known that could be put in the lead ahead of the illusion, like the bumster. Hzh (talk) 13:30, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Don't be silly, just because he didn't physically build it with his hands doesn't make it not his own design - he didn't hand carve the individual armadillo boots either, but those are unquestionably his design. Widows is one of his most significant shows, and the illusion was the banger closing element that people remember years later. It was displayed as an artwork in its own right at the V&A. Obviously it is a significant piece of his design, and unlike the bumsters, it has an article. It belongs in the lead. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 13:59, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

There is a big difference between an actual object designed, and a idea realised. It is also entirely misleading to mention it as one of his designs - people simply don't consider elements in a show as an object designed by a fashion designer, it is not a fashion item. Whether it has its own article is irrelevant - you created the article, all you are doing now is just to publicise your article. Other design elements may be more worthy of inclusion or their own articles, for example the robot spray-painting (that one had more publicity, I even remember one TV show on McQueen where it was the main subject of discussion, and it has also been exhibited). Plenty of McQueen's works are exhibited, you simply cannot list them all in the lead. Mentioning it in isolation (since it is not a fashion item) gives it more prominence than it warrants. Unless you want to devote a paragraph in the lead on his runway shows, it should be not be included. Hzh (talk) 14:23, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Note also that it other people objected to your edit, per WP:BRD, you should discuss it first before reverting it back. Hzh (talk) 14:33, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm on vacation, per my userpage, so try to be a tad more patient before you accuse me of abandoning a discussion. I'll respond to you further when I'm able but for now I'm going to enjoy the beach. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 19:29, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Per your request, lead rewritten entirely and now accommodates a mention of the robots and the illusion. Article updated as well since the legacy section was a bit outdated. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 18:55, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

@Hzh, if you haven't looked at BRD since you were a new editor, then you might want to take note of the word "optional" in its first sentence. Wikipedia:What editors mean when they say you have to follow BRD isn't BRD itself. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:21, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Ah, don't worry about it, the lead looks much better with the revisions so in the end I'm glad this gave me the motivation to rewrite it. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 17:59, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

DYK for The Widows of Culloden

On 28 December 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Widows of Culloden, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the runway show for the Alexander McQueen collection The Widows of Culloden ended with an illusion of Kate Moss that brought the audience to a rowdy standing ovation? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Widows of Culloden. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, The Widows of Culloden), 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, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

What an incredible read, brilliant research, thank you. No Swan So Fine (talk) 13:42, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

@No Swan So Fine, thank you for reading and enjoying them! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 14:55, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Illusion of Kate Moss

On 28 December 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Illusion of Kate Moss, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the runway show for the Alexander McQueen collection The Widows of Culloden ended with an illusion of Kate Moss that brought the audience to a rowdy standing ovation? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Widows of Culloden. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Illusion of Kate Moss), 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, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 17,073 views (711.4 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of December 2022 – nice work!

GalliumBot (talk • contribs) (he/it) 03:30, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Widows of Culloden

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Widows of Culloden 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 Trainsandotherthings -- Trainsandotherthings (talk) 14:21, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Widows of Culloden

The article The Widows of Culloden you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Widows of Culloden for comments about the article, and Talk:The Widows of Culloden/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 Trainsandotherthings -- Trainsandotherthings (talk) 15:21, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

♠ New Year's Wishes ♠

Happy New Year, PMC! Thanks for your contributions and supportive words to the users of Wikipedia during your nineteenth year on the free encyclopaedia. Including—by no means limited to—getting eight-ball jacket, illusion of Kate Moss (ayyy!) and The Widows of Culloden (at the last second!) to GA status. I hope we get to interact even more throughout 2023. Have a great day!

Yours truly, 𓃦LunaEatsTuna (💬) 00:06, 1 January 2023 (UTC) (It is now New Year's Day in UTC)

Birdhaur

Hi. You added a link to the census, but it will not open for me. Could you please double check the link? It could be my computer, but I'd like to make sure. Thanks in advance. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:32, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Link's correct, but the Census of India website has been super fucky for at least the last year or so. They're badly overdue for Census 2021 what with COVID and all, and I think they just threw up their hands and decided who gives a shit about Census 2011. Meanwhile, we've blacklisted the best mirror, Census2011.co.in, but here's a link to the Birdhaur entry there: https://www.census2011.co.in/data/village/365211-birdhaur-jharkhand.html. I've never had any issue with the accuracy of their data, which is ripped wholesale from the original census. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 20:32, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

I've asked at MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist#Proposed_removals for the blacklist to be lifted, at least until the new Census is conducted and uploaded. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 20:52, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Discuss Reinstating an Entry

Hi Premeditated Chaos,

I would like to kindly request a second look at the deleted entry for "Aleks Oniszczak" https://wikiarchive.miraheze.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Aleks_Oniszczak. To cut to the chase, I think the entry merits a reinstatement due to at least one important work: being one of the inventors of the technology behind the current Apple "Magic Trackpad" with multitouch surface as found on all current Apple MacBook computers. The invention is well documented in the CHI 1997 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/The-tactile-touchpad-MacKenzie-Oniszczak/d0b97061ce4c3615214d713d6af09be681c77269. The followup paper "A comparison of three selection techniques for touchpads" in the 1998 Engineering Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems has been cited 116 times. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/A-comparison-of-three-selection-techniques-for-MacKenzie-Oniszczak/f940911596d8f98fe7cea9f97a9fe260889a8d76

Thank you for your consideration of this matter. 99.224.63.243 (talk) 05:56, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Both of those are papers co-authored by him, so they can't support a claim to notability. We need significant independent coverage in order to retain an article - that means coverage in sources he didn't write. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 09:09, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Your GA review of Muhajir (Pakistan)

Hi, I noticed that in your GA review of Muhajir (Pakistan) you stated 'The culture section is underbaked and somewhat unencyclopedic' can you please provide me with some more details of the grievances in that section. Please leave a post on my talk as I am prone to forgetfulness and might not recheck this page.

Muhajir (talk) 18:52, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Requesting review of previously deleted article - Narendra Nath Yaddanapudi

Hi, this article was previously deleted for lack of credibility. However, I truly believe and can validate that this article does satisfy the criteria. The director has made a film with top actors/actresses from tollywood. The lead actress is a national award winner. I would like the opportunity to put this update for debate so I can prove credibility. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pilot03 (talk • contribs)

Read the big blue banner at the top of the page. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 19:36, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Notability Criteria -

• Directed Miss_India_(film) - with national award winning actress Keerthy Suresh that acted in over 30 films
• Film was released on OTT platform due to Covid. It was released in three languages.
• Currently he is also working as a Producer at GOLDEN DIAMOND ENTERTAINMENTS
• Won the Best Debut Director – Special Jury 2020 for his film ‘Miss India’- Santhosham Awards 2021
• In the deletion log, it was stated that he only directed one movie, but he has multiple projects that he is directing

References

Pilot03 (talk) 21:08, 21 January 2023 (UTC)Pilot03

None of the sources linked are reliable sources with significant coverage of the subject Narendra Nath Yaddanapudi. Coverage or notability of other people does not support a claim to notability for Yaddanapudi. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 21:30, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Simenona

This entry does have creditable verified sources. 66.74.128.152 (talk) 13:05, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Simenona has never been article, and you didn't bother to post any sources anyway, so you might as well have just not posted at all for all the usefulness this post provided. Link whatever article you're actually talking about and post actual sources or don't bother replying. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 20:36, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Deleted Page Karl Lagasse

Hi, hope you are doing well. This article was deleted some months ago: Karl Lagasse. As I did not have time or the opportunity to send my arguments on the discussion page of the article. I have been working on the text of the article again, trying to prove the notability of the artist. Is there a possibility to recreate the article again in this draft space, asking other editors to help work on it, and move it into "article space" when it is ready? or, what are the options just to create the English version of the already french article? I want to mention that the artist Karl Lagasse has an original version of the Wikipedia article in French, since most of his 25 years as an artists were in France, I wanted to create the English version with updated information about his career, as he has lived in the USA since 2018 and has recently been nationalized as an US citizen.

Looking forward for your help and response, 3d.nftart (talk) 20:52, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Did you read the big blue banner at the top of the page? ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:54, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi, hope you are doing well. This article was deleted some months ago: Karl Lagasse. As I did not have time or the opportunity to send my arguments on the discussion page of the article. I have been working on the text of the article again, trying to prove the notability of the artist. Here are some sources to indicate the notability of the artists- He is mentioned in several independent art and news magazines (some of them are in French): [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]

Lagasse is represented by more than 80 galleries worldwide. Here are some of them:

1. Artsper: Is one of the world leaders in the sale of contemporary art online. Karl Lagasse is represented by Artsper.
2. Design by Jaler: Art Gallery in Paris France, partnered with Artsper N°1 European platform for online contemporary art sales. Karl Lagasse has been in several exhibitions represented by the gallery.
3. Be Crazy Art Store: French art gallery that offers a range of street art artists, but also pop art, and some contemporary art. The gallery has represented famous artists like Jeff Koons.

Is there a possibility to recreate the article again in this draft space, asking other editors to help work on it, and move it into "article space" when it is ready? or, what are the options just to create the English version of the already french article? I want to mention that the artist Karl Lagasse has an original version of the Wikipedia article in French, since most of his 25 years as an artists were in France, I wanted to create the English version with updated information about his career, as he has lived in the USA since 2018 and has recently been nationalized as an US citizen. Looking forward for your help and response 3d.nftart (talk) 17:20, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

You didn't need to repeat your entire first message and start a brand new section. Please keep further replies in this section, and please stop doing the weird formatting thing where you put a line break between every sentence and make your messages take up half the page. It's very annoying to read. I've reformatted it for the sake of my eyes.

The sources you've posted above were mentioned and analysed at the original AfD. If you look at the gray bar that says "Source assessment table:" and click "Show", it will expand into a large table that shows why the original nominator did not find those sources reliable - mainly because many are interviews or are based on press releases from the artist. I'm not inclined to undelete a highly promotional article that was deleted at AfD with a reasonable consensus when the best sources you can provide are ones that were already considered and discarded at the AfD. Gallery representation alone is not an indication of notability so I won't bother with that further. You're always free to start a new version in draftspace, which frankly might be better given that the original was so promotional and overwritten it would have had to be blown up and started again anyway. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:34, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

The Dance of the Twisted Bull

Nice article! I really enjoyed it. BorgQueen (talk) 20:54, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, @BorgQueen, it's sweet of you to say :D ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:47, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thank you for reviewing Muhajir (Pakistan)

Muhajir (talk) 18:11, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Four Awarding

Hi Premeditated Chaos and thanks for helping out in checking and giving Four Awards! Per Wikipedia:Four Award/Instructions, make sure you increment the author tally on the main page if it's a first-time winner, as I believe it was in Astrophobe's case. — Bilorv (talk) 21:06, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

DC GAR

I'd like to move user:SandyGeorgia/sandbox9 to GA space today (Tuesday); might you have a look at it before I do that? If you have any suggestions, it would help to have them with the rest at User talk:SandyGeorgia#PLEASE review my sandbox. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 06:27, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Hey Sandy, looking now.

• Under the first header, why are we asking people to start talk page discussions rather than directing them to remove problematic content? I thought the whole point was that we've removed the presumption of good faith and are now empowered to slash and burn
• I would reword from "consider" adding to the CCI to just "please add to the CCI", it's firmer
• The rest looks basically fine, it's a bit of a complicated process but I think that's the nature of any big endeavour like this.

♠PMC♠ (talk) 19:43, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

On your first point, MER-C has already given me new/better text (I'm iPad editing from Dr. Appt so haven't yet fixed that). Second point, will do. When I'm home ... thanks again! Do you have a strong opinion on whether I should avoid using the name Doug Coldwell in the GA subpage name? I'm hearing different opinions at GAN talk, but MER-C felt we should NOT use the name, rather a numbering system (as CCI does), as there are other Doug Coldwell's in the world, and we will be spreading that name across 200+ talk pages. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:56, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

I think it can't hurt to use the CCI approach. The account name can be mentioned within the subpage, as it is at CCI, so I think there will be minimal confusion and it will indeed be kinder to the other Doug Coldwells of the world. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 20:16, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Sounds about right ... having a name for the page will help me get this wrapped up. On it as soon as I get home. Thanks! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:19, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

DYK for The Dance of the Twisted Bull

On 2 February 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Dance of the Twisted Bull, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a model walked the runway at the Alexander McQueen show The Dance of the Twisted Bull in a flamenco dress pierced with spears? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Dance of the Twisted Bull. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, The Dance of the Twisted Bull), 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) 00:03, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Armadillo shoe

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 7 March 2023. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/March 2023, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/March 2023. I suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from two days before it appears on the Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work!—Wehwalt (talk) 18:22, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 3

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Widows of Culloden, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Andrew Bolton.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello there

Hello again! I hope you are doing well. I just wanted to say you are doing really awesome work with all of the Alexander McQueen collection, and I wish you the best of luck with the FAC for The Widows of Culloden. Unfortunately, I doubt I will be able to do a review for the FAC, but I still wanted to say congrats on all that work. I keep meaning to work on fashion articles. I just need to figure out how to better balance Wikipedia with off-Wiki projects before jumping into a completely new area. Anyway, sorry for this super random message. I hope you have a great weekend! Aoba47 (talk) 01:29, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi Aoba! It's always lovely to hear from you, please never apologize for getting in touch :) No worries about the review! It's a pretty long, dense article. I appreciate you taking the time to reach out regardless, positive feedback is so rare and always welcome. If you do ever get some time and still have the interest, Illusion of Kate Moss is much shorter and will be up next, and The Dance of the Twisted Bull (also shorter and with much less dense scholarly analysis) will be up after that. Please let me know about your next GA or FAC as well, I'm happy to take a look! Cheers and hope your weekend is a good one too. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 01:36, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the kind words! I will check out both articles in the future, and I would (at least hopefully) have the time to review both at the FAC stage. It is fun and rewarding in my opinion to read a longer, more dense article because I feel like I get a much richer and deeper understanding and appreciation of the subject matter. And not to sound too superficial, but I find that even just seeing the images from the shows to be incredibly inspiring. I will keep you updated for sure whenever I do another GA or FAC. Always glad to hear from you too! Aoba47 (talk) 01:52, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Daniel Ménard

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Daniel Ménard 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 ScottishFinnishRadish -- ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:02, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

@ScottishFinnishRadish: and PMC - I'm not familiar with the GA nomination process, so here is my small bit of feedback after reading the article. At section "Affair with subordinate" it mentions Yon and I ask who is Yon? It needs to be clarified for readers not aware of bloggers. Regards, JoeNMLC (talk) 15:14, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

They are identified, and their name wikilinked in the section above. There are only two mentions of the name, so I don't think using the full name both times would be necessary. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:19, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

@ScottishFinnishRadish: - thanks for correcting me, you are right - if I only had more than two eyes. JoeNMLC (talk) 20:41, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

No worries, it's easy to miss things while reading. I had to scan back up to find the full name while I was reading as well. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:58, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Daniel Ménard

The article Daniel Ménard you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Daniel Ménard for comments about the article, and Talk:Daniel Ménard/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 ScottishFinnishRadish -- ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:02, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Dance of the Twisted Bull

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Dance of the Twisted Bull 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 Sammi Brie -- Sammi Brie (talk) 01:21, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Dance of the Twisted Bull

The article The Dance of the Twisted Bull 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 Dance of the Twisted Bull and Talk:The Dance of the Twisted Bull/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Sammi Brie -- Sammi Brie (talk) 01:41, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Dance of the Twisted Bull

The article The Dance of the Twisted Bull you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Dance of the Twisted Bull for comments about the article, and Talk:The Dance of the Twisted Bull/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 Sammi Brie -- Sammi Brie (talk) 06:01, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fairy (Artemis Fowl)

Thanks for considering and discussing the ATD of merging. I think the way the participants addressed it and you closed it is precisely the way it's supposed to work when there's nothing worth merging. Jclemens (talk) 01:03, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

A Barnstar for you!!!

		The Teamwork Barnstar
		For your participation and help at Wikipedia:Good Article proposal drive 2023. It wouldn't have been such a success without you. 🏵️Etrius ( Us) 20:42, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

• Etriusus, you're too kind. You're the real MVP for actually launching and effectively coordinating the drive. Working with Wikipedians can be like herding cats (very much myself included), and you did a great job. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:06, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

  Awww, thanks (you're gonna make me blush) . I wanted to give out kind barnstars for those who participated, 'specially those who were major contributors. An event is only as good as those who contribute, and I'm just floored by the amount of support it received. This is my way of saying thank you, with a nice fancy barnstar to hang on the fridge. 🏵️Etrius ( Us) 22:53, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Mea culpa

Per this, I'm not sure how that happened. Some newfangled edit conflict screen appeared. And – while I appreciate the hard work that went into improving the edit conflict system! – it looks like I botched it and somehow deleted part of your comment. My mistake! I was about to fix it manually but you beat me to it. Ajpolino (talk) 01:56, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Nah, you're all good, I figured it was an error and not on purpose :) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 01:59, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Band drama!

Hi there.

Last year, when you reviewed my GA nomination for a song by the Kinks, you mentioned offhandedly an interest in band drama. I thought you may be interested in an article I just created which is full of exactly that: The Kinks' 1965 US tour. It was quite a disaster. I think I may work this article up to featured status eventually, so I'd appreciate it if you had any prose improvements, as I remember your suggestions being quite good the last time around ... that said, I promise I only brought this to you because I figured you'd be interested in it! Not because I'm trying to solicit any help. Anyway, I hope all is well with you. Cheers. Tkbrett (✉) 12:53, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Oh fun! You were lovely to work with last time and the article looks interesting. I'd be happy to do a GA review for it if you want to toss a nomination up - might as well take the extra step and do the formal process, as it certainly looks in a position to pass GA. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 16:23, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Wow, that would be great! I really appreciated your incisive comments last time around. I've made some more changes to the page to flesh out and rewrite bits I didn't like, but now I think I'm ready. I've nominated it. Tkbrett (✉) 17:40, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

I've grabbed the review :) Per my usual, I should get to it within a week or so, but feel free to hassle me if I let it slide longer than that. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:29, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Promotion of The Widows of Culloden

Congratulations, Premeditated Chaos! The article you nominated, The Widows of Culloden, 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, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

All seriousness aside ...

Never mix a metaphor you can puree. (Thanks again.)
Olivetheother (talk) 21:05, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

I don't know what this is supposed to mean, and your newest change to the article actively made the formatting worse by making the image tiny and section-breaking. Can you please stop mucking about with it? ♠PMC♠ (talk) 21:19, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Four Award

		Four Award
		Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on The Widows of Culloden. — Bilorv (talk) 10:35, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

Congratulations! Sorry that I didn't make it to the FAC in time. - Thank you today also for Armadillo shoe, introduced: "British designer Alexander McQueen was a wild child of fashion, a theatrical mastermind known for runway shows that doubled as performance art. Never was that more true than at his final show, Plato's Atlantis (2009), which featured a number of models walking in foot-tall armadillo shoes that made them look like alien ballerinas. The shoes were both lauded and loathed by the press and the public: many reviews called them grotesque and beautiful in the same sentence. Lady Gaga became famously associated with them after wearing them in a music video and on the red carpet. They remain a subject of fascination for academics and fashion journalists – and me – to this day." --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:54, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Gerda! :) No worries, there will always be more fashion to write about later. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 05:30, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

1911-1912 Barcelona Season

Hi! We talked 3 months ago about your delete closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1911-12 FC Barcelona season, and I said I'd find sources on the article. I was wondering what would be the best way to show you sources. There are plenty of newspaper reports in digital libraries, such as this one reporting on a 1911 match between Barça and Real Sociedad, as well as in the BNE, such as this one describing in detail their 1912 Copa del Rey Final win (teams participating in the Copa del Rey saw wide coverage in Spain as can be seen in my work for 1919 Copa del Rey Final). I could find another if necessary and link it as part of a reply, but trust this should be enough to convince you of the season's notability. If you deem this sufficient to prove notability, how should we proceed? — Ixtal ^{( T / C )} ⁂ Non nobis solum. 10:50, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Come on, at least give me the title of the article that's the match report or the location on the page. You've linked an entire newspaper page in tiny print and in Spanish. I tried to use Google Translate on the OCR text but I'm not seeing the match report, just a letter to the newspaper from (I think?) someone at the sports club. The second ref looks fine, from what I can tell via OCR/GTranslate. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 12:37, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

I apologize, I must have misread the first source when looking through it. From the same newspaper in 1912 we can find match reports of the Copa del Rey Final (section titled "'Barcelona' campéon"), a minor cup match against Espanyol (section titled "FOOT-BALL Copa Ciudad-La Riva"), a match of the Catalan Championship (section titled "LOS CONCURSOS DE LA F.C.C.F 'Catala' - 'Barcelona'"), and the inaugural match of that year's Copa del Rey (section titled "CAMPEONATO DE ESPAÑA 'España' - 'Barcelona'"). The same newspaper also would published details of future matches, such as these news of an upcoming friendly against New Crusaders F.C. (section titled "New-Crusaders de Londres contra F.C. Barcelona").

Reports of their other matches of the Copa del Rey, Catalan Championship, and major friendlies can be found either in this newspaper or in others from the era. — Ixtal ^{( T / C )} ⁂ Non nobis solum. 13:24, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Okay, I've restored the history. Left as redirect for now so you can work on it at leisure and restore it when you want to. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:12, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Much appreciated ^u^, I'll get on it after I get done with some irl deadlines. Hope you have a good rest of the week :) — Ixtal ^{( T / C )} ⁂ Non nobis solum. 08:11, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

No rush! All yours now. Cheers :) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 18:37, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Adminship

Hello PMC! So recently, a user I"m mentoring said that they wanted to nominate me for adminship however they were told that I needed to mature a bit more first (or at least, that was what they told me, but that's not a big concern for me for the time being). While I'm not planning on trying to run for adminship anytime soon, it did get me thinking about what I could do now to improve my chances of becoming an admin when I do eventually run. I've already asked ScottishFinnishRadish mostly about what their experience of getting nominated for adminship was considering their account age was similar to mine (i know account age isn't everything, however I figured it would be good to hear from someone who has been on Wikipedia under their current username for about as long as i have), however I want to hear what your experience was and what you think I should do now to improve my chances. I figured I'd ask you since you've been a great help to me with various things, which I greatly appreciate. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 15:05, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Well... my experience as a self-nominator in 2004 was very different from what RfA is like now, so it won't be very applicable to you. The best advice I can give you is to try to find opportunities to demonstrate maturity and level-headedness onwiki and off. Remain calm, don't jump to conclusions, and discuss things with people. You probably also want to remove the "considering retirement" banner from your talk page - it's not a good look for someone asking about RfA to also be apparently considering retirement for months on end. (As they say, either shit or get off the pot.) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 18:43, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Fair. I may as well remove it at this point since it's more of an intrusive thought (if that's the correct term) than something I'm actually considering at this point. Thanks for the advice. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:45, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Sheldan Nidle

I noticed you have looked into subject of Sheldan Nidle once before: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sheldan Nidle. I am worried about its suitability on the Dutch wiki where a user is adding all kinds of fantasy stories (and on the English wiki as well). Is it still unsuitable on the English wiki? VanBuren (talk) 20:27, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

All I did there was close the deletion discussion with a snarky comment. I didn't personally "look into" the article in the way you're thinking, I just enacted the consensus, which was that sourcing was not sufficient to support a claim to notability, so the article should be deleted.

The content in the present version is significantly different from that of the deleted version, so it's not eligible for speedy deletion under criteria G4. The text looks adequately NPOV, describing Nidle's supernatural claims as claims, without representing them as real. The sourcing looks better this time around as well - journals and books by what appear to be actual academics, from legitimate publishers. That being said, I haven't gone and read all the sourcing in depth so I can't say whether or not it's significant coverage. But overall at a glance it looks acceptable. As for Dutch Wikipedia, nothing I can do for you there - I don't speak it and every local Wikipedia is independent. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 21:24, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback. It is useful to me. --VanBuren (talk) 07:16, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Sandbox

Hey there!Im very sorry i was unaware that including the information from the "dost mohammad khan" page into the sandbox violated copyright.I created this sandbox as a way to improve the revisions done by Noorullah.Although his contributions did violate copyright,i felt like because of the amount of dedication he did to that page that his contributions should be improved and worked on in the sandbox.We will however rewrite the article in order to avoid any copyright or plagriasm issues.Thanks Twarikh e Khalsa (talk) 23:13, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Copyright infringement is a major threat to Wikipedia's integrity as a project. If an administrator goes to the extent of revision-deleting content for copyright issues, it means there was a serious problem - that isn't done lightly. I cannot stress enough that this is something people get blocked over. You need to start writing from scatch, in your own words and structure, not simply borrowing what is in the source. Noorullah's sandbox is also a copyright violation as it contains the same problematic text that was revision-deleted from the mainspace version. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:18, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Understood Twarikh e Khalsa (talk) 23:20, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Promotion of Illusion of Kate Moss

Congratulations, Premeditated Chaos! The article you nominated, Illusion of Kate Moss, 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, Ian Rose (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:05, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

• Congratulations on the FA promotion! Aoba47 (talk) 22:49, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

  Thanks Aoba! And thank you as always for your review. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:35, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

  I am glad that I was able to help, and I had a lot of fun reading through the article. Just out of curiosity, but do you have anything in mind for your next FAC? Aoba47 (talk) 01:32, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

  Probably The Dance of the Twisted Bull :) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 01:33, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

  Awesome! Best of luck with it in the future. Aoba47 (talk) 21:42, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

  Cheers! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:11, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Greeting PMC!

Greetings PMC! Can you please protect Georgian calligraphy and Category:Georgian scripts as it’s being disrupted by an unknown IPs for some time now with adding irrelevant categories not related to these articles. Regards, An emperor ✖ 16:48, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

That looks like a content dispute. Have you tried to talk to them about it? ♠PMC♠ (talk) 01:34, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi PMC. Thank you for your quick response. The IPs keep adding Western calligraphy which is Latin script derived when Georgian script and its calligraphy has nothing to do with it. Georgian does not originate from Latin script, and has 0 connection with it, but these articles gets disrupted by IPs' addition of irrelevant categories. It's like adding Arabic script categories into Kanji. Regards, An emperor ✖ 02:25, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

The lead sentence of the Western calligraphy article says that it refers to Latin-derived calligraphy "(but also including calligraphic use of the Cyrillic and Greek alphabets, as opposed to "Eastern" traditions such as Turko-Perso-Arabic, Chinese or Indian calligraphy)". Given the possible/theorized connection between the Georgian and Greek alphabets, I think it's reasonable to think that the IP might have a good-faith belief that it is an appropriate category. It's not vandalism, it's a content dispute, and you should try talking to them first instead of just reverting them without any explanation. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 04:43, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Greetings PMC! I have addressed the concern on Talk:Georgian calligraphy. I appreciate your perspective and I hope the articles would not see any serious escalation. Regards, An emperor ✖ 13:11, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. You may also want to put a message on their talk page directing them to the discussion, as many people who aren't regular editors don't realize talk pages exist. Let me know if they continue to revert without engaging. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 14:06, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Just did. Thank you PMC! Regards, An emperor ✖ 14:21, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Four Award

		Four Award
		Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Illusion of Kate Moss. — Bilorv (talk) 18:02, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Congrats on the four award PMC. I showed the article to my wife when I was reviewing it and she has been talking about it for weeks. Tkbrett (✉) 18:05, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Oh noooo you're gonna make me blush :3 ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:01, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

The Widows of Culloden scheduled for TFA

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 3 May 2023. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 3, 2023, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/May 2023. I suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work. Gog the Mild (talk) 11:38, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

May songs

my story today

Thank you today for the article, introduced: "I'm back with another round of work by British designer Alexander McQueen. This time it's his second Scottish-themed collection, The Widows of Culloden (Autumn/Winter 2006), a mature and measured counterpart to the angry Highland Rape collection of 1995. Widows is well-known as some of McQueen's best work for its emotional narrative, balance of artistic and commercial concerns, and the glorious illusion of Kate Moss that closed the show. Although it has been neearly twenty years since its debut, it remains a popular subject of scholarly analysis from all kinds of critical lenses."! -- (and then I forgot to sign)

more pleasant music (heard today!) if you click on songs - did you know a string quartet with two cellos (and no article yet in English? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:53, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Copy

Dear Premediated Chaos.

My article on a new podcast called Stories in the Room: Michael Jackson's Thriller Album Podcast - interviewing the musicians who played on the album has been deleted, before I had a chance to keep a copy of the article let for my personal archive. Would you kindly help me get a copy of that last version before deletion? Thank you. Nightboat (talk) 18:27, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

I've emailed you the raw wikitext of the most recent revision. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 19:24, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. Nightboat (talk) 21:11, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

No problem :) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 21:22, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Deletion of GA nominations

Hi, you've removed my GA nominations for Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed, Zakir Husain (politician), Shankar Dayal Sharma and Zail Singh noting that "removing nomination by nominator inactive for nearly months". What exactly is the rule allowing such a removal of nomination? Ashwin147

There's no black and white rule either way - Wikipedia isn't a bureaucracy. GA is generally expected to be a collaborative process between the reviewer and the nominator. You haven't made an edit since January and haven't been editing anything close to regularly since November (and even that's a stretch at 21 edits). It's not unreasonable to think that you wouldn't be here to participate in that collaborative process. If you are planning to return to active editing, great! Welcome back, feel free to revert those removals and put yourself back in the queue. If not, it's not fair to expect others to do the work of reviewing when you're not here to participate. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 13:59, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Those articles have been pending review for a while now and it is for a reviewer to take them up. My activity here has nothing to do with when they'll be taken up for review. And taking them off the list by making wild assumptions does not help with the process either. It would be really great if you don't jump the gun the next time around. Ashwin147

Welcome back to Wikipedia. Reviewers are often reluctant to take up nominations where the nominator is flagged as inactive, so to make your nominations more appealing and reduce your wait time, you may wish to return to active editing in order to prevent the inactivity flag from appearing again. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:24, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

DYK for The Birds (Alexander McQueen collection)

On 27 April 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Birds (Alexander McQueen collection), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that British designer Alexander McQueen constructed a dress made of clear pallet wrap for his Spring/Summer 1995 collection The Birds? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Birds (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, The Birds (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) 00:04, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Neptune (Alexander McQueen collection)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Neptune (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 Trainsandotherthings -- Trainsandotherthings (talk) 02:22, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Neptune (Alexander McQueen collection)

The article Neptune (Alexander McQueen collection) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Neptune (Alexander McQueen collection) for comments about the article, and Talk:Neptune (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 Trainsandotherthings -- Trainsandotherthings (talk) 15:41, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of The House on Haunted Hill for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The House on Haunted Hill, 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/The House on Haunted Hill 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) 01:01, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Neptune (Alexander McQueen collection)

On 30 April 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Neptune (Alexander McQueen collection), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Alexander McQueen collection Neptune drew negative reviews comparing the clothing to 1980s science fiction, Xena, and Wonder Woman? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Neptune (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, Neptune (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.

-- RoySmith (talk) 12:02, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Super Nova Card Game

Hello! You closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Super Nova Card Game in 2020, and at the time it had only one review and a couple of other brief sources. I was able to find a two-page review in Inquest Gamer: [7] If that's not quite enough coverage to restore it to article space, would you be willing to restore the article and talk page and move to Drafts so it can be worked on? Thank you! BOZ (talk) 14:45, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

IMO two reviews at time of release isn't enough for a unilateral return to mainspace, but I'm willing to draftify, and have done so here: Draft:Super Nova (card game) (disambiguated since the original title appears to be tacking on words to the actual title of Super Nova). ♠PMC♠ (talk) 21:15, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, much appreciated! BOZ (talk) 21:18, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

AFD outcomes undone by User:Jclemens

Hello PMC. Your recent closure of the Soda Tax (Parks and Recreation) AFD has been undone by Jclemens [8], and similar has happened to Lucky Thirteen (House) [9] (which was closed by Explicit).

What can be done about this please? Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 00:45, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

I suppose a 'thank you' would be too much to ask? Jclemens (talk) 00:56, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

(and, for the record I fixed Sleep Tight (Angel) as well.) Jclemens (talk) 00:58, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

For reference, here are some better diffs which illustrate how I mooted the central argument (no RS reviews, doesn't meet GNG) in each of the three corrected episode articles. Jclemens (talk) 01:02, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Put your thoughts into one message please, there's no need to leave a new one every minute.

No, I don't think you should be thanked for silently undoing the results of consensus-based discussions. If you have sources, put them in the AfD while it's live. Don't wait for the discussion to be closed and then revert the result to make some kind of point about how every TV episode of every popular TV series that's ever existed is notable because some guy knocked off a few paragraphs in AV Club. If you have concerns about a series of nominations that you think are insufficiently justified, take it to the user's talk page, or perhaps to ANI if you think it's a serious behavioral concern.

On the other hand, MST, I don't have the patience to knuckle down and argue about increasing our standards for the notability of TV episodes. I'm not going to revert what Jclemens has done. If you have concerns about his series of close reversions, please take it to ANI or anywhere else that isn't my talk page. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 01:11, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I admit I was posting here while still formulating thoughts, and apologize for multiple rapidly successive posts. I took action when I did because I did not see the articles on DELSORT due to being busy IRL, and when I do see them I do find and put sources in the AfD, as can be seen from the past several years of my contribution history. Now on to the substance:

No, these were not "silent." I ping'ed the various contributors and admins, and wrote a post about it on my talk page.

I really hope you don't really mean a clearly incorrect consensus should be honored just because it's a "consensus." The threshold for TV episode notability is pretty clear: Multiple reviews or other reliable, independent, non-trivial commentary demonstrate notability for a television episode. While consensus can change, each of those three AfDs demonstrate that neither the nom nor any participant took the time to find and include the sources I did, and no editor in any of the AfDs argued for any different standard: all of their !votes were policy based (they agreed with that standard) but factually incorrect (they assumed sources didn't exist when they in fact did), and the closing admins just went along and correctly implemented an incorrect discussion.

A final suggestion, and then I'll buzz off your talk page: ANI is a horrible place to argue about the correct implementation of deletion discussions; I would suggest DRV instead. Jclemens (talk) 02:57, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Man, I don't care where you go to discuss it, I've already said I don't care enough to revert you or argue about it. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 03:14, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

DYK for List of Alexander McQueen collections

On 7 May 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article List of Alexander McQueen collections, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that across his thirty-six collections, fashion designer Alexander McQueen contemplated religion, told fairy tales, and criticized the fashion industry? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/List of Alexander McQueen collections. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, List of Alexander McQueen collections), 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) 12:03, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

File:McQueen feather corset from Watt.png

Hi, thank you for your always excellent work! I've uploaded a new version of the fair use image as the original one was too dark and over-saturated. Please let me know if you object to it. BorgQueen (talk) 14:07, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

No, it looks great, thanks for doing that! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 18:36, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Taxi Driver (Alexander McQueen collection)

On 17 May 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Taxi Driver (Alexander McQueen collection), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that British designer Alexander McQueen partied so hard that he accidentally abandoned the entirety of his second collection among a nightclub's rubbish? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Taxi Driver (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, Taxi Driver (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.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:03, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Promotion of The Dance of the Twisted Bull

Congratulations, Premeditated Chaos! The article you nominated, The Dance of the Twisted Bull, 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, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

• Congratulations on the recent FAC promotion! Aoba47 (talk) 18:14, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

  Hi Aoba, thanks very much! Next up is Neptune, if whoever has the McQueen Mythos book at my library will return it >:( ♠PMC♠ (talk) 20:53, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

  Looking forward to seeing that nomination! I hate when that happens. Hopefully, that person is enjoying it lol. Hopefully, if you have put it on hold, it shouldn't be too much longer. I am glad that your library has a copy. I was genuinely surprised how many fashion books in my local library system. Unfortunately, my library does not have a copy of Mythos, otherwise I would try to help in some way. Aoba47 (talk) 00:02, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

  I've been mournfully refreshing the page for the last couple days hoping it's come back early, haha. Shouldn't be long I hope. After that, I'm stuck waiting till Taxi Driver and The Birds pass GA, which could be years at the rate things are going at GA these days. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:22, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

  I know that feeling all too well lol. If I have more time in the future, I will try to review either of those articles if the nominations are still active. I always enjoy reading your articles, and I have fun in general learning more about fashion and fashion history. I think it is wild that McQueen lost the Taxi Driver collection in that way. What a story lol.

  Apologies if I had already asked you this before, but do you plan on creating articles for all of McQueen's collections or are you going to focus on specific ones? Either way, it is a lot of time and work so serious props to you for that. Aoba47 (talk) 02:08, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

  I'm not sure. Widows was several months of work and spawned a subarticle that had enough coverage to get FA in its own right. On the other hand, I popped out Neptune in a day and it's pretty much comprehensive already, Mythos aside. I suspect both are extreme outliers and most of the collections will be more like The Birds or Twisted Bull which were a few weeks each. Really it'll depend on whether or not the work takes longer than my ADHD hyperfixation lasts, lol.

  I'm glad you enjoy reading them! There's been a surprising amount of positive feedback about this series, which is nice considering interest in fashion appears to be somewhat minimal on this project. If I had to pick I would love your feedback on The Birds especially, because I'm not satisfied with the article and I can't figure out what's wrong with it (if anything). ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:41, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

  Congratulations from me too. I recall it being on DYK a while ago. Good to have you onboard always. BorgQueen (talk) 02:46, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

  Thanks, BorgQueen! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 03:14, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

Four Award

		Four Award
		Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on The Dance of the Twisted Bull. — Bilorv (talk) 10:19, 21 May 2023 (UTC)