Knowledge Base Wiki

Archives

Index Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 5 sections are present.

The article Etika you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Etika for comments about the article, and Talk:Etika/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Vaticidalprophet -- Vaticidalprophet (talk) 14:03, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

	The Half Million Award
	For your contributions to bring Etika (estimated annual readership: 700,000) to Good Article status, I hereby present you the Half Million Award. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers! Vaticidalprophet 17:34, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Now it’s FA! 48JCL (talk • contribs) 01:25, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article The Creative Gene you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Creative Gene for comments about the article, and Talk:The Creative Gene/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Rhain -- Rhain (talk) 05:42, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:57, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi PantheonRadiance, why did you write "If this somehow gets closed as delete instead of relisted, I'm considering doing a deletion review anyway" in this diff? That isn't how Deletion Review works - you don't foreshadow a deletion review within an active discussion. It comes across as trying to create a chilling effect for what may have been a legitimate course of action (closing as 'delete'). I can't say I have ever seen someone foreshadow taking a discussion to DRV before it's even been closed in my time editing, and I don't want to see it become a thing that happens - and on that basis, I would encourage you to strike that part of your comment in the discussion. Regards, Daniel (talk) 00:10, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Daniel, I said it not for a chilling effect, but rather because of the timing. At the time I first replied to the discussion, I saw that it had been a week since the AfD first started (11/25) and I thought the debate would close soon. Since the consensus seemed to sway towards delete, I half-expected that the debate would most likely close instead of a relist, even with the two late keep votes. There have been times (2 exactly) where I managed to get to an AfD late and share my thoughts, only for the debate to close. And for the record, if it did close as delete, I would have asked the closer first in line with the DRV policy, but I guess I didn't communicate that as well as I thought - my apologies. Thanks, PantheonRadiance (talk) 00:25, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. Two things I'd like to expand on - one wording, and one to do with WP:DRVPURPOSE.

Firstly, you wrote "If this somehow gets closed as delete instead of relisted, I'm considering doing a deletion review anyways". The word "somehow" strongly implies that you find it incredulous that an administrator may close as delete, despite there being a pretty clear consensus to delete at the stage you wrote the comment. This only adds to the chilling effect that is created in my opinion - you're passively criticising a decision in advance. If you want evidence of said chilling effect happening from your comment, please consider the fact that I've decided not to close this because I don't want the inevitable run at DRV you've foreshadowed. I normally don't shy away from closing tough AfD's - there's a section on my talk page about this very thing - but that comment in the discussion has made me not want to go near closing it.

Secondly, I don't understand what rationale of DRVPURPOSE your hypothetical DRV would be filed under - it can't be #1, as a consensus potentially exists to delete (and definitely did when you wrote your comment). I also don't believe #3 applies as you haven't really brought "new information", simply an alternate policy interpretation. I guess you could potentially argue #5 on the basis that you commented late and your comment wasn't considered by others for long enough, but my gut feeling would be that it wouldn't be a slam-dunk - and definitely not black-and-white enough to be calling out in advance.

I'd still like you to strike that sentence in the AfD - or alternatively, at a minimum, consider striking some and rewording it to better capture your intent around it being relating to your late !vote (per your comment above). Up to you though, and I won't press the issue any further if you disagree and want to leave it unchanged.

Thanks, Daniel (talk) 00:37, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I struck the sentence in my recent edit, along with adding extra sources. I initially wanted to add those in my original comment, but I felt it was already long enough (but ironically I added another long comment as well - brevity's something I need to improve on a lot more). So I omitted it on the outcome that it would get relisted, and if it didn't, planned on sharing them with the closer while asking for a relist first. If the closer and I disagreed, then the DRV would've taken place as it usually does.

Anyway, I would've applied both #3 and #5 of the policy in that hypothetical DRV. It was my intention to ask for a relist for more time to consider the late votes Skyshifter and I added, along with deeper discussion on the sources. For #3 I felt (at the time) that my vote wasn't just an alternate policy interpretation, but qualified as new information that would've furthered the debate - that the streamer also fits other potential SNGs that weren't considered yet in the discussion. And of course in light of such SNGs, discussing whether the sources presented in the article proved that he passes such criteria. And you explained my thought process for #5; thank you for that.

After reading your response, I see how my actions created that chilling effect. I admittedly acted hastily when I saw that it had been a week, and was fretful it would close. So I tried applying common sense by considering a potential course of action: if an AfD was nearing its end, and there was the possibility of no relist even with a late vote, then perhaps consider a DRV. In retrospect, that was quite misguided judgement on my part. My apologies towards you and any other potential closers of the debate, as it was not my intention. Thanks, PantheonRadiance (talk) 02:05, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	For your work on The Completionist. Good job! Davest3r08 >:) (talk) 13:13, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good article nominations | March 2024 Backlog Drive
March 2024 Backlog Drive: On 1 March, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here or ask questions here.
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year.

(t · c) buidhe 02:39, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I think you did a good job with Northernlion and if you had the time to GA nominate it, I would be happy to review it as part of the March 2024 backlog drive. Although, heads up that I wouldn't be able to take a look until next week at the earliest (but would still push to finish it as part of the month drive). Mokadoshi (talk) 23:33, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, thank you so much! To be honest though, I feel Northernlion would need more work with its sourcing first - there are some SPSs that could be trimmed, and I'd like to find more sources to expand it. However, I've considered GA nominating BrolyLegs this month, as I feel it has good potential. If you're still interested, I'd be more than happy to nominate it next week or so; it just needs a picture first. Thanks, PantheonRadiance (talk) 00:45, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I'm not familiar with BrolyLegs and am not sure if I could give it a good review. For NL, keep in mind that there is no length requirement for a GA, and so to solve some of the SPS problems, you might just move them to the Talk page. Whenever you feel like coming back to NL, feel free to ping me. Mokadoshi (talk) 00:59, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's okay, and I'll think about nominating NL soon. Also, I may also consider reviewing Tyler1 since it would be my first GA review. I can't make any promises, but if nobody else steps up to review by next week, I'll see if I can try it out. Thanks, PantheonRadiance (talk) 01:10, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I really appreciate that, but since I've offered to review your NL article, I would prefer you not review any of my GA articles so there is no appearance of quid-pro-quo. I don't think it's against the rules or anything but I want the article to be the best it can be so I want the reviewer to be as unbiased as possible. Thank you though! Mokadoshi (talk) 01:14, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Once again, good luck with your nomination! PantheonRadiance (talk) 03:00, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi PantheonRadiance :) I'm looking for people to interview here. Feel free to pass if you're not interested. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 07:00, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On 21 March 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Is This Band Emo?, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that My Chemical Romance and Fall Out Boy are not emo bands, according to Is This Band Emo? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Is This Band Emo?. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Is This Band Emo?), 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, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Real Emo only consists of the dc Emotional Hardcore scene and the late 90's Screamo scene. What is known by "Midwest emo" is nothing but Alternative Rock with questionable real emo influence. When people try to argue that bands like My Chemical Romance are not real emo, while saying that Sunny Day Real Estate is, I can't help not to cringe because they are just as fake emo as My Chemical Romance (plus the pretentiousness). -- In actu (Guerillero) ^{Parlez Moi} 14:41, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Devin AI, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

TLA^tlak 10:31, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, PantheonRadiance! The article you nominated, Etika, 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, David Fuchs (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:06, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bravo! Panini! • 🥪 16:34, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, at this point, you're probably Etika's greatest fan, ever. Your love for the guy and the efforts you took to honor him are incredible. Thank you and congratulations for taking his article to GA and FA first try, the balls you got are really insane. I hope your efforts aren't a one-hit wonder, you have much more potential in you. By the way, have you considered yourself a member of WP:NETPOP? Its members have done lots of GAs for meme articles and associated people, to the point where it kicks Know Your Meme up the ass. Seems to be your thing. But whatever you're doing now, you deserve it. See you later :) Carlinal (talk) 18:09, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Carlinal LOL, thanks so much! I've been a fan of him since around his Mewtwo Sm4sh reaction, but I'd definitely say there are others who deserve that crown, probably even more than me, like the archive channels and the ones who set up his memorials (plus everyone who worked on the article from the start). I really appreciate your support too; if it weren't for you I wouldn't have even thought to trim the lead until well after the GA review started. Also, I do have some more plans for bringing other articles to GA/FA status in the near future, including more YouTubers. I think we've reached that point where the culture's been around long enough to see more GAs/FAs. I haven't officially joined the YT or IC projects yet, but I might do so soon.

Also 48JCL, thank you so much for the award! Appreciate the love! PantheonRadiance (talk) 20:00, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

		The Deletion to Quality Award
		For your contributions to bring Etika (prior candidate for deletion at: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Etika) to Featured Article status, I hereby present you The Deletion to Quality Award. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers! 48JCL (talk • contribs) 02:32, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You may put this on your user page:

This user has successfully taken 1 article from deletion discussion at Articles for Deletion — to Featured Article quality.

48JCL (talk • contribs) 02:36, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Added your name to the hall of fame, congrats! 48JCL (talk • contribs) 02:37, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

story · music · places

Thank you, and all who helped, today for Etika, introduced: "Desmond Amofah, better known as Etika, rose to popularity through his gaming videos, reactions, and spirited personality. However, his life took a tragic turn when he publicly underwent numerous incidents due to his struggles with mental health, leading to his suicide in June 2019. I nominated this article for three reasons.

Etika was the reason I created my Wikipedia account. When I first heard of his passing, an overwhelming mix of emotions whirled in the pool of my mind, with regret leaping for air the most. As someone who saw his unraveling in real time, all I wanted to do was change the past, but was powerless to do so – instead I focused on the future. In 2023, I brought the page to GA status as a healing process of coping with tragedy through copy-editing and typing. This year I continued my journey in hopes to bring it to FA.

If everything goes well, Etika would become the very first article of a YouTuber, and perhaps an Internet personality, to reach the coveted title. This is quite unprecedented territory in several ways, and I feel that in those same ways there couldn't be a more fitting person to wear that crown, because

His story is a compelling yet tragic tale about one's journey through fame and battles with social media and mental health. Although dealing with troubling subject material, Etika's life is one future generations deserve to know about. I wanted to do my part in honoring his life and legacy.

I'd like to thank @HappyBoi3892, Vaticidalprophet, Masem, and VARNAMi: and every other contributor to the article." - Enjoy your first TFA day! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:33, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Etika

Thank you for quality articles such as Etika (from deletion to highest quality), Alpharad, Chuggaaconroy, The Creative Gene in your pandora box, for "adding valuable knowledge that others can one day use", for "I genuinely appreciate all the advice you've given me throughout this review!" - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

You are recipient no. 2940 of Precious, a prize of QAI. I meant to say so yesterday, but the day was too short ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:17, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gerda Arendt, thank you so much for the award! Wonderful thing to receive for my 5th year anniversary. Love this community 😊❤️PantheonRadiance (talk) 06:05, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for nominating Etika's page as a featured article and appreciating my contributions. This is a pretty big deal considering Etika's Wikipedia page has now reached the same page status as Michael Jackson and Elvis. I shared this achievement on his subreddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/EtikaRedditNetwork/comments/1dsst7r/etikas_wikipedia_page_was_recently_nominated_as_a/ VARNAMi (talk) 06:53, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

VARNAMi, you're welcome! And once again, thank you for all your work on the article too, and for sharing it on Reddit! Also, I left a special gift for you on your talk page :) PantheonRadiance (talk) 05:10, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, PantheonRadiance. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Cultural impact of Kanye West, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 08:06, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to inform you I asked about the Social Blade in Talk:Vaush#This page is due for a major overhaul about a month ago, and two other users disagreed with its usage for a few reasons. It's a pretty big discussion, so just Ctrl+F "Social Blade" if you click the link. I wasn't going to revert your edits even if I could, just wanted to tell you. Solitaire Wanderer (talk) 00:38, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also I don't think you need to call the bottom reference section "Primary Sources and Videos". The videos are primary sources too. Solitaire Wanderer (talk) 00:42, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Solitaire Wanderer Oh okay, thanks for letting me know. I've been meaning to ask about it in the noticeboard, but I'll do so soon. Personally I believe Social Blade should be considered a reliable primary source for YouTube statistics, as I've seen it cited in various news outlets, and IIRC I haven't seen a prominent outlet criticize or question its reliability. If it's not reliable, I'll be okay with removing it.

Also, I figured "primary sources and videos" would imply "primary sources and primary videos" as a separation between text-based sources (his Tweets) and video sources (the Owen Jones interview), but just "primary sources" is fine. Thanks, PantheonRadiance (talk) 00:50, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Just posted the discussion, let's see how it goes. PantheonRadiance (talk) 01:20, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Smosh, you may be blocked from editing. While WP:3O may not be binding, being the one to call for one (and in a misleading way at that) and then ignore it to instead force through your preferred edits is highly bad form. I suggest you stop acting like Smosh is your own article and get consensus on talk.

Rambling Rambler (talk) 20:02, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:42, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]