User talk:Thebiguglyalien

Welcome to the alien's nest.

• If you seek wisdom, you have likely come to the wrong place, but I will do my best.
• If you come with insults or put-downs, at least make them clever.
• If I haven't replied in 48 hours, either I forgot or I assumed you didn't want a reply.
• Talk page stalkers are welcome. The vast majority are not abducted or eaten.

1251 days since the last alien abduction.

---

Your GA nomination of Kgabo Commission

The article Kgabo Commission you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Kgabo Commission for comments about the article, and Talk:Kgabo Commission/GA2 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Spookyaki -- Spookyaki (talk) 21:44, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Nice work. There's a personal tale between the lines there for Mmusi. CMD (talk) 06:59, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Cat in the Hat Comes Back

The article The Cat in the Hat Comes Back you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Cat in the Hat Comes Back for comments about the article, and Talk:The Cat in the Hat Comes Back/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Rjjiii -- Rjjiii (talk) 02:02, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	Thank you for your help with getting Veiqia to FA Lajmmoore (talk) 09:28, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Question from Herohcreatives (16:53, 28 April 2025)

Hello, I will be publishing my first article on the wiki soon. Is there anything I need to know to deliver a successful article that will meet the guidelines? --Herohcreatives (talk) 16:53, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello Herohcreatives, does the article have sources that meet the requirements listed at WP:42? The most important thing is that all of the information is based on reliable sources, and that these sources prove that the subject meets Wikipedia's notability requirements. If you think it does, then you can use the article wizard to get started with the publishing process and I can take a look at it for you. The other important thing is whether you have a connection with the article's subject. If you're being paid to write the article or if it's about something you're personally involved with, you might have to disclose that. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 17:54, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks @Thebiguglyalien for your reply. Yes the two articles met with the requirement to my possible knowledge. Also, I am personally involved with the two subjects. Both of them have impacted my life and they have played a prominent role in the Academic environment both home and abroad. Therefore, no money is involved. As a matter of fact I am using this to build a portfolio in Wikipedia as I am planning to choose the path of a Wikipedia writer. I am a graphic designer and I do layout for academic journals.

I am still doing the necessary things to get started on Wikipedia; editing and contributing to previous articles....once that is done I will commence writing and get it across to you for your input. Herohcreatives (talk) 07:37, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

WikiCup 2025 May newsletter

The second round of the 2025 WikiCup ended on 28 April at 23:59 UTC. To reiterate what we said in the previous newsletter, we are no longer disqualifying contestants based on how many points (now known as round points) they received. Instead, the contestants with the highest round-point totals now receive tournament points at the end of each round. These tournament points are carried over between rounds, and can only be earned if a competitor is among the top 16 round-point scorers at the end of each round. This table shows all competitors who have received tournament points so far. Everyone who competed in round 2 will advance to round 3 unless they have withdrawn or been banned.

Round 2 was quite competitive. Four contestants scored more than 1,000 round points, and eight scored more than 500 points (including one who has withdrawn). The following competitors scored at least 800 points:

• BeanieFan11 (submissions) with 1,233 round points from 24 good articles, 28 Did you know articles, and one In the news nomination, mainly about athletes and politicians
• Thebiguglyalien (submissions) with 1,127 round points, almost entirely from two high-multiplier featured articles on Black Widow (Natasha Romanova) and Grace Coolidge, in addition to two GAs and two reviews
• History6042 (submissions) with 1,088 round points from four featured lists about Michelin-starred restaurants, nine good articles and a good topic mostly on Olympic-related subjects, seven ITN articles, and dozens of reviews
• Gog the Mild (submissions) with 1,085 round points from three FAs, one GA, and four DYKs on military history, as well as 18 reviews
• Arconning (submissions) with 887 round points, mostly from four FLs, six GAs, and seven DYKs on Olympic topics, along with more than two dozen reviews

In addition, we would like to recognize Generalissima (submissions) for her efforts; she scored 801 round points but withdrew before the end of the round.

The full scores for round 2 can be seen here. During this round, contestants have claimed 13 featured articles, 20 featured lists, 4 featured-topic articles, 138 good articles, 7 good-topic articles, and more than 100 Did You Know articles. In addition, competitors have worked on 19 In the News articles, and they have conducted nearly 300 reviews.

Remember that any content promoted after 28 April but before the start of Round 3 can be claimed in Round 3. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, feel free to review one of the nominations listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:03, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

Barbara Bush

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 8 June 2025. 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/June 2025, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/June 2025. Please keep an eye on that page, as comments regarding the draft blurb may be left there. I also suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from two days before the article appears on the Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work! Wehwalt (talk) 11:03, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

DYK for Ardo Hansson

On 2 May 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ardo Hansson, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Ardo Hansson was appointed to the committee overseeing the transition from the Soviet ruble to the Estonian kroon as a replacement for someone who fell ill? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ardo Hansson. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Ardo Hansson), 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, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

Promotion of Barbara Park bibliography

Congratulations, Thebiguglyalien! The list you nominated, Barbara Park bibliography, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best lists on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured list. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Hey man im josh (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

Question from OmegaAndromedae (03:10, 2 May 2025)

Hello! I would like to ask, how to make a reference? I use source and I'm confused since I don't really get it --OmegaAndromedae (talk) 03:10, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

OmegaAndromedae, the simplest way is to type <ref>your reference</ref>. The most important thing is that you have the basic info like the title, the author, the date, the publisher, and anything else that might be relevant. That's really all you need to worry about. A lot of editors like to use citation templates, where you add something like <ref>{{cite web |last= |first= |date= |title= |url= |website= |publisher= |access-date=}}</ref> and then fill in the parameters for each part. Then it formats it automatically. You can practice in your sandbox if you like. As a side note, make sure you're only editing using one account. You generally shouldn't be using a second account unless you have a valid reason. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 03:41, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

Question from MayaRubySmith (21:01, 7 May 2025)

How do you suggest I cite a movie credit for my boss without relying on IMDb Pro? --MayaRubySmith (talk) 21:01, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello MayaRubySmith. You have to be careful when writing about someone you work for because that's a conflict of interest (I see that Knitsey has already offered you some guidance on this). With that said, if you're simply looking to add a citation, I suggest looking for press coverage that verifies the role. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 21:34, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Maria das Neves

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Maria das Neves 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 LEvalyn -- LEvalyn (talk) 20:45, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Johann Voldemar Jannsen at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in step III of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 07:15, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Maria das Neves

The article Maria das Neves you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Maria das Neves for comments about the article, and Talk:Maria das Neves/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of LEvalyn -- LEvalyn (talk) 20:24, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Writer's Barnstar
	For your work on List of pre-Socratic philosophers. Wow! I am very impressed at how well you have filled this content gap. Thanks, Eddie891 Talk Work 13:02, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! I was surprised that we didn't have this already and I've really enjoyed working on it. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 16:59, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Question from Therian Controls (17:53, 12 May 2025)

How do I publish an article --Therian Controls (talk) 17:53, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello Therian Controls! If you want to write an article on Wikipedia, you start by finding reliable sources about the subject you want to write about. Then you can use those to start a draft with the article creation wizard. One important thing is that articles cannot be promotional. The text currently written at User:Therian Controls/sandbox would not be accepted because it describes a product using marketing-like language. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 17:58, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

re-did the page, included devices from the company (based off of the info on their website https://www.bluepointalert.com)

is this better? (due to not a lot of info currently new info might be added by other users if new info is available in the future) Therian Controls (talk) 18:13, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

I suggest looking at other Wikipedia articles to see how it should be written. You'll want to find sources that are independent of the subject. The guide at WP:42 might help. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 19:11, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Jan Brewer

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Jan Brewer 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 Jon698 -- Jon698 (talk) 22:45, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Question from Thabo Clement mokoena (20:28, 13 May 2025)

Hi can you please help me. --Thabo Clement mokoena (talk) 20:28, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

Well, that depends. What do you need help with? Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 20:40, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

2023

Did you mean to change pretty much every 2023 to 2023a? DuncanHill (talk) 22:39, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I added Volume 2 of the same book and wanted to avoid confusing the template by having two books with the same author and year, so I labelled Volume 1 as 2023a and Volume 2 as 2023b per Template:Sfn#More than one work in a year. It's a little more complex with Template:harvc, so I'm open to any other ideas. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 22:44, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Ah OK, it made the article appear in Category:Harv and Sfn template errors and I thought perhaps you had made a slip. Personally I would recommend against shortened citations, they are so terribly error-prone. DuncanHill (talk) 22:50, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

I had missed a few A's, but I found where they were needed. I wish there was something better than shortened citations, but right now the only other realistic option is Template:Rp, which creates a lot of clutter. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 22:52, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Question from Warren Edle (03:21, 17 May 2025)

How do I make a Wikipedia article? --Warren Edle (talk) 03:21, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Warren Edle, the first thing you want to do is find reliable, independent sources that will be used to get information for the article. Then you can get started by using the article wizard. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 03:24, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Exciting Progress on the POV tag Backlog!

I just finished off the last of the low-hanging fruit in Category:Wikipedia_neutral_point_of_view_disputes_from_December_2019! That means that all the junk tags from before 2020 have been dealt with! Over the coming month or two I plan to take a break from mass-processing of tags and shift to actual content-writing work to fix the tagged articles from pre-2020 that actually still need work. I have also noticed your work addressed POV tags from this year, which has greatly slowed the growth of the backlog, so thank you! -- LWG ^talk 20:10, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Nice! Not counting the subcategory I created for Template:Criticism section (I noticed the process for resolving them is a little different and figured it would help to separate them), it looks like we've removed or resolved roughly 1,500 of them since I joined in about three months ago. I've been leaning toward the content-writing side of things for the older ones, but I also figured that it might help to go to the other end and work backward as well. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 20:48, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Question from Ultimatelooks4 on Wetsuit (13:43, 21 May 2025)

Hello! I recently created a Wikipedia account and was fortunate to receive an edit opportunity. However, I'm having trouble understanding it clearly. What should I do next to improve it? --Ultimatelooks4 (talk) 13:43, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello Ultimatelooks4, you can edit just about any article on Wikipedia. I suggest getting started at Help:Introduction. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 19:28, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Jan Brewer

The article Jan Brewer you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Jan Brewer for comments about the article, and Talk:Jan Brewer/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Jon698 -- Jon698 (talk) 21:23, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

Question from XandarK (19:58, 25 May 2025)

how have you be able to get your edits accepted on wikipedia --XandarK (talk) 19:58, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello XandarK! Anyone can edit Wikipedia, which means that you can usually edit any article as needed. But this also means that anyone else can challenge or undo your edits. I see that the edit you made to science fantasy was undone by another editor. They added an edit summary to their edit, where they thanked you for helping but pointed out that the part you added was just about one book instead of the entire genre. It can take some time to learn the ins and outs of what to add to an article, so no worries. It looks like they also left a message on your talk page with some helpful links that give you some tips or other helpful resources. Let me know if there's anything else I can help with! Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 20:08, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

The World Destubathon

You are invited to participate in The World Destubathon. It's currently planned for June 16-July 13, partly due to me having hayfever during that period and not wanting to run it throughout July or August in the hotter summer and will be run then unless multiple editors object. There is currently $3338 going into it, with $500 the top prize. As 250 countries and entities is too much to patrol, entries will be by user, but there is $500 going into prizes for editors covering the most countries. Sign up if interested! ♦ Dr. Blofeld

Unsourced material

Hi, I'm new to editing. I happened upon an article which was almost entirely unsourced, and I had real trouble finding sources for anything (mentioned some specifics in the edit summary). It's entirely possible someone with more skill could find some trustworthy sources to add, but I am left wondering at what point an article does not meet the notability criteria. I have read pages like WP:BEFORE, but without specific examples I am unsure where the line might be (for example, working out whether "uncontroversial deletion" should be used, or whether this article should infact be left as-is, seems hard to work out). Also - anything I have done wrong so far would be great to know and learn from. Thanks! Swiftfall1 (talk) 16:24, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello Swiftfall1! Normally for this type of thing I'd suggest checking for Urdu-language sources and then nominating it for deletion at WP:AfD if those don't exist either. But in this case there's an exemption for populated places. Some editors (including myself) don't like how this exemption works because it results in these types of articles that can't really be improved, but that's the current standard. I've gone ahead and removed the maintenance template requesting a copyedit, since it looks like you fixed that. You can feel free to remove templates like this once whatever problem has been addressed. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 17:27, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of This Man... This Monster!

The article This Man... This Monster! you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article needs changes or clarifications to meet the good article criteria. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:This Man... This Monster! and Talk:This Man... This Monster!/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Simongraham -- Simongraham (talk) 14:44, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

AfD query

Hi. I'm happy to drop the stick and whatever on this one, but in your opinion, can this AfD that you voted the other day in really be considered no consensus whereas it was a bunch of SPAs voting keep with no policy-based reasoning? In my opinion, you were one of the only people there actually making sense, and I'm honestly a little frustrated. If you think I should let it go, I will. Thanks, MediaKyle (talk) 17:13, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

MediaKyle, yeah, pretty much any AfD with that much discussion is going to be relisted, even without taking the SPAs into consideration. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 18:25, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for getting back to me. Yes, I had assumed it would be relisted as consensus was still unclear, but it was closed as no consensus. Maybe I was unclear on that point. Is that to be considered an appropriate close? MediaKyle (talk) 18:29, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

Probably not appropriate, you might want to dispute that one. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 18:35, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of This Man... This Monster!

The article This Man... This Monster! you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:This Man... This Monster! for comments about the article, and Talk:This Man... This Monster!/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Simongraham -- Simongraham (talk) 22:01, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

Possible RfC re GA review trading

Hi. I was thinking of posting an RfC related to GA review trading. I saw your comment there which said If there does end up being any RfC, there should be a brief summary of how the review process works and what it's for, for the sake of people who don't regularly participate here.

If you have time, would you mind taking a quick look at the following rough draft of an RfC and let me know what you think? If you don't have time, no worries. Noleander (talk) 16:10, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

Question

Is it permissible for two impartial, experienced GA nominators to exchange reviews on each other's nominations?

What is a GA nomination?

A good article (GA) is a Wikipedia article that meets a core set of editorial standards, the good article criteria, passing through the good article nomination process successfully. They are well-written, contain factually accurate and verifiable information, and is broad in coverage. Any significant contributor may nominate the article if they believe it meets the good article criteria. Any impartial editor may review the article from the queue of good article nominations. If it meets the criteria, it is added to the list of good articles.

Terminology

To avoid confusion, please use this terminology in your comments within this RfC:

• "Review Trading" is when a GA nominator asks another nominator to perform reviews on each others' articles. This RfC is addressing Review Trading.

• "Quid pro quo" (qpq) means a DYK-style obligation to perform a review (of any item) in order to nominate an article. That is not a subject of this RfC.

Background

The GA documentation has virtually no discussion of Review Trading: it is neither explicitly prohibited nor explicitly permitted in the GA documentation. Some editors have suggested that "what is not prohibited is permitted". The only place Review Trading is mentioned, I believe, is in the GA Review Circle page, which states: "GARC is not quid pro quo or horse trading arrangement, because those approaches can lead to low-quality reviews, quick approvals, and a culture of complacency."

Review Trading has not been discussed very much in GA Talk pages (contrast with DYK-style qpq, which has been proposed several times over the past 20 years, and always rejected). There is only one significant on Review Trading within GA Talk page discussion in the past ten years: A March 2024 proposal at Wikipedia_talk:Good_article_nominations/Archive_31#Proposal_4:_Formalize_"horse_trading". It was a small discussion, asking if Review Trading should be "formalized", meaning documented as a GA practice. There was 1 Support and 5 Oppose. One Oppose objected to all Review Trading; some Oppose's supported Review Trading, yet objected to making it a formal process. Some of the editors clearly felt that Review Trading was permitted and was occurring.

From several comments throughout the GA talk pages, it is clear that some editors are engaging in Review Trading. I saw mention that some inexperienced editors engaged in Review Trading, resulting in poor-quality GA reviews, and they were discovered and educated (I was not able to find links for those events). Some other experienced editors, who apparently perform good-quality GA reviews, have stated that they engage in Review Trading.

So, it appears that Review Trading is happening to some extent. There are a couple of editors who assert in recent Talk page discussions that Review Trading is not acceptable.

This RfC is asking whether the practice of Review Trading is acceptable for GA nominations, when performed by two experienced, impartial editors. To my knowledge, this question has never been posed before in a RfC or a GA "Proposal".

Asking "Is Review Trading is acceptable?" is not an idle question. For example, I'm working on an article that will be ready for GA nomination in a couple of months from now. I'd like to know if I will be able to reach out to other nominators and ask if they'd like to exchange reviews. Of course, I would only contact editors that are experienced, impartial, and who do thorough, diligent reviews.

(NB: This RfC is not asking if Review Trading should be formally documented in GA instructions ... that was recently discussed in March 2024, and the consensus was "no".) Noleander (talk) 16:10, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

This is very long, no one is going to read it. Once you have a few sentences, each new sentence is going to increase the number of people who don't read it. And just a heads up, I get a ping every time you edit this. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 17:34, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

Alright, thanks for the tips. Sorry about the excessive pings. Noleander (talk) 17:47, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

Bentinho Massaro

What happened there? And why do you hide the truth about your intergalactic conquest? Polygnotus (talk) 22:24, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

Indiscriminate criticisms and controversies are not encyclopedic if they don't have any significant bearing on the subject, as described at WP:BALASP. Both also brush against the types of problems that WP:BLPCRIME is meant to address even if they don't explicitly describe criminal charges or liability. Regarding intergalactic conquest, I, uh... don't know what you're talking about. You must have me confused for someone else. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 00:33, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

An Indiscriminate criticism is something like "all X are Y", like "all politicians are corrupt" which is unfocused. But these statements are pretty damn specific. "This particular person did this and that during this period".

Like "all aliens are big, ugly, and abduct those who disagree with them"...

As all reliable sources have mentioned the accusations, and most have gone pretty in-depth, they meet WP:BALASP, specifically:

An article [snip] should strive to treat each aspect with a weight proportional to its treatment in the body of reliable, published material on the subject

There is no material that suggests Massaro has committed a crime, as far as I know, and being accused of undesirable behaviour is not a crime (otherwise the incarceration rate would be >80%).

I also note that you claim on your userpage to be a life-long resident of Arizona, but isn't it true you spent some years in Nevada? Polygnotus (talk) 01:28, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

That's not the sense in which I'm using indiscriminate, but I digress. I'd be open to including it if were treated the same way as other information about him, rather than separated from the rest of the content. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 01:34, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

If you wanna get rid of the section header, sure. But why do you refuse to explain, or even acknowledge, these highly unusual interference patterns on our radio telescope array? Polygnotus (talk) 02:04, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

TFA

Thank you today for Barbara Bush, introduced (in 2023): "Barbara Bush is one of only two women in American history to be both the wife of a U.S. president and the mother of a U.S. president. One of the oldest women to hold the position, she was known for her non-threatening grandmotherly image that earned her some of the highest approval ratings of any contemporary U.S. first lady. She was the last of the first ladies from the Greatest Generation, and as such the last to live the traditional lifestyle of a housewife. Under this lifestyle, she underwent two periods of severe depression: once after the death of her young daughter Robin to leukemia, and once again when her husband's secretive work at the CIA left her in emotional isolation. She held a strong rivalry with her predecessor, Nancy Reagan, and her matronly image forever made her the comparison point for her politically active successor, Hillary Clinton. Besides her widely publicized work in promoting literacy, Bush was also involved in activism for AIDS patients. She died in 2018, shortly after leaving the Republican Party of which she was an icon for much of her life."! -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:51, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Thankyou for getting Barbara's article to be featured! Wonderful work! – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 15:55, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Question from Folabiomath (17:17, 8 June 2025)

Hello, Good day. I have been editing the article about African Society for Mathematical Biology. When would it be moved to the main page for public viewing? --Folabiomath (talk) 17:17, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

It will need to be written in a way that won't be confused with advertising or promotional material. Phrases like "advocates for the professional development of its members while engaging in scientific research and innovation across the continent" sounds like someone talking about what makes ASB great, not a neutral descriptor of its function. The sources need some fixing too. Each source should be used to confirm the information before it. For example, the draft says "In 2010, ASB sought affiliation with the African Mathematical Union (AMU)", but I don't see where the source verifies that; it's just a link to the AMU website. You'll also want to make sure all of the sources you use are independent and reliable. This means sources written by ASB or people associated with it aren't going to be helpful. Wikipedia also can't be used as a source in another Wikipedia article. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 17:26, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Question from Ennibrave on Finley Hospital (16:15, 9 June 2025)

Olamide --Ennibrave (talk) 16:15, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Question from Prathimacuppala (13:38, 11 June 2025)

Hi, Im new to editing in wiki. i made an edit recently in a television show page. there was a random name placed inbetween square brackets next to the names of the contestants. i removed those names and retained the original names and the same was publised. but in my user contribution i have got a (-192) points. why is that? --Prathimacuppala (talk) 13:38, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello Prathimacuppala! That number indicates how much your edit changed the article's size. It's -192, so that means the article is now 192 characters shorter than it was before. Removing bad content can be just as useful as adding good content, the number just makes it easy to see what type of change it was. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 15:49, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

thank you for the clarification. Prathimacuppala (talk) 04:17, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

Question from Cityoforono (17:17, 12 June 2025)

Hi! I am work as the Public Relations for the city of Orono and would like to add more information to my city's page and edit somethings that are very biased towards another city with whom we are working through a conflict, so it reflects the positive changes we have made. My first two edits were reverted, and I would like to know what I need to do to make sure I edit it the right way, so it doesn't get reverted again. Thank you! --Cityoforono (talk) 17:17, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello Cityoforono, it sounds like what you're describing is promotional editing, which is not allowed. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that neutrally documents subjects based on what has been written about them in independent sources. The article can't be written from the perspective of the city, nor can it include original ideas or information that have not already been reported by third parties. You have a conflict of interest, so you may want to read the conflict of interest guide. Assuming that you hold a paid position, you're also required to have a paid-contribution disclosure. Generally speaking, information isn't removed solely because it is negative. This is an aspect of the city that was covered by reliable independent sources, so there's grounds to document it in the article. If you can provide sources such as news coverage to update the information, the conflict of interest guide explains how you can help get the new information into the article alongside the existing information. I see you already have a few sources in the edits you made, so that's a good start. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 18:07, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

A Barnstar For You

		Women in Green Editathon May '25
		Thank you for participating in Women in Green's 8th editathon! Your good article about Maria das Neves is another step forward for our coverage of female heads of government. --Grnrchst (talk) 19:36, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Question from Lolo12345945 (07:10, 17 June 2025)

Hi there, how do I finish off publishing an article? --Lolo12345945 (talk) 07:10, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

It looks like you did it at Jay Lobwein! In the future, note that it's better to use the "move" button to take it from the draft page to the main page. This avoids having a duplicate where it exists in both the draft and the article. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 05:16, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

The DCWC is back!

The Developing Countries WikiContest Gold Belt Buckle

Hey Thebiguglyalien, the Developing Countries WikiContest will be returning for a second year, and sign-ups are now open! The contest will run from 1 July to 30 September, and the objective remains the same: improve as many articles relating to developing countries as you can to help fight systemic bias on Wikipedia.

In other news, we have a new face on the coordinator team this year: last year's sixth-place finisher, Arconning (talk · contribs)! The coordinators would like to extend a sincere thanks to Ixtal (talk · contribs), who is leaving the team, without whom the contest would not exist. After feedback from contestants last year, the scoring rules are undergoing some modifications; the new rules and a summary of the changes made will be posted to the contest talk page shortly.

If you have any questions, please leave a message on the contest talk page or contact one of the coordinators: Arconning (talk · contribs), sawyer777 (talk · contribs), or TechnoSquirrel69 (talk · contribs). (To unsubscribe from these updates, remove yourself from this list.) Sent via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 09:33, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

Question from Labonham (04:51, 19 June 2025)

Howdy! I may have jumped the gun a little bit with this, but I saw that the title image on the 'Diboll, Texas' page was an aerial view of a town in 1945. Although it's labeled as 'Diboll, Texas,' in the image itself, I noticed that it was actually an aerial view of Lufkin, Texas, which is the next town over. I went ahead and changed it, but do you have suggestions on the 'proper' way to go about editing stuff like this? It's my first time so bear with me! --Labonham (talk) 04:51, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello Labonham! How did you confirm that it's not really Diboll? Assuming you're correct that it was mislabeled, then you made the right call by removing it. I'd also want to head over to Wikimedia Commons where it's hosted to describe the error (otherwise someone might end up adding it back), but we'd need to be able to demonstrate that it was mislabeled. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 05:23, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Howdy! Thank you for your reply! This is the image I'm referring to: [1]. I initially noticed that it wasn't Diboll when I was comparing the image to other aerial photos of Diboll dated around the 1950s and '60s. The following link contains some of the images I compared it to: [2]. I then recognized some of the features on the original photographs of being in Lufkin, Texas (specifically some of the buildings owned by Lufkin Industries). I compared the image with Lufkin instead of Diboll on Google Maps, Google Earth, as well as the following collection of photographs which contains some aerial photos of Lufkin: [3], and I was able to tell that the image matched Lufkin, not Diboll.

I wish I could upload images of some of the comparisons I made, but I'm still getting used to this site. I hope the links I provided you are able to show that the image isn't correctly labelled. Labonham (talk) 21:37, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

I'm not terribly active at Commons and I'm not super familiar with its inner workings, so I left a message at its Village Pump page to get some input. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 22:22, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi! I noticed that the image on Commons now has a note mentioning that it is likely a photo of Lufkin, not Diboll. Thanks for your help! Labonham (talk) 05:37, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

No problem! These mentorship module questions are usually the same few things, so it's nice to have a more interesting one from time to time. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 06:27, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

Question from LLarysaLingva (07:00, 24 June 2025)

Dear Thebiguglyalien, Earlier this spring, I published an article on Ukrainian Wikipedia about a Ukrainian filmmaker. I've now written a shorter English version of the article with the goal of linking it to its Ukrainian counterpart. Could you take a moment to review the draft and let me know if there are any aspects I should revise or improve. Your feedback means a lot. Here is a short link to the article: https://w.wiki/EYg4 Thank you very much in advance for your time and support! regards, LLarysaLingva (talk) 07:00, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello, the English Wikipedia has higher standards for inclusion than many of the others. You'll want to make sure that there are a few reliable sources independent of the subject that provide significant coverage. You'll need at least a few sources like this, and I'm not sure if any of the current sources in the article meet all three of these criteria. User-generated sources like IMDb are unreliable and can't be used in articles at all. Many of the other sources are okay to use but won't count toward proving notability because they're not independent of Naumenko or because they don't give him significant coverage. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 19:46, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

Question from Mizusoup (23:47, 24 June 2025)

Hi! I'm writing and editing an article about a living person. I had put all the relevant resources and citations about that person, but it still got rejected. Could you help me with what kind of resources are accepted for the article to get approved? Thanks! --Mizusoup (talk) 23:47, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello Mizusoup, sources have to meet three criteria to prove that someone is notable enough to be included on Wikipedia: they're reliable, independent, and provide significant coverage. IMDb and Wikipedia are user-generated, so they're not published by reliable authors or outlets and should be removed. Things written by Knight, interviews involving her, or pages about her on organizations she's involved with are not independent; they can still be used as sources in some cases, but they don't prove notability. They also need significant coverage, which means that the source provides substantial information about her that isn't just a passing mention or a brief note. An article is only approved if there are multiple sources that meet all of these criteria. Also note that there are additional considerations if you personally know Ivy Knight or are working on her behalf. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 23:57, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

Question from Sparrassidae (12:54, 26 June 2025)

hello! I was wondering how to tweak existing links on wikipedia articles as the link on the theridiosomatidae page which should lead to a page on the genus sennin it instead leads to a historical article on xian, and i would like to fix it. --Sparrassidae (talk) 12:54, 26 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello Sparrassidae, often you can just open the editor and click to change the link, but in this case the links are wrapped in a template, so you'll have to make sure you're using the source editor (there should be a drop down setting that lets you change between "Visual editing" and "Source editing"). You'll edit the page and find where it says [[Sennin]] and replace it with whatever the correct link is. The brackets tell the page to make it a link. You can check out the Introduction to Wikipedia for the basic pointers on how to edit, and it includes a page specifically about adding links. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 15:30, 26 June 2025 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2002

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2002 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 GoldRomean -- GoldRomean (talk) 01:24, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

WikiCup 2025 July newsletter

The third round of the 2025 WikiCup ended on 28 June. This round was again competitive, with three contestants scoring more than 1,000 round points:

• BeanieFan11 (submissions) with 1,314 round points, mostly from articles about athletes and politicians, including 20 good articles and 48 did you know articles
• Gog the Mild (submissions) with 1,197 round points, mostly from military history articles, including 9 featured topic articles, two featured articles, and four good articles
• Sammi Brie (submissions) with 1,055 round points, mostly from television station articles, including 27 good articles and 9 good topic articles

Everyone who competed in round 3 will advance to round 4 unless they have withdrawn. This table shows all competitors who have received tournament points so far, while the full scores for round 3 can be seen here. During this round, contestants have claimed 4 featured articles, 16 featured lists, 1 featured picture, 9 featured-topic articles, 149 good articles, 27 good-topic articles, and more than 90 Did You Know articles. In addition, competitors have worked on 18 In the News articles, and they have conducted more than 200 reviews.

Remember that any content promoted after 28 June but before the start of Round 4 can be claimed in Round 4. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, feel free to review one of the nominations listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:50, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

The DCWC is open!

See a    "developing" or    "least developed" country? Write about it to earn points!

Thebiguglyalien, for the second running of the Developing Countries WikiContest, it is now open for submissions. The coordinators have addressed some of the queries at the last contest and we are hopeful that it'll turn out great! If you haven't done so already, please review the following:

• New to Wikipedia? Many experienced editors are part of this contest and willing to help; feel free to ask questions on the talk page.
• Got open nominations? List them at the review requests sidebar.
• Looking for a topic to work on? Check out suggested articles and eligible reviews. Remember, reviews now award 10 points!
• Not sure if your article qualifies? See the scoring rules for more information or contact a coordinator.
• Know someone else who might be interested? Sign-ups remain open throughout the contest, so don't hesitate to invite other editors!

On behalf of the coordinators, we hope you enjoy participating and wish you the best of luck! If you have any questions, please leave a message on the contest talk page or ask one of the coordinators: Arconning (talk · contribs), sawyer777 (talk · contribs), or TechnoSquirrel69 (talk · contribs). (To unsubscribe from these updates, remove yourself from this list.) Sent via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 03:52, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

Rose Cleveland scheduled for TFA

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 20 August 2025. 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/August 2025, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/August 2025. Please keep an eye on that page, as notifications of copy edits to or queries about the draft blurb may be left there by user:JennyOz, who assists the coordinators by reviewing the blurbs, or by others. I also suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from two days before it appears on the Main Page. Thanks, and congratulations on your work! Gog the Mild (talk) 12:30, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

Promotion of Rose Cleveland

Congratulations, Thebiguglyalien! The article you nominated, Rose Cleveland, 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) 00:11, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

• Congratulations on the promotion! Aoba47 (talk) 21:10, 7 July 2025 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Luke Cage

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Luke Cage 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 MidnightAlarm -- MidnightAlarm (talk) 22:27, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Barbara Park

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Barbara Park 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 LEvalyn -- LEvalyn (talk) 03:23, 7 July 2025 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Barbara Park

The article Barbara Park you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Barbara Park for comments about the article, and Talk:Barbara Park/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of LEvalyn -- LEvalyn (talk) 04:08, 7 July 2025 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Luke Cage

The article Luke Cage you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Luke Cage for comments about the article, and Talk:Luke Cage/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of MidnightAlarm -- MidnightAlarm (talk) 13:21, 7 July 2025 (UTC)

Question from Herohcreatives (17:19, 9 July 2025)

Hello, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Tayo_Nathaniel_Fagbemi I requested that this article be deleted after seeing it does not meet Notability under Academic, but someone contested it. I want to know the specific thing I need to adjust or remove from this to become notable. Do you have any idea? --Herohcreatives (talk) 17:19, 9 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello Herohcreatives! Instructions for deletion can be found at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion#Nominating article(s) for deletion, but I don't think it's necessary here. Like the editor who challenged it said, there are a couple independent sources here, so the article would have a good chance of being kept. If you want to be extra sure, you can try to find a few more sources that describe Fagbemi that aren't affiliated with him or an organization he worked with. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 18:22, 9 July 2025 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for your help.⁣ Herohcreatives (talk) 18:52, 9 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello mentor, I recently requested an article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K-ID_(company)) to be restored from soft deletion in order to improve on it (I am not the original writer). Do I need to create a new sandbox to start afresh or can I edit directly on the page? Thanks --Herohcreatives (talk) 17:24, 9 July 2025 (UTC)

You can feel free to edit the article as it currently exists. You'll want to make sure to find more independent sources and add them to the article to prove that it's notable. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 18:22, 9 July 2025 (UTC)

Noted, thanks. Herohcreatives (talk) 18:52, 9 July 2025 (UTC)

Question from Herohcreatives (17:27, 14 July 2025)

Hello, amiable mentor,

I hope you’re doing well. I’m reaching out because I could use your guidance on a small but important issue. I recently worked on improving the K-ID (company) article, and instead of making a proper paid contribution disclosure, I mistakenly declared a conflict of interest (COI). That seems to have triggered the current tag.

The truth is, I don’t have any personal or professional connection to the company; I was simply contacted to improve the article based on available sources. I now understand that what I should have done was a paid disclosure, not a COI, and I’d like to fix that if possible.

Would it be appropriate to update the Talk page with a corrected disclosure? Or is there a better way to handle this now that the tag has already been added?

Thanks, as always, for your time and support. I truly appreciate your guidance on this.

Warm regards, (User:Herohcreatives) --Herohcreatives (talk) 17:27, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Herohcreatives, I added a paid-contribution template to the talk page. I also made a few changes to the article to limit any potentially promotional content, so that way it doesn't need to be tagged as having a COI problem. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 17:42, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, and thank you once again for being a true mentor.

I truly appreciate your guidance and support, it means a lot. I noticed the COI tag has been removed, and I’m grateful things are moving in the right direction.

Please let me know if there’s anything else I need to do or improve to help ensure the article eventually goes live and aligns fully with Wikipedia’s expectations.

Thanks again for always being there. Herohcreatives (talk) 17:48, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Question from Noriko4377 (06:02, 15 July 2025)

Hi --Noriko4377 (talk) 06:02, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello Noriko4377! Let me know if you need help with anything, or you can post questions about editing at the Teahouse. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 21:53, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

Question from Mizusoup (22:57, 15 July 2025)

Hello! My recent article has been rejected twice. I ensured that I used reliable sources, but I'm unsure what I'm doing wrong. Could you please help me with it? Thanks! --Mizusoup (talk) 22:57, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

It looks like the problem is that all of the sources with significant content are things by her or by organizations she's affiliated with. People are only notable if there's significant independent coverage of them, otherwise anyone with a company profile page or anyone who put out a few quotes could have an article about them. I can't make any promises that she meets these requirements, but you could potentially find something if you looked for independent reviews of her work by reputable critics/publishers. Also keep in mind that IMDb and Wikipedia aren't considered reliable as sources for Wikipedia articles since they're user-generated. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 23:20, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

Help with FAC

Hey. Hope you are doing well. This is a bit out of the blue, but I was wondering if you'd be interested in reviewing an article I've put up for FAC. It's not a comic character article like Iron Man or Black Widow, but Erik Campbell (Final Destination) follows the general outline; a fictional biography section, one on his development, and lastly one for the reception towards him. As a character with just one film appearance, the info on him was less than those two Avengers.

If you don't have time to do a review or simply don't find the subject interesting I understand. :) PanagiotisZois (talk) 21:13, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

My area of interest with reviewing is usually things from the developing world (I was actually working on a FAC review about Ming dynasty China when you sent this). It looks like Campbell only just hit the "Older nominations" section, so even with the coordinator note you still have a good chance of getting the reviews you need in my experience. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 21:27, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

Love the fact you said I'd probably get additional reviews soon, and I literally got one yesterday. XD Anyway, I understand wanting to review things that you're an expert on or interest you, so no worries.

Sidenote, I do have another question. How come you ended up working so hard on the Iron Man and Black Widow articles? Don't get me wrong, I'm happy that they managed to become featured articles, and I hope more attain that feat. Your work on them was, in some ways, groundbreaking. Now, all Wikipedia users have a template on how they should write a comic character article; particularly one Marvel/DC characters.

It's just that even with the MCU's influence, neither Iron Man nor Black Widow seem to necessarily be among the most popular Marvel characters. [Or maybe I'm just biased towards the X-Men] Were you a fan of them from reading the comics, became one through the MCU, or did you think they were some of the Marvel characters with the most potential to become FA? PanagiotisZois (talk) 11:27, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

I got the courage to start working on big comic book articles after doing the good article review for Captain America and realizing that more articles could be written like that. From there I started working on ones where there was enough sourcing to make a reasonably in-depth article. Iron Man and Black Widow ended up being the two I was happiest with in terms of depth, in large part because both of them had an entire edited volume published about them. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 15:51, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Oh, yeah. Morgan's work on Captain America was amazing. Still hope to see that up at FAC one day.

I see. So it was less about which character you're the biggest fan of, and more about which one would be the easiest to write a good article on. Good call. I've often started working on certain pages, only to realize that there's not enough sources to actually make an entire article for X thing.

I did look up the edited volumed by McFarland. The one on Black Widow does seem like an interesting read; especially since it seems she's the only female superhero from Marvel to actually have such a book. :/

Having one such volume on individual X-Men characters would have been nice, but for now I'll settle for the volume that exists about the entire team.

Sidenote, since you worked on the "This Man... This Monster!" article, seem to have an interested in the Fantastic Four, and plan on working on "The Galactus Trilogy" in the future, I thought you might be interested in this book. It's by Penguin, and collects various Fantastic Four issues from the 1960s. I saw that Morgan used Penguin's equivalent book on Captain America for a particular story arc, so it might prove useful to you for issue #51 and "The Galactus Trilogy". PanagiotisZois (talk) 19:49, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

My biggest goal with comic book articles would be to rewrite Fantastic Four and the articles for all four members. I did some digging on this a while back and took notes on some sources, but the only really good source I'm aware of is Marvel's Fantastic Four: The First 60 Years. A collection could be useful if it has good commentary, but I don't know how much that would be. This would definitely move up on my list of projects if I could find one or two more in-depth sources about the Fantastic Four from an out-of-universe perspective. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 20:20, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

An article on Sue that's on-par with Black Widow and Iron Man would be SO great. I've never gotten around to reading the comics this far, but it's definitely on my list once I've read enough X-Men comics.

I'd partit be curious to read what critics and whatnot had to say about Sue's "Malice" persona/story, especially given how much focus has been given to that the last couple of months with her Malice skin in Marvel Rivals and Vanessa Kirby's comments from the new film.

I'll admit, I don't know how much info the collection includes, but you never know. If nothing else, I'm guessing the commentary on issue #1 will prove useful on the creation of the team/characters. PanagiotisZois (talk) 20:56, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

In appreciation

		The Reviewers Award
		By the authority vested in me by myself it gives me great pleasure to present you with this award in recognition of the thorough, detailed and actionable reviews you have carried out at FAC. This work is very much appreciated. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:15, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Question from Dimpho Mongadi on Wikipedia:Username policy (08:30, 18 July 2025)

How to create account --Dimpho Mongadi (talk) 08:30, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

Dimpho Mongadi, it looks like you already have. Congratulations! :) Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 15:29, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

Source formatting of Sebele II

I mucked around with the source formatting of Sebele II. Feel free to throw rotting fruit at me if you disagree. -- Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 13:35, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

DYK for Johann Voldemar Jannsen

On 22 July 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Johann Voldemar Jannsen, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Johann Voldemar Jannsen was rebuked by the Estonian nationalist movement that he helped to found, only for a song he wrote to become Estonia's national anthem? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Johann Voldemar Jannsen. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Johann Voldemar Jannsen), 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.

~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:03, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

Your nomination of Peanut butter and jelly sandwich is under review

Your good article nomination of the article Peanut butter and jelly sandwich is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Vacant0 -- Vacant0 (talk) 19:44, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Jianwen Emperor

@Thebiguglyalien The comments you raised in the FAC, I have finished editing them. If you have time, could you help me review them? Min968 (talk) 02:27, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

The nomination has been marked as archived because no one else was interested in reviewing it, and now you have to wait two weeks before nominating again. In my opinion it's needlessly cruel that they do that at FAC, but if you renominate it in the future then you can ping me and we can pick up where we left off. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 05:58, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

Your nomination of Peanut butter and jelly sandwich is on hold

Your good article nomination of the article Peanut butter and jelly sandwich has been placed on hold, as the article needs some changes. See the review page for more information. If these are addressed within 7 days, the nomination will pass; otherwise, it may fail. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Vacant0 -- Vacant0 (talk) 12:22, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

Your nomination of Peanut butter and jelly sandwich has passed

Your good article nomination of the article Peanut butter and jelly sandwich has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Vacant0 -- Vacant0 (talk) 10:24, 27 July 2025 (UTC)