User talk:Epicgenius
Add topic| This is Epicgenius's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
Archives (index): 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83Auto-archiving period: 7 days  |
|
|
Click here to scroll to the bottom of the page.
dyk
[edit] | This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
Hey, Epicgenius! So here's the thing about dyk: if you haven't created preps, you have no idea what prep-setters and admins at dyk do or what challenges they face. Many editors who are regular nominators and reviewers think they'd be willing to admin, but have never filled preps, and when they become admins and start moving preps to queues, they quickly realize they didn't know what they were volunteering for. A prep-setter doesn't just create a balanced set. They also do a quick re-review on many of the hooks; you get to know whose hooks you don't have to review too heavily, but you always have to at least go check for a recent edit war or tags. If the nominator or the reviewer are new or known to be sloppy, you'll have to do a full re-review of that hook. Often prep-setters have questions they have to ask at the hook, and they deal with pushback from noms/reviewers/passersby for that. Then once you've finished a prep you have to deal with fallout at DYK talk and ERRORS. Admins do the exact same thing -- a re-review, because prep-setters miss things too, then the move (fairly simple), posting questions at DYK talk and pinging involved parties, dealing with pushback from them, and finally any fallout at ERRORS when someone finds an error you missed. So if you think you would be willing to admin at dyk, definitely go fill preps for a while to see if you like it or not. Some people love it -- I did, and I like adminning there -- but not everyone is cut out for it. It's a high-visibility job. People catch your mistakes, and the only way to prevent that is to catch other people's mistakes first. —valereee (talk) 15:20, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
- Valereee, thanks for the advice. That is good to know. I think this sort of stuff should be enjoyable for me, even if a bit difficult. I just read the project page on prep areas, and it seems a bit difficult to get a good balance on hooks. epicgenius (talk) 15:23, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
- That's one of the most fun parts of setting preps. The thing to do for your first prep is pick the bottom empty set (which right now gives you three days to fill it but normally six days.) Count to figure out whether the image hook needs a bio or a non-bio (it alternates by day). Go find one, vet it, and transfer it. That'll let the other prep setters know you'll fill that set. Not that they or an admin won't move stuff in and out if they need it or think another set is better for that hook, but in general one prep-setter works on a set. Then start putting the puzzle together -- no more than four bios (alternating in the set with non-bio), no more than one music/science/military/whatever subject. Not too many from any one country, though 2 - 4 USA hooks will be necessary. A balance of geographical area, not all from English-speaking countries. A balance of long and short. And of course a quirky. It's an art. Don't be afraid to trim or tweak hooks, but read the nom first if you do, as there may have already been discussion. Keep on top of talk in case someone asks a question about one of the hooks in that set, because some people won't realize they need to ping you as the promoter. :) Ping me any time, and Yoninah will often leave pointers on how to improve at your talk. When she stops, you know you're getting near the point of competence. :) —valereee (talk) 15:47, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
Happy Holidays
[edit]
Peace is a state of balance and understanding in yourself and between others, where respect is gained by the acceptance of differences, tolerance persists, conflicts are resolved through dialog, people's rights are respected and their voices are heard, and everyone is at their highest point of serenity without social tension. Happy Holidays to you and yours. ―Buster7 ☎
Subway articles
[edit] | This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
Once again, very impressive work on very important station complex and line articles. There is more to be added about the change in BMT plans re:Canal Street. Eventually, Clark Street Tunnel should be its own article. Also, the citations for IRT Broadway–Seventh Avenue Line are really messed up and include self-published sources like nycsubway.org, and there is more history that could be added. A lot of my older GA nominations should be looked at again for things like this. Also, for Union Square, it is worth mentioning the impromptu 9/11 memorial, and the post-2016 election post-it notes (https://mashable.com/article/power-of-post-it-note-protest-subway-therapy, https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/post-it-notes-left-union-square-election-preserved-article-1.2913344, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/12/19/post-election-subway-therapy-sticky-notes-taken-down-but-not-thrown-out/, https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/16/nyregion/subway-election-therapy-wall-sticky-notes.html). Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 14:25, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Kew Gardens 613, the pleasure is mine. I do agree that the Clark Street Tunnel should get its own page in the future. I've also noticed that there's a lot more that can be said about the Broadway-Seventh Avenue Line, especially its construction, and will have to work on it gradually. The biggest mess, though, is the Canal Street article - there are a lot of details about the BMT station that are just not mentioned at the moment, and the article in general needs more refs.As for the Union Square station, the article already mentions both the 9/11 memorial and the post-it wall (the second paragraph of 14th Street–Union Square station#Artwork). I thought one paragraph would be sufficient, seeing as how the artwork was not sanctioned by the MTA but seems to be covered by multiple reliable sources. – Epicgenius (talk) 14:38, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
- I fully agree. I missed it somehow. Don't forget the Stantec studies, like the one that found making Clark Street accessible was infeasible, and which provides some sourcing for station layout (i.e. platform length/width). Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 15:17, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
- It also is probably worth mentioning the 1990 fire in the Clark Street article. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 15:30, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
- I agree and can get around to that soon. In the meantime, I was looking at the study for Union Square, which says:
This technology does not meet ADA standards, and since there is currently no technology that does, there is no fully accessible solution for the southbound platform. We are including an option for providing elevator service to this platform in this report with the understanding that this will not provide a fully accessible solution at this time.
So I suppose this means the southbound platform can get an elevator, it just won't be ADA-accessible because gap fillers, by their very nature, are ADA-inaccessible. – Epicgenius (talk) 15:47, 2 May 2023 (UTC)- Yeah. Also, unrelated, but the 1990 Clark Street Tunnel fire was very notable, and there were major reports done on fire safety/communication, etc. in its aftermath. It would warrant an article of its own. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 16:06, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
- I also think the 1990 Clark Street fire should get its own article. (I think the fire happened just east of the Clark Street station, though, not in the tunnel under the river.) In terms of recent NYC Subway disasters, the fire has had at least as much of an impact as the 1991 Union Square derailment or the 1995 Williamsburg Bridge subway collision did. – Epicgenius (talk) 17:11, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
- Also-the provisions in the Eastern Parkway Line used for the Clark Street Tunnel connection were initially intended for a line over the Manhattan Bridge. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 14:27, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
- That is interesting. If we can find a reliable source for this, I could add it to the Borough Hall or Eastern Parkway Line articles. – Epicgenius (talk) 14:35, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
- I have seen reliable sources for this-if you cannot find them, I can look for them after I get my final paper for the semester done today. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 14:49, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
- That is interesting. If we can find a reliable source for this, I could add it to the Borough Hall or Eastern Parkway Line articles. – Epicgenius (talk) 14:35, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
- Also-the provisions in the Eastern Parkway Line used for the Clark Street Tunnel connection were initially intended for a line over the Manhattan Bridge. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 14:27, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
- I also think the 1990 Clark Street fire should get its own article. (I think the fire happened just east of the Clark Street station, though, not in the tunnel under the river.) In terms of recent NYC Subway disasters, the fire has had at least as much of an impact as the 1991 Union Square derailment or the 1995 Williamsburg Bridge subway collision did. – Epicgenius (talk) 17:11, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
- Yeah. Also, unrelated, but the 1990 Clark Street Tunnel fire was very notable, and there were major reports done on fire safety/communication, etc. in its aftermath. It would warrant an article of its own. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 16:06, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
- I agree and can get around to that soon. In the meantime, I was looking at the study for Union Square, which says:
- It also is probably worth mentioning the 1990 fire in the Clark Street article. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 15:30, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
- I started a draft Clark Street Tunnel article here: User:Kew Gardens 613/sandbox 7#Clark Street Tunnel. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 14:41, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- Have you seen this article before? Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 16:53, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Kew Gardens 613, I have, but thanks for clipping it. The first part of that source seems to largely duplicate the New York Herald Tribune ref that's already in the Fulton Street station article. But it has some info that isn't mentioned in the NYHT source, specifically the 535-foot length of the station. The second part of the source could be used for the Broad Street station article though. – Epicgenius (talk) 17:00, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- Outstanding work on the article. We really shouldn't be using The Station Reporter as a source. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 18:44, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- There is stuff to be added about flooding/water intrusion problems at Canal. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 17:52, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
- There was a report put out. I found two articles I had clipped (https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-new-york-times/98305321/, https://www.newspapers.com/article/times-union/99774843/) Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 17:57, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
- I agree. I've noticed quite a bit of info about how Canal Street's proximity to the old Collect Pond contributed to tons of water problems there. I can add these sources in later. – Epicgenius (talk) 18:04, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
- It was a paper, not a report. I haven't found it online. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 18:14, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
- I found it. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 18:18, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
- This journal is a great source for construction details. I found one article with details on underpinning and other aspects of subway construction from 1919, one on sewer siphons, SI transportation, and Columbus Circle construction Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 18:40, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
- That's very interesting. I might have to look through this journal to, um, shore up some architectural articles as well. That Canal Street article was really detailed, and I expect the others will be no different. – Epicgenius (talk) 18:46, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
- Also one on train dispatching, the Manhattan Bridge Plaza, and the ENY tunnel Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 18:57, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
- Sorry for spamming here, but also Joralemon, and here, excavation, the Atlantic Av improvement, and Brighton Line improvements Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 19:08, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
- No problem. I will just add all these links to a subsection of User:Epicgenius/sandbox/to do, where we can both track it easily. – Epicgenius (talk) 21:59, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
- Sorry for spamming here, but also Joralemon, and here, excavation, the Atlantic Av improvement, and Brighton Line improvements Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 19:08, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
- Also one on train dispatching, the Manhattan Bridge Plaza, and the ENY tunnel Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 18:57, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
- Signaling, car design, and ventilation, and IRT track design as well Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 18:47, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
- There is this thorough masterpiece on Dual Contracts construction. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 19:15, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
- That's very interesting. I might have to look through this journal to, um, shore up some architectural articles as well. That Canal Street article was really detailed, and I expect the others will be no different. – Epicgenius (talk) 18:46, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
- This journal is a great source for construction details. I found one article with details on underpinning and other aspects of subway construction from 1919, one on sewer siphons, SI transportation, and Columbus Circle construction Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 18:40, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
- I found it. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 18:18, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
- It was a paper, not a report. I haven't found it online. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 18:14, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
- There is stuff to be added about flooding/water intrusion problems at Canal. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 17:52, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
- Outstanding work on the article. We really shouldn't be using The Station Reporter as a source. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 18:44, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Kew Gardens 613, I have, but thanks for clipping it. The first part of that source seems to largely duplicate the New York Herald Tribune ref that's already in the Fulton Street station article. But it has some info that isn't mentioned in the NYHT source, specifically the 535-foot length of the station. The second part of the source could be used for the Broad Street station article though. – Epicgenius (talk) 17:00, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- Have you seen this article before? Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 16:53, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- I fully agree. I missed it somehow. Don't forget the Stantec studies, like the one that found making Clark Street accessible was infeasible, and which provides some sourcing for station layout (i.e. platform length/width). Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 15:17, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
Bumping thread for 30 days. Epicgenius (talk) 22:32, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
Bumping thread for 60 days. Epicgenius (talk) 16:30, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
- Bumping thread for 360 days. Epicgenius (talk) 17:03, 11 September 2023 (UTC) – Epicgenius (talk) 17:03, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Kew Gardens 613, by the way, we might want to flesh out User:Epicgenius/sandbox/article-draft1, my sandbox on the Manhattan Bridge subway closure. I'm planning to bring the Manhattan Bridge article to GA, which will probably require condensing the Manhattan Bridge#Trackage history section, and the closures are a notable topic that I've been meaning to finish writing about for a while. – Epicgenius (talk) 23:12, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Epicgenius I have been very busy, but, when I have a chance, will try to get back to this. Amazing work on all the bridge articles. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 13:17, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- The 2025-2029 Capital Program recently came out. Some articles may need to be updated to reflect this. – Epicgenius (talk) 13:42, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
Updating the complex articles (since they are all extremely short)
[edit] | This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
1 World Trade Center
[edit]- Needs history section
- Needs design section, which I will write shortly
- Needs destruction section
- "List of tenants" may need to be split to a separate article due to length
- "92nd Floor" section needs removed and incorporated into above "Destruction" section
2 World Trade Center
[edit]- Needs history section
- Needs design section
- Needs destruction section
- Potentially needs rewrite, after reading it I spotted a few errors
3 World Trade Center
[edit]- Actually has a history section, but needs expanded
- Rewrite Destruction section
- May need a "design" section
4 World Trade Center
[edit]- Has history and destruction sections
- Both need expanded
- More images needed
5 World Trade Center
[edit]- Half of the article is about 9/11, meaning half of the article is about 1 day when the structure existed for 31 years
- Needs a design section
- Either the gallery section needs removed or expanded to comply with MOS, it's currently just 3 images chilling around
6 World Trade Center
[edit]7 World Trade Center
[edit]- Needs architecture section
- Needs more history pre-2001
- The destruction section may need to be summarized per WP:SUMSTYLE
I added the above subheaders just in case we need a list of things to do. :) Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 16:36, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Sir MemeGod: Thanks for starting this section. I might move this to User:Epicgenius/sandbox/to do when we're done figuring out what to do (since idk where else to put it). Epicgenius (talk) 16:41, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- By the way, Construction of the World Trade Center has some info about the Twin Towers' structural design, so we can copy some of the relevant info into these articles. – Epicgenius (talk) 16:46, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
Wikimedia Apps Newsletter – Third Quarter of 2026
[edit]Hello, and welcome to the third Wikimedia Apps newsletter of 2026!
In this edition, we’ll walk you through the main updates, experiments, results, and improvements in the Wikipedia mobile apps during July, August, and through mid-September.
Following the rollout of the redesigned Home experience on Android, the team continued work to bring the Explore Feed Refresh to iOS.
Development focused on building the foundations of the new experience, including the shared card structure and navigation for the For You feed.
The team also developed a new onboarding experience that allows users to:
- Choose their preferred feed experience.
- Select topics and articles they are interested in.
- Confirm or update the Wikipedia languages they want to read.
- Learn how the new Home and For You experiences work.
The team also built article recommendations based on users’ selected interests and introduced a one-time explanation of the new Home experience for existing users.
Additional work focused on improving the reliability of the experience, including resolving an issue that prevented the For You feed from loading in non-English languages.
Following the launch of “Which Came First?” in June, the team continued improving the game and analyzing how people were using it.
Additional work during this period included:
- Updated App Store screenshots to better reflect the app’s current design and functionality, with localized versions for different regions.
- Replaced the Reading Challenge widget with Random Article following the end of the challenge.
- Improved VoiceOver navigation in Search history by identifying dated groups as headers.
- Added autofill support to the login form to improve compatibility with password managers.
- Improved Find in Page behavior on iOS 26.
- Continued preparation for iOS 26 and iPadOS 26.
Saved and Collections
[edit]A major area of work on Android was redesigning Reading Lists to create a clearer and more consistent Saved experience.
The redesign aligns Android more closely with the current iOS experience and proposed Web experience.
The team:
- Renamed Reading Lists to Collections.
- Added an “All articles” view so users can see their saved articles together regardless of collection.
- Removed the default Saved collection and introduced guidance for existing users.
- Added a “Not in a collection” filter.
- Updated saving and unsaving menus to make collection management clearer.
- Updated search within collections to match the overall Saved experience.
- Migrated the Reading Lists screen to Jetpack Compose as part of the app’s ongoing technical modernization.
Following the launch of the redesigned Home experience, the Android team moved into the next phase of Explore Feed experimentation.
Research showed that new articles personalized around users’ interests were among the content types participants found most interesting and most likely to encourage them to return.
Based on these findings, the team designed and began an A/B test of a new Articles by Topic module in the For You feed.
The team also continued exploring other potential content types, including Creator Videos and Trending by Country, while investigating ways to surface new articles across different Wikipedia languages and account for differences in quality and moderation between Wikimedia projects.
The Apps team has also been working with the Web and Machine Learning teams on Listening to Wikipedia, an initiative exploring how text-to-speech can help readers listen to Wikipedia content.
Research found a strong preference for natural, human-sounding speech over the more robotic on-device voices currently available. Based on these findings, the teams have been exploring an experience using the open-weight Kokoro text-to-speech model.
For the first Apps experiment, the Android team is preparing a limited test that allows selected users to listen to English Wikipedia article introductions directly from the For You feed.
The experiment starts with a limited collection of pre-generated audio rather than generating audio for every article. The audio reads existing Wikipedia article text without rewriting or adding content.
The goal of this initial experiment is to understand whether readers return to listening and learn more about what they would want from a future listening experience.
The team also recognizes the Wikimedia movement’s existing work around spoken content, including Wikispeech and volunteer-recorded Spoken Wikipedia, and is approaching this experiment as complementary to those efforts.
Cross-Platform
[edit]Following the conclusion of the Wikipedia 25th Birthday Reading Challenge, the team completed an analysis of the experiment.
The results showed that the challenge encouraged more frequent app use, increased account creation, and supported the wider app marketing campaign.
Users who completed the challenge continued to show retention rates 20–30% above their pre-challenge baseline after streak tracking ended.
The experiment showed that installing the widget and participating in the challenge helped users build a daily reading habit and that users were willing to create an account to participate.
The team will continue evaluating whether these retention gains persist and explore opportunities for future reading challenges and permanent streak tracking.
The Apps teams continued preparing a new VisualEditor journey designed to make it easier for app users to edit Wikipedia using the visual editing experience available on the web.
User testing was completed for the proposed journey, with a static banner selected as the preferred approach for helping users return to the app after editing.
On Android, the team completed development of an editing entry point that allows users to choose between the native source editor and VisualEditor and remember their preference.
Editing preferences were also added across Android and iOS so users can choose their preferred editing experience when starting an edit.
Following the first phase of the Hybrid Search experiment, work continued on the next generation of Wikipedia search.
During July, the team explored how search results could more clearly communicate that Wikipedia content is human-authored. Designs experimented with trust signals including contributor counts, references, and quoted passages.
Research included surveys and qualitative interviews using realistic multilingual search content. Early findings suggested that the redesigned trust signals improved perceptions of human authorship, while also showing that some participants associated the broader search experience with AI.
In August, the team completed Android and iOS wireframes for the next phase of search. The proposed experience introduces a single search interface that routes queries behind the scenes while making the source of results clearer.
Work on the next Wikipedia Year in Review began across both apps.
The team explored a more immersive design after research participants indicated that they expected a full-screen, slide-based experience similar to experiences they encounter on other platforms.
The team continued defining the overall user journey and preparing the experience for implementation, while working with Communications, Fundraising, and Design on product marketing, feature copy, donor messaging, and connections to Wikipedia’s 25th Birthday.
The team focused on encouraging earlier account creation through a new prompt in the Activity tab and defining the end-to-end Year in Review experience.
Work also included:
- Validating immersive full-screen interactions across Android and iOS.
- Establishing success metrics and experimentation plans.
- Implementing topic identification for articles in iOS and Android reading history.
- Adding Topics metadata to mobile HTML responses to support topic-based Year in Review insights.
- Continuing collaboration on product marketing, donor messaging, and Wikipedia 25th Birthday integration.
Rudin Management Company
[edit]Hello, Epicgenius. I noticed you’re an avid editor with an interest in NYC and its buildings. You recently made some edits to Rudin-owned properties, including 3 Times Square. Perhaps you’ve noticed that the Rudin company doesn’t have its own article; mentions of the company link to Lewis Rudin’s article. I put together a draft in my userspace, User:Sophie35967/Rudin_(company)_DRAFT, that covers the firm’s history and current work. Might you be willing to consider moving it to mainspace? I look forward to your review and input. Thank you, Sophie35967 (talk) 21:16, 2 November 2026 (UTC)
- @Sophie35967, thanks for reaching out, I appreciate it. Sure, I can take a look and give some feedback. I must say that new page patrol isn't my on-wiki specialty, but please let me know if you want me to leave feedback on your talk page or the draft's talk page, and/or if you want me to just edit the draft directly. – Epicgenius (talk) 22:02, 2 November 2026 (UTC)
- Thanks so much for your willingness to help. Feel free to edit the draft directly. If you happen to have access to older newspaper archives, that might help fill in the firm’s earlier history. Really, any sources you turn up would be a big help. Appreciate the opportunity to collaborate on this. Thanks again!
- Sophie35967 (talk) 14:49, 9 November 2026 (UTC)
- No problem, thanks for letting me know. I'll take a look tomorrow – Epicgenius (talk) 14:58, 9 November 2026 (UTC)
Your nomination of Marin County Civic Center has passed
[edit]Your good article nomination of the article Marin County Civic Center 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. Please also consider reviewing somebody else's nomination to help keep the backlog down. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Nebulous2357 -- Nebulous2357 (talk) 16:24, 5 November 2026 (UTC)
DYK for Hanna–Honeycomb House
[edit]
On 8 November 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Hanna–Honeycomb House, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Frank Lloyd Wright decided to continue building a house on a fault line (pictured) despite warnings from a geologist neighbor? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hanna–Honeycomb House. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (Hanna–Honeycomb House), 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 nominate it.
Zzz plant (talk) 00:02, 8 November 2026 (UTC)
|
Hook update | |
| Your hook reached 24,887 views (1,037.0 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of November 2026 – nice work! |
GalliumBot (talk • contribs) (he/it) 03:29, 10 November 2026 (UTC)
FAC
[edit]Hi Epicgenius, would you be willing to take a look at an FAC I have open? NRP (talk) 03:41, 12 November 2026 (UTC)
- Hi @NRP, sure, I can take a look starting tomorrow. Accessedgrant (Epicgenius mobile alt) (talk) 04:54, 12 November 2026 (UTC)
DYK for Loudoun County Courthouse
[edit]On 13 November 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Loudoun County Courthouse, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Loudoun County Courthouse (pictured) hosted the first case in the Southern United States with an all-black legal team? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Loudoun County Courthouse. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (Loudoun County Courthouse), 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 nominate it.