User talk:Fathoms Below

Hello, Fathoms Below. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 03:00, 26 July 2026 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

SuperPianoMan9167 (talk) 03:00, 26 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

August thanks

[edit]

story · music · places

Thank you for improving article quality in August! - Cute story today ;) -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:28, 20 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

September 2026 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
On 1 September 2026, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin at a particularly important time for NPP. The backlog has now passed 30,000 unreviewed articles, a level that has been described in current NPP discussions as exceptionally high and potentially difficult to overcome through normal reviewing alone. Backlog drives are one of the few measures that have historically produced a noticeable reduction in the backlog, so the participation of as many active patrollers as possible will matter this month. If you can review during September, please make articles your priority. Every article that is reviewed is a meaningful reduction in the backlog. With the queue at its current size, even a relatively small increase in the number of articles each patroller reviews can add up to a substantial difference over the course of the month. This is a hybrid drive, so redirect reviewing is still included. Redirects can be a useful way for newer patrollers to get comfortable with NPP and can help people build up to reviewing articles. However, the main goal of this drive is to tackle the article backlog, and experienced patrollers are particularly encouraged to spend as much of their available reviewing time on articles as they can. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Each article review will earn 1 point, while each redirect review will earn 0.2 points. Streak awards will be given out based on consistently hitting point thresholds for each week of the drive. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. If you have been thinking about doing more NPP, this is an especially good month to jump in. Whether you can review a few pages or hundreds, every review helps. And if you are already an active patroller, please consider whether you can put in some additional time during September to help bring the backlog back under control. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:50, 24 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi Fathoms! I've re-added the expanded Tears of the Kingdom score (i.e: 10/10, 10/10, 10/10, 10/10) over (40/40) against your edit here. Per the infobox guidelines, we don't average out scores anymore. In the case of a magazine like Famitsu, they have since the 80s almost always had four reviewers give the game four unique scores. As its four critics reviewing the game, we generally now show the expanded score to be more inline with WP:STICKTOSOURCE. Andrzejbanas (talk) 20:03, 26 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Okay, thank you for letting me know @Andrzejbanas. Fathoms Below (talk) 17:59, 27 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

The fourth round of the 2026 WikiCup ended on 29 August at 23:59 (UTC). Everyone who competed in round 4 will advance to round 5 unless they have withdrawn or been removed. Round 4 was competitive, though slightly less so than round 3. Three contestants scored more than 1,000 round points; six scored over 500; and nine scored over 300. Each of the top five competitors had hundreds of points accumulated from multiple GAs. The following competitors scored more than 800 round points:

• Generalissima (submissions) with 1,318 points, mostly from 13 good articles and 3 featured articles about creeks and Chinese and Japanese subjects
• Vanderwaalforces (submissions) with 1,208 points from 2 featured articles, 2 featured lists, and 12 good articles about African leaders, along with over two dozen reviews
• A.Cython (submissions) with 1,084 points from 16 good articles and a small good topic about warfare and Greek elections, along with over two dozen reviews
• Vestrian24Bio (submissions) with 955 points, mostly from 2 FLs, 2 featured topics, and 16 GAs about cricket, and almost two dozen reviews
• Bgsu98 (submissions) with 837 points from 4 FLs and 8 GAs about figure skating, along with two dozen reviews

The full scores for round 4 can be seen here. During this round, contestants have claimed 10 featured articles, 11 featured lists, 8 featured-topic articles, 103 good articles, 6 good-topic articles and more than 30 Did You Know articles. In addition, competitors have worked on 11 In the News articles, and they have conducted 170 peer reviews, FA and GA reviews. The tournament points table has been updated.

Remember that any content promoted after 29 August but before the start of Round 5 can be claimed in Round 5. 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) 02:43, 30 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Nominations for the upcoming Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history coordinator election have opened. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 1 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

(This message was sent to User talk:The Night Watch and is being posted here due to a redirect.)

Voting for the Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history coordinators is now open! A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. You can vote here. Voting closes at 23:59 UTC on 29 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:19, 15 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

(This message was sent to User talk:The Night Watch and is being posted here due to a redirect.)

story · music · places

Thank you for improving article quality in September! -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:33, 20 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

You were correct to revert the edit to Political correctness but for the wrong reason. Wikisource is not generally UGC (and specifically not in this case). The problem was WP:OR and "not in citation given". The phrase was used in the court transcript but we have no idea whether or not that was the first such use (let alone whether it had its modern meaning). So it simply was not a valid citation for the assertion being made. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 19:51, 28 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

@JMF that's why I said that the edit needed a secondary source that directly stated that this was the first usage of the term and prove that this was not original research. And in my mind Wikisource was technically "user-generated" because the sources on it were still compiled by users, even though I should have better clarified that it can be used to provide access to specific sources. That was just poor communication on my part. Fathoms Below (talk) 20:57, 28 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

yes, Wikisource would not be my first choice either. But for these out-of-copyright texts, it would not be unreasonable to assume that it is a faithful copy. Though I don't know how easy it is for "bad actors" to mess with it afterwards? 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 06:13, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello, Fathoms Below I hope you are wellOn October 1st, Amir gave a controversial interview criticizing the Islamic Republic of Iran's government; I believe that, as a result, supporters of the Iranian government are trying to discredit this Iranian actor and singer.I am requesting that this actor's page be protected.Because they are making destructive edits.thanks

Rprww1 (talk) 18:35, 13 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi @Rprww1. Pages are typically only protected if there is significant disruption by multiple users over a short period of time, and at the moment in the page history I don't see any of that. There was that temporary account that was behaving slightly disruptively by reinstating the A7 tag, but I'm going to assume good faith that it was due to confusion with how Speedy deletion works, and that account is even discussing their changes over here. If other accounts begin showing up and disrupting the page, you can file a report at requests for page protection and another admin can look at the article and protect it if needed. Fathoms Below (talk) 22:03, 13 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

story · music · places

Thank you for improving article quality in October! -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:37, 22 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

The 2026 WikiCup has come to an end. Our top scorers, based on the tournament point rankings (which can be seen here), are:

1. Generalissima (submissions) with 1077 tournament points, will receive the 1st place award.
2. Bgsu98 (submissions) with 1046 tournament points, will receive the 2nd place award.
3. MCE89 (submissions) with 762 tournament points, will receive the 3rd place award.
4. A.Cython (submissions) with 606' tournament points
5. Vestrian24Bio (submissions) with 537 tournament points
6. Reconrabbit (submissions) with 349 tournament points
7. BeanieFan11 (submissions) with 297 tournament points
8. Arconning (submissions) with 183 tournament points

Our three high scorers in the final round, who each got over 1,000 points, happen to all be among the top 8 as well:

1. Generalissima (submissions) with 2846 round points from 40 good articles, 4 pieces of featured content (including 2 featured articles), 11 DYK articles, and various reviews.
2. Bgsu98 (submissions) with 2603 round points from 43 good articles, 5 pieces of featured content (1 featured article and 4 featuyred lists), and various reviews.
3. Vestrian24Bio (submissions) with 1141 round points from 20 good articles, a good topic, a featured list, and 30 good article reviews.

The final round was very productive, and contestants had 29 featured articles, 8 featured lists, 1 featured picture, 150 good articles, 43 good topic articles, 189 article reviews, 28 did you know articles, and 4 in the news articles. Altogether, Wikipedia has benefited greatly from the activities of WikiCup competitors all through the contest. Well done everyone!

The top eight scorers will receive awards shortly. The following special awards will be made, based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. These prizes are awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field over the course of the competition.

• Generalissima (submissions) wins the following prizes:
  • The featured article prize, for 12 featured articles.
  • The featured picture prize, for submitting the only featured picture for the second year in a row.
  • The good article prize, for 82 good articles.
• Bgsu98 (submissions) wins the following prizes:
  • The featured list prize, for 21 featured lists.
  • The featured content reviewer prize, for 72 featured article reviews.
• Vestrian24Bio (submissions) wins the following prizes:
  • The featured topic prize, for 8 pages in featured topics.
  • The good topic prize, for 26 pages in good topics.
  • The good article reviewer prize, for 84 good article reviews.
• BabbaQ (submissions) wins the ITN prize, for 9 ITN pages.
• BeanieFan11 (submissions) wins the DYK prize, for 47 DYK pages.

A special mention also goes to these users who scored the highest in a particular category in a single round:

• A.Cython (submissions), for 20 good-topic articles in round 5.
• Olliefant (submissions), who withdrew during the competition but who had 38 featured-content reviews in round 2. Olliefant also had 43 good article reviews in round 1.
• The Robot Parade (submissions), for 5 ITN pages in round 1.

Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate. We are also looking for an experienced editor to help write the bimonthly newsletter. If you would like to help write next year's newsletters, please contact Epicgenius at his talk page.

The WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2027 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement!

On behalf of the judges, Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email), Epicgenius (talk · contribs · email), Frostly (talk · contribs · email), Guerillero (talk · contribs · email) and Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs · email):

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:12, 1 November 2026 (UTC)Reply

In our November 2026 newsletter, there was a mistake in calculating the final tournament point rankings (which have been updated here). We regret the error.

1. Generalissima (submissions) with 1461 tournament points, will receive the 1st place award.
2. Bgsu98 (submissions) with 1302 tournament points, will receive the 2nd place award.
3. Vestrian24Bio (submissions) with 793 tournament points, will receive the 3rd place award.
4. MCE89 (submissions) with 762 tournament points
5. A.Cython (submissions) with 606 tournament points
6. BeanieFan11 (submissions) with 425 tournament points
7. Reconrabbit (submissions) with 349 tournament points
8. Arconning (submissions) with 183 tournament points

On behalf of the judges, Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email), Epicgenius (talk · contribs · email), Frostly (talk · contribs · email), Guerillero (talk · contribs · email) and Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs · email):

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:42, 1 November 2026 (UTC)Reply

hello can you make an edit for me in the list of finals in the galway junior football championship. I have tried to edit it multiple times because my club won the title. The score was Headford 1-14 Father Griffins/ Éire Óg 0-8. Thanks --BobbyB8263 (talk) 21:11, 5 November 2026 (UTC)Reply

@BobbyB8263 The page isn't protected so you should not have much trouble in editing the page unless there is something wrong with your device. The edit filter isn't showing any hits either so that probably isn't the issue. So can you try making your edit again? Also, when adding this information to Galway Junior Football Championship, please make sure that you cite a reliable source for this information such as a newspaper or other reputable online source to make sure that the content is verifiable. Fathoms Below (talk) 22:21, 5 November 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hiie ~2026-59468-02 (talk) 17:10, 7 November 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Shovel Knight, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A generic name error. References show this error when author or editor name parameters use placeholder names, or the name of the newspaper or organisation, instead of the source's actual author or editor name. If no human author is given, the fields should be removed. (Fix | Ask for help). Below are the references causing this error:
  • Contributor, Kat Bailey (2019-04-23). ""Shovel Knight is Not Done:" Yacht Club Games on the Road to King of Cards and Beyond". VG247. Retrieved 2026-11-07. {{cite web}}: |last= has generic name (help)
  • Contributor, Kaan Serin (2026-10-30). "GOTY hopeful Mina the Hollower bought the studio financial stability "for now," while the Shovel Knight devs work on a new 3D game". Eurogamer.net. Retrieved 2026-11-09. {{cite web}}: |last= has generic name (help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 04:03, 9 November 2026 (UTC)Reply

Would you be interested in undeleting this hoax for WP:HOAXMUSEUM given how long it lasted? 🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 00:24, 15 November 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Kepler-1229b Just added it there. If you need anything else from me please let me know. Fathoms Below (talk) 01:51, 15 November 2026 (UTC)Reply

NervousBot (talk) 01:12, 15 November 2026 (UTC)Reply