|
|
JustARandomSquid, despite saying you originally weren’t particularly interested in it, here you are, keeping the backlog down at our brand new project-wide assessment page! At the risk of repeating myself, thanks for kick-starting that discussion and for all your contributions to the project. Have a wonderful holiday season, and see you in 2026! |
GoldRomean (talk) 18:57, 26 December 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you! JustARandomSquid (talk) 18:58, 26 December 2025 (UTC)
Your good article nomination of the article Air Serbia Flight 324 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 TheNuggeteer — TheNuggeteer (talk) 00:07, 4 January 2026 (UTC)
Your good article nomination of the article Air Serbia Flight 324 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 TheNuggeteer — TheNuggeteer (talk) 02:46, 5 January 2026 (UTC)
Hey! Thanks for assessing it, but since it is a B, I wonder what else should be done before I make it a GAN. English language sources, perhaps? I can’t expand much on the 1973-74 iteration, the Hebrew article claims that this iteration performed in festivals, but I could not find any press coverage of said festivals that mention them. Since this is about a band that didn’t last that long, I think it is fair to assume that there’s not much more to add. If you can’t help here, then that’s fine, too, but thanks nonetheless for assessing it! S.G. (They/Them) (Talk) (Edits) 11:58, 5 January 2026 (UTC)
- Non-English sources are ok if there aren’t better ones in English. You can see the relevant policy on that at WP:NONENG.
Since this is about a band that didn’t last that long, I think it is fair to assume that there’s not much more to add.
This is why I assessed it as B, even if most people would’ve gone for C based on length alone. As for GA, there are Good Articles shorter than yours (indeed I’m told the GA process was originally intended for high-quality articles that are too short for FA), and the criteria technically only want comprehensiveness (meaning everything that there is to write about the subject is in the article), but short articles are always slightly controversial. That said, if you’ve tried your absolute best to find any information about them, and there genuinely is none, that’s not your problem, and there probably will be someone ready to pass it at GAN. JustARandomSquid (talk) 12:14, 5 January 2026 (UTC)- There’s only this pretty good JSTOR journal (already cited in the article) and I guess this book but they’re not the focus nor mentioned much there. I don’t think there is much more I can add, aside from maybe why they’re called “the High Windows”, but honestly, in the sources that mention this, it is usually just speculation from the band members like “Oh, Kraus came up with it because of X and Y” or something like that and I don’t really see how that merits being included. As for how good the non-English sources are, I’d say that the Dudi Patamir retrospective is pretty good (he is a musicologist, so I’d trust his expertise here), and the other retrospectives are all comprehensive as well. Lastly, I did one last search for the band’s 1973-1974 iteration and found…three results that are about actual high windows…heh. But yeah, this seems like its at the best state it really could be before a GAN. Thank you for your help! If you have anything else to add, before I nominate it, let me know. S.G. (They/Them) (Talk) (Edits) 12:25, 5 January 2026 (UTC)
Hello. Your account has been granted the “pending changes reviewer” userright, allowing you to review other users’ edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.
Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.
See also:
Dr vulpes (Talk) 04:13, 6 January 2026 (UTC)
- Amazing, thank you! JustARandomSquid (talk) 09:01, 6 January 2026 (UTC)
- If you have any questions or are unsure of anything feel free to leave a note on my talk page. Thanks for helping to keep things running around here! Dr vulpes (Talk) 15:20, 6 January 2026 (UTC)
- If you are going to accept pending changes, you need to actually check them. The changes you accepted at Peshawar were full of errors… Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 15:50, 7 January 2026 (UTC)
- What was wrong with the edit? Was it factually incorrect? If so, I apologise. But from what I can tell, they just added non-existent parameters, something I didn’t spot because I’m not intimately familiar with infobox parameters and also because there were no obvious visible problems with the infobox in the new revision. If that’s the case, sorry for contributing to the CAT:UNKNOWN backlog, but just FYI I don’t feel like I merited this message, considering WP:Reviewing pending changes explicitly says you should not be scolding me for accepting an edit incorrectly unless it was vandalism, a BLP violation, had copyright issues etc. (and if I understand correctly this didn’t even visibly change the page). JustARandomSquid (talk) 16:29, 7 January 2026 (UTC)
- My point is that if you are coming to accept pending changes you should take the time to examine the changes being made, not just blanket approve. The fact that you accepted this change indicates to me that you did not even review it as there is no scenario in which that would be a valid addition to an infobox. If you can’t see that, you should not be accepting pending changes. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 23:58, 7 January 2026 (UTC)
- What was wrong with the edit? Was it factually incorrect? If so, I apologise. But from what I can tell, they just added non-existent parameters, something I didn’t spot because I’m not intimately familiar with infobox parameters and also because there were no obvious visible problems with the infobox in the new revision. If that’s the case, sorry for contributing to the CAT:UNKNOWN backlog, but just FYI I don’t feel like I merited this message, considering WP:Reviewing pending changes explicitly says you should not be scolding me for accepting an edit incorrectly unless it was vandalism, a BLP violation, had copyright issues etc. (and if I understand correctly this didn’t even visibly change the page). JustARandomSquid (talk) 16:29, 7 January 2026 (UTC)
- If you are going to accept pending changes, you need to actually check them. The changes you accepted at Peshawar were full of errors… Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 15:50, 7 January 2026 (UTC)
- If you have any questions or are unsure of anything feel free to leave a note on my talk page. Thanks for helping to keep things running around here! Dr vulpes (Talk) 15:20, 6 January 2026 (UTC)
Hello, I’m Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Novak Djokovic, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A bare URL and missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for 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) 15:27, 16 January 2026 (UTC)
Hello, I’m Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Economy of Egypt, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A bare URL and missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for 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) 09:57, 17 January 2026 (UTC)
Hi there,
I’m leaving this message because you contributed to the recent RfC regarding the inclusion of airport destination lists. As promised, now that that RfC has closed, I’ve initiated a further discussion about the sourcing standards to be applied to these lists.
If you wish to contribute to the discussion, please do so at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Airport destination lists – sourcing requirements.
Cheers! Danners430 tweaks made 15:23, 19 January 2026 (UTC)
How do I make a new article? —James The Writer0402 (talk) 19:41, 29 January 2026 (UTC)
- Hello, James The Writer0402! Welcome to Wikipedia! Unfortunately, creating an article from scratch is one of the hardest tasks here, because not only do you have to be aware of all the policies about writing content, you also have to be sure that your article topic meets the criteria for inclusion. If at all possible, I recommend that you try and spend at least a few weeks helping out on existing articles before attempting to make your own. As for exactly how to create a new article, there is a tutorial page at Help:Your first article. I’ll also leave some other helpful links on your user talk page. Welcome again to Wikipedia, and I hope you like it and stick around! JustARandomSquid (talk) 20:13, 29 January 2026 (UTC)
Hello JustARandomSquid, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Bird Game 3, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not blatantly vandalism or a hoax. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 19:48, 29 January 2026 (UTC)
I see you recently accepted a pending change to January 30 that did not include a direct source.
Days of the year articles require direct sources are required for all new additions. For details see the edit notice on that page, the content guideline and/or the WikiProject Days of the Year style guide.
All new additions to the DOY pages without references are now being either reverted on-sight or in some cases where the patroller is especially motivated, immediately sourced. I’ve gone ahead and backed this edit out.
All the pages in the Days of the Year project have had pending changes protection turned on to prevent vandalism and further addition of entries without direct sources. As a pending changes patroller, it’s not required but it sure would be helpful if you didn’t accept additions to day of year pages where no direct source has been provided on that day of year page. The burden to provide sources for additions to these pages is on the editor who adds or restores material to these pages.
Thank you and please keep up your good work! Toddst1 (talk) 14:13, 30 January 2026 (UTC)
- Alright, I’ll keep that in mind! JustARandomSquid (talk) 16:17, 31 January 2026 (UTC)
How do I create a citation? —Wsnffdm (talk) 02:21, 1 February 2026 (UTC)
- Hello! Welcome to Wikipedia. There’s a guide on citing sources here. If you use the visual editor, read this. JustARandomSquid (talk) 06:56, 1 February 2026 (UTC)
Hello, I’m Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Iowa City, Iowa, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for 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) 14:59, 3 February 2026 (UTC)
how do i add a link to the artist’s name —Michaela Rost (talk) 09:22, 4 February 2026 (UTC)
- Hello! Welcome to Wikipedia. I’m not entirely sure what you’re trying to do, but if you’re editing in the visual editor (the one that’s like using Microsoft Word or whatever), there’s a button to add a link. If you’re using the source editor, the one that looks like code, putting the name of the page in double square brackets makes it link there. Example:
- [[Wikipedia]] » Wikipedia
- You can also link to something, but display different text by putting them both in double square bracket with a pipe symbol in between. For example:
- [[Wikipedia|the free encyclopedia]] » the free encyclopedia
- Hope that helps! JustARandomSquid (talk) 09:35, 4 February 2026 (UTC)
- Thanks. I inserted what was a live word link between the brackets but it did not open (to the subjects’s website – he does not have a wikipedia page) and his name appeared red. Should I submit it anyway? Michaela Rost (talk) 12:07, 4 February 2026 (UTC)
- Ah, external links (that is, those leading to outside of Wikipedia) are a different matter. You can read the relevant guide at Wikipedia:External links. That guide does however say that external links shouldn’t be in the body of the article, that is that they should only be in a dedicated external links section or in an infobox. Also, if you’re adding someone without a Wikipedia article to List of Italian Australians, that might not be a good idea. As that page says, that’s a list for notable Italian Australians, which generally means that they should have a page. Adding someone without one, especially with an external link to their website, might be seen as advertising them, which isn’t allowed. Hope that helps. JustARandomSquid (talk) 12:23, 4 February 2026 (UTC)
- Thanks. My subject IS a notable Italian Australian interdisciplinary artist and academic with 60 years of continuous practice. However he has no Wiki page. But he does have a comprehensive official personal site with plenty of data verifying his notability.
- Please advise further. Michaela Rost (talk) 23:10, 4 February 2026 (UTC)
- The issue is that Wikipedia’s standards for notability are very strict. There’s a short essay at WP:42 that explains what the criteria are in the simplest possible way, I suggest that you read it. If you can find multiple sources about this artist that meet those requirements, tell me, and he will be able to get, not just a mention on the list, but a page, too. But, just to warn you, most people unfortunately don’t meet these requirements, and when I mean most people, I really mean the vast majority — there’s a YouTuber out there with 10 million subscribers, and no article here. If you divide the number of living people with pages with the total population of the world, you get just over 0.01% (and that’s an upper limit too — some of the people here have slipped through the cracks and have articles even when they don’t meet the criteria). But best of luck, either way. Feel free to ask me if you have any additional questions! JustARandomSquid (talk) 09:19, 5 February 2026 (UTC)
- Thank you. Where would I send those multiple sources to? Michaela Rost (talk) 21:33, 5 February 2026 (UTC)
- Depends what you’re trying to do. There’s no central source review page or whatever — if you want some input, send them here, and I’ll tell you what I think. If you just want to add him to the list, you can do it, leaving the link red to encourage someone to write an article, and maybe put those sources in a footnote. Now someone can always remove him if they don’t think the sources demonstrate notability, but that’s another matter. If you want an article, Wikipedia generally believes in doing things yourself, so you can always try and follow the instructions at Help:Your first article. You can also try and list it at Wikipedia:Requested articles. Hope that helps. JustARandomSquid (talk) 08:05, 6 February 2026 (UTC)
- thank you for all this info!
- will think about and process it all. Michaela Rost (talk) 10:05, 6 February 2026 (UTC)
- Depends what you’re trying to do. There’s no central source review page or whatever — if you want some input, send them here, and I’ll tell you what I think. If you just want to add him to the list, you can do it, leaving the link red to encourage someone to write an article, and maybe put those sources in a footnote. Now someone can always remove him if they don’t think the sources demonstrate notability, but that’s another matter. If you want an article, Wikipedia generally believes in doing things yourself, so you can always try and follow the instructions at Help:Your first article. You can also try and list it at Wikipedia:Requested articles. Hope that helps. JustARandomSquid (talk) 08:05, 6 February 2026 (UTC)
- Thank you. Where would I send those multiple sources to? Michaela Rost (talk) 21:33, 5 February 2026 (UTC)
- The issue is that Wikipedia’s standards for notability are very strict. There’s a short essay at WP:42 that explains what the criteria are in the simplest possible way, I suggest that you read it. If you can find multiple sources about this artist that meet those requirements, tell me, and he will be able to get, not just a mention on the list, but a page, too. But, just to warn you, most people unfortunately don’t meet these requirements, and when I mean most people, I really mean the vast majority — there’s a YouTuber out there with 10 million subscribers, and no article here. If you divide the number of living people with pages with the total population of the world, you get just over 0.01% (and that’s an upper limit too — some of the people here have slipped through the cracks and have articles even when they don’t meet the criteria). But best of luck, either way. Feel free to ask me if you have any additional questions! JustARandomSquid (talk) 09:19, 5 February 2026 (UTC)
- Ah, external links (that is, those leading to outside of Wikipedia) are a different matter. You can read the relevant guide at Wikipedia:External links. That guide does however say that external links shouldn’t be in the body of the article, that is that they should only be in a dedicated external links section or in an infobox. Also, if you’re adding someone without a Wikipedia article to List of Italian Australians, that might not be a good idea. As that page says, that’s a list for notable Italian Australians, which generally means that they should have a page. Adding someone without one, especially with an external link to their website, might be seen as advertising them, which isn’t allowed. Hope that helps. JustARandomSquid (talk) 12:23, 4 February 2026 (UTC)
- Thanks. I inserted what was a live word link between the brackets but it did not open (to the subjects’s website – he does not have a wikipedia page) and his name appeared red. Should I submit it anyway? Michaela Rost (talk) 12:07, 4 February 2026 (UTC)
how can i create a wikipedia page —Psychedelicchola (talk) 11:17, 4 February 2026 (UTC)
- Hello, @Psychedelicchola! Welcome to Wikipedia! Unfortunately, creating an article from scratch is one of the hardest tasks here, because not only do you have to be aware of all the policies about writing content, you also have to be sure that your article topic meets the criteria for inclusion. If at all possible, I recommend that you try and spend at least a few weeks helping out on existing articles before attempting to make your own. As for exactly how to create a new article, there is a tutorial page at Help:Your first article. I’ll also leave some other helpful links on your user talk page. Welcome again to Wikipedia, and I hope you like it and stick around! JustARandomSquid (talk) 11:40, 4 February 2026 (UTC)
Hi, Joseph Rickard was not German. We come from the same lineage. We have the same great-grandparents, from Cornwall, England. How can I correct this? —Myttik (talk) 14:17, 4 February 2026 (UTC)
- Hello! Welcome to Wikipedia. I’m not sure which Joseph Rickard you’re talking about, but cases like these are a bit problematic. Wikipedia doesn’t really trust someone to be who they claim to be, and one of the core content policies, the one on verifiability, demands that every piece of content be, well, verifiable, which means that a published source must be out there that confirms it, and that anyone can, at any time, go and see it for themselves and assess it. Facts for which no published source exists (“well, I just know it”, “so-and-so told me”) are considered original research, which is not allowed. So your only real option is to find a news article or book or website or journal article that corroborates this. If you find one, you can fix it yourself, citing this source. Hope that helps! JustARandomSquid (talk) 18:39, 4 February 2026 (UTC)
- Thank you! JustARandomSquid (talk) 09:00, 5 February 2026 (UTC)
How can I make citations and folders? —Wasdepix (talk) 03:03, 7 February 2026 (UTC)
