Jump to content

User talk:The Grid

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 22 hours ago by MediaWiki message delivery in topic Wikimedia Foundation Bulletin 2026 Issue 16
Skip to top
Skip to bottom

Tech News: 2026-32

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 19:44, 3 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Wikimedia Foundation Bulletin 2026 Issue 14

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 22:24, 4 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Administrators' newsletter – August 2026

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2026).

Administrator changes

added
removed

CheckUser changes

readded

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Miscellaneous


Tech News: 2026-33

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 20:43, 10 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Feedback request: Wikipedia proposals request for comment

[edit]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Articles for improvement on a "Wikipedia proposals" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

SodiumBot (botop|talk|contribs) 18:33, 13 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Tech News: 2026-34

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 21:02, 17 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Wikimedia Foundation Bulletin 2026 Issue 15

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 19:23, 18 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

The Signpost: 24 August 2026

[edit]
  • On the bright side: The great outdoors
    Blue Angels, Indigenous Peoples' Day, and the Perseids meteor shower.
  • Opinion: Are we embarrassed yet?
    One editor wants to find out more about a Department of Justice investigation of Wikipedia and its editors.
  • Comix: WP:FAOWN
    "Explaining civilly" probably should go both ways...

Tech News: 2026-35

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 20:43, 24 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

New pages patrol September 2026 Backlog drive

[edit]
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) 22:49, 24 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Reverting my Skies of Arcadia Edit

[edit]

Hello, for the second time for some reason someone has undone my edit to the article on Skies of Arcadia. The reason given was puffery and also asked me to look a neutral point of view. However, there was no explanation given as to how this even applies. Puffery applies to unqualified statements, however, for Skies of Arcadia, this links to the Wikipedia article about games that are listed as among the best. The criteria there is strict and is stated directly. It comes from at least 6 independent greatest games of all time lists by reliable gaming publications, as chosen by editorial staff or experts.

In other words, it qualifies greatest games of all time with strict criteria. In the summaries of their Wikipedia articles many of those games have have the phrasing "one of the greatest games of all time" with a hyperlink to the relevant article, namely games listed among the best, or some variation of that phrasing. You can see the FFVII article, Ocarina of Time, etc. for established examples but there are many more. If you feel like this is puffery I don't see why all of the other games are allowed to use it. Unless you can somehow explain how these issues affect the article, I'd like to undo your edit, though I'd prefer if you can do it yourself. Thanks.

VizeTheLegend (talk) 15:14, 26 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

It doesn't matter if you're linking to another Wikipedia article, statements need to provide the sources to those claims. The lede does not need references as it's a summary of the article, but the prose needs to have the sources. For both examples you provided, there's a referenced Reception section: FF7 and Zelda OoT. Look at what Skies of Arcadia has in its reception section to mirror the lede. – The Grid (talk) 20:08, 26 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
Oh... I see, so that's the issue. I didn't include the relevant content and sources in the reception section of the article itself to support the statement in the lede.
When I have some more time, I will edit the reception section and include the sources, then revert my edit in the lede or you can possibly do it. It'll be more work, but I agree it'll definitely make for a stronger and more convincing article. I'll let you know when I get it done. VizeTheLegend (talk) 20:31, 26 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
After starting a thread on the Talk page there, someone else already made the necessary changes by including the sources in the article. VizeTheLegend (talk) 12:21, 27 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
I saw the talk page thread. Thanks for reaching out though. It can be frustrating to understand the policies and guidelines all at once. – The Grid (talk) 12:51, 27 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Tech News: 2026-36

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 20:51, 31 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Wikimedia Foundation Bulletin 2026 Issue 16

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 20:59, 1 September 2026 (UTC)Reply