User talk:Masem

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15 Archive 16 Archive 17 Archive 18 Archive 19 Archive 20 Archive 21 Archive 22 Archive 23 Archive 24 Archive 25 Archive 26 Archive 27 Archive 28

Thanks for the note. Agreed that we shouldn’t interpret or “parse” legal arguments in Wikipedia’s voice—doing so runs afoul of WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. For clarity, though, WP:PRIMARY does allow limited use of primary sources like briefs to support simple, descriptive facts (e.g., who filed, when they filed, the exact words quoted), while analysis, significance, and characterization should come from independent secondary sources per WP:SECONDARY and WP:RS. Proposed approach for this article:

* Keep cites to briefs only where they verify non-analytic facts: “On 3 March 2025, X filed an amicus brief” or a short, attributed quote from the brief, with a pin cite. See WP:V and WP:PRIMARY.
* Add/replace with reliable secondary coverage (e.g., law reviews, treatises, SCOTUSblog, major outlets) wherever we summarize or weigh arguments, to avoid WP:UNDUE and WP:OR.
* Avoid using party or amici filings to establish contested propositions of law or fact about living persons; use court opinions and high-quality secondary sources instead (see WP:BLP and WP:RS).

If you’re seeing places where a brief is being used for interpretation rather than straightforward verification, please flag with } and we can swap in the appropriate secondary sources. This keeps the article precise (via the primary for “what/when/who/quoted text”) and neutral/encyclopedic (via secondary for “what it means/why it matters”).

IndyNotes (talk) 15:05, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are two problems. First is with amicus briefs, because we should not be picking and choosing ourselves which briefs to present as that otherwise is favoring sides. In the article, the lower court brief is included because third party sources highlighted it, and I know for other major cases, as we get closer to argue date, we'll see more sources likely outlining those briefs. Second is that broadly that even dissecting the basic arguments of any party's filing or brief is a matter of being knowledgeable in law, which purposely WP editors are not supposed to be. We rely on what other sources say and then summarize those. Now, if this is handled like the recent VRA case (and I see no doubt it will considered a high profile case), in the week ahead of the orals (that is, next week) we will see many sources come out with their analysis of their positions including major players in the amicus briefs. So this is more a situation to wait a bit more and sources will be there to help us summarize the arguments in the days ahead of the case, so we shouldn't try to get ahead of that. We have external links to the docket that a more curious reader can review to find these if they need yo see them. Masem (t) 15:31, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just stating for the record I have some trepidation about using images from that trailer, especially given the Brazilian Overwatch account's upload isn't under a free license. Even the main US upload lacks the free license. Kung Fu Man (talk) 13:20, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I don't like the idea that material that is clearly copyright in most countries, but posted by an office outlet in a different language is claimed to be CC. The page that is linked on the version of the trailer on Commons [1] does have the CC text on it, but not the version you have linked fro the OW brazil community. Masem (t) 17:31, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply] @Kung Fu Man: I've raised the question over at the commons village pump on copyright questions. Masem (t) 19:29, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have started a new discussion on whether Aeroroutes is a reliable source, if you wanna join the discussion to mention on if its a reliable source feel free to do so, the discussion is at WP:RSN#WP:AEROROUTES Metrosfan (talk) 07:04, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. While I'm still working on trying to get Emily Neves up to B-class or GA-class as per the ongoing discussion at Talk:Emily Neves#B-class/GA-class efforts, can you please take a look at Talk:Peanuts#GA/FA? and Talk:Charles M. Schulz#GA/FA plans, if you are interested in joining these discussions? I'm planning on on getting the Peanuts and Charles M. Schulz articles up for GA or FA in the future. Thanks, sjones23 (talk - contributions) 07:18, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga § Voice actor GA/FA drive?. sjones23 (talk - contributions) 13:43, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Masem. This message is being sent to remind you of significant upcoming changes regarding logged-out editing.

Starting 4 November, logged-out editors will no longer have their IP address publicly displayed. Instead, they will have a temporary account (TA) associated with their edits. Users with some extended rights like administrators and CheckUsers, as well as users with the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will still be able to reveal temporary users' IP addresses and all contributions made by temporary accounts from a specific IP address or range.

How do temporary accounts work?

Editing from a temporary account

• When a logged-out user completes an edit or a logged action for the first time, a cookie will be set in this user's browser and a temporary account tied with this cookie will be automatically created for them. This account's name will follow the pattern: ~2025-12345-67 (a tilde, year of creation, a number split into units of 5).
• All subsequent actions by the temporary account user will be attributed to this username. The cookie will expire 90 days after its creation. As long as it exists, all edits made from this device will be attributed to this temporary account. It will be the same account even if the IP address changes, unless the user clears their cookies or uses a different device or web browser.
• A record of the IP address used at the time of each edit will be stored for 90 days after the edit. Users with the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will be able to see the underlying IP addresses.
• As a measure against vandalism, there are two limitations on the creation of temporary accounts:
  • There has to be a minimum of 10 minutes between subsequent temporary account creations from the same IP (or /64 range in case of IPv6).
  • There can be a maximum of 6 temporary accounts created from an IP (or /64 range) within a period of 24 hours.

Temporary account IP viewer user right

How to enable IP Reveal

• Administrators may grant the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right to non-administrators who meet the criteria for granting. Importantly, an editor must make an explicit request for the permission (e.g. at WP:PERM/TAIV)—administrators are not permitted to assign the right without a request.
• Administrators will automatically be able to see temporary account IP information once they have accepted the Access to Temporary Account IP Addresses Policy via Special:Preferences or via the onboarding dialog which comes up after temporary accounts are deployed.

Impact for administrators

• It will be possible to block many abusers by just blocking their temporary accounts. A blocked person won't be able to create new temporary accounts quickly if the admin selects the autoblock option.
• It will still be possible to block an IP address or IP range.
• Temporary accounts will not be retroactively applied to contributions made before the deployment. On Special:Contributions, you will be able to see existing IP user contributions, but not new contributions made by temporary accounts on that IP address. Instead, you should use Special:IPContributions for this (see a video about IPContributions in a gallery below).

Rules about IP information disclosure

• Publicizing an IP address gained through TAIV access is generally not allowed (e.g. ~2025-12345-67 previously edited as 192.0.2.1 or ~2025-12345-67's IP address is 192.0.2.1).
• Publicly linking a TA to another TA is allowed if "reasonably believed to be necessary". (e.g. ~2025-12345-67 and ~2025-12345-68 are likely the same person, so I am counting their reverts together toward 3RR, but not Hey ~2025-12345-68, you did some good editing as ~2025-12345-67)
• See Wikipedia:Temporary account IP viewer § What can and can't be said for more detailed guidelines.

Useful tools for patrollers

• It is possible to view if a user has opted-in to view temporary account IPs via the User Info card, available in Preferences → Appearance → Advanced options → Enable the user info card
  • This feature also makes it possible for anyone to see the approximate count of temporary accounts active on the same IP address range.
• Special:IPContributions allows viewing all edits and temporary accounts connected to a specific IP address or IP range.
• Similarly, Special:GlobalContributions supports global search for a given temporary account's activity.
• The auto-reveal feature (see video below) allows users with the right permissions to automatically reveal all IP addresses for a limited time window.

Videos

• How to use Special:IPContributions
• How automatic IP reveal works
• How to use IP Info
• How to use User Info

Further information and discussion

• For more information and discussion regarding this change, please see the announcement from the Wikimedia Foundation at Wikipedia:Village pump (WMF) § Temporary accounts rollout.

Most of this message was written by Mz7 (source). Thanks, 🎃 SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 02:48, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Learning Resources v. Trump, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ABC News.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:58, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga § Merging defunct WikiProjects. sjones23 (talk - contributions) 18:56, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I know we usually (though not always) disagree, but I have to say that you're possibly my favorite editor to argue (and occasionally discuss) policy nuance with.

It's apparent to me that I often come across as highly aggressive and sarcastic, and while I am very sarcastic, my aggression is usually just a matter of mannerisms, and isn't reflective of the way I feel.

But I really enjoy being able to engage with someone who expresses themself very clearly and is capable of finding subtle nuances worth exploring and maintaining a constant logic. And you very much do all of that. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 16:07, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I was sent to you recommended from the Wikipedia:Mentoring for FAC, I'll copy-paste the same request. Thank you in advance!

I've been working on a bunch of The White Stripes articles and, earlier this year, got the Meg White article promoted to a good article. In light of the band's recent induction to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, I was able to add more to the article and use new sources to max out the information available. I think I've covered every important aspect (with early help from GA reviewers, too) and want to work on possibly promoting this to a featured article. Would you be able to help? Watagwaan (talk) 19:56, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You said on the Rog Ally Xbox X that the "YouTube video" debunking the article is not a reliable source. I used it as a source because it has visuals indicating how the article is incorrect.

Beyond that, the article uses also uses a random, non-reliable source. And that video is an outright lie. If you look at the video you see on Windows it's actually at 17w tdp. Look at bazzite it says 20/21w tdp. TDP being Thermal Design Power in watts, and it's a measure of performance.

That video above is not a fair comparison at all and should not be used as proof.

I want this to be clear: There might boost in using other operating systems, but that video is not proof of it. The Library Attendant (talk) 04:10, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

you can delete this after you see it, i just wanted to say i figured out what i did wrong with my recent edit you reverted (thanks), when i go to a wikipedia article by name in my browser, it goes through the search page on wikipedia which drops the special capitalization, so i ended up on Gaas instead of GaaS, oops. Mikachu42 (talk) 18:23, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Masem. I've been working on the article for indie game Rain World solo for a while now and am planning on nominating it to FAC soon. I've already put it through Peer Review, but before I actually nominate it, I just want one more pair of eyes to read over it and name anything that you think needs improvement. I'm not asking you to do anything too in depth (although I would be really glad if you did anyways), just a check that the article has a good chance of passing at FAC. Thank you for considering. Good luck with whatever work you're doing. Tarlby (t) (c) 20:42, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Considering you've been making edits in the meantime and also left another editor asking for FA help earlier unanswered, I assume you'll also not respond to this. I'll find someone else. Thanks. Tarlby (t) (c) 19:57, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply] Sorry, I look at my talk page but tend to forget to reply immediately. I can certainly help to give it a second look before you nominate. Masem (t) 20:06, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply] Okay, thank you. I have the same habit too to be honest, lol. Tarlby (t) (c) 20:06, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply] @Tarlby: this is just a quick first pass read, as I'm not seeing any major issues, but within the release section, I would not worry too much about when announcements and trailers were released (though you do want to keep the discussion about trailer and pre-release reception). Like in the first paragaph there: A final trailer was posted on March 8, 2017, revealing its release date to be March 28[6] for PlayStation 4 and Windows and to be published by Adult Swim Games. That being future tense, its a bit weird, instead possibly Rain World was released on March 28, 2017, published by Adult Swim Games for PlayStation 4 and Windows. There's a few other places like that in that section. Only other immediate issue I see is the start of the Downpour section in the plot, the text "This section is in chronological order." is confusing and I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. (And I have only briefly actually played the main game, so I'm seeing this as one w/o knowledge of the the DLC). Maybe you're trying to say "Downpour takes place across five chronological chapters." or something like this. I'm looking at the size of this plot section and it seems large relative to the main game, so I'm making sure you have it clear why you need that much to describe it. And just trying to search on stuff, this is a newsletter from Simon Carless who is an industry expert and would be an RS (probably with attribution), that has some details on at least player count in response to certain events in the game's marketing. I was hoping to find hard sales numbers but had no luck. Masem (t) 20:29, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• I've dealt with this example and plan on looking through it more thoroughly soon
• Due to some peculiar creative decision by the devs, the five slugcat stories (or "chapters" if you wish) are actually played in non-chronological order; Gourmand -> Artificer -> Rivulet -> Spearmaster -> Saint. I felt it'd be clearer and easier to just have it in chronological order for the section, which is why I included this sentence. I've added a clarifying bit now. Regarding the plot length, I assure you I've trimmed each chapter down as much as I can. Downpour has a much more defined narrative than the original game, so it would have more detail.
• I'll see how I can add this in later. Thank you!

Tarlby (t) (c) 21:40, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply] Ok, on the Downfall, say something that "The individual chapters, while presented in a non-linear order within the game, are presented below in chronological order." or like that. Look to Memento (film) for another possible approach. Masem (t) 22:31, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply] @Tarlby: I've looked through it a couple more times now and can't really see anything else, outside of when you use Downpour as a header, it should be in italics since that's how you're formatting it within the prose. The other changes look good. You will probably get more checks at FAC but make sure when you nominate you do mention you had it copyedited. Masem (t) 02:29, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply] Thanks. I think I'll nominate this maybe a week from now as that's when my life isn't too busy with things anymore. Cheers! Tarlby (t) (c) 03:06, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!

I'm here because I do not understand why in most season articles the characters are put with their name and last name the first time they are mentioned but in season five of Stranger Things don't.

Thanks :) Marco camino 10 (talk) 20:50, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Infamous (video game) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 03:51, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Overwatch (video game)/PlayerGrowth has been nominated for discussion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 19:34, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, for your information, as you were involved in the previous discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Airport destination lists or the RfC on consensus of WP:DESTNOT at WT:NOT, I wanted to let you know that the discussed broader RfC has been opened at WP:VPP#RfC - The inclusion of destination lists in Airport articles. If you wish to contribute, please feel free. Many thanks! Danners430 tweaks made 20:40, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Wata-slab SMB cart.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. — Ирука13 03:06, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you remove Abigail from the Universal Monsters article from its modern list it doesn't count it never mention Dracula name in the film or anything relating to the title it's just a universal vampire film like An American Werewolf in London is a universal Werewolf film neither of them count. ~2025-39863-84 (talk) 02:09, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if the last voyage of the demeter counts or not. ~2025-39863-84 (talk) 02:10, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Abigail is definitely not truly a Dracula movie it never mentioned his name or anything Universal monster relating to the film title Abigail is its own film. ~2025-39863-84 (talk) 02:13, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Its probadbly better to bring that up on the Universal Monsters page. I think that there may be confusion on "a monster movie from Universal" and a "'Universal Monster' movie", which from the sources, Abagail falls into the first but not the second. Masem (t) 02:23, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am not allowed to report people in contentious topics in WP:ANI because I do not have an extended confirmed account yet. Smallangryplanet (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is not capable of acknowledging the basic reality that Palestinian militants committed sexual violence against Israeli civilians on October 7th 2023. I recently submitted an edit request to Sexual and gender-based violence in the October 7 attacks citing an Amnesty International report which found that Palestinian militants committed crimes against humanity including sexual assault on October 7th. Smallangryplanet continues to insist that sexual violence only "reportedly" happened and wants to use ambiguous language in the article that casts doubt on the veracity of the sexual violence. They are also deliberately misrepresenting aspects of the report in question. After I corrected them on the facts, I warned them that I would report them to WP:ANI if they continue to refuse to acknowledge basic reality that is inconvenient to Palestinian militant groups. They also deleted the factual information I added to the talk page without acknowledging it. They should not be allowed to edit pages under the contentious topic of Israel/Palestine. Diff in question:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ASexual_and_gender-based_violence_in_the_October_7_attacks&diff=1327058759&oldid=1327026337 RedrickSchu (talk) 13:56, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Clair Obscur: Expedition 33, 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) 00:58, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IgelRM (talk) 00:58, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Happy adminship anniversary! Hi Masem! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of your successful request for adminship. Enjoy this special day! DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 05:09, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects you have created have been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 December 19 § some v2 redirects to have fun with until a consensus is reached. consarn (talck) (contirbuton s) 18:35, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Masem,

I hope this message finds you well. I am Mohammed Filali, the founder of GameLair (https://gamelair.me/).

I am reaching out to suggest the creation of an article for GameLair as an independent media entity. I’ll be candid: in my earlier enthusiasm as a founder, I didn't fully grasp the community's protocols regarding COI. I’ve since taken the time to study the guidelines, and I am now approaching this properly by providing independent, high-authority sources for your expert evaluation. My goal is to ensure the platform’s notable growth and recognition are documented according to Wikipedia’s neutrality standards.

Here is the verified dossier:

Institutional & Market Recognition (Primary Proof):

• Crunchbase: https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/gamelair-39bc (Verifies market traction & institutional status).
• Tracxn: https://platform.tracxn.com/a/d/company/69443cd4a8aa964d7fe33495/gamelair.me (Verified startup profile).
• TheOrg: https://theorg.com/org/gamelair (Corporate structure transparency).

Media & Editorial Footprint:

• Muck Rack: https://muckrack.com/media-outlet/gamelair (Official editorial indexing and newsroom tracking).
• Wellfound: https://wellfound.com/company/gamelair
• F6S: https://www.f6s.com/gamelair

Reputation & Social Proof:

• Product Hunt: https://www.producthunt.com/products/gamelair-me
• Trustpilot: https://www.trustpilot.com/review/gamelair.me
• LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/gamelair
• YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@gamelair_me

I believe these metrics—especially the institutional rankings and our documented 108% growth—establish sufficient notability for a dedicated article. I would be grateful if you could evaluate these and, if satisfied, consider leading the creation of a draft or advising on the best path forward.

Thank you for your time and for everything you do for the community.

Best regards,

Mohammed Filali (Founder & CEO, GameLair) Mohamed0612 (talk) 16:06, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Masem, Understanding that it is the busy holiday season, I will take this request to another editor to avoid adding to your backlog during the break. Best wishes for the New Year. Mohamed0612 (talk) 08:44, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] I am sorry I didn't get back to you sooner, but I want to caution you that you are going to need much more than those sources to establish an article on WP. As a website, it likely will need to meet WP:NCORP standards, which require significant coverage of the site from independent sources, not just basic facts but more in-depth coverage of the origins of the site and recognizition that it got, which I am not seeing via web searches right now. Masem (t) 13:03, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Masem, just noticed that you have some talk discussions which need to be grammar checked or spell checked. I see this in ITN discussions. Not sure if this is a typing fast thing, or mobile editing, but can you review what you post? For example, in your recent post, I don't understand what this means: Now is WP a newspaper and there is no expectation for ITN to be on the spot timely due to that. (I am guessing this means ITN is not a newspaper, but the meaning is not conveyed well.) Natg 19 (talk) 22:32, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to see this run for TFA on the 25th anniversary of its release (Either or NA). The article could use some fine tuning, and there's other additional readily available sources out there. Famitsu has written modern articles about it and put them on their website, so it's easy to access. They also ran it on their front cover for the 20th anniversary in 2021 which should probably be mentioned in the legacy section.

• https://www.famitsu.com/news/202112/06243009.html
• https://www.famitsu.com/news/202112/06243242.html

Harizotoh9 (talk) 22:58, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've forwarded this to WP:VG users on Discord. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 16:57, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Thanks for letting us know about this @Vacant0. I've posted it to the WPVG talk page as well for onwiki visibility. @Harizotoh9, you might want to put those links under {{refideas}} on Ico's talk page, so that they're easy to find :) Rosaece ♡ talk ♡ contribs 20:05, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Sure, I can do some ref checks. Cukie Gherkin (talk) 12:53, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] By the way, video games being run for anniversaries are almost always run on the date of first release, not of subsequent releases, so it should probably be nominated for September. Just figured I'd bring this up because you mentioned that you didn't feel strongly about a specific date. QuicoleJR (talk) 02:34, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Persona (series) anniversary of its first game is also sept 2026, and I didn't want to run two video game articles in a single month. Ideally, Ico should have ran in 2021. Harizotoh9 (talk) 03:48, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2026!

Hello Masem, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2026. Happy editing, Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 16:55, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Spread the love by adding } to other user talk pages.

Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 16:55, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Gap (Pluribus), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Ringer.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:54, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Iljhgtn (talk) 07:51, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've recently been working on the article The Executioner and Her Way of Life, a light novel series later adapted into a well-received and occasionally contentious anime. After around 2 months of writing and about 60,000 characters added to the article, I feel that it's a fairly comprehensive treatment of the work. I was advised by another user to seek mentorship before embarrassing myself at going to FAC, and I wanted to ask you since you mentioned you have experience with pop culture and animated series.

I would sincerely appreciate if you would be willing to take a look at the article and give some feedback on anything that should be improved. Even a short comment on whether it's likely to be prepared for FAC, or needs significantly more work, would be very helpful.

Thank you, Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 20:17, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will take a look, but please bug me again if you dont get feedback after a couple of days. Masem (t) 21:40, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] @Crestfalling: I've done a quick look and a few small things stand out

• I don't think you need to separate setting and premise here, the flow of the work's premise is very good so including those headings feels unneeded on the franchise article. If you can it might be good to see if you can source these at a high level (from reviews?)
• watch for language around announcements. You have one that is "On date, it was announced...". Announcement dates are rarely important and would be better to flip around to something like "A anime adaption was announced by (group) in (month year)".
• I wonder if it would be better to put the three major media parts (novels, Manga, and anime) ahead of development of each, then going back to a new top level "other media" section for these rest. You have it such that those media sections provide a good intro to the franchise, and with links to the respective lists with addition synopsis, that ties well with the previous synopsis and character sections, and then the reader can follow the organization of the development and reception sections that follow.
• if you have not yet done so, it is always a good check to have a copy edit done, which can be requested at the WP:GOCE.
• Along with the premise, anything you can possibly source in the character list would help.

Otherwise, haven't not dig further, all other aspects seem fine, referencing looks good, image use is fi E (though are their any free images of the major contributors on the various works you could add?) and so forth. Masem (t) 18:44, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Thank you very much for the feedback!

• I changed the synopsis into one section and compressed it a bit, hopefully it looks better now.
• I changed the announcements to the format you recommended.
• Can you clarify this a bit? If you're talking about moving the main parts of the "Media" section to before "Production", I based the layout of the article on previous FA animanga articles, which all seem to be in the Plot/characters -> Production -> Media -> Reception order.
• I've asked a few people to give feedback on the prose, but I'll look into getting it copy-edited.
• Again, I'm basing this off previous FA animanga articles so I might be wrong, but it seems like that those sections generally don't have inline cites, per WP:PLOTSOURCE. I could definitely add them if needed, but I'm not sure if it'd be a strict improvement?
• Unfortunately, I wasn't able to find free images of major contributors to the work. I know the article is a bit light on images right now, so would it be worth considering adding some more tangential images (e.g. ones representing the influences on the work, such as steampunk aesthetics)?

Best, Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 21:04, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Hi, just wanted to quickly check in on the above. Feel free to take time, but any clarification would be helpful. Thanks, Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 18:11, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] Sorry, yes. The ordering if that's the way that's standard for combined anime/manga franchises, then thats fine, the only thing to be careful is that by the time you get to discussing the media releases themselves, it should be obvious that the three different main releases (novels, manga, anime) exist so you shouldn't have to reintroduce the creators, that's in the development section above. Anything in that section should be more related to release aspects at that point. Sourcing of prose is only if you can find it, I know we don't require sources for plot but if you had sources, thats a benefit but not essential for an FA. For images, if you have it specifically sourced that steampunk was an inspiration, then a free image of a steampunk setting would be useful. But be sparse with these. It should be an image that despite not being from the work itself helps the reader to understand that. Masem (t) 18:51, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] Thank you. I'll take all of that into account, especially regarding the flow of information, when doing my last few copyedits. Just two final questions (thanks for being very patient with me):

• A lot of the development section is sourced from online Japanese-language interviews. Will that be problematic for source checking? I would be able to provide the specific Japanese quotes used for information upon request.
• At a glance (just based on the overall coverage), does it stand a decent chance at FAC? I'm fine if it doesn't succeed (statistically, it's probably likely), but I do want to make sure that it's justified as a potential nomination. Best, Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 19:42, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

We do not have any restrictions on foreign language sources. Interviews are okay, just make sure the notability of the franchise is not overly dependent on that (I dont think it is from glancing at sources). I think you're in good shape for FAC, short of a copyedit and the one section on releases. The only thing I can see potentially as an issue if there's too much in the premise section but that's something to be prepared to deal with at FAC rather than now. Masem (t) 19:45, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Masem. Since you uploaded File:Djhero1.jpg and added the rationales for where the file is currently being used, I just wanted to let you know that I'm not really seeing how the file's non-free use is justified for a single sentence in Daft Punk#2008–2011: Tron: Legacy. Perhaps the article has been revised considerably since you uploaded the file back in 2009, but I don't think it meets WP:NFCC#8 right now given the way it's being used. The other use in DJ Hero seems OK, but I think the file should be removed from "Daft Punk". -- Marchjuly (talk) 09:51, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't add its use on the Daft Punk page, and agree its inappropriate there. Masem (t) 13:04, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] It was a long time ago. FWIW, I did find this and this before posting the above; FWIW, it looks like you might've just replaced a redundant non-free file with this one so that there weren't two of the same being used. Anyway, I'm not trying to be rude or anything like that; I was just trying to get a better feel for the justification for using the file before figuring out what to do next. I think I'll just boldly remove the file from the article and remove the corresponding rationale from the file's page. Would you be opposed to that or would it be better to use } or WP:FFD instead? -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:43, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Wow, okay, I forgot about that. It can be removed without and challenge I think. Masem (t) 01:23, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

		Military history reviewers' award
		On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the The Milhist reviewing award (1 stripe) for participating in 1 review between October and December 2025. Hawkeye7 (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 00:30, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste } to your user space

   Send New Year cheer by adding } to user talk pages.

Volten001 ☎ 03:02, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Code mystics logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:18, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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 15:31, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

TikTok added a link pointing to ABC News TikTok, Inc. v. Garland added a link pointing to ABC News

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:53, 23 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Why does the History of video game consoles article have a banner stating: "Parts of this article (those related to Ninth generation (2020–present)) need to be updated. The reason given is: The Nintendo Switch 2 should be added as a separate console, not as just a new revision of the original Switch. Please help update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information." if doing so causes the changes to be deleted, stating that the Switch 2 isn't a 9th generation console? What other objective way is there to define which generation a console belongs to other than the release time? In case you want a source, how about this one? NinjaEule (talk) 21:15, 23 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

We have no source that places the Switch 2 in the ninth generation. We need to rely on the industry sources to place the console in that generation, as generations are not defined by timeframes but by what consoles are considered to be competing against each other. Both the Switch and Switch 2 have proven difficult to nail down any console generation due to the fact they are not the same powerhouse that the Sony/Microsoft consoles are, and that they're on a completely different schedule. Masem (t) 12:56, 24 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Masem. What do you think about File:Xenogenesis film Opening titles (1978).jpg? It seems too simple to be eligible for copyright protection per US copyright law, However, the YouTube page given as the source is almost certainly a case of WP:COPYLINK since it shows the entire video. The quality is kind of bad and looks like it might be bootleg copy; I also can't tell whether there's a copyright notice at the end of the video. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:16, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

logo is too simple, and unless the video artifacts are intentional (doubt, looks like quality of the source material), that shouldn't contribute. It likely can be replaced with a vector of the logo. Masem (t) 12:31, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] Thanks for taking a look at this. What about the source URL? Is it still OK to link to that YouTube page? -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:50, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] Likely not since the upload is likely copyright violating. Masem (t) 02:32, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings. May I ask why is my edit not considered important for the lede? The previous version included initial sales and reception, without sources. I believe it was painting a very misleading picture. Mine is about the initial sales and reception as well, but with sources. I only added a sentence for the total known sales as well. Dragon's Dogma (talk) 15:25, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Because what was included is not a reflection or summary of the body. There's nothing about the criticism of the narrative, and gives too much weight to the PC issues. Masem (t) 15:53, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] The original already mentions technical issues, which were/are not PC exclusive. I linked an article talking about the Steam reception, because it is a good indicator of user sentiment. Perhaps the source about possible PC fixes was not needed. p The body already has a lengthy paragraph about the difficulty. The story is only praised in the body, but that's for sure not the whole conversation even among journalists, for example the Polygon, Gamesradar. I could add that to the body? Maybe my version can be simplified, but I think it is completely fair to say the reception of the game has been mixed since the start, it has never been "generally positive", especially among users, but critics as well. Dragon's Dogma (talk) 16:22, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] We try not to give any significant weight to user reviews because those can be gamed, but if third party sources do discuss those we can include that, and that us the case for the PC version tech issues. If there is criticism of the story from those it should be added in the reception section first. Masem (t) 16:54, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this comment: did you mean "election articles about smaller countries", rather than "from smaller companies"? isaacl (talk) 04:21, 31 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

• A generic name error. References show this error when author or editor name parameters use place-holder names. Please edit the article to include the source's actual author or editor name. (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) 05:14, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I wanted to let you know that since it's been a few weeks, and the main page discussion has been archived, I made an additional post on my talk page about this topic. Since it seems like we are 2 of the few that care about this, I'd like to come up with a structure that will satisfy you as well. I welcome your input 13akoors (talk) 23:05, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think my preference is putting things like release dates last, and instead focusing on the more broader aspects So in a typical year article this would be have highest rated games (avoiding using hardware abbreviations as to keep the legend lower) and awards first, financial aspects next, major events and deaths, the the releases with hardware, games and tv/film adaptions last. That to me is the order that most readers would consider has how to summarize a year in video game history. That might call for hardware releases being higher but I think most major hardware releases would be called out in the lede, and the table later becomes a courtesy along less significant hardware releases. Masem (t) 23:43, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] In general I think i agree with that direction. The only reason I argue for Hardware and TV/Film to be higher is that I give weight to the size of certain sections. Since the Game Releases is so big (80% of the entire page for 2025), I hesitate to put anything below that section. That said, I think the bigger issue is that the Games Released section probably just needs its own page. I'm currently sandboxing some options before throwing it up for WT:VG discussion. But assuming that section is removed, I think any order you want is fine, since everything is easily findable. 13akoors (talk) 02:17, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] It used to be that these pages were just mostly the game releases, but when you look at other "Year in media", it was everything else that got focus first. One issue I have had wth the game release lease is that it is every game, not limited to notable ones, as long as the release can be sourced. It also includes late releases on other platforms and rereleases. With so many indie games, that becomes a problem. I'd rather have more selective rules for the game releases, at minimum must be a notable game (which means some games won't be added to this until after they are released and can be determined notable). Masem (t) 00:48, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] Added a new talk discussion here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games#Splitting "year in video games" pages. I think I agree with keeping a small section on these pages with only the most notable games, but I think the full data is still useful, and should be kept somewhere. 13akoors (talk) 00:34, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Masem. Do you think File:The Silent Traveller in London (Book Cover).jpeg is too simple to need to be treated as non-free under US copyright law? The cover seems to be basically nothing but text (including some Chinese), but I can't tell whether the left border is part of the binding itself or perhaps just a completely unrelated background on which the cover was photographed. I tried Googling this and it's also possible that this isn't the book's cover per se but rather its inner title page, with the left side showing part of the inner side of the book's cover. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:20, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Likely free, the cut artwork is impossible to recognize and would fall under de minimis, and Chinese text is just like most Romanized text, its just lettering that can't be copyrighted. Masem (t) 12:28, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] Thanks for taking a look at this? -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:42, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]