User talk:Sddarealone/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Invitation to share your Good Article review experience

Thankyou Sddarealone for completing the GA review for Carmarthen Infirmary, it is greatly appreciated. At the moment, we're asking new reviewers to share their experience with the process, so we can see how it can be improved and made more welcoming. We'd welcome any thoughts you can share in the survey here. Whonting (talk) 08:19, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

Done. I think the GAN process is untouchable now since more GANs get passed than are questioned at renomination. Also, you guys are doing a good job on keeping GA process this successful. Sddarealone (talk) 10:26, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

Thanks Sddarealone for sharing! Interested in this dictionary idea of yours, what do you imagine that could look like? Whonting (talk) 23:54, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

A simple online and searchable A to Z thesaurus of all the policies and guidelines from say WP:AGF to essays like WP:ZT. Noticeboards and WikiProjects can be also included in this as they are a tiny fraction of the no. of articles (over a whopping 7 million) here. I thought you guys already had that, isn't it? Sddarealone (talk) 04:34, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

Yes I see what you mean. I suspect most editors are just typing in the acronyms to find out what they mean, but it would be interesting to compile that information. Are you familiar with the glossary? That's might be somewhat close to what you're thinking of. Whonting (talk) 02:59, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

Pretty much similar but it could be added on either the tools sidebar for all the editors or generally as an icon to refer to for the policies like how it shows in visual or source editing. Preferably at the page box's top bar, right where Link, Images and media, Template, and References are located. A Metawiki discussion can be opened up for this (I'll strongly support the proposal if it fits). This proposal then can be put to vote as it will make finding the policies much easier than it looks as of now. Sddarealone (talk) 10:23, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of Cockchafer has failed

Your good article nomination of the article Cockchafer has failed. See the review page for more information. If or when the reviewer's feedback has been addressed, you may nominate the article again. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Phlsph7 -- Phlsph7 (talk) 16:42, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

WWU petition

I think you browsed the article by The Verge too fast and accidentally misread it. The quote you give on the petition page is part of a press release sent by Communications Workers of America, with which Wiki Workers United is affiliated: it's WWU/CWA objecting to WMF wasting resources. Paragraph two is only about the WWU/CWA POV. A description of the WMF statement is in the next (third) paragraph, In a public statement ... Boud (talk) 12:14, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

Yes, I fixed it now. The petition needs to be accepted if we want to keep the WP uninfluenced by bad-faith actors such as the recently community banned, Sanger and the "tr-n-illionaire", Musk. I believe something bigger is at play here to cause an internal wiki disruption but I want to be proven wrong. Again, thanks for calling out my silly mistake, Boud. Sddarealone (talk) 15:28, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

Women in Red – August 2026

Women in Red | August 2026, Vol 12, Issue 8, Nos 358, 359, 378, 379, 380 Events: New: Alphabet run: Countries starting with N and O | Indigenous women | Women born before 1900 Continuing (year-long initiatives): #1day1woman | Sports More ... Announcements: On 25 July, at Wikimania Paris, Women in Red was named the Coolest Project! Tip of the month: Read the essay Determining Native American and Indigenous Canadian identities to understand the criteria for a woman's status as Native American or Indigenous Canadian. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram & Pinterest

--Chocmilk03 (talk 21:44, 30 July 2026 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Your nomination of Cockchafer is under review

Your good article nomination of the article Cockchafer 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 Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:22, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of Bahmani–Vijayanagar War (1443) is on hold

Your good article nomination of the article Bahmani–Vijayanagar War (1443) has been placed on hold, as the article needs some changes. See the review page for more information. If these are addressed within 7 days, the nomination will pass; otherwise, it may fail. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Vanderwaalforces -- Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:42, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of Bahmani–Vijayanagar War (1443) has passed

Your good article nomination of the article Bahmani–Vijayanagar War (1443) has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Please also consider reviewing somebody else's nomination to help keep the backlog down. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Vanderwaalforces -- Vanderwaalforces (talk) 20:22, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of Cockchafer has passed

Your good article nomination of the article Cockchafer has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Please also consider reviewing somebody else's nomination to help keep the backlog down. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:23, 10 August 2026 (UTC)

Good article nominations RfC

Hi Sddarealone,

There is an ongoing Request for Comment (RfC) at Wikipedia:Good article nominations/August 2026 RfC, which you may be interested in because in the past year, you have nominated or reviewed more than one good article nomination. This message has also been sent to all subscribers to the Good Article Gazette. The RfC contains many proposals (33 at the time of writing), which are split into the following categories: nominators, reviewers, reviews, volunteer roles, reviewing initiatives, and others. However, you are more than welcome to add any proposals of your own that you wish to put to the community.

By the end of September, all the proposals will have been closed by an uninvolved editor, either as a consensus for one of the options or with no consensus. At this point, editors will be invited again to develop these proposals into coherent policy and implement them.

Thank you for your contributions to the good articles project, and I look forward to your input! (in solidarity), JacobTheRox^{(talk|contributions)} 16:03, 11 August 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the invite @JacobTheRox. The proposal list is good and I concur with most of the voting by the participants in each proposal. I added my comments where my views differ. Sddarealone (talk) 17:57, 11 August 2026 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in WP:GARC

Hello, I noticed you are a user who has a number of open Good Article nominations and thought you might be interested in Good Article Review Circles. It is an initiative that helps articles get reviewed more quickly through collaborative efforts. By joining, you will review another user's article and get your own GA nomination reviewed in return. Check out the project page for more details! — ‍🌷Reverosie🌷^★talk★ 03:54, 14 August 2026 (UTC)