User talk:StooperSpoon45

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Matthew Hernendez, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help. Need some ideas about what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Madeline (part of me) 21:31, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Joules chapter 11[edit]

Thanks for the edit! Has Joules filed for chapter 11? That's a US bankruptcy law, I had assumed it's mostly based in the UK. Do you have a source that it's filed for chapter 11 under US law? Blythwood (talk) 16:45, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Companies that filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2023[edit]

A tag has been placed on Category:Companies that filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2023 indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:05, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Shopping mall anchors[edit]

Perthis edit, Bergen Town Center has 17 anchor stores?!?!?! As you're not adding any sources, where are you getting this information from and why aren't you including this in your edits? Alansohn (talk) 22:07, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've 100% checked the entire mall to see if there is 17 anchors in the mall. Counting them all up, there is Best Buy, REI, Marshalls, Saks OFF 5th, Burlington, Whole Foods Market, Kohl's, Blink Fitness, HomeGoods, Bloomingdale's, Nordstrom Rack, Fernish Outlet, Target, H&M, and Nike Factory Store, with two vacant anchors last left by Neiman Marcus Last Call and Kirkland's. Although it may take a while to get all the sources, if you need me to add them all for the anchors that don't have them, remind me and I will add sources.

Thanks, and all the best.

- Matthew Hernendez. Matthew Hernendez (talk) 01:43, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto for the similar edits you made to The Mills at Jersey Gardens and Garden State Plaza, which in the latter case, you deleted a citation that supported the material that had been in the article, and replaced it with uncited material.

I also see similar edits by you to other articles on malls, including:

Wikipedia requires that the material in its articles be accompanied by reliable, verifiable (usually secondary) sources explicitly cited in the article text in the form of an inline citation, which you can learn to make here. If you ever have any other questions about editing, or need help regarding the site's policies, just let me know by leaving a message for me in a new section at the bottom of my talk page. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 23:03, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there,

I noticed that most of my edits were reverted, and you are saying it was because of uncited material. A lot of those edits were constructive edits, and just saying, you could've just reminded me to add sources to these articles and not just removing them altogether. I am currently working hard enough to get sources of all of these mall articles by the way. And besides, you also removed the anchor store count and mall store count for "uncited material", when other mall articles have the exact same thing with uncited material. I'll tell you everything I found in those articles.

For Eastdale Mall, you literally just have to check the mall map and you'll find that there's two Belk stores, one women's, and the other is men's and children's. Check this article and keep scrolling until you find a mall map. http://skycity2.blogspot.com/2010/07/eastdale-mall-montgomery-al.html

For Decatur Mall, check this article and it shows that the JCPenney and Sears spaces have been demolished. https://www.al.com/business/2017/07/multimillion_dollar_renovation.html

What am I even supposed to add as a source for Brookwood Village, all I added was that Target was the only traditional anchor left in the shopping center, was I supposed to add a date for when Target opened or something??

Auburn Mall, I will admit. I did forget to mention about B. Turner being an anchor store in the mall, but roughly nothing else to add for that article.

I might have been a little bit lazy for Outlet Collection Seattle and forgetting to add sources, but I was gonna do that at a later time. So prepare for major construction for that article.

For Buena Park Downtown, I LITERALLY said that Bed Bath & Beyond would be closing, and just stated that one of the anchors was closing, and I also added the source, and you're calling that "uncited material"??

Brass Mill Center, I will also be doing a major construction for that article, since a lot of the stuff is uncited.

Connecticut Post Mall, don't know why you removed the "1 anchor last left by Sears" part where there is LITERALLY a paragraph stating that Sears shuttered, unless if it was repeating information, I don't know, but still. I also probably should've added a source for when the apartment project was cancelled, I swear I thought I did, but guess not.

Danbury Fair, LOTS of problems. What was even the point in removing the floors and stores part?? They were perfectly fine and didn't really need a source whatsoever. For the number of anchors part, there were sources for BOTH of the stores that were under construction, despite them being both from their corporate websites, sure, they should've also gotten a news article, which I will add soon, but whatever. LL Bean also had a source so I don't know why you removed it's portion as an anchor at the mall.

Sure, East Brook Mall had lots of errors that I can see, but I see ZERO reason on why you removed my facts that Michaels was an anchor, and removed repeated information, maybe except the fact I replaced the Old Navy part with the Michaels part, and should've kept the Old Navy part, but whatever.

Westfarms, Jordan's Furniture LITERALLY had a source so no point in removing that part, amongst other parts of the article such as the anchors, floors, parking, etc.

Stamford Town Center, holy god the amount of stuff you removed here... Anyway, the food hall had the source, so again, no point in reverting my edit.

Buckland Hills, Bob's Stores had a source, don't know why you removed it as an anchor. Yes, I should've added the source where it opened, but really that was it.

Meriden Mall, ZERO clue on why you removed my edits. The edits were literally constructive and didn't really need a source whatsoever.

Lakeforest Mall, I literally worded the Macy's closing part better, and I see you also removed someone else's edit that had like 7000 characters in it, and most of it HAD sources....

Foothills, once again, worded the Macy's part better, that's all. And also, you reverted another person's edits just for changing the mall's name to the new mall name. Sure, he should've added the sources, but you could've just reminded him and not removed the entire thing.

Windward Mall, once again, worded the Macy's part better, that's all....

Namdar, LEGIT the ONLY thing I ever did was add the South Shore and Trumbull malls to that page since they were sold. Although you didn't revert the info, still kinda weird why you added it to this talk page when it was completely fine.

Westfield Trumbull, Lord & Taylor's closure had a source, no clue why you removed the anchor section. To admit my wrongdoings, the 5th largest mall part should've had a source or something but that's alright. Forgot to say this for almost every mall here but what was even the point in removing the current anchor count and some of the more unique stores? They were perfectly fine and really didn't need a source whatsoever. And I see you removed the title of a source? Why? There was nothing wrong with that.

Overall though, I will make major constructive edits to this by adding more sources to these articles and making them as neat and clean as possible. Sorry for the backlash, but still, a lot of these didn't really make sense in my opinion, but that could be because I am rather a newcomer here.

All the best, and have a good night. Matthew Hernendez (talk) 02:57, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Matthew Hernendez:

Again, Wikipedia requires that the material in its articles be accompanied by reliable, verifiable (usually secondary) sources explicitly cited in the article text in the form of an inline citation. Do you dispute this, yes or no?

If you do, then please falsify this. Present a counterargument with which you can explain the above statement is wrong.

If you do not, then we an agree that you and other editors have violated these policies/guidelines by adding material to those articles without citations, which at least in some cases, appears to be based on editors' personal knowledge, in direct violatioon of WP:NOR. Again, do you dispute this?

These are the criterion by which inclusion of material in articles is predicated, and not whether you declare by fiat that the edits are "constructive", nor whether you stated something "literally". I'm not sure why you use the term "literally" six times in your message to describe your additions. Is there some other way in which I implied you composed your edits. Were you under the impression that I accused you of saying these things metaphorically? Or figuratively?

I understand that you're new here, and since I neglected to do so above, a belated WELCOME! If you need help or have questions about editing here, let me know. But I'm hoping that you come to this project, as I did, willing to learn and adhere to its policies and guidelines.

As for some of the points and questions you posed:

"For Eastdale Mall, you literally just have to check the mall map...."

We do do not use primary sources or self-published sources for material that goes to a subject's notability. We rely on secondary sources. While primary sources can be used in limited fashion in an article for things that do not go towards a subject's notability, which are not self-serving, or which do not represent a conflict of interest. For stuff that does support the reason why an subject is notable, like in the case of a mall, the number of stores, number of anchors, square footage, parking capacity, articles must primarily be supported by secondary sources.

"For Decatur Mall, check this article and it shows..."

Did you include a citation in the article for that information? If so, and I missed it, I apologize. If not, then that's why it was removed. Citations must go in the article, and the end of the supported material, per WP:PAIC, as I mentioned --- and linked --- in my edit summaries and/or in my message above. You can't just say on a talk page or elswhere that "It's in this source", or "If you do a Google search, you'll see...", as some editors, particularly new ones, tend to offer as an explanation. Did you read those policies/guidelines I linked to? Did you click on those links and read those policies and guidelines? If so, did they not support what I stated? If you did not, then why not? You express incredulity at what I reverted and why, but you never address the detailed rationales I gave in my edit summaries, or above, right here on this talk page, either to incicate that you agree that the policies and guidelines are valid, or to explain why what I related about them is wrong. Why is that?

"What am I even supposed to add as a source for Brookwood Village..."

The reliable, secondary source that supports the information in question, as required by WP:V, WP:NOR, WP:CS, WP:PSTS, etc.

"....all I added was that Target was the only traditional anchor left in the shopping center, was I supposed to add a date for when Target opened or something??"

If you mentioned such a date, then yes. If not, then no. Did I ever say or imply or indicate what information you had to add? At the risk of repeating myself, Wikipedia policies require you to explicitly indicate to the reader where that information came from, and it cannot come from personal knowledge, assessment, or opinion, because prohibits that.

"I might have been a little bit lazy for Outlet Collection Seattle and forgetting to add sources, but I was gonna do that at a later time."

You have to add it when you add the material.

"For Buena Park Downtown, I LITERALLY said that Bed Bath & Beyond would be closing, and just stated that one of the anchors was closing, and I also added the source, and you're calling that "uncited material"??"

No. I never specified in my edit summary or in my message above which part of the material I reverted was uncited.

On top of that, you evidently didn't bother to see which material I reverted, did you? Because you did, you'd have seen that I never touched that piece of information, which is still in the article, for the simple reason that you had included a citation of a reliable source when you added it. You sure you don't want to re-check that revert, Matthew?

I'm sorry if it feels that I'm coming down upon you. I know that all the various rules may seem a bit labyrinthine to a newcomer. But it's important to understand that Wikipedia wants the information in its articles to be derived from published sources, usually reliable, secondary ones, and not the personal knowledge of editors, because readers have no way of assessing the reliability of mostly anomymous editors like you and I. That's why we put the onus on the cited source, since it allows an encyclopedia to exist without experts. If you make a point of learning them and sticking to them, you'll find that most of your edits will be retained, just as I did.

All the best to you as well, and have a great weekend.

(Literally.) :-)

Nightscream (talk) 21:59, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Flybe rename[edit]

Can you fix your page move so that the 2022-2023 reads 2022–2023, i.e. with a {{ndash}} between the years? Then it would be consistent with the other article? 10mmsocket (talk) 15:05, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the speedy fix. Do you think Flybe should be left as a redirect or turned into a disambiguation page? The latter is neater, but would have the disadvantage of breaking a shed-load of links. 10mmsocket (talk) 15:36, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of 2022–2023[edit]

A tag has been placed on 2022–2023 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

It may meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion under CSD g6

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here.

February 2023[edit]

Hello, I'm Jauerback. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Weber Inc., but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 14:08, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I've reverted all (or most of) the additions of the Meme stock category. You can't just add categories that are not supported by a source within the article itself, so please stop doing this. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 14:14, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there. The source where Weber can be considered a meme stock can be found here.

https://stocknews.com/news/webr-bset-ayi-door-stay-as-far-away-as-possible-from-this-meme-stock/

Another source that I found regarding with what I added could be found here.

https://investorplace.com/2022/12/meme-stocks-alert-weber-webr-stock-is-going-private/

I'll add the edit later as I don't feel like adding the sources right now.

All the best.

- Matthew Hernandez. Matthew Hernendez (talk) 14:18, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to analyze those sources, but make sure that they are considered to be reliable sources before adding them. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 14:20, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category: Companies that filed for Chapter 11 in 1978 or earlier[edit]

With this note I'd like to ask that you please stop adding the category "Companies that filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 19XX" (where XX is a year equal to "78" or earlier) to any more articles where the company filed for bankruptcy before 1978. "Chapter 11," as it is now known, was created by Public Law 95–598 on November 6, 1978. To add a category that references "Chapter 11" bankruptcy prior to 1978 does not make sense. FFM784 (talk) 23:44, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Companies that filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 1961[edit]

A tag has been placed on Category:Companies that filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 1961 indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:38, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Jenny Craig bankruptcy[edit]

I believe the bankruptcy filings are indicating the Jenny Craig bankruptcy is a Chapter 7, and not an 11.

https://www.pacermonitor.com/court/15/Delaware_Bankruptcy_Court https://www.inforuptcy.com/browse-filings/delaware-bankruptcy-court/1:23-bk-10580/bankruptcy-case-jenny-c-holdings-llc

Hopefully that helps Neoterix (talk) 18:25, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 9[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Trumbull Mall, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ruby Tuesday. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Logo of Terribly Terrific Productions.png[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Logo of Terribly Terrific Productions.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair 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) 17:27, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mitchell Gold + Bob Williams moved to draftspace[edit]

Thanks for your contributions to Mitchell Gold + Bob Williams. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it is promotional and reads like an advertisement. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 05:43, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mitchell Gold + Bob Williams moved to draftspace[edit]

Thanks for your contributions to Mitchell Gold + Bob Williams (2). Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it needs more sources to establish notability and Please do not create ,multiple versions of the same article. It os seen as an attempt to game the system. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:24, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Belk[edit]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Belk, 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) 20:37, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started[edit]

Hello, StooperSpoon45. Thank you for your work on EbLens. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thank you for writing the article on Wikipedia! I genuinely appreciate your efforts in creating the article on Wikipedia and expanding the sum of human knowledge in Wikipedia. Wishing you and your family a great day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 02:37, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

November 2023[edit]

Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at QVC, you may be blocked from editing. Don't use listicles or junk news sites to source articles, please. They rarely cite their sources and put the reader last by making them click through multiple items to get to an entry, which is usually filed down by SEO to be worse than useless. Nate • (chatter) 00:19, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

	The Original Barnstar
	Francesca's is a very good page. Well done! Kiwiz1338 (talk) 01:59, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Solstice Sunglasses for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Solstice Sunglasses is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Solstice Sunglasses until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Weißer Storch (talk) 09:59, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Daily Thread for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Daily Thread is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daily Thread until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Weißer Storch (talk) 10:00, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Francesca's at Oak Park Mall.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:Francesca's at Oak Park Mall.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 12:23, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Mallinckrodt[edit]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Mallinckrodt, 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) 14:11, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Mastermind Toys[edit]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Mastermind Toys, 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) 18:08, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:55, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Rite Aid[edit]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Rite Aid, 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) 19:29, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fay's is also part of Rite Aid's Bankruptcy Filing[edit]

Not Just Eckerd and Thrift Drug, Since Many Rite Aid stores in Upstate New York were former Fay's Drug, and Eckerd stores. 23.245.43.13 (talk) 15:07, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

well I’ve searched all of Rite Aid’s court documents, there is no court documents stating that Fay’s Drug is apart of Rite Aid’s bankruptcy filing, and the source you provided is bankruptcy court documents for Thrift Drug, not Fay’s Drug. If you are almost positive that Fay’s is apart of Rite Aid’s Chapter 11, can you identify a source regarding that? StooperSpoon45 (talk) 23:17, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Retail companies established in 2024[edit]

A tag has been placed on Category:Retail companies established in 2024 indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:45, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Daily Thread[edit]

A tag Speede deletion has been placed on Daily Thread 84.240.100.112 (talk) 10:48, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You![edit]

	Boston Market Meal!
	Thank you for your addition & citations over at Boston Market! Youre appreciated! Here’s a Boston Market Meal! Elvisisalive95 (talk) 00:24, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Mitchell Gold + Bob Williams (2)[edit]

Hello, StooperSpoon45. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Mitchell Gold + Bob Williams (2), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 22:06, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Mitchell Gold + Bob Williams (2)[edit]

Hello, StooperSpoon45. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Mitchell Gold + Bob Williams".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:43, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Daily Thread for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Daily Thread is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daily Thread (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Rodgers V (talk) 12:15, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]