User talk:Spy-cicle/Archive 1

Archive 1

Spy-cicle, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Spy-cicle! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Cordless Larry (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:04, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

CPR & MeToo

Hi there, just a jot to let you know that I reverted your CPR edit on the MeToo page, but I did add it, with a bit more scholastic detail, to the CPR page. It's very good information for that page, but is not suited to the MeToo page, as that aspect is merely conjecture (and the non-WP:RS for that was a blog). Cheers! AHampton (talk) 20:16, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tom White

Hi, just noticed your creation of Thomas White (footballer, b.1981). From what I can see, he never played a match for Portsmouth or at a professional level so doesn't seem to meet the notability requirements of WP:NFOOTBALL or WP:GNG. Do you know if he actually did play a professional game? Kosack (talk) 11:58, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

        Hi, thanks for your concerns. I am pretty sure he played for Portsmouth F.C. for two years under one of the sources called worldfootball.net. Spy-cicle (talk) 15:55, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

He may have been a member of the squad but did he actually play in any first team matches? Soccerbase, Soccerway and Neil Brown's A to Z all have no record of him playing for the first team. Kosack (talk) 08:19, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

       Very strange I am pretty sure he did play at least a few times. Very odd he does not appear in the database. Leave it as is for the moment. Spy-cicle (talk) 15:03, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, in its current state, the article actually provides no confirmation that the subject is actually notable. Are you able to add any sources that would support a first team appearance for Portsmouth or any significant coverage that could meet WP:GNG? Kosack (talk) 08:40, 3 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Commons

Just a heads up that Wikimedia Commons should only be used for images that are freely licensed or in the public domain. The Watch Dogs logo is non-free media and thus does not qualify for Commons. Lordtobi (✉) 22:48, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Okay thanks I will keep that in mind. The only reason I put it up on the commons is that a similiar logo from GTA was released under commons as well [1]Spy-cicle (talk) 09:53, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Watch Dogs Logo2.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Watch Dogs Logo2.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) 18:01, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about Wolfgang Kiessling

Hello, Spy-cicle,

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username SportingFlyer and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, Wolfgang Kiessling should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wolfgang Kiessling .

You might like to note that such discussions usually run for seven days and are not ballot-polls. And, our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|SportingFlyer}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

SportingFlyer T·C 15:02, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Thomas White (footballer, b.1981)

The article Thomas White (footballer, b.1981) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTY having never played in a fully professional league or in a senior international fixture. Soccerbase lists 0 appearances, Soccerway and Neil Brown's have no record of him.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Kosack (talk) 06:03, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi Spy-cicle! You created a thread called List of Verifiable/Reliable Sources accepted on Wikipedia at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.

Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

FA criteria

Hello, you may want to educate yourself with regards to the criteria, for future reference. Best regards. Cassianto^Talk 13:23, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Uncharted 4 Gameplay Pic.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Uncharted 4 Gameplay Pic.jpg. 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) 17:49, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

October 2019

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in discussions about infoboxes and to edits adding, deleting, collapsing, or removing verifiable information from infoboxes. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

- SchroCat (talk) 20:40, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please note WP:INFOBOXUSE: "The use of infoboxes is neither required nor prohibited for any article." (My emphasis). Articles do not have to have an IB, and edit warring to force one in is not a great way to go about things. - SchroCat (talk) 20:45, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

- @SchroCat: see WP:BOLDSpy-cicle (talk) 20:50, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  - There is a huge difference between being bold with the first edit (often great, but care is needed on FA-rated articles), and edit warring to try and force in something you want. See the ArbCom warnings on the subject of IBs. - SchroCat (talk) 20:55, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Victor Sullivan.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Victor Sullivan.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) 17:48, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bad faith accusations

If you accuse me of imposing my own criteria, as you did here, I will happily drop you into ANI for not showing sufficient good faith in other editors and a generally bad attitude towards others, including edit warring. Don't try and quote the GAN criteria to me about images: it is not the important guideline you think it is. The strict policy we have is something imposed by the Wikimedia Foundation as the use of opyrighted materials carries a legal risk. All media - free and non-free - has to pass every one of the criteria at WP:NFCCP. Points 3a and 8 were the problems I saw regarding the images; in terms of non-free images, less is more if the rule. Make sure all images you use on any article comply with every single point on that set of rules: they are not negotiable and are not that flexible. - SchroCat (talk) 18:13, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ps. Don't try to continue conversations at closed GANs: they are rarely looked at again, particularly by the reviewers, who have moved on to other things. - SchroCat (talk) 18:14, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, I do not edit war, I often revert things but that does not mean I edit war sometimes you have to be WP:BOLD. Secondly, I always try to assume good faith in editors and try to have a good attitude to editor however some editors can be disruptive. Thirdly, thank you for the response, I simply wanted to know your reasoning behind the non-free images for the next time it is renominated becuase other video game articles demonstrate a gameplay screenshot and an environment screenshot (like The Last of Us). If you responded the first time I would not have made that accussation; I took a shot in the dark becuase there was no extended rationale for point 6: images (I have also made a note of your Ps message). Kind regards Spy-cicle (talk) 18:46, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You do edit war: I have seen it on at least three articles. You need to actually read WP:BRD. If you make a bold edit that is then reverted you should not revert again: that is edit warring. It is not being bold: that was your first edit. When you revert someone who has reverted you that is edit warring. Please learn it quickly or you will end up on the wrong end of edit warring reports and could face bans for it. - SchroCat (talk) 19:03, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Uncharted4 Gameplay Clip1.webm

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Uncharted4 Gameplay Clip1.webm. 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) 02:46, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Views/Day	Title	Tagged with…
132	Video game writing (talk)	Add sources
100	Deadstick landing (talk)	Add sources
44	Rings of Power (video game) (talk)	Add sources
798	Ghostbusters: The Video Game (talk)	Add sources
72	Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six: Lockdown (talk)	Add sources
95	Uncharted: Fight for Fortune (talk)	Add sources
320	Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six (video game) (talk)	Cleanup
17	Joe Fedele (talk)	Cleanup
65	Marlène Schiappa (talk)	Cleanup
1,148	Southern Poverty Law Center (talk)	Expand
564	Crash Bandicoot N. Sane Trilogy (talk)	Expand
35	Keef the Thief (talk)	Expand
68	Temporary foreign worker program in Canada (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
23	Reloaded (warez) (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
303	Billy Clanton (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
160	The TerraMar Project (talk)	Merge
330	PopCap Games (talk)	Merge
1,022	Caillou (talk)	Merge
9	Primary ticket outlet (talk)	Wikify
55	Daxter (talk)	Wikify
60	Crime Victims' Rights Act (talk)	Wikify
55	Carbyne (company) (talk)	Orphan
13	Organ donation in Australia (talk)	Orphan
11	Moscow Racer (talk)	Orphan
17	Peter Fader (talk)	Stub
40	Evan Wells (talk)	Stub
30	Margot Parker (talk)	Stub
24	David Michaels (author) (talk)	Stub
12	Alex Evans (video game developer) (talk)	Stub
4	Into Hot Air (talk)	Stub

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 22:44, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

An hour ago I'd never heard of Jacob Rees-Mogg. I saw a YT account called "Rees-Mogg for PM", or something like that, and thought to myself, "I haven't heard of William Rees-Mogg in years. Whatever became of him?" A quick search led me to find that William passed on seven years ago, and that the YT account was presumably a reference to William's son, Jacob.

Defense: I'm American.

Reading through Jacob Rees-Mogg's page, I experienced a familiar feeling - the Wikipedia pages on American politicians are skewed so far to the left as to be absurd.

I removed an obviously inappropriate and false claim from the Rees-Mogg article. But let's be serious: A large portion what remains still comes across as if written by Jeremy Corbyn.

It sounds like your areas of interest are gaming and politics. Mine are true crime and politics. I don't know a damned thing about gaming, but some of the true crime articles on Wikipedia are as biased - and simply false - as the political articles are.

I wonder whether or not my little edit on the Jacob Rees-Mogg article will last. When I've attempted similar work on the Wikipedia pages of American politicians, I have gotten my editing privileges suspended for daring to cross the leftist powers that be.

Anyway, fancy "meeting" you! Vcuttolo (talk) 15:28, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Vcuttolo Yes unfortunately some articles about politics can be skewed in one direction as seen by that Rees-Mogg edit even though WP:POV is clear that Wikipedia should be neutral and have no bias. The only thing I would recommend is whether you think your edit is right or wrong try not to edit war. It was nice to hear your perpective on some of the biases on Wikpedia. Regards Spy-cicle💥 ^Talk? 16:37, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I do try to avoid the edit warring thing, but I've gotten suspended for just about everything else. (I don't believe I've ever been suspended for edit warring.) One example: There is a left-wing politician here named Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez who is stunningly ignorant, a bartender plucked from obscurity by a far-left group to run for office in a far-left district, which she won. The media treats her as a god, despite the fact that she frequently embarasses herself when she opens her mouth. Her WP article is straight hagiography. When I tried to even slightly balance out that article, I was immediately reverted, and repeatedly suspended. There is one editor, a self-described member of the demi-terrorist far left-wing group "Antifa", who watches her page like a hawk, and immediately recommends for suspension anyone who writes a negative word about her. That is just one example of the nonsense I've experienced here on WP.

The overwhelming number of edits I've made are hardly controversial, but the minute I try to balance out some left wing propaganda, I get backlash. And I have occasionally run into these problems on True Crime articles as well. Ben Shapiro likes to say that facts don't care about feelings. On WP, though, the feelings of many editors don't care about the facts.

Be well,

Vcuttolo (talk) 02:30, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback granted

Hi Spy-cicle. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
Rollback should never be used to edit war.
If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Beeblebrox (talk) 19:33, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:24, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jeffery Epstein

Not sure how I'd managed to drop that source before saving, as I'd already added it to Death of Jeffrey Epstein. Thanks for fixing it. Lindenfall (talk) 22:39, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lindenfall No problem, errors happen to the best of us. Spy-cicle💥 ^Talk? 22:44, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I didn't see you weigh in here, thought you might want to... Talk:Death of Jeffrey Epstein#Merger proposal. Lindenfall (talk) 17:10, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lindenfall Thanks, I will check it out. Regards Spy-cicle💥 ^Talk? 17:24, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Stranger Things awards and nominations FLC

Hey! Just wanted to let you know that I've responded to your comment at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of awards and nominations received by Stranger Things/archive1. - Brojam (talk) 06:21, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Brojam: Okay noted. Spy-cicle💥 ^Talk? 16:27, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied :) - Brojam (talk) 00:01, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Illegal immigration

If the source was indeed the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, we just cannot accept their wording and use that in Wikipedia's voice. One cannot possibly argue that that agency is a neutral agent. Drmies (talk) 18:28, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Drmies: The only reliable source dictates they were illegal aliens so we should stick to it unless we have any other proof on the contrary. Spy-cicle💥 ^Talk? 18:36, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You'd have to prove, first of all, that the source is reliable. You can't, esp. not given a. the history of the agency and b. the complexity of the photograph. How do you know all these people are "illegal aliens"? Do you see the children in there? Are you 100% sure that for all of these people, children included, the proper paperwork and procedures were followed? Did the CBP state so, and is there an independent agency that verified it? No. And that is before we even get to the appropriateness of the photo. Drmies (talk) 18:40, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

U.S. Customs and Border Protection has declared them of being illegal aliens so it is likely that they have already been sentenced. Either way it is not as if they are being identified hence not a BLP violation. I.e we are not saying "John Smith illegally entered the United States" since that image has blurred out the faces of those involved. Spy-cicle💥 ^Talk? 19:56, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever. You have no clue whether any of those things happened, and again, we are not going to take the word of the CBP for that. "Sentenced"? That depends on many things, for instance whether it was their first time (misdemeanor) or not. It seems that you truly believe you are dealing with criminals. Drmies (talk) 21:27, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:VNT is meant just for cases like this one. We don't determine what's true, we determine what has been published in verifiable sources. Heptor (talk) 15:15, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Media Molecule, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page News Corporation (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 08:56, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lede edits

On what consensus are you systematically editing video game article ledes to follow the same syntactical format? There is no need to automatically change articles to "X is a 199X game developed by Y and published by Z for ABC console." There is editorial discretion for following other formats. czar 18:34, 12 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As previously discussed, please do not standardize opening sentences to a format for which there is no consensus for mass action. Editors disagree on whether the year needs to immediate precede the genre. If you wish to do it on an article you're writing, go for it, but please do not systematically change all featured articles to suit your preferred style without consensus. czar 18:37, 12 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Czar: When going through the FAs it was not my intial intention to change the format to one standardized format. I was trying to apply WP:VG/LEAD, WP:VG/DATE, WP:GENRE, WP:SEAOFBLUE. For WP:VG/LEAD, I was making sure the release year was stated in the lead sentence. For WP:VG/DATE, I was making sure the dates in the lead were summarized to be as general as possible. For WP:VG/GENRE, I was making sure no more than two genres were placed in the lead sentence. For WP:SEAOFBLUE (and WP:OVERLINK), I was making sure not to have excessive overlinking. Like X is a 2007 action-adventure video game --> 2007 action-adventure game. During this I was also piping occasions where "video" was unneccessary. For instance: "Y is 2007 first-person shooter video game" --> "Y is 2007 first-person shooter game" and arguably that can be reduced to --> "Y is 2007 first-person shooter". Also, during this I was trying to spot occasions where FAs where not meeting MOS:CITELEAD like Chrono Trigger and Halo 2 so I can fix them in the future (more examples can be seen here). I have done this in order to try to retain as many as these FAs as possible.

Although during this I may have inadvertently starting reworking the lede to fit a certain format as seen on Donkey Kong 64. And for not considering that, I apologize for some of those edits. Feel free to revert some of them if you want since Wikipedia is not set in stone. But overall, almost all of those edits now meet the MOS:VG criteria for leads (or at least more so than they did before). Spy-cicle💥 ^Talk? 23:53, 12 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Video games Newsletter Q4 2019

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 11, No. 3 — 4th Quarter, 2019
Previous issue | Index | Next issue

Project At a Glance
As of Q4 2019, the project has:

Content

Project Navigation

VG Project Main pages
- Main project – talk
- Project category – talk
- Portal – talk
VG Project Departments
- Assessment – talk
- Cleanup – talk
- Peer review – talk
- Reference library – talk
- Newsletter – talk
- Video game images – talk

To opt-out or sign up to receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to update the distribution list.
(Delivered ~~~~~)

Thanks!

Hi Spy-cicle,

I've noticed your edits on video game-related articles, good work. I see you started editing in December 2018; in 2019, I took a year of from editing so we haven't crossed editing paths before. There are some minor guideline changes that I've missed last year, inluding this one, so thanks for fixing my mistakes. Kind regards, soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 08:42, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back @Soetermans:. No problem, WP:VG/YEARINLEADSENTENCE was added to MOS:VG some time last year. Since its addition, I have trying to make sure other VG articles state the year of release in the lead sentence (if you spot any VG articles without the year in lead sentence, if you could adjust it to meet the guideline it would be greatly appreciated). Some other additions to MOS:VG last year include WP:VG/GENRE Avoid using more than two genres, or more than one hybrid genre (like "action-adventure") in listing the genres. And the clarification that Release edition tables are inappropriate content (Do not add tables featuring a game's many release editions, such as special, limited, collector's, into articles. If they are notable, write them and their contents into prose instead.) at WP:GAMECRUFT. In regards, to wiki-wide the big event was WP:FRAMGATE. Anyway, nice to meet you and I hope you have a great year of editing. Spy-cicle💥 ^Talk? 19:58, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I do NOT want to get into an edit war

Okay so my edits are correcting borderline misinformation. I have talked to the other people but they are slow to respond and dont seem to care Rollingdowntown (talk) 23:16, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

List of awards and nominations received by Game of Thrones FLC

Hello Spy-cicle hope all is well! I saw that you contributed to the List of awards and nominations received by Stranger Things FLC nominations. I was wondering if you could take a look at the List of awards and nominations received by Game of Thrones FLC nomination. I would appreciate any input and comments. Thank you! -- LuK3 (Talk) 17:21, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@LuK3: Sure, I should be able to take a look at it some time this week. Spy-cicle💥 ^Talk? 21:39, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just a friendly ping. Looks like the FLC was added to the backlog. Thank you! -- LuK3 (Talk) 18:24, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry been quite busy lately. Should be able to start some comments soon. Spy-cicle💥 ^Talk? 18:31, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I know it is a monster to review. Appreciate your fast response! -- LuK3 (Talk) 18:38, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Media Molecule

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Media Molecule you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of OceanHok -- OceanHok (talk) 18:20, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Media Molecule

The article Media Molecule you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Media Molecule for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of OceanHok -- OceanHok (talk) 14:00, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 19

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited No-go area, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Davis (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 13:02, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Clint Hocking

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Clint Hocking you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of OceanHok -- OceanHok (talk) 02:21, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question on the use of Forbes in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare Remastered

@Spy-cicle: Hi, I noticed you removed the sources using Metro and contributors for Forbes from the Call of Duty: Modern Warfare Remastered article as these are deemed unreliable as per WP:RSP/ WP:VG/S. What I wanted to ask, however, is that one of the Forbes article on the contents of Remastered compared to the original Modern Warfare mentions that he spoke directly to Activision's Rob Kostich over the phone where these details were confirmed to him. Is this considered an exception to the rule if such information was disclosed directly from the game's publisher, or is it that anything written by the author is still seen as unreliable? I did look but I'm struggling to find a reliable source to replace it that says the remaster uses the same killstreaks, perks, modes, etc. -- Wikibenboy94 (talk) 20:43, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Wikibenboy94:, Sadly, at least in my eyes, that the Forbes contributor source cannot be used for this exception because Forbes contributors are not been fact-checked nor any editoral oversight meaning that the infomation given cannot be verified. In this siuation, the contributor in question could have exagerrated or possible even lied or told the truth but we have no way of verifying which is the case as Forbes contributors are considered a self-published source (per WP:RSP) hence it cannot be used. Well that is my view at least, though you could check with other editors. Regards Spy-cicle💥 ^Talk? 23:04, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ferret: I'm expecting you to nonetheless agree with Spy-circle but could I have your thoughts on this anyway? Regardless that it should be sourced, I think it would be assumed before release that this remaster would include the same features as the original game. -- Wikibenboy94 (talk) 16:47, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Wikibenboy94, Spy-cicle, and Masem: I believe Masem may be planning to start a discussion at some point about particular Forbes contributors being treated as reliable authors. In general though at this time, Forbes contributors are considered situational on WP:VG/RS and should be replaced with other sources where appropriate (outside of reviews/opinions which is a little different) -- ferret (talk) 16:50, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

They would for only a few long-standing ones and only for their reviews. Not for their regular articles. --Masem (t) 17:01, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable coverage

Are GamesRadar+, OneAngryGamer, Gamingbolt considered reliable sites?

Pretty fucked up that they've wikipedia pages but aren't considered reliable themselves.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Hitman731 (talk • contribs) 02:59, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Hitman731: Per WP:VG/RS: GamesRadar+ is considered reliable and One Angry Gamer is considered unreliable. I could not find any listing of Gamingbolt on WP:VG/RS. I could not find any Wikipedia pages of One Angry Gamer or Gamingbolt. Regardless, most topics are determined to be suitable for a stand-alone article if the topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject (WP:GNG). Articles exist on newspapers like the Daily Mail and The Sun despite them being unreliable source per WP:RSP. This is becuase they are deemed notable. Conversely, there are websites that are likely reliable but not notable enough for a stand-alone article. Regards Spy-cicle💥 ^Talk? 23:19, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:2019 Worcester Park fire

Hello, Spy-cicle. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "2019 Worcester Park fire".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 00:52, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Age of Empires III: Definitive Edition

Hello, Spy-cicle. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Age of Empires III: Definitive Edition".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 15:23, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Video games Newsletter Q1 2020

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 12, No. 1 — 1st Quarter, 2020
Previous issue | Index | Next issue

Project At a Glance
As of Q1 2020, the project has:

Content

Project Navigation

VG Project Main pages
- Main project – talk
- Project category – talk
- Portal – talk
VG Project Departments
- Assessment – talk
- Cleanup – talk
- Peer review – talk
- Reference library – talk
- Newsletter – talk
- Video game images – talk

To opt-out or sign up to receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to update the distribution list.
(Delivered ~~~~~)

I'm still waiting for you to continue reviewing the FAC Sakura Wars (1996 video game)

I wish the only thing you should do now is resuming reviewing Sakura Wars (1996 video game), a FAC. Ignore the coronavirus entirely. Sakura Wars is the only important thing. Red Phoenix reviewed the whole thing, so you should complete your review of it now. «“I'm Aya Syameimaru!”I„文々。新聞“I„userbako”» 09:07, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, okay, it's optional to ignore the coronavirus, you don't have to take the option. I just wanted you to finish off your review of the Sakura Wars FAC. «“I'm Aya Syameimaru!”I„文々。新聞“I„userbako”» 10:34, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

FT closure

Hey Spy-cicle, can you close Wikipedia:Featured topic removal candidates/MediEvil series/archive1 for me? I usually do not close the nominations I make and this one has the most consensus right now. GamerPro64 01:48, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@GamerPro64: No problem,

Done. Regards Spy-cicle💥 ^Talk? 14:32, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Talk:Rockstar San Diego/GA1

Hello, Spy-cicle. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "GA1".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! JMHamo (talk) 09:31, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dominic Raab volunteered on Kibbutz Sarid

Hi Spy-cicle, why did you revert my addition to the article on Dominic Raab? just wondering... Baalmaloche (talk) 21:21, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Baalmaloche: I reverted your edit ([2]) because it was not sourced to a reliable source. Claims on Wikipedia have to backed up by reliable sources, especially so on biographies of living persons. Hope this helps. Regards Spy-cicle💥 ^Talk? 20:37, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Spy-cicle: Thanks for that, I've reverted your edit and added the most recent reference I can find, I reckon photos of me and Dom sharing a beer in the nineties (I was a volunteer with him), although reliable and accurate might detrimentally affect the tone of the article.Baalmaloche (talk) 21:08, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Clint Hocking

On 22 May 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Clint Hocking, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Clint Hocking was the level designer, game designer, and scriptwriter for Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Clint Hocking. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Clint Hocking), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

—valereee (talk) 00:04, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Media Molecule

The article Media Molecule you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Media Molecule for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of OceanHok -- OceanHok (talk) 18:21, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Signature

Would you consider changing your signature? I find it very distracting when reading talk pages that otherwise do not contain such high-contrast block coloring. This is something mentioned in WP:SIGAPP. — MarkH₂₁^talk 22:07, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I will think about it. Regards Spy-cicle💥 ^Talk? 21:57, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

On another note, the signature is broken on mobile devices (at least in Chrome), so that the black background only fills the lower half of the text, possibly because the color is applied before the bolding. To fix this, you could move the color from the enclosing to the enclosed element. To avoid disruption of talk pages as noted above, try switching to a light background with a dark font instead. IceWelder [✉] 12:58, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

IceWelder, MarkH21

Done Changed the signature. It may not be as impactful but at least people can read it more easily. Regards Spy-cicle💥 ^Talk? 21:49, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Important notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in the intersection of race/ethnicity and human abilities and behaviour. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Barkeep49 (talk) 16:23, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Wikipedia featured topics Margaret (singer)

A tag has been placed on Category:Wikipedia featured topics Margaret (singer) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more 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 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.

This message was automatically delivered by QEDKbot. 01:55, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 17

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dominic Raab, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Telegraph (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:41, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Last of Us Part II story

Hey, how is your day? Hope you have a good one. Sorry to disturb you but it is actually about the story tab you just deleted l. I'm not upset don't worry but I made this tab because I actually played the game, so I can prove actually that is was true. I just wanted to help the inprovment of this page by giving the best writing I can about the story. Don't need to put it back I can do it myself tommorrow as I am about to finish it already. Sorry for being your time-killer and I hope you have a nice day and that you can enjoy the game in the next hours. Thank you. TwilightMidna (talk) 20:30, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Last of Us 2 Audience Reaction

Hi,

Can I ask why you undid the whole audience reaction contribution if the issue was a single source for one statement that had multiple sources for it? As put in the changelog the inclusion of PinkNews was only because it had primary sources that the other sourced article from VG247 refers to in short terms without linking to any of it, so PinkNews was useful in that situation I believe.

Apache287 (talk) 16:11, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Apache287: Feel free to add some of the expansion back but do not use an unreliable source for it. Pink News and that VG247 article (since it seems to be exaggerated satire, as opposed a quality article) should not be used. The only exception would be the fact that a publication (VG247) made a fake review mocking those who criticised it (WP:PRIMARY). Regards Spy-cicle💥 ^Talk? 16:23, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Spy-cicle: Hi. The VG247 article if the one I think you're referring to (namely "incel review") was only used in the context of it sourcing it to point out that publications mocked a certain point of view. It's not used in any other context while other changes I made were to add more reference to the other sources which aimed to discount audience reaction entirely. As for PinkNews that's fine to remove.

It it OK if I undo your amendment and then remove the PinkNews source rather than rebuild all the references from scratch again? Apache287 (talk) 16:28, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]