Jump to content

user talk:theleekycauldron

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Trout this user
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
abcdefgh
8
c8 black king
e8 black rook
a7 black pawn
b7 black pawn
f7 black knight
h7 black pawn
e5 black pawn
g5 black pawn
c4 white pawn
d4 white knight
e4 white rook
f4 black pawn
g3 white pawn
a2 black rook
c2 white pawn
f2 white pawn
h2 white pawn
e1 white rook
g1 white king
8
77
66
55
44
33
22
11
abcdefgh
White to move, so it's leeky's turn – check back later! (last mover: TechnoSquirrel69)



Inbox

[edit source]

Sometimes messages slip through the cracks. Sorry about that! I keep this list to let me know what I still need to respond to – feel free to add your own name and message here if you're still looking for a response from me.

  1. 05:04, 17 February 2025 (UTC) fill out your thing at WP:REFLECTIONS – HouseBlaster (talk • he/they)
  2. 02:51, 15 May 2025 (UTC) ban houseblaster from my talk page for messing with the inbox format theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 02:52, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  3. 06:14, 26 January 2026 (UTC) amber

Draft:State v. Demesme

[edit source]

Hello, Theleekycauldron,

I just deleted this stale draft as CSD G13 and since you had done a lot of editing on it, I thought I'd let you know. Since you were not the page creator, you were not likely to receive a notification. I hope you are having a pleasant summer. Take care! Liz Read! Talk! 02:42, 6 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats on Featured article of the day!

[edit source]

Looked good on main page! Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 03:49, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, @Mr Serjeant Buzfuz!! theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 22:54, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

On User:Belgium 2025-2026

[edit source]

@Theleekycauldron: I pinged you on the user's talk page to get your input on level of engagement/investigation, especially as it seems like there are plans to sock and possibly old, active sock accounts. I wanted to be transparent to the user, so kept in on the talk page. As his responses make it clear that he is unable to understand the messages or is feigning his misunderstandings, I'm moving this discussion to your talk page. I reviewed some of the edits to the pages he'd been engaged with, and wonder if there are active socks editing articles related to TV in the Philippines. Is it worth a further investigation? — ERcheck (talk) 16:38, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@ERcheck: Might be worth looking into; are you only concerned about the threats of socking, or do you see edits that could be active socking? theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 16:40, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Theleekycauldron - There are a lot of active users on those pages, some seem to coincide with the date that he mentioned starting to edit again. In addition, he mentioned a June 30 date for resuming editing. Wonder if checkuser tools might provide more info. — ERcheck (talk) 16:44, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, it's a bit hard for me to parse what they were saying, so I can't track down what date you're referring to; could you tell me what date they mention having returned to editing and what accounts you think might correlate with that timeline? theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 16:46, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Theleekycauldron: - Here are dates with a few associated users - there are possibly many more.
  • DATE: 1 June 2026: At 07:09, 28 May 2026 (UTC), as TA , said on Belgium 2025-2026's talk page, "May possile to create the new username (expect the company, group, organization, product, service, and website). Starting June 1, 2026 but did not violate the Wikipedia policy, thank you."
  • DATE: 11 June 2026: At 11:06, 11 June 2026 (UTC), he said, "It's possible that a new edit has been made and what happened today won't happen again."
  • DATE: 30 June 2026: At 03:53, 12 June 2026 (UTC), he said, "....other will continue to editing starting June 30, 2026."
— ERcheck (talk) 17:19, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@ERcheck: Behaviorally speaking (looking at edit times and language use), I don't see a compelling reason to check – they're just editing popular articles on dates thrown out by a person who has otherwise not been coherent, and their own run-ins with editing policy aren't rare or very similar to this situation. But feel free to go to WP:SPI if you'd like a more experienced analysis. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 05:14, 13 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

GalliumBot missing tick'd nom

[edit source]

Hi leeky, I was looking through the open noms on WP:DYKN and GalliumBot seems to have missed Template:Did you know nominations/Overture in G minor (Ives), which is still listed on open instead of approved despite a green tick through the {{DYK checklist}} template. It's currently listed under the May 31st header on DKYN so I don't think PEIS is the issue. Any idea what's up with it? Thanks, ScalarFactor (talk) 21:24, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@ScalarFactor: Fixed, thanks! theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 21:42, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
One other similar thing: Template:Did you know nominations/2026 Men's T20 World Cup is stuck on DYKNA even though it's promoted. ScalarFactor (talk) 21:00, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
jeez, I have never seen someone try that – fixed. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 21:09, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Swanson v. Roman Catholic Bishop

[edit source]

On 14 June 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Swanson v. Roman Catholic Bishop, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a priest–marital counselor's alleged affair with his client went to Maine's highest court over religious freedom? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Swanson v. Roman Catholic Bishop. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Swanson v. Roman Catholic Bishop), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:03, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

They are all "law courts." The section is deceptively and unhelpfully denominated. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:58, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@7&6=thirteen: they are all "law courts", but there is only one Law Court in Maine, afaik. Can't really be helped that they chose a dumb name. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 14:27, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Understood. You are right. Local usage matters. Hell, the top Supreme Court of New York is called the "Court of Appeals" which puts it at odds with almost all of the other states. You are reporting it, not creating it.
Otherwise, I thought it was an admirable article. Well done! 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:50, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@7&6=thirteen: Thank you! theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 18:32, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Tban question

[edit source]

TLC, Do I need approval to open a close challenge at AN? I wouldn't think so but since AN is often about editor behavior I want to make sure this doesn't violate my ARBCOM restriction. Thanks. Springee (talk) 13:58, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think it might, unfortunately, but if you ask at ARCA I'm sure you'd get permission to post. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 17:07, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

DYKSTATS

[edit source]

Hi. I finally got around to updating User:Launchballer/Did you know with hooks from Wikipedia:Did you know/Statistics/Monthly DYK pageview leaders/2026/May. There was an error retrieving hooks from 31 May, which meant my Pinky Up hook scored 0, and the same happened the month before to the last day's hooks. I'd rather not put a score of 0 for that hook. Any chance of setting the bot to try those hooks again?--Launchballer 17:30, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Launchballer: On it! theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 19:40, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Theleekycauldron&oldid=1359886079"