User talk:Gen. Quon

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

Mentoring for FA

[edit]

Hey I saw your post at mentioning for FA. I recently got an article I wrote to a GA and was hoping to atleast nominate it for FA. I was looking over the criteria and noticed the mentor thing. So would you be willing to assist me? The article is Beebo the God of War. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 04:36, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@OlifanofmrTennant: Sure thing! I'd be happy to help. To begin with, what all would you like out of the experience? I know that some people want overall tips, whereas others would prefer exhaustive feedback about the article itself, etc. I'm happy to help in any way that I can, but I want to check first!--Gen. Quon[Talk] 01:00, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What ever you think would be helpful but if I had to pick, the second one. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 04:03, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@OlifanofmrTennant: First off, super sorry about the delay. Life kinda hit me like a train this last week and a half, and I haven't had a ton of time to focus on Wikipedia. Hopefully things will be a bit slower now! OK, I'll take a look at the article, make some comments, and then we can go from there. If it's easier, we can also communicate via email, as I often am better at responding there.--Gen. Quon[Talk] 18:54, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No worries take your time, I;ll be eagerly awaiting. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 04:54, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@OlifanofmrTennant: OK, so here are some of my preliminary thoughts on this page:
  • Your sourcing looks solid; I'll try to delve into the individual citations here in a bit, but I'm impressed with the look of your inline citations. (In many of this site's articles, they're a mess!)
  • The plot summary is quite large compared to the production and reception sections. IMHO, cutting down the summary and expanding the latter two would make this a bit more balanced, per other FAs.
  • Similarly, I'm a sucker for production info, and while the article briefly mentions the production process, more information about the writing, filming, directing, editing, etc. would enhance readers' understanding of the episode's development. Is there any info about Beebo's creation? Given the character's impact, that seems like a great way to expand the article.
  • In a lot of FAs about television episodes, there is a section that looks at themes explored, etc. Providing this sort of analysis—if it exists—would making the article more substantial.
  • I know that the "Christmas special" is discussed in the article for the show itself, but it might be worthwhile to include that section in the "Beebo the God of War" article, too. You could probably use the exact same text, alongside the {{Template:Copied}} template.
  • Personally, I believe the "Critical response" section can be improved upon by organizing the section by thematic elements, rather than just listing reviews one after the other. (For a GA, I think this approach is fine, but for an FA, you want to weave it all into a narrative, so to speak.)
I'll try to take a deeper dive into everything here in a bit! Let me know if you have any questions about the points I raise; I'm more than happy to expand upon any of them, or give you some tips and tricks about how to proceed.--Gen. Quon[Talk] 15:13, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Where would the Christmas special section go? Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 18:35, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@OlifanofmrTennant: My instinct is to put it in its own section at the very end of the page, before "Notes".--Gen. Quon[Talk] 18:43, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have added information on the Christmas special. I'll begin putting together a an analysis section. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 03:36, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I havent worked on it in a while. Just wondering am I going about putting the anayalsis together correctly? Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 03:59, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@OlifanofmrTennant: It's looking better! One minor quibble: I think that "Analysis" might not be the right title for the section. Maybe something more like "Cultural allusions", etc.--Gen. Quon[Talk] 17:35, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I dont plan on having it all be allusions. That's just what I've found so far in the sources. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 17:49, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FAC mentorship?

[edit]

Hi Gen. Quon! My name is Dylan and I have been working on the article Not Strong Enough (Boygenius song), though I've slowed during the past couple months to allow for it to be reviewed at GAN (which ultimately passed) and to focus on some other tasks. I've had a peer review open for the article for the past couple months, though it has yet to attract any comments. I'm hoping to tie up any loose ends there may be with the article and submit it to FAC soon. Since this will be my first FAC, and I saw popular alt and rock music listed as one of your specialties at WP:FAM, I was wondering if you could provide me with some guidance? Dylan620 (he/him • talk • edits) 21:06, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dylan620: It's good to hear from you! I'd be happy to help. What sort of feedback are you interested in (prose, structure, etc.)? The end of the school has left me with less time than I would have liked to edit here, but with the semester winding down, I'm going to have more time! (Also, if it's easier, we can also communicate via email; I check that regularly).--Gen. Quon[Talk] 02:34, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks, Gen. Quon :) Prose and structure are probably the two main things I'd like help with, actually. I'd also appreciate if you had any suggestions to ensure that the article meets criterion 1b. While waiting for the GAN to finish, I made mental notes of things that may need to be tweaked or expanded during the final push toward FAC; specifically, I want to try polishing/flushing out the background and composition sections, and maybe seeing if there are more reviews (whether of the song itself, the music video, or live performances) I can add. I admittedly check Wikipedia more often than I check my e-mail, but if the latter would be easier for you, then I am more than happy to be flexible; just drop a {{YGM}} on my talk page :) Dylan620 (he/him • talk • edits) 20:13, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Dylan620: Sorry for the delay in responding; the end of the semester has been a busy one. OK, well, I'm happy to help in that capacity. Hopefully I'll have some time here in the next few days to dive in!--Gen. Quon[Talk] 17:45, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dylan620: I did a read-over the article, and I have to say, it looks pretty darn good. I'll try to do a closer read here in a bit, but here are a few things that jumped out to me:

  • The article doesn't include much info about the recording of the song. Do you have any references that discuss the band's time in the recording studio? The overall process? Dates the song was recorded/mixed/etc.? Info like that can really elevate a music article.
  • Similarly, is there any more info about the song's lyrics or meaning? There's that pretty good paragraph with Dacus's quote, but even more info would go a long way!
  • A minor thing: If you can bulk up some of the paragraphs, I feel like the "Writing and composition" could either be split into two stand-alone sections (for instance, one called "Lyrics" and the other called "Music"), or you could keep the "Writing and composition" section, but break it into two sub-sections. This might make it a bit easier for a reader to navigate.--Gen. Quon[Talk] 21:47, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much Gen. Quon – I'll try to act on these in the next week or so! Please let me know if you have any other suggestions :) Dylan620 (he/him • talk • edits) 00:27, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gen. Quon, I wanted to provide an update on this. I've expanded the article by quite a bit over the last couple weeks and am curious to hear what you think of my progress. The music section is just about complete – it is now three paragraphs, one each dedicated to genre classification, instrumental composition, and structure. I'm aiming to expand/refine the lyrics and critical reception sections in a similar format. Dylan620 (he/him • talk • edits) 18:52, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FA mentorship

[edit]

I humbly request FA mentorship. My goal is to one day bring Tetris to be an FA article, but I have to crawl before I can Run. As you know, I've been focused on the next possible one, Lumines: Puzzle Fusion. It seems 1a is the common problem. No matter how much I adjust the writing style.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 14:43, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Blue Pumpkin Pie: Happy to help, although as I just told Dylan620, my life has been a little hectic with the end of the semester and the like, so I apologize if I'm not super speedy. What sort of help are you after? Let me know what you're envisioning, and I can go from there!--Gen. Quon[Talk] 17:51, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's hard to say what I'm envisioning. I just want to know what I'm missing that is preventing Lumines: Puzzle Fusion from becoming FA quality. All I know is most of the time it's failing criteria 1a. And I have no idea what I can do to pass it. I look at other articles that recently passed, such as The Longing and Katana Zero for comparison, and I don't see much difference in quality. So I'm looking for mentorship to help assist in that.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 18:02, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Blue Pumpkin Pie: That makes sense! So, taking a peek over the Lumines: Puzzle Fusion article and its past FACs, indeed it seems that 1a is the snag. This really is the ol' wiki-chestnut, so to speak. When I have been in your situation, the two ports-of-call that I have found to be useful are the WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors and the Wikipedia:Peer review pages. The former is a group dedicated to proofreading/copyediting articles, and the latter is a space wherein editors can post articles and ask for feedback. These venues have helped me out a ton in the past. My other suggestion is a bit more experimental: If you have access to AI writing tools, they can often help you identify problem prose. For instance, I have used the program ProWritingAid to analyze my text and alert me to any repetitive phrases, weird syntax, malapropisms and misspellings, etc. (Having said that, these tools are by no means a replacement for actually digging into the text and slowly carving the prose until it is just right.)
I'll try to take a closer read here in a bit!--Gen. Quon[Talk] 21:59, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I used the Guild of Copy Editors once, and it backfired during my second FAC. A lot of the changes done, I had to undo. But I'm also at the beck and call of whoever is reviewing too. So some will say it looks good and some may choose to say its beyond help at an FAC and want me to work on the article more (without specifics on what to work on). I've looked into getting AI writing tools. I attempted to use Grammarly, but Lumines is one of those games that isn't perfect for talking about Lumines gameplay. Be happy to try the one you recommended.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 14:56, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Blue Pumpkin Pie: Dang, I'm sorry to hear that the c/e guild wasn't as helpful as it could have been. I know that in the past, I've had to nominate my articles two or so times before I feel they're really polished. If you want to try and tackle some of the prose issues yourself, some great resources are the writing guides/exercises developed by Tony1 awhile back:
Another good sources is the "Copy-editing essentials" page, maintained by the Military History WikiProject.--Gen. Quon[Talk] 18:15, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd be happy to take a look and improve that way. Although I still wouldn't mind having a quick look at the article. this is a tough one because of how the game decides to explain its rules and how developers choose to word the issue.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk)
Are you still interested by the way? just curious.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 13:33, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Blue Pumpkin Pie: Yes, sorry about the delay. Would you be willing to email me a message? I've been a bit distracted these last few months on here, but I'm always checking my email.--Gen. Quon[Talk] 13:39, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Blue Pumpkin Pie: I played around with some of the tools I have access to, and I got some of these results:

  • Current Text: "Mizuguchi was inspired to make a music game on the PSP, one of the few handhelds on the market with a headphone jack."
Improved Text: "Mizuguchi's inspiration for creating a music game on the PSP stemmed from the console's headphone jack—a rare feature among handhelds."
  • Current Text: "The gameplay tasks players to arrange descending two-colored 2×2 blocks to create 2×2 squares of matching color."
Improved Text: "During the game, players must strategically arrange falling 2×2 blocks, each comprising two colors, to form single-color 2×2 squares."
  • Current Text: "Each stage has a skin that affects the background, block colors, music, and the speed of the time line."
Improved Text: "Each stage features a unique skin that influences the background, block colors, accompanying music, and the time line's speed."
  • Current Text: "The game was released as a launch title for the PSP in Japan in December 2004, North America in March 2005, and Europe in September 2005."
Improved Text: "The game debuted as a launch title for the PlayStation Portable in Japan on December 12, 2004. It subsequently launched in North America on March 23, 2005, and in Europe on September 1, 2005."
  • Current Text: "Mizuguchi originally wanted to make a music-heavy Tetris-style game, but licensing issues prevented this so he created a new concept for Lumines."
Improved Text: "Initially, Mizuguchi envisioned creating a music-heavy game inspired by Tetris. However, due to licensing challenges, he decide to develop a game based on a new concept."
  • Current Text: "Lumines: Puzzle Fusion sold over half a million copies in North America, Europe, and Japan, and was awarded "Best Handheld Game of 2005" by multiple media outlets."
Improved Text: "Lumines: Puzzle Fusion was a commercial success, selling over half a million copies sold across North America, Europe, and Japan. It was also named "Best Handheld Game of 2005" by the Spike TV Video Game Awards, GameSpot, and Electronic Gaming Monthly."
  • Current Text: "It was praised for its music and gameplay; multiple reviewers described it as addictive and drew comparisons with Tetris."
Improved Text: "Critics praised the game for its innovative combination of music and gameplay, often describing it as addictive, and many favorably compared the game to Tetris."
  • Current Text: "The ports received less praise than the original version; critics commended the mobile phone version for its new features but criticized its poor sound quality, while the PS2 port was criticized for omitting some songs present in the original."
Improved Text: "The game's various ports have received mixed reviews. The mobile phone version, for instance, was lauded for introducing new features, but it was criticized for poor sound quality. Similarly, the PS2 port was critiqued for omitting some tracks from the original release."
  • Current Text: "Reviewers complimented the remastered version for enhancing the quality of sounds and visuals but were disappointed that an online multiplayer mode was not included as a new feature."
Improved Text: "While the remastered version was praised for its enhanced sound and visual quality, some reviewers expressed disappointment over the lack of new features, such as an online multiplayer mode."

I'll continue to experiment!--Gen. Quon[Talk] 17:14, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the belated response. this is most helpful. I discovered will have to adjust my grammar apps then, as they do not give proper recommendations.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 20:16, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In addition, I was thinking about making a separate section for "release" and combining the original release alongside the Ports. Since the original release history makes only 5% of the currents section it belongs to.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 20:56, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Blue Pumpkin Pie: No worries on the delay; as you know, I'm the king of delay! Also, note that these were just some suggested fixes. I don't think what you have is bad, but I've always found that when it comes to prose, many eyes (even robotic ones) make it all the better.--Gen. Quon[Talk] 13:12, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ProWritingAid and Grammarly both give the exact same advice when it comes to fixing grammar. So I just had to read it out loud and see if it sounds professional. i made some micro adjustments based on the information provided. let me know if this is better.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 19:31, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sade and John Gray

[edit]

Hello there I summarised your contribution and moved it to the section on Sade's Political, philosophical and religious views where it seems to fit better. I placed it after Phillip's critique on much the same issue. I think the main point Gray makes is that Sade wasn't totally atheist/materialist as his protagonists (sometimes) almost deify nature. However, I think the other critics are right that Sade's "confusion" of ideas is really his characters contesting different ideas. He was satirising both Christianity and nature worship (and many other things). Happy to discuss if you think I have cut out too much. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 23:06, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Aemilius Adolphin: Thanks for letting me know! I think the change makes total sense.--Gen. Quon[Talk] 14:43, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red June 2024

[edit]
Women in Red | June 2024, Volume 10, Issue 6, Numbers 293, 294, 308, 309, 310


Online events:

Announcements from other communities

Tip of the month:

Other ways to participate:

Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter/X

--Lajmmoore (talk 07:04, 23 May 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

FA mentorship

[edit]

Hi there, Gen. Quon! I would very much appreciate if you could be a mentor for my first FA. The article I'm thinking of is the 2000 album It Was Hot, We Stayed in the Water, which I brought to GA last year. At the time, I did a source search and included everything I found. As well, I think the prose is the sharpest of all my GAs, likely due to the help of GOCE. I'm not too sure on the differences between GA and FA, so would love your assessment and guidance on how to bring this to FA. Thanks a lot! — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 21:24, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PerfectSoundWhatever: Thanks for reaching out! I'd be happy to take a peek at this. Let me see what I can do the next few days. A quick glance shows me that it certainly looks solid! Is there anything in particular you're looking for?--Gen. Quon[Talk] 03:47, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate the response! I don't think there's anything in particular, just in general what I need to work towards to promote the article, and any advice on the FA process. Thanks a lot! — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 21:51, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PerfectSoundWhatever: Just wanted to say that I haven't forgotten you! I'll try to take a crack at this sometime this week.--Gen. Quon[Talk] 13:24, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the message Looking forward to your advice — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 02:11, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PerfectSoundWhatever: No prob. Also, as I mentioned to another editor above, feel free to email me a message. I've been a bit distracted these last few months on here, but I'm always checking my email.--Gen. Quon[Talk] 13:39, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PerfectSoundWhatever: OK, I took a look at this and basically performed an unofficial peer-review with some suggestions. Feel free to respond to certain points, ask for clarifications, etc. This is just to get the ball rolling:

  • Prose/Writing: The writing style in general is clear and professional, but (as always!) there are a few spots where the readability could be improved. Some complex sentences could be simplified too, and I think a few of the transitions could be tweaked. (Controversial opinion: When it comes to enhancing prose, I think working with newly developed AI and LLM technologies can be extremely useful. I've been playing around with a tool that integrates with Word called "ProWritingAid" that helps me identify knotty or overly complex sentences. I could also see Co-Pilot or ChatGPT being helpful in this regard, depending on your opinions about using them. As always, YMMV.)
  • Coverage: The article is mostly comprehensive. However, I think a few sections could be expanded. The "Music and themes" section, for instance, has a solid first and second paragraph, but it would all benefit from more detail (if possible) about the album's other songs. (Of course, I realize this is often easier said than done, since you're limited to what others have said.)
Talking about the "Music and themes" section: Is "The Glow" basically the mid-point of the album? And then the tracks that follow separate songs? Or is it like They Might Be Giants' Fingertips 'Suite'? I just want to make sure I understand it sufficiently. I think part of my confusion is the use of the word "climax," which technically means 'point of highest tension in a work,' but is often used colloquially to mean 'finale.'
Were AllMusic and Pitchfork the only contemporary publications that reviewed it upon its release? That section could maybe use a bit more detail. (Also, not a critique, but I really like the last paragraph in the "Retrospective" sub-section.)
  • Images: This is kind of a minor thing, but I think that while the article includes relevant images, the captions could be a bit more informative. For instance, maybe the second image of the lake could pull some text from the body so that it reads: "While recording the album, Phil Elverum frequently visited the ocean in Westport, Washington (pictured), contributing to the album's theme of the ocean, lakes, and swimming." That sorta thing.

Feel free to let me know what you're thinking!--Gen. Quon[Talk] 16:43, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the late reply. Thanks a lot for these comments! I'll try to address them now:
  • My understanding is that climax here refers to "highest point of tension". It's not a narrative work so I see it as more of a sonic climax.
  • I added mentions of the two songs without: (something) and The Breeze. However, there wasn't much in the sources I have access to.
  • NME and Rock Sound also reviewed the album on release (apparently). I couldn't find anything else on ProQuest/Google News. I don't have access to the offline sources; if you have any advice on finding these 20-year old magazines I would greatly appreciate it.
  • I've updated the image captions.
  • I've given the article a copyedit and will give it another go soon.
Let me know what you think. Thanks! — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 03:53, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PerfectSoundWhatever: My apologies for missing this comment! I got your email and sent you a reply. Would you prefer communication that way? If not, I can post what I sent here, too.--Gen. Quon[Talk] 14:09, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't mind either way, but let's do email! — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 05:57, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FA mentorship for Dexter's Laboratory

[edit]

Hello, Gen. Quon! I hope you're doing well. Congratulations on achieving your PhD! I'd like to ask for your mentorship in promoting Dexter's Laboratory to become a FA. I've been involved in this article for many years, and even though I feel like I've improved it in every way I can think of, I am very critical of myself (even tonight I was rewriting things). The article has received a recent peer review, which is now archived. If you would offer your advice on how this article could be improved, boy, would I appreciate it! — Paper Luigi T • C 04:30, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Paper Luigi, it's good to hear from you, and thank you! I'd be happy to help. Before I take a crack at it, what exactly are you looking for? Prose issues? Sourcing? I'm happy to look at anything, but just wanted to make sure that I'm looking at the right thing.--Gen. Quon[Talk] 15:01, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, my dissertation finally got published; feel free to email me for more info if you're curious!--Gen. Quon[Talk] 15:01, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Glad to know! Judging by what you sent me, you must have put a mountain's worth of time and effort into it. Anyway, my main concern with this article is its sourcing. The books, press releases, newspapers, and magazines look fine, but others like blog posts, tweets, product pages, etc. look weak by comparison. I don't know if any of these are weak enough to fail FAC. Also, a peer reviewer mentioned that website names in the cite web template shouldn't include ".com" and like suffixes, but I was unable to find a style guideline to support this. I'd be grateful for any help you could offer! — Paper Luigi T • C 04:10, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see! Happy to take a look. A couple of quick comments:
  • I know that sometimes, editor recommendations can be more or less preferences disguised as "Wikipedia requirements," which is frustrating. I'm not sure if there's a solid 'rule' about whether to include '.com'. Personally, I usually leave it off and render the site name as a proper noun (e.g., "Reddit" instead of "reddit.com"), but again, that's just my preference. To my mind, consistency is the big thing. That said, I'll do a little digging...
  • When I worked on the Adventure Time article, I was pulling from a lot of 'popular' and 'grey literature' (so to speak), and there were some editors who pushed back on my use of that material. I somewhat dug my heels in, however, because I felt that many blog posts and tweets, etc. were providing a 'peek' behind the scenes that traditional sources just couldn't provide. (When it comes to TV/animation/music, I've noticed that disdain for 'pop sourcing' often comes from editors who aren't super versed in the specifics of the online animation world; I know that a ton of artists regularly post content on social media, which probably isn't the case in other 'fields'.) In the end, my viewpoint seems to have won out—although maybe that was due to attrition! Regardless, when it comes to more 'modern' topics, I feel like 'pop sources' are inevitably going to make up a decent chunk of the reference section. As long as they seem to be appropriately curated and you can defend why you included them, I feel like you should be OK.
Either way, like I said, I'm happy to take a look!--Gen. Quon[Talk] 18:03, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Paper Luigi I wanted to touch base on this and let you know that I haven't forgotten about you! I hope to take a deeper dive here in a bit.--Gen. Quon[Talk] 21:12, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, and there's no rush, especially at this time of year. I'm in no big hurry to get this article improved upon. I appreciate your help! — Paper Luigi T • C 02:51, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Paper Luigi I wanted to finally get back to this. I know I've already asked, but is there anything you'd like me to look at in particular? I know that in the weeks since we talked, things might've developed.--Gen. Quon[Talk] 16:56, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for getting back to me, Gen. Quon. I don't know how familiar you are with the article's subject, but I would like your input on the general flow of the article. I'm concerned that transitions from one topic or section to another may not be as smooth as I would like. I'm pretty familiar with the subject, so it's hard for me to look at it as someone who is just getting to know Dexter's Laboratory through this article. I may be leaving the reader questions where I should have answers. — Paper Luigi T • C 08:05, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Paper Luigi I finally started to take a crack at this. First things first, the prose (to my mind) is pretty solid. I can tell that a lot of work went into getting it smoothed out and readable. I haven't completed a full sweep, but here are some initial comments about the first half:

More to come soon(ish)!--Gen. Quon[Talk] 16:46, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking the time to look at this article! — Paper Luigi T • C 07:21, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mentoring for FAC

[edit]

Hi, I'm contacting you because I noticed your username is listed at WP:FAM and I am interested in nominating a FAC but have never done so in the past. I'm contacting several people listed as FA mentors so if you are busy that is okay. The article is Neurocysticercosis, a parasitic brain disease. Thanks in advance for your time and consideration! IntentionallyDense (Contribs) 22:00, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@IntentionallyDense: Sorry for the delay. I can certainly try to help out, although I will say that medicine and anatomy are far from my forte.--Gen. Quon[Talk] 22:46, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for getting back to me! I understand that medical stuff is not an area most editors are confortable with but I am a huge believer that if the langauge used in a medical article is getting in the way of understanding it, there may be an issue with how it is written. It seems to be that the biggest issue thusfar is my prose which I could use all the help available with. Thank you for yout time and consideration! IntentionallyDense (Contribs) 20:32, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@IntentionallyDense: IMHO, that's a very reasonable attitude, and an especially refreshing one to hear coming from someone in world of science. I'll take a look at the article here and make some notes/see if I can copyedit to improve readability in certain places.--Gen. Quon[Talk] 21:11, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good, thank you IntentionallyDense (Contribs) 21:15, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@IntentionallyDense: I've done a few read-throughs of the article, and I have to say, you've done a good job making all of this readable. I recognize that this is tough material to convey to the masses. I'll leave more comment on the PR page.--Gen. Quon[Talk] 17:04, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you that means a lot. I’m excited to hear your comments. IntentionallyDense (Contribs) 19:29, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Potential FA

[edit]

Hey there! I'm hoping to eventually take Line of Duty to FAC. I've put a ton of work into the article over the last two years or so. It seems to have improved quite a bit and recently passed a GA nomination. This would be my second FA, but my first in three years (bar one quick fail on a different article last year). I'm seeking a mentor to get an idea on where the article stands in its current state, and ideally improve it further. I recently requested that the GOCE take a look at it so that should hopefully take care of any spelling or grammatical problems. I would appreciate it if you could take a look at it whenever you get a chance and let me know about any problems you see that would come up in an FAC? Everything from prose to coverage to sourcing, or honestly anything else you notice would be appreciated. TheDoctorWho (talk) 07:51, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@TheDoctorWho:. I'd be happy to look at it and help, though as I noted below, I've been a bit swamped lately, so it might not be right away.--Gen. Quon[Talk] 21:03, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for offering to help! And no worries, take as long as you need. Hope you're doing well, TheDoctorWho (talk) 21:31, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hey TheDoctorWho I wanted to finally get back to this. Is there anything you'd like me to look at in particular?--Gen. Quon[Talk] 16:56, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing specificslly comes to mind right now, like I said abything that might come up in an FAC would be helpful to me. I feel like the article is in pretty good shape overall, but there's probably things I'm not noticing. TheDoctorWho (talk) 18:33, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Steven Universe

[edit]

Hi there, several years ago you reviewed Steven Universe for GA. Recently I’ve been working on it again and I opened a peer review so I can be prepared to nominate it at FAC soon. If you have any insights, feel free to post it there, I’d much appreciate that. 1989 (talk) 20:19, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@1989: Ah yeah, I remember. I'm glad to see it hurtling toward FA! I'd be happy to look at it, though I've been a bit swamped lately irl.--Gen. Quon[Talk] 21:02, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hey 1989 I wanted to finally get back to this. Is there anything you'd like me to look at in particular?--Gen. Quon[Talk] 16:57, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, anything you find worthy of attention really. 1989 (talk) 20:25, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@1989: I've been kinda swamped IRL, but I intend to circle back on this! If a few more weeks pass by, please reach out and remind me.--Gen. Quon[Talk] 14:13, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you still intend on giving feedback, I’d put a placeholder comment on the peer review to avoid an inactivity closure. 1989 (talk) 18:29, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Smitten Good Article Nomination

[edit]

Good evening,

In case you have yet to be notified, I have started the GA review process for Smitten. This article has been left unreviewed for quite some time, so I thought that it would be worthwhile to finally tackle it. You're no stranger to the good article review process, but you can find my initial comments on the nomination here. Dobbyelf62 (talk) 01:52, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Smitten (Pale Waves album)

[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Smitten (Pale Waves album) 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Dobbyelf62 -- Dobbyelf62 (talk) 02:02, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there. I'm curious if you'll be able to address some of my suggestions for Smitten. I will try to move through the review in an expeditious manner once you are able to resume work on the article. Dobbyelf62 (talk) 23:21, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Dobbyelf62: Yes, thank you for the note! I replied on the talk page.--Gen. Quon[Talk] 17:41, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
From the quick glance I took, you seemed to address some of the issues I addressed. Later today, I plan on continuing the assessment in earnest. Thank you for the reply. Dobbyelf62 (talk) 18:25, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

4-D (The X-Files)

[edit]

Your edit of 02:45, 14 July 2012 (UTC) of 4-D (The X-Files) included {{cite journal|journal=The X-Files: The Collector's Edition|publisher=GE Fabbri|year=2006|volume=45|issn=1747-9096}}, which is missing the article title. Please supply the missing title. Also, {{cite journal}} is only for academic journals, please use {{cite magazine}}. Cheers! —Anomalocaris (talk) 21:50, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I managed to clean it up a bit. I'll see if I can find the rest of the details elsewhere.--Gen. Quon[Talk] 22:14, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Smitten (Pale Waves album)

[edit]

The article Smitten (Pale Waves album) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Smitten (Pale Waves album) for comments about the article, and Talk:Smitten (Pale Waves album)/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! 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. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Dobbyelf62 -- Dobbyelf62 (talk) 14:45, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Always precious

[edit]

Ten years ago, you were found precious. That's what you are, always. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:44, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Gerda Arendt: Thanks so much for the original award and for the reminder! It always queues up fond memories.--Gen. Quon[Talk] 13:49, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I like to hear that! - Perhaps keep this thread from archiving then, because after ten, I won't come again, - the sapphire grew too big ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:53, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Gerda Arendt: Good idea! I'll also add it to my user page! I can't believe I hadn't done that already!--Gen. Quon[Talk] 13:57, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of All the Things I Never Said (Pale Waves EP)

[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article All the Things I Never Said (Pale Waves EP) 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of CatchMe -- CatchMe (talk) 07:24, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of All the Things I Never Said (Pale Waves EP)

[edit]

The article All the Things I Never Said (Pale Waves EP) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article needs changes or clarifications to meet the good article criteria. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:All the Things I Never Said (Pale Waves EP) and Talk:All the Things I Never Said (Pale Waves EP)/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of CatchMe -- CatchMe (talk) 08:25, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of All the Things I Never Said (Pale Waves EP)

[edit]

The article All the Things I Never Said (Pale Waves EP) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:All the Things I Never Said (Pale Waves EP) for comments about the article, and Talk:All the Things I Never Said (Pale Waves EP)/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! 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. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of CatchMe -- CatchMe (talk) 19:45, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Advice/review

[edit]

Hello Gen. Quon! I sincerely hope I am not bothering you! While I am not aiming for featured articles just yet, I saw you under the FA mentors list and thought you'd be a great person to contact. I have two articles I have tried my best to improve and edit to my fullest extent, and I was wondering if you may have the time to take a skim/look? I would ideally like to try and make them good article status, and I'm not sure if it's there yet. If you're busy or do not accept requests this way, that's alright!

The articles:

Thank you, have a lovely day/night! Watagwaan (talk) 03:24, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Watagwaan: Thanks for the connecting! I've been fairly bad at giving reviews my full attention, given some of the stuff going on IRL right now, but I am certainly still interested in helping out. Let me see what I can do. If you don't hear back in a bit, feel free to ping me again.--Gen. Quon[Talk] 16:35, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thank you! And of course, it's no pressure! Watagwaan (talk) 18:10, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Watagwaan: OK, I finally took a peek at these! Starting with "In the Cold, Cold Night", which comes across (to me at least) as a pretty solid article:
  • I know that, with regard to image placement, right-aligned images are preferred. That said, I'm not sure if there's another more logical place for that image of Meg White. Maybe it could be moved to the "Release" section, since you talk about live performances there?
  • A minor critique: I think breaking up the giant paragraph in the "Reception" section would improve readability.
  • Another super minor thing: Having the sentences in “Cover versions” be in the active voice might sounds a bit better (e.g., instead of the first line, have "In 2012, Tracey Thorn included a cover of the song on her Christmas album Tinsel and Lights.")
  • I'd change the case style for ref 15 so that it's either in sentence or title case, per MOS:ALLCAPS.
  • You might think about using a bot like User:InternetArchiveBot to mass-archive the various sources on the page.
Like I said, "In the Cold, Cold Night" strikes me as a strong article already. I'll try to take a crack at the Meg White article here in a bit.--Gen. Quon[Talk] 13:36, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
OK, now for some comments about the Meg White article. Overall, this one reads well, too.
  • Is there anything more to say about her post-White Stripes life? That section seems rather short, considering the band dissolved in 2011. Of course, it's totally possible that she's remained out of the spotlight, but I thought it best to check.
  • Note MOS:IMAGELOC in the "Final years" section; also, without closely looking at the nested headings, that title kind of sounds like its referring to her final years. Maybe change it to something like "Disbandment"?
  • This is totally up to you, of course, but is there a short snippet from a White Stripes song that you could include in the article to sonically convey White's unique approach to drumming? I know that, for me at least, it's always nice to read about a unique song, style, etc. while also listening to it.
  • Instead of being formatted like a book ref, Ref 38 should be converted to Template:Cite magazine and include information about the publication (in this case, Billboard magazine).
  • Do you think some of the info included in the "Further reading" sources could be worked into the article proper?
  • This is just a gut feeling, but I'd wager there's more Billboard and Pitchfork sources out there that could help beef up some sections of the article.
  • I'd change the case style for ref 78 so that it's either in sentence or title case, per MOS:ALLCAPS. Same for the titles to refs 97, 105, 119, 143, as well as the author case for ref 115.
  • For some of the citations, you include the name of a magazine/newspaper/etc. as both the author and publication (e.g., refs 78 and 108); I'd only include the name in the publication slot and leave the author slot blank.
  • Be sure to format similar citations in a consistent way (for instance, compare ref 34 and ref 37--both are references to AllMusic, but the two are formatted differently and include/exclude different fields)
  • It looks like the Handyside source is only used once, maybe twice. Can this be mined for anymore material?
  • Again, You might use a bot like User:InternetArchiveBot to mass-archive the various sources on the page.
Those are my initial thoughts. Let me know if you have any questions!--Gen. Quon[Talk] 13:58, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I've looked over the Meg White one. I've applied some of the changes to the best of my ability! The article was a bit barebones/short before I expanded it, but I kept most (if not all) of the references from back then as well. There's a chance those weren't properly formatted, so when I have more time I could do a deep look. I tried to format the ones I could see (in terms of MOS:ALLCAPS and Ref 38) and I could definitely try to mine the Handyside source when I have more time. One of the further reading sources were already used in the article and I'm not sure why they were there. When you say "This is just a gut feeling, but I'd wager there's more Billboard and Pitchfork sources out there that could help beef up some sections of the article." What sections would you mean? I can try to search, but I don't exactly know where needs expanding. She's been out of the spotlight since her retirement, and I've tried my best to document all I could. Watagwaan (talk) 20:13, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Watagwaan: My comment about Billboard and Pitchfork was more of an aside—I was basically saying that I'm sure there's some more info in both magazines that you could use, but of course, you'd have to find those sources first. Basically, they're potential leads if you ever want to expand the article beyond what you've already done.--Gen. Quon[Talk] 13:11, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much for your feedback! This means a lot. I'll look over the Meg White one when I get home later; as for In The Cold Cold Night, I applied everything except for the InternetArchiveBot purely because I don't know how to use it… again, I cannot wait to look over the rest. And thank you for your kind words! I tried my best and it's very affirming to hear that. After I figure out the use of the InternetArchiveBot, and apply the Meg White changes, what happens next to try and get it reviewed for Good Article or more status? Watagwaan (talk) 23:44, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Watagwaan: No worries about the InternetArchiveBot bit (in fact, I can tackle that for you). As far as next steps go, that depends on whether you think the pages are ready or not. (I know that's a non-answer!) Personally, I think that "In the Cold, Cold Night" is probably good to go: It's readable, fairly comprehensive, and has solid sourcing. If you want to take the plunge, you can nominated it by following these directions. As for the Meg White article, I think it's pretty close to being ready, too. Given its size, however, it might be a good idea to open a peer review to get a few more eyeballs on the article. I'm admittedly not a topic expert when it comes to the White Stripes, so having others look over the article before a GAN would likely help to compensate for my ignorance!--Gen. Quon[Talk] 13:10, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thank you for offering to help with the InternetArchiveBot bit! I plan to submit "In The Cold, Cold Night" for nomination then! As for Meg White, I tried to request a peer review a few months back, I'm not sure what happened. Watagwaan (talk) 16:04, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question about a past edit

[edit]

Hi - I was just editing George Williams College (Chicago) -- thank you for starting it! -- and came across wording from your contributions in 2019: "the stark racial divide between the mostly-black student body and the mostly-white citizens of Downers Grove". I was surprised to read the college's student population described as "mostly-black" because I'd just been looking at yearbooks from ten years prior, and although racially integrated, the student population at that time was very much majority white. So I checked the citation you used, and it described "the school, which by the late 1960s was about 20% African American".

Do you recall what might have led you to the description you wrote? Were you perhaps relying on an alternative source that has a conflicting description of the proportions within the student body? I know this was six years ago so it's unlikely you remember, but I figured I would ask. Thanks! Sumana Harihareswara 15:44, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’ll need to dig back through my sources. I think I was pulling from a source I found elsewhere, but I can’t quite remember. Feel free to revert/edit if you think it’s wrong.—Gen. Quon[Talk] 20:53, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I have already edited that sentence to better reflect the existing cited sources, yes. And of course feel free to update and further edit it if you find further sourcing that further illuminates the matter! Cheers and thanks for the reply. Sumana Harihareswara 23:51, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Transformative Works and Cultures

[edit]
Notice

The article Transformative Works and Cultures has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable journal. Not indexed in any selective databases, no independent sources. Does not meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG.

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. Randykitty (talk) 18:54, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again!

[edit]

Hello Gen. Quon! I am the editor from before who asked for advice regarding the Meg White and "In the Cold, Cold Night" articles. I wanted to ask if you could possibly help with the review and process of promoting Meg White into a Featured Article? I recently got it promoted to a Good Article (early last month) and want to begin the process of promoting it. If you are too busy, that's okay. Thank you! Watagwaan (talk) 19:09, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Watagwaan, it's good to hear from you. My schedule has been very erratic lately, but I'll see what I can do! (As always, if I get distracted, feel free to message me in a bit as a reminder.)--Gen. Quon[Talk] 13:29, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh goodness, it's no rush! The last thing I want to do is put pressure on you. As a college student (though it may be entirely different from your situation) I at least partially understand having a packed yet sporadic schedule. I hope all is well! Watagwaan (talk) 14:57, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Qen. Quon! I hope all is well. I figured I would put a reminder here and hope I'm not bothering! Watagwaan (talk) 22:39, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red July 2025

[edit]
Women in Red | July 2025, Vol 11, Issue 7, Nos. 326, 327, 341, 342, 343


Online events:

Announcements:

Progress ("moving the needle"):

  • Statistics available via Humaniki tool. Thank you if you contributed one or more of the 1,514 articles during this period!
  • 19 May 2025: 20.114% of EN-WP biographies are about women (2,066,280 bios; 415,618 women)
  • 23 Jun 2025: 20.130% (2,072,236 bios; 417,132 women)

Tip of the month:

  • A nuanced article is more useful than a shiny pedestal. Readers can find hope in your subject's survival or achievements,
    but they can also learn from your subject's mistakes and limitations.

Other ways to participate:

--Lajmmoore (talk 09:20, 30 June 2025 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Take On Me Reel Big Fish.jpg

[edit]
Notice

The file File:Take On Me Reel Big Fish.jpg has been proposed for deletion. The proposed deletion notice added to the file should explain why.

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 files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This is an automated notification. Please refer to the page's history for further information. DatBot (talk) 00:32, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of "Weird Al" Yankovic's Greatest Hits for deletion

[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article "Weird Al" Yankovic's Greatest Hits, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/"Weird Al" Yankovic's Greatest Hits until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Byzantine rump states

[edit]

Hi, I reverted a few of your edits where you added Category:Rump states since the pages were already categorized as Category:Byzantine rump states, which is a child. There is no need to also include the first category due to WP:DIFFUSE. Thanks. Mellk (talk) 16:05, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Mellk: Thanks for that. I totally missed those.--Gen. Quon[Talk] 16:18, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red August 2025

[edit]
Women in Red | August 2025, Vol 11, Issue 8, Nos. 326, 327, 344, 345, 346


Online events:

Announcements:

Tip of the month:

Other ways to participate:

--Rosiestep (talk) 14:49, 30 July 2025 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

FA mentoring request

[edit]

Hi Gen. Quon, I'm planning to nominate Murder of Sara Sharif for FAC in the near future. I would really appreciate a mentor because I've never been through FAC before. The article is already a GA, and I'm not sure what else to do to improve it. I understand that this is a big ask, and any advice or assistance you can provide will be greatly appreciated. Thanks for your time, Grumpylawnchair (talk) 01:11, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chicago Edit-a-thon for September 18

[edit]

Hello! This is Luiysia again. Hope everyone had been having a great summer! Here are the details for our September bimonthly meetup.

We will be hosting this month's meetup at UIC's Wiki Week, at the September 18th edit-a-thon. It will take place at the Institute of Humanities from noon to 4 pm.

Here is the official meetup page, where you can add yourself as an attendee.

(If you would prefer not to see messages for Chicago meetups, go ahead and take yourself off this list.)

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:16, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red September 2025

[edit]
Women in Red | September 2025, Vol 11, Issue 9, Nos. 326, 327, 347, 348, 349
Recognized as the most active, topic-based WikiProject by human changes.


Online events:

Announcements:

Tip of the Month:

  • Researching historical women writers who used pseudonyms requires careful investigation across multiple sources, as many women adopted pen names to avoid gender bias and judgment (e.g., being labeled a bluestocking) and, ultimately, to get published.

Progress ("moving the needle"):

Other ways to participate:

--Rosiestep (talk) 23:53, 31 August 2025 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]