User talk:Sksatsuma

This is Sksatsuma's talk page, where you can send her messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

This talk page is archived. Threads older than 30 days may be archived, manually or automatically.
To browse the archives, press "Show" and select the month of posts you want to view.

2025 — Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Rev/del

I got your email. Looks like someone took care of that edit already. Thanks for taking care of notifying people about problems. Joyous! Noise! 21:55, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Joyous! I saw it was resolved elsewhere mere minutes after I sent the email! Admins working swiftly and effectively :) thanks for acknowledging! sk satsuma 00:16, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Request review of Madhupur Municipality

Created Madhupur Municipality in June 2025. Requesting page review. Thanks! Flashthomsom (talk) 06:48, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately I don't have new page reviewing permissions, I only review drafts via Articles for Creation. This page is the category of new page reviewers, so hopefully you can find someone there.

Just note there's a bit of a backlog on NPR so I can't guarantee someone will get to your article. sk satsuma 10:31, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 9 September 2025

News and notes: Wikimedia Foundation loses a round in court

UK Online Safety Act remains undefeated.

In the media: Congress probes, mayor whitewashed, AI stinks

Plus Wiki rules, Wiki Spin, and physicists get street cred!

Disinformation report: A guide for Congress

The price of Liberty is eternal vigilance.

Recent research: Minority-language Wikipedias, and Wikidata for botanists

And other new research findings.

Technology report: A new way to read Wikisource

Tis true: there's magic in the web of it.

Traffic report: Check out some new Weapons, weapon of choice

With the usual mix of war, death, super heroes, a belt, and Wednesday.

Essay: The one question

It's an easy one.

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:06, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your message

Hi Sksatsuma, thanks for your e-mail. I've passed it on to the Wikimedia office, for them to assess the situation and take whatever action they deem necessary. Thanks for your vigilance and swift action. Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:42, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@DoubleGrazing thank you for the swift action! Appreciate your efforts :) sk satsuma 10:37, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your approval of Greg Hayes (audio engineer)

Hi Sksatsuma - just wanted to let you know that there's a deletion discussion happening here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greg Hayes (audio_engineer). Thanks! Brucemyboy1212 (talk) 16:28, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know, it was a borderline case when I accepted it for review so will read through the discussion and, if appropriate, leave a vote or comment. sk satsuma 07:57, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question regarding Draft:Davi The Mavi

Hello sksatsuma, and thank you again for your review and approval of the Ronzoni Hines' article.

I am writing to you specifically because you are familiar with the context of these related artists. The draft for Ronzoni's brother, Draft:Davi The Mavi, is similarly well-sourced but has unfortunately been stuck in the AfC process with a series of contradictory reviews.

Crucially, the approved article for Ronzoni Hines now establishes Davi The Mavi as his notable brother, making the lack of a corresponding article a bit of an anomaly. Since you have demonstrated expertise in this area and are familiar with the types of reliable sources involved (Clash, Notion, Music Crowns etc.), I was hoping you might be willing to take a look at the draft when you have a moment? I believe it now overwhelmingly meets the notability criteria of WP:NMUSIC #1.

I fully understand that you are a volunteer and are under no obligation, but I would be very grateful for a fair and knowledgeable assessment to help resolve its status.

Thank you for your time and consideration. Musiclover1975uk (talk) 12:15, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning! Thanks for leaving me a message.

If I do get some time I may take a look, although due to the unique conflict of interest, I did consider reviewing this article but thought it would be best to leave to other reviewers.

It has been a bit of time though so I expect I can have a fresh look but won't make any promises! There is a growing backlog of drafts at AfC so no guarantees it will be soon.

Thanks for your contributions! sk satsuma 09:36, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciate it and thank you 🙏🏼 77.225.241.45 (talk) 15:14, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Confessions Part 2

Hey Satsuma! Before I submit another AfC for Draft:Confessions Part 2, I was just wondering what you thought of the current state of the article seeing as you were the one who reviewed my request. I've added more coverage from recent developments to the article, particularly the lead; they contain quite a bit more substance than the announcements / routine coverage that came beforehand, notably The Independent source. Does the draft now have enough content in it to justify another go at AfC, do you think? Thanks a lot, Yasslaywikia (talk) 18:09, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! Firstly it is a good draft and is well referenced. At first I was unsure on whether it will be accepted, as press release/announcement articles may fall under routine coverage and might not qualify for notability. However, looking a bit deeper, that guideline mainly focusses on events, whereas WP:FUTUREALBUM suggests that these kinds of articles are fully notable!

On that basis I would suggest re-submitting as the article has plenty of reliable and independent sources. I won't re-review myself as I'm unsure on what would be considered routine coverage for future albums, but I'm sure other reviewers will provide a suitable judgement on that.

Great work though and as always thanks for your contributions :) sk satsuma 23:24, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your feedback! I’ll resubmit the draft to AfC now. Yasslaywikia (talk) 06:50, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Editor experience invitation

Hi Sksatsuma. I'm looking for experienced editors to interview here. Feel free to pass if you're not interested. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 05:08, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oooh how interesting, I shall take a look! sk satsuma 09:10, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bloom EP

Hi,

I don’t know if you can help with this, but I couldn’t find any reviews that could have been in the article, but maybe I overlooked. Could you please help me find some reviews for Bloom?

Thanks,

Jibblesnark86 (talk) 18:29, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can't make any promises but if I find some free time I'll try to give you a hand! sk satsuma 10:13, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. Whenever you're willing, I'll be on the lookout. Hopefully you have time and that you find something. Thanks again.

Edit: I also put some more stuff that I found under a new "Critical Reception" section in the draft. Any feedback is fine if necessary, but you can enter what you find in that section as well.

Jibblesnark86 (talk) 21:03, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Want to resubmit draft

Hi,

I know you probably are/have been busy, but I went ahead and added one more piece of critical reception to the draft for Bloom. I think I have found enough critical reception for the draft, and I want to resubmit it. But I want to know what your opinion is first, since you had declined it, but I'm not asking for a pre-review. Just your opinion is fine.

I hope you are free to scan through it soon.

Thank you,

Jibblesnark86 (talk) 20:11, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, certainly an improvement you've done well! I think that this would be considererd borderline in terms of meeting the notability requirements for musical releases. There are sources that mention the EP, but these tend to be passing mentions, not in-depth. I would expect that for future reviewers, there may not be enough in-depth coverage that reviewers look for in the sources.

I have tried to help you out, but I do appreciate it is pretty light in terms of coverage for this EP specifically.

~~This link: [1], seems like a good source although I am not sure how reliable the scottish sun is considered.~~ I did check this, the Scottish Sun is a deprecated (unreliable) source so ignore this point!

I would suggest working to demonstrate notability further, and if you keep finding that your draft is not expected, the content can always be used in Capaldi's article, as the content is informative and encyclopedic!

Hopefully this points you in a good direction, I appreciate notabiilty requirements can sometimes feel like you're jumping through hoops, but we have these guidelines in place for good reason, although you do find in instances like this it can be quite borderline. sk satsuma 10:16, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your insight. I think I will try resubmitting the draft and see what happens now. If all else fails, then, like you said, to Capaldi's article it shall go. But fingers crossed!

Thanks again,

Jibblesnark86 (talk) 18:09, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]