User talk:Sock

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

This editor is a
Master Editor
and is entitled to display this Platinum
Editor Star.

Template:Did you know nominations/Blackened (song)

[edit]

The article was created from a redirect on March 8, 2025, as proven by this revision. And since the nomination was made only 3 days after that date, it is within the nomination range. This is an erroneous close and I request that you re-open the nomination. λ NegativeMP1 19:37, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies for that, I'll absolutely reopen the nomination! I foolishly relied on the DYK check tool to check for requirements, and it didn't detect your recent expansion for whatever reason. This was my mistake, but I would also encourage you to include a note for future DYK nominations if they're created from a redirect, was I'm sure I'm not the only person to make that gaffe. Sock (tock talk) 19:42, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, thank you reopening it! I'll be sure to leave a note in the future for any articles I create from a redirect and link the revision as well. λ NegativeMP1 19:47, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for understanding, and I'm sorry again for the gaffe. I'm just starting the review, but I can already tell you've done a lot of great work! Sock (tock talk) 19:48, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@NegativeMP1: Hello again! I just wanted to check in and let you know I'm still going through the article and vetting everything. It's been a busy couple of days at work so it's taking longer than expected, but I've got a Google doc working and should be able to wrap everything up tomorrow. Thanks for your patience! Sock (tock talk) 22:19, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Temporary (album), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Richard Russell.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:58, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RSD LLM usage

[edit]

Hi Sock - hope you are well.

As we previously worked together on some of the BC,NR articles, I'd hopefully like to request a second opinion on something I thought was quite strange. I came across the Record Store Day article in my random browsing across WP and it seems like most of it has been replaced with LLM style writing with barely any sources. While I have no concrete proof, I've listed some of my rationale in this talk page message and would like to know what you think or what actions would be in order. Thank you! Rambley (talk) 09:06, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very much sharing your sentiment here. While I've definitely done my fair share of hefty single edits, this one is absolutely gargantuan and the complete lack of wikilinks sticks out as a glaring red flag. Unsourced additions are pretty common so that isn't too strange on its own, but it becomes especially odd after looking at one of that editor's other expansive changes that includes several links and citations for almost everything they added.
I'll pop a message over there and ping the editor so they have the avenue to own up if they did use ChatGPT or to defend themselves if they didn't. That whole history section is definitely gonna require a huge amount of cleanup and research no matter what, so that'll be something we have to consider as well. Sock (tock talk) 14:06, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

A redirect or redirects you have created has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 April 23 § acronymception time babyyyyy until a consensus is reached. consarn (prison phone) (crime record) 20:10, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rolling Stones Year-End Song Charts

[edit]

Hi Sock,

I noticed you were a contributor to the entry "Rolling Stone Charts." I'm reaching out to you in desperation. Years ago, I printed PDFs of all the Rolling Stones Top 100 song charts, but I lost them all in a recent hard drive crash. I'd at least like to get back their 2020 year-end song chart. I don't suppose you downloaded that 2020 year-end chart? I can access the first page through archive.org, but you had to load multiple pages with the Rolling Stone charts, and it looks like only the first page was crawled:

https://web.archive.org/web/20210411163610/https://www.rollingstone.com/charts/songs/year-end/

I'm sure my quest is in vain, but I thought I would inquire.

Thank you, superbu (talk) 08:19, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I didn't, I'm sorry! Best of luck on your quest. Sock (tock talk) 16:11, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alcatraz Prison

[edit]

How did I incorrectly edit my tag, I'm not great at web stuff. Upert (talk) 09:29, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I totally understand! If you click here to view your revision, it only included part of your citation and formatting, which made it display like this: url=https://www.bizzbuzz.news/international/trump-orders-reopening-of-alcatraz-prison-to-detain-violent-offenders-and-immigration-detainees-1360798}}</ref>
You were missing the opening <ref> and citation template, which completely broke your citation and your link. When you're editing, you should see a "Cite" drop-down above the text. If you click that, you'll get a "Templates" drop-down where you'll see cite web, cite news, cite book, and cite journal. Clicking those will open a pop-up that lets you input information from your source, including the author name, page title, URL, publisher, access/publication date, and so on. Once you've entered that information, it automatically formats your source to look like this.
Last Name, First Name (May 6, 2025). "Title". Source. Retrieved May 6, 2025.
I know that's a lot of information to throw at you, so I'd encourage you to check out WP:CITE for a more thorough (and much better constructed) walkthrough of the process. However, I want to note restoring that edit even with an appropriately formatted citation will almost certainly result in another reversion. BizzBuzz is not a notable publication, and even if it was, a single source is not enough to make such a sweeping claim in the lead of an article.
Let me know if you have any other questions and I'll happily answer them to the best of my ability! Sock (tock talk) 16:20, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]