User talk:Namelessposter

	The Original Barnstar
	Well done and thank you for getting good article standards! SSSB (talk) 19:32, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply ]

Thank you so much - I appreciate the kind words and your civility during our discussion earlier. Namelessposter (talk) 19:46, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

John Hogan (motorsport executive), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as B-Class, which is recorded on its

grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You may also consider nominating a fact from the article within the next 7 days to appear on the Main Page's "Did you know" section

.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now

create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation

if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to

create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation

.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:25, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! It’s so kind of you to review my first article. I really appreciate it. Namelessposter (talk) 14:13, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

		The NBA WikiProject Barnstar
		This is in recognition of all of your hard work improving the Left guide (talk) 23:43, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply ]

Thank you! Namelessposter (talk) 23:53, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Muboshgu, thanks for letting me know. I've made some edits - please let me know if they're to your liking. Thanks for reviewing! Namelessposter (talk) 04:39, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey again, just a heads-up the DYK nom ran into a roadblock due to the article having too many tweets. Is this something you might be willing/able to help fix? If not, the easy way out would be to simply gut the Twitter-cited content from the article. Please let me know either way. Best,

Thanks for the heads-up. I found replacement sources for most of it, but had to take out two bits of info. If you can find sources to bring them back, that would be great. Namelessposter (talk) 14:51, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I personally think those two bits are rather trivial, but spent some time searching anyways and came up empty. Thanks for helping, and for keeping me posted. Best,

Left guide (talk) 13:09, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply

]

Thank you for trying, anyhow. Sorry nothing turned up. Take care! Namelessposter (talk) 15:29, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On

6 March 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article François Guiter, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a former French secret-service agent was responsible for seven out of the 26 Formula One drivers qualifying for the 1980 South African Grand Prix being French? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/François Guiter. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, François Guiter), 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 suggest it on the Did you know talk page

.

1=Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:02, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On

10 March 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article John Hogan (motorsport executive), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that tobacco brands like Marlboro, led by John Hogan (pictured), turned Formula One into a global sport because F1 cars evaded European tobacco advertising restrictions? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/John Hogan (motorsport executive). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, John Hogan (motorsport executive)), 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 suggest it on the Did you know talk page

.

RoySmith (talk) 00:02, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Spinster300 was:

This submission reads more like an

neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner

.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Madring and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and
  may be deleted
  .
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Spinster300 (talk) 11:54, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Namelessposter! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Spinster300 (talk) 11:54, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Amazing work on the article! I haven't had the chance to read through the whole thing, but it looks really good. I've barely finished season 1, but I may watch the film regardless at some point in the near future. I won't promise to do a GA review, as I don't have much time or energy, but I do hope your nomination goes well and it doesn't take long for someone to pick it up. PanagiotisZois (talk) 13:30, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’m so glad you enjoyed the article! But oh dear oh dear - I really hope the article didn’t spoil the big reveal. No worries about the GA review, it will happen when it happens. Namelessposter (talk) 14:13, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, don't worry it. XD I actually started the show a few months ago, but for a couple of reasons, ended up putting it on hold and then decided to spoil the big reveal for myself. Admittedly, not something I usually do, but meh. Just because you know how the story plays out doesn't mean you still can't enjoy it. And there is a difference between reading a recap of a story, versus actually watching it. If you don't mind, one small suggestion I have to offer is to go through the "Plot" section again. Having just a single sentence / line acting as its own paragraph is discouraged. I understand that given the somewhat confusing plot of Twin Peaks, it may be best to separate such things, but it may cause issue during the GAR; or FAC if you decide to go there. PanagiotisZois (talk) 16:27, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I've heard that before (no one-sentence paragraphs) on a different review when I was saving an article from GAR. I'll see what I can do. I think there is only one such paragraph but you're saying it applies to one-line paragraphs too? That kind of depends on your screen size, no?

Candidly, I wonder whether FWWM is the version of Twin Peaks for people who don't especially love seasons 1/2, so if you think you'd prefer FWWM, you can probably skip episodes 10-21 in season 2 as they have minimal relevance to either FWWM or S3. (I watched all of S2 anyway, and the last six or so episodes have some nice moments, but in my mind it's like an extended Easter Egg or spin-off.) I do think episodes 1-7 from S2 have aged very well, probably better than S1. You also have to watch episodes 8, 9, and 22 to make FWWM comprehensible, but there's already a noticeable drop-off in quality after episode 7 that really begins to show once the plotlines from episodes 1-7 have run out. Namelessposter (talk) 16:57, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]