User talk:Sportsfan77777

Happy New Year!

Sportsfan77777,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (talk) 01:58, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Abishe (talk) 01:58, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you have nominated this for GA. I was looking it over with the idea of doing a review, but, it looks like I would have to get a copy of Tanner's biography. Before I do that, is there anyone else who is doing a review? Note, I have never done a GA review; the idea only occurred to me because I have been working on Paul Morphy, after getting a copy of Lawson's biography. Bruce leverett (talk) 02:34, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, silly question, I misunderstood the process. There can only be one reviewer. I will get the book, and when it arrives, I'll sign up to review the article. Bruce leverett (talk) 20:12, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bruce leverett! Generally, it isn't expected of a GA reviewer (or even an FA reviewer) to obtain a copy of the sources if they aren't easily accessible. If you are reviewing an article and have a question about the accuracy of a particular statement, you could ask the nominator for a clarification. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 05:44, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

First, I have my copy of the book and am reading it, but I have been busy (and at one point sick), and I don't want to start the clock on a 7-day process until I know that I can follow through promptly.

I am aware that one can do a GA or FA review without having all the sources at one's fingertips, and if a reviewer had to spend $48 for each such review he did, it could get expensive. But I am interested in the topic, and this seemed like as good an occasion as any to acquire a new chess book. Also, it seems to me that when an article depends heavily on one source, which this one does (as it should, since Tanner's book is now "the" reference on this topic), doing a review without that source is going to be unsatisfying for the reviewer. Bruce leverett (talk) 13:10, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, great! I just wanted to make sure you didn't feel forced to spend money. Also, just to let you know, the 7-day rule isn't strict. Many reviews can take longer, unless there really aren't a lot of comments. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 04:57, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've

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 Bruce leverett -- Bruce leverett (talk) 03:41, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

Hello Sportsfan77777:

WikiProject Women in Green is holding a month-long Good Article Editathon event in June 2023!

Running from June 1 to 30, 2023, WikiProject Women in Green (WiG) is hosting a Good Article (GA) editathon event – another Wildcard Edition! Participants are invited to work on nominating and/or reviewing GA submissions related to any and all women and women's works during the event period. Want to improve an article about a Bollywood actress? Go for it. A pioneering female climate scientist? Absolutely. An award-winning book or film by a woman? Yes! GA resources and one-on-one support will be provided by experienced GA editors, and participants will have the opportunity to receive a special WiG barnstar for their efforts.

We hope to see you there!

Alanna the Brave (talk)

You are receiving this message as a member of the WikiProject Women in Green. You can remove yourself from receiving notifications here.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:27, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Four years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:43, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Vera Menchik you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Vera Menchik for comments about the article, and Talk:Vera Menchik/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Bruce leverett -- Bruce leverett (talk) 22:41, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking on this article and driving it to GA. Among chess players, Menchik is Notable with a capital N. Looking at Wikipedia biographies of chess players, I would have to conclude that it's not easy to write a good one, but you have set a good example. Bruce leverett (talk) 03:18, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good article nominations | August 2023 Backlog Drive
August 2023 Backlog Drive: On 1 August, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here .
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year. (t · c) buidhe 05:15, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Kassa Korley has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not even a grand master. Fails

WP:GNG

. Not known for anything else.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be

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. Usedtobecool ☎️ 10:41, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Sportsfan77777:

WikiProject Women in Green is holding a month-long Good Article Edit-a-thon event in October 2023!

Running from October 1 to 31, 2023, WikiProject Women in Green (WiG) is hosting a Good Article (GA) edit-a-thon event with the theme Around the World in 31 Days! All experience levels welcome. Never worked on a GA project before? We'll teach you how to get started. Or maybe you're an old hand at GAs – we'd love to have you involved! Participants are invited to work on nominating and/or reviewing GA submissions related to women and women's works (e.g., books, films) during the event period. We hope to collectively cover article subjects from at least 31 countries (or broader international articles) by month's end. GA resources and one-on-one support will be provided by experienced GA editors, and participants will have the opportunity to earn a special WiG barnstar for their efforts.

We hope to see you there!

Alanna the Brave (talk) 00:53, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are receiving this message as a member of the WikiProject Women in Green. You can remove yourself from receiving notifications here.

A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 1 § Category:WikiProject X members on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Qwerfjkltalk 09:36, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the

2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:42, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

March 2024 GAN backlog drive

Good article nominations | March 2024 Backlog Drive
March 2024 Backlog Drive: On 1 March, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here or ask questions here.
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year.

(t · c) buidhe 02:39, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Women's Candidates Tournament, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Georgia.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:08, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good day,

I was wondering why you deleted the section about channel growth that i did in your latest edit on that page. Cause it is relevant objective information that is up to date, gives more details about the channel over the years and is referenced well.

The readdition and rephrasing about the 2nd most female channel in the past is perfect. As a non native english speaker however "have had" sounds a bit weird. Could it be possible to just change it to "had" or would that not be grammatically correct. The link reference you added there needs an update as well i think. When clicking on it it gives me "the page you are looking for isnt here"

with kind regards, Infrabel1 (talk) 18:36, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you can't add your own interpretation of a source, especially one that's not an RS. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 20:04, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Link rot on the page has been restored.

I would however like to point out that the reference after checking out the article is not a reliable source.

The reference (yahoo finance) itself uses a quote from another website (lineups.com) wich is not considered a reliable source.

Is there no other source you can use as a reference? Infrabel1 (talk) 14:20, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]