This should not be redirected to moksha, which is Liberation. That's different than Enlightenment. See the deletion discussion, which determined that the word "enlightenment" in academic sources can only refer to Enlightenment in Buddhism or Kevala Jnana in Jainism. Buddhists clearly distinguish bodhi from moksha, and refer to the latter as "personal liberation", a state short of Englightenment. Skyerise ( talk) 22:25, 2 January 2024 (UTC) reply

With respect, your statements here are way too technical in this situation The simple meaning is plainly what was intended in the quoted statement. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 07:08, 3 January 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Rice you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Rice for comments about the article, and Talk:Rice/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", 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 at 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 RecycledPixels -- RecycledPixels ( talk) 20:04, 4 January 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Húrin you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Húrin for comments about the article, and Talk:Húrin/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", 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 at 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 Frzzl -- Frzzl ( talk) 20:21, 4 January 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Ant mimicry you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Ant mimicry for comments about the article, and Talk:Ant mimicry/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", 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 at 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 AryKun -- AryKun ( talk) 20:22, 4 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Many congratulations on your 3 GAs in one day!  Frzzl   talk;  contribs  20:49, 4 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Yes, one waits for months and then 3 come along at once, like London Buses all in a row! Many thanks, Chiswick Chap ( talk) 20:52, 4 January 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Languages constructed by J. R. R. Tolkien you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Languages constructed by J. R. R. Tolkien for comments about the article, and Talk:Languages constructed by J. R. R. Tolkien/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", 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 at 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 Generalissima -- Generalissima ( talk) 19:23, 5 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Since these animals lack a common ancestor and are polyphyletic, I suppose you can combine the cladograms of the four extant families. Considering that this group came together due to a shared ecological niche, their evolutionary histories are not necessarily the same. 20 upper ( talk) 12:14, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply

20 upper: I'll draw a tree. Obviously there are different clades of MHs within it. But this only covers the extant 1/4 of the story. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 13:31, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Not sure how you get to "nine extant species", there seem to be 14 here. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 14:01, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply

I didn't come up with it; Owen-Smith did. The key definition is animals that exceed 1 metric ton in body mass, and apparently only 9 terrestrial herbivores meet this criterion. 20 upper ( talk) 15:02, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply

20 upper: Your Pleistocene tree is something like this, but I'd need more detail of the species (e.g. what Cingulata? what Pilosa? what Perissodactyls? what Artiodactyls?) to fill it out a bit better:

Thanks for the help. For Cetartiodactyla: camels, bovids, and, of course, hippos. Cingula; glyptodonts. Pilosa, giant sloths. Perissodactyla; rhinos. Proboscidea, elephants & similar species, and Notoungulata, toxodonts. 20 upper ( talk) 15:02, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply

20 upper: OK, tweaked. You can fill in the nos. of spp in each case as the "7 spp" for Artiodactyls don't show what goes where.

20 upper: Here's the tree for the Campanian (late Cretaceous). There are plenty of images available. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 10:15, 10 January 2024 (UTC) reply

A Permian MH among the Pareiasaurs:

The article Tove Jansson you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Tove Jansson for comments about the article, and Talk:Tove Jansson/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", 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 at 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 Ljleppan -- Ljleppan ( talk) 11:22, 12 January 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Translation of The Lord of the Rings into Swedish you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Translation of The Lord of the Rings into Swedish for comments about the article, and Talk:Translation of The Lord of the Rings into Swedish/GA2 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", 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 at 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 Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth ( talk) 14:41, 17 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Category:Purported ancient yoga texts has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason ( talk) 15:50, 20 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Smasongarrison: thanks for letting me know. You should however have checked the article to see that the category is definitely not "subjective", indeed impeccably cited, before firing the blunderbuss. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 16:07, 20 January 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Anopheles you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Anopheles for comments about the article, and Talk:Anopheles/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", 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 at 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 AryKun -- AryKun ( talk) 14:42, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Hello, I was about to sign up to review the article you nominated, Mental illness in Middle-earth, but from just a cursory view, I see there are some big gaps that I feel would best be fixed so that it does not get a quick fail.

• Include whatever intentionality Tolkien may have had to infuse his books with depictions of mental illness
  • Include Tolkien's knowledge of psychology; for example, other articles on wikipedia discuss his interest in Jungian psychology
    • Done.
  • Include personal experiences (if applicable, I admit I am no expert on Tolkien) that Tolkien may have had with mental illness (his own experience of PTSD?)
    • Done.

• Epilepsy is considered a neurological disorder, not a mental-illness. That said, might be worth a mention of other specific medical conditions that are portrayed accurately in his books
  • Removed epilepsy, not discussed in text. Not sure there are other conditions to mention.

• Consider broadening the article to "mental-illnesses depicted in the works of Tolkien", or something along those lines. I'm going to take a guess (especially considering the titles of some of the references) that there are works by Tolkien that depict mental illness.
  • Not really, no. He certainly didn't explicitly write on that topic, but as the article says, people have read it into The Lord of the Rings in particular.

• Perhaps include the significance of this topic, such as cultural impact of potentially reducing (or reinforcing) stigma against mental illness, or examples of people with mental illness who said that they could relate to the characters.
  • Not sure about that.

Apologies that I did not read this article in depth, so perhaps some of these things are already there that I overlooked. And some of these items are more wish-listy, and may not constitute a fail if not present. I look forward to reading more into this in the future! Thanks for your work. Tea with toast (話) 05:18, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Tea with toast -- well, I've done most of what you suggest. Let me know if you think this is now ready for GA. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 16:49, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Winchester College football you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Winchester College football for comments about the article, and Talk:Winchester College football/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 PCN02WPS -- PCN02WPS ( talk) 17:41, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply

You thanked me on my Anopheles edit at https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Anopheles&diff=1198618074&oldid=1198240238 - however, such small edits are considered cosmetic edits and are not encouraged if they are done en masse, see the discussion at User_talk:Maxim_Masiutin#CiteByBot on my Talk page - you can commend there if you wish, for example, if you have on opinion on whether all "cite" templates should be lowercase or, vice versa, they should start with an uppercase letter {{Cite.... Anyway, thank you for your appreciation, this is very important for me, and it is a big pleasure for me when people thank me for my edits. By the way, I nominated a few articles on GA, and they stay for months, there are no reviewers for them :-(((

Can you please help me when you have time and select one article you like most and that you think is most suitable for GA and review?

Thank you again! Maxim Masiutin ( talk) 18:56, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply

I don't quite know why the Tove Jansson nomination attracted so much heat, but it is true that the people involved in DYK have grown a little tired of being constantly shouted at because of witty and ambiguous hooks that other people consider un-encyclopedic: see this one for one I promoted that was really set upon at WP:ERRORS recently. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 23:06, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply

How interesting. It is clearly a cultural change, either generational or perhaps a widening from native speaker to multinational. I don't think it'll prove to be reversible. Philosophically, Chiswick Chap ( talk) 03:03, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Minas Tirith you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Minas Tirith for comments about the article, and Talk:Minas Tirith/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 Ligaturama -- Ligaturama ( talk) 13:22, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Barley you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Barley for comments about the article, and Talk:Barley/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 Bruxton -- Bruxton ( talk) 22:03, 1 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Wondering if you would like to create a DYK for this article? If you do I have a quid pro quo to donate. I can do the nomination myself if you like. I am familiar with all of the procedures there. Also I am watching a Crusader show and The Barley Barn was discussed which made me think of this article. Bruxton ( talk) 03:01, 3 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Bruxton: That would be really nice, thank you! Chiswick Chap ( talk) 06:18, 3 February 2024 (UTC) reply

The Barley as money is intriguing - Mesopotamia's first currency. Bruxton ( talk) 03:17, 3 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Yes, maybe we should mention it alongside the neasurement usage. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 06:21, 3 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Added. And the Barley Barn into the, er, Bargain. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 11:51, 3 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the review on that holdout business. I nominated the article and you can participate there or propose hooks. Template:Did you know nominations/Barley. In writing hooks I see that one citation may need to be adjusted. #72 in the Beer, whisky, and soft drinks section. I could not find whiskey in the source. In a search, I did find this passing mention of Japanese whiskey in Magazine. Well I am on to the next one. Have a great weekend. Bruxton ( talk) 16:48, 3 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Many thanks. The whisky text had just got separated from its source; I've repeated the McGee ref. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 16:54, 3 February 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Tolkien's impact on fantasy you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Tolkien's impact on fantasy for comments about the article, and Talk:Tolkien's impact on fantasy/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 Tea with toast -- Tea with toast ( talk) 01:03, 5 February 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Forests in Middle-earth you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Forests in Middle-earth for comments about the article, and Talk:Forests in Middle-earth/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 Seltaeb Eht -- Seltaeb Eht ( talk) 19:24, 6 February 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Chicken you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Chicken for comments about the article, and Talk:Chicken/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 DocZach -- DocZach ( talk) 16:04, 7 February 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Valinor you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Valinor for comments about the article, and Talk:Valinor/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 TompaDompa -- TompaDompa ( talk) 19:21, 7 February 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Ian Holm you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Ian Holm for comments about the article, and Talk:Ian Holm/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 BennyOnTheLoose -- BennyOnTheLoose ( talk) 14:23, 8 February 2024 (UTC) reply

— Ganesha811 ( talk) 12:02, 8 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Hello! I've temporarily removed the DYK hook for barley because of a source issue. I'm not convinced that the source given in the article, Timothy F. Peterson's Debauchery of Currency, is a reliable source. Peterson does not appear to be an academic - he's a crypto promoter. I don't doubt that the information is accurate, but a more reliable academic source should be swapped into the article for the sentence that supports the hook ("In ancient Mesopotamia...shekel"). @ LlywelynII, tagging you as reviewer as well. Thanks! — Ganesha811 ( talk) 16:44, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Template:Did you know nominations/Barley < Link to the DYKN. —  LlywelynII 19:09, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Upon cursory googling, there's this rather thorough treatment:

* {{citation |last=Powell |first=Marvin A. |jstor=3632646 |contribution=Money in the Orient: Money in Mesopotamia |title=Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient |date=1996 |volume=39 |issue=3 |pp=224-242 |publisher=Brill |location=Leiden }}.

@ Ganesha811: Any issues with that one? ChisCha: Assuming there aren't, just add that into the #Sources section and {{sfnp|Powell|1996}} in place of the cryptobro. Remove the "shekel" part since it's the wrong language in the wrong place at the wrong time. —  LlywelynII 19:18, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

@ Ganesha811: I've replaced the citation per this discussion. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 09:44, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Thanks to you both - I've restored the hook and it should be on the front page in the next couple days! — Ganesha811 ( talk) 13:21, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi Chap, Some headmasters taught as teachers before they became headmasters. Sabben-Clare was a teacher at Winchester, then became a headmaster, so shouldn't he feature in both categories, unlike those headmasters who were appointed from elsewhere straight into the top job? Thanks, Ericoides ( talk) 14:58, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Thanks for discussing. No, every headmaster is part of the teaching profession, and most actually teach while being head, too. Being a senior teacher and a junior teacher at different times still makes you a teacher. All the best, Chiswick Chap ( talk) 15:00, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply

OK, I've undone the other three I put into that cat so it's consistent. Ericoides ( talk) 15:09, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Mosquito you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Mosquito for comments about the article, and Talk:Mosquito/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 20 upper -- 20 upper ( talk) 20:43, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply

— Ganesha811 ( talk) 00:02, 13 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Thanks for getting so many basic articles up to GA status. I'm glad someone nominated this one for a DYK and I hope you'll do more of these to bring all of your great work to the masses. —  AjaxSmack  23:11, 13 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Many thanks for the kind words. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 05:41, 14 February 2024 (UTC) reply

— Ganesha811 ( talk) 00:03, 13 February 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Cereal you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Cereal for comments about the article, and Talk:Cereal/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 Bruxton -- Bruxton ( talk) 23:43, 15 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the GA review. It was my first GA. I will be able to do more GA reviews during the backlog drive and I want to review one of your nominations. Have a great week. Lightburst ( talk) 17:57, 26 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Lightburst: My pleasure! Well done, and looking forward to whatever you do. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 18:50, 26 February 2024 (UTC) reply

		The Good Article Rescue Barnstar
		This is presented to you by the GAR process in recognition of your sterling work in helping Invasive species retain its Good Article status. Please feel free to display the GA icon on your userpage. Keep up the good work! ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 00:41, 1 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Thank you, that's very kind of you! Chiswick Chap ( talk) 04:49, 1 March 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Eusociality you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Eusociality for comments about the article, and Talk:Eusociality/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 Wolverine XI -- Wolverine XI ( talk) 17:21, 2 March 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Barnacle you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Barnacle for comments about the article, and Talk:Barnacle/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 Lightburst -- Lightburst ( talk) 00:43, 3 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Comment post GA review. I listed this under GA invertebrates. I notice that the article does not seem to mention that they are invertebrates. Maybe you should think about adding it. Thanks for allowing me to review the article, it was a pleasure. Lightburst ( talk) 00:36, 3 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Only one more comment about the image, and I think Corey Olsen is a pass! Averageuntitleduser ( talk) 12:40, 3 March 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Corey Olsen you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Corey Olsen for comments about the article, and Talk:Corey Olsen/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 Averageuntitleduser -- Averageuntitleduser ( talk) 13:25, 3 March 2024 (UTC) reply

I saw your userpage and holy moly; I'm very impressed. You've actually turn most of the important articles in a decent shape/GA. You and Little Jerry. I was wondering if you're gonna work Honey badger or Komodo dragon soon, but anyway take care of yourself/your health. 2001:4455:3AA:B000:1023:CFC1:1024:132A ( talk) 12:31, 4 March 2024 (UTC) reply

That's very kind of you. I very rarely work on individual species articles - there are perhaps a million of them: and I prefer to try to cover major groups so that we have a sensible starting-point for looking at the tree of life. But who knows, I might give it a go sometime. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 12:35, 4 March 2024 (UTC) reply

I mean there are millions of individual species, but there are quite few popular articles (like I mentioned above) that have high page views. But, yeah. I'm just amazed at your work and thanks for making those articles look good. 2001:4455:3AA:B000:1023:CFC1:1024:132A ( talk) 12:51, 4 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Thanks. Yes, importance can be measured by views, or in other ways. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 13:48, 4 March 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Pig you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Pig for comments about the article, and Talk:Pig/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 Wolverine XI -- Wolverine XI ( talk) 21:25, 4 March 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Elijah Wood you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Elijah Wood for comments about the article, and Talk:Elijah Wood/GA2 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 Cocobb8 -- Cocobb8 ( talk) 23:05, 4 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Hello, thank you for fixing the second paragraph in the lead, I had struggled with how to rewrite it because Wood's post-LotR career has been so varied. I hope you didn't mind that I made a minor change to the summary of the child acting phase of his career. The previous GAN also asked for the Lord of the Rings section to be expanded. More information has been added since, but I wanted to ask if you were aware of any other details that could be added? Best, Lord Theoden ( talk) 04:46, 5 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Many thanks. I think we've got it about right, but I'm aware that actor's careers need constant updating! Happy editing. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 05:22, 5 March 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Marguerite Agniel you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Marguerite Agniel for comments about the article, and Talk:Marguerite Agniel/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 Lightburst -- Lightburst ( talk) 15:43, 5 March 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Ancestry as guide to character in Tolkien's legendarium you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Ancestry as guide to character in Tolkien's legendarium for comments about the article, and Talk:Ancestry as guide to character in Tolkien's legendarium/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 ZombiUwU -- ZombiUwU ( talk) 17:44, 7 March 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Economy of Middle-earth you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Economy of Middle-earth for comments about the article, and Talk:Economy of Middle-earth/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 Reidgreg -- Reidgreg ( talk) 11:59, 9 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Hello again, are you interested in nominating this article for Did You Know as well? I was thinking Wood's Frodo audition tape and other career as a disc jockey would both make good hooks. Were there any others you had in mind? Lord Theoden ( talk) 05:48, 6 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Go for it! Chiswick Chap ( talk) 06:16, 6 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Can you help me with this section? Writing about an animal's significance in human culture is my weakest point. Wolverine XI ^{( den • 🐾)} 03:44, 8 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Wolverine XI - it doesn't seem too bad, barring a quote that needs a ref beside it. It seems a reasonable length, too. I've copy-edited very slightly. What is your concern about the section? Chiswick Chap ( talk) 04:11, 8 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Per this peer review. I'm trying to make this section FA quality, and I'm struggling to do so. You've written FAs before, so I was hoping you'd help. Wolverine XI ^{( den • 🐾)} 04:26, 8 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Wolverine XI: Aha. My feelings on FAC are ... mixed. The GA principle is to cover "the main points" so as to create a decent article, reliably cited. Its goal, my goal, is to achieve decent coverage across the encyclopedia (only 6 million articles to go, then...). GAN used not to care very much about itsy-bitsy details like formatting, ref style, parameters and all such apparatus: it's steadily getting more FAC-like, which is a shame. FAC has the theory that perfection is possible within the confines of a small space, and that in that little arena the article should be "comprehensive", covering all the facts there completely and with perfect, symmetric, regular beauty like a polished crystal. No topic of any substantial size is like that; no article that has been edited by many hands over many years is remotely like that; and the amount of work needed to get an article like that is forbiddingly large, rising steeply with the complexity of the topic. Needless to say, there is no hope whatsoever of getting millions of articles that have been messed about with by the great unwashed into this pristine state within finite human lifetimes.

The easiest way — perhaps the only sane way — to get an article through this particular needle's eye is to start by creating an article on a small but curious topic, using a strictly enforced format for everything per the MOS and one's personal taste, and to write the whole thing as a single coherent draft. Then one goes away and thinks about it for a while, and illustrates it as crisply as possible from Commons or by taking photos, drawing diagrams, or structuring tables to make the thing's single meaning as plain as possible. Then one carefully checks and polishes every single sentence, every single citation until one is heartily sick of the things. Then one waits awhile or converses with colleagues about the article. Then it's FAC, complete with all the usual stress responses, until with good fortune, wearing out two or three sets of perfectly good worry beads, and a following wind, the thing gets its little bronze star.

This does not mean that I am totally against FAC, but it does go with a certain reluctance to spend much time there. All the best, Chiswick Chap ( talk) 10:18, 9 March 2024 (UTC) reply

I see writing an FA as being akin to the male rite of passage. Not everyone has the ability to write FAs. The GA procedure is just one of many processes that must be completed prior to FAC. Writing an FA is labor-intensive, and it is quite emotional to see it Featured and visible to the public on the main page. Since Wikipedia revolves around the FAC procedure, I'm afraid I'll have to join the FA community. One of the main reasons I've been editing Wikipedia since 2022 is to write a ton of FAs. I find it a little disappointing that you feel that way about FAC. Wolverine XI ^{( den • 🐾)} 12:07, 9 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Wolverine XI: Sorry to hear that; there's no reason really, as it's a personal choice for everyone. My take is that one FA costs about as much work as 10-30 GAs, and I'd rather see that many GAs improving the encyclopedia; more than that, I'd rather see big complex articles on knotty subjects like Animal and Plant taken to GA than a few articles on easier topics dragged effortfully to FA. By the same token, I don't see GA as a stepping-stone to anything, but as the goal in itself, a decent article in a decent encyclopedia. As you say, it's not for everyone; getting major articles through GAN isn't easy either. I don't know about rites of passage, that's very much a personal feeling; some people unwisely see getting the Admin mop as the same thing. I've tried FAC and know how to do it but it takes a lot to get me to do it for a topic, there has to be a pretty good reason. That doesn't stop me from helping out here and there, or even going for it hell-for-leather now and again. All the best, Chiswick Chap ( talk) 12:15, 9 March 2024 (UTC) reply

To truly have an impact on Wikipedia—and especially on articles about animals—I feel compelled to write FAs. I think we can work on the chimpanzee article after I finish with narwhal? They are our closest living relatives, and they deserve the best article possible. Imagine the impact on global opinion and the amount of knowledge that will be spread about this amazing species after we feature the chimpanzee article. As things stand in its GA-state, I don't see anyone learning everything there is to know about chimps. Wolverine XI ^{( den • 🐾)} 12:52, 9 March 2024 (UTC) reply

A great vision. Chimpanzee is certainly a big subject; it might make sense to start on Bonobo perhaps. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 12:55, 9 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Why not both? I work on bonobo and we co-nominate chimpanzee? Wolverine XI ^{( den • 🐾)} 13:14, 9 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi! So, while working on those livestock articles this week, I noticed several low-traffic, low-quality sub-articles which I think can be comfortably merged into more topic-specific articles, making that material more widely-viewed and easier to maintain. However, I am not sure of the best way to go about it as far as the procedure is concerned. Merging articles unilaterally, without a discussion, seems frowned upon, but a lot of those articles seem too obscure to attract any input during a merger discussion over a reasonable timeframe. Worse, the relevant WikiProjects, like Environment and Agriculture, also seem to be completely lacking in a core of users who could be expected to respond when a request for comment is posted to the WP talk page. Do you have any suggestions here? InformationToKnowledge ( talk) 15:01, 10 March 2024 (UTC) reply

InformationToKnowledge: If articles are short, practically uncited, and at best marginally notable, then being bold and merging is pretty much the best solution. If they're more defensible, then discussion is generally essential, as editing can improve articles with additional sources. Rumen, for instance, is not well-cited but is definitely notable (22 million ghits; it gets some 200 views per day, 74,000 per year, which is pretty respectable: but even articles which get many fewer than this may be more than notable (measured by scientific paper count, for instance)), and is already covered in enough detail that it would not fit decently into Cattle (but would look like a WP:COATRACK) and merging would be destructive. Which articles did you have in mind? Chiswick Chap ( talk) 15:05, 10 March 2024 (UTC) reply

These are the ones I spotted for now.

1) Intensive pig farming -> pig farming (and some parts of the article likely moved to the almost wholly-uncited section in Intensive animal farming)

2) Bovine genome database -> Bovine genome

3) Environmental impact of pig farming -> Environmental impacts of animal agriculture (a lot of content is poorly cited and will likely be culled outright before the merge)

4) Environmental impact of cattle production (the sub-article you split away) -> also to Environmental impacts of animal agriculture

For the last one, I started a merger discussion last week, but predictably, no-one has responded to it. InformationToKnowledge ( talk) 16:02, 10 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Those seem to make sense. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 16:05, 10 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi, about a month ago there was a discussion on pl wiki about putting the translation of the article you've co-created to "Did you know" section. One of the biology experts - Carabus has made a lot of effort to review it all and made a lot of suggestions. One of them was to delete the whole "Myrmecophily" section, because - in his words - "it's unrelated to the topic". Here's the link for the discussion, I'm sending you it because you might be curious about it and it might also help make en wiki better, as this article has been awarded with Good Article title (it's all in Polish, but you can use some tools like Google Translation to get even more than a brief overview about what's happening there): https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikiprojekt:Czy_wiesz/propozycje/2024-02/Myrmekomorfia

There's yet another discussion pending on pl wiki (about making it "Good Article'd"), but I'm waiting for the results: https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Propozycje_do_Dobrych_Artyku%C5%82%C3%B3w/Myrmekomorfia.

Thanks for reading this block of text, regards Karol739 ( talk) 16:12, 11 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Many thanks. Myrmecophily is certainly mimicry of ants. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 16:21, 11 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Could you please elaborate? He has written that "he wouldn't name myrmecomorphical larvae of Lycaenidae or Myrmecophilidae" and stated it's "confusion of concepts". He also said something about Wassmannian mimicry in those species, yet "not all species have it".

(source of Carabus's message I cite: https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikiprojekt:Czy_wiesz/propozycje/2024-02/Myrmekomorfia)

I will definitely link this conversation to his discussion page, as it's really interesting for entomologists.

Thanks for clearing it out in advance, Karol739 ( talk) 16:28, 11 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Well, it's always possible that "ant mimicry" is broader than "myrmecophily", and the Polish definition may be narrower, I don't know. The Lycaenid caterpillars of course do not visually resemble ants, so the mimicry is by other means, such as chemical. To me that is still definitely "myrmecophily" but no doubt scientists use different definitions too. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 16:35, 11 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Do you have any scientific articles on that topic? I couldn't find it while reviewing sources you've cited, it might be really helpful to put it in both pl and en wiki versions of the article. Karol739 ( talk) 16:38, 11 March 2024 (UTC) reply

What topic? But do note that myrmecophily is zoo-Greek "ant-loving", implying "ant mimicry", whereas "myrmecomorphy" is zoo-Greek for "ant-shaped", implying physical structure. Perhaps that is the issue over at PL wiki. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 16:43, 11 March 2024 (UTC) reply

It might be, as in Poland we don't have any term for "ant mimicry". It might be translated directly to "mimikra mrówcza", but it's not really correct, as it's not really used. That's why I named the article "Myrmekomorfia", which is translated simply to "Myrmecomorphy". As myrmecomorphy is not myrmecophily, it makes sense now. Thanks! Karol739 ( talk) 16:46, 11 March 2024 (UTC) reply

It's semi-interesting, but I wonder what "Eowyn as negative animus" is supposed to mean?? AnonMoos ( talk) 20:02, 12 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Ours not to reason why, it's a standard item in Jungian psychoanalysis, and reliably cited. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 20:11, 12 March 2024 (UTC) reply

OK, but it doesn't seem to make much sense. AnonMoos ( talk) 20:12, 12 March 2024 (UTC) reply

There's plenty on the subject on the web, e.g. Jungian Psychology Series: The Anima and Animus. The concepts are I think clear and readily grasped: Jung was not a woolly new-ager but a clinician with a sharp mind. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 20:15, 12 March 2024 (UTC) reply

P.S. File:Beowulf Tribes.svg is pretty helpful. AnonMoos ( talk) 20:14, 12 March 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Maize you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Maize for comments about the article, and Talk:Maize/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 AryKun -- AryKun ( talk) 10:01, 13 March 2024 (UTC) reply

	The Original Barnstar
	For all your work, help and patience in the GA review of Jo Clifford. Thank you! GnocchiFan ( talk) 12:12, 13 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Thank you, that's very kind of you. I'm glad you're pleased with the result, and hope you'll pick an article from the GAN queue to review. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 12:14, 13 March 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Literary devices in The Lord of the Rings you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Literary devices in The Lord of the Rings for comments about the article, and Talk:Literary devices in The Lord of the Rings/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 CipherSleuth -- CipherSleuth ( talk) 16:23, 16 March 2024 (UTC) reply

I don't know why you didn't just refer me directly to the "Unfinished Tales" book, instead of to a 1-megabyte PDF file of some dude ruminating about Buddhism. Of course, if you had done so, it would have been evident that the reference was to the "Galadriel and Celeborn" section, which is the most tangled and sometimes self-contradictory part of Tolkien's whole framework. As Christopher Tolkien made clear, JRR Tolkien changed his mind a number of times about some things connected to Galadriel and Celeborn. If it were me, I would definitely not connect Narya to Gil-galad based on anything in that section of the "Unfinished Tales" book. AnonMoos ( talk) 19:12, 16 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Well, staying with the facts, we clearly agree that Gil-galad is at most a temporary ring-bearer in a UT draft; and that there is no great need to have him in the diagram. I've removed him. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 11:36, 17 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Thank you, I think that's best... AnonMoos ( talk) 11:37, 17 March 2024 (UTC) reply

I just realized that you're the same person I previously tangled with over the worthless and useless "Aphrodite"[sic] gibberish on Paganism in Middle-earth (when Roman Catholic influence is a far simpler and more natural explanation), as well as changes to "Basic constituent structure analysis English sentence.svg". You undoubtedly have knowledge and technical skills in certain areas, but you also have narrow rigidities and curious blind-spots which make it almost useless to try to discuss issues which you have fixed preconceptions about, and are thus unwilling to admit the possibility of any alternative views to your own. I see now from page Talk:Paganism in Middle-earth that you've had an extended discussion with someone other than me about the Catholicism-denialism policy which you've unilaterally imposed onto that article. You have a sense of WP:OWNERSHIP over that article which is contrary to Wikipedia policies, and is blocking improvement of the article. AnonMoos ( talk) 19:12, 16 March 2024 (UTC) reply

On the structure analysis file, the result of the discussion was a prompt change to the file, undoubtedly correct and many years ago, and I've never been near it since. On the "extended discussion with someone", that involved not just me and the "someone" but multiple editors, and we all agreed that the "someone" had an unacceptable point of view which was not supported by the evidence. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 11:38, 17 March 2024 (UTC) reply

It was not correct as you initially uploaded it, because "predicate" is not commonly used as a term in hierarchical constituent analysis. AnonMoos ( talk) 11:45, 17 March 2024 (UTC) reply

And MEANWHILE, if you have little idea what the heck "File:Patrick Grant's Jungian View of LOTR.svg" is supposed to mean, and are unable to explain it in any meaningful way, then that means that you're necessarily unable to advance any valid argument as to why that image should be on the Galadriel article... AnonMoos ( talk) 19:12, 16 March 2024 (UTC) reply

WP:NPA.

When I have a moment I'll look past the rudeness to see if any actions may be needed in response to any substantive points you may have made. For now I'll just note that if you believed what you have written about me, we could certainly not have any form of intelligent and constructive dialogue. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 22:49, 16 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Stop adding the diagram to the article -- if you have little knowledge of what it is, and can't really explain it when it seems to have some problematic aspects, then it's hard to see how you can really know whether it's useful to the article. I don't really care too much whether you mess up "Paganism in Middle Earth", but I care quite a bit if you add excrescent material to Galadriel. AnonMoos ( talk) 11:42, 17 March 2024 (UTC) reply

(You'll see from the paragraph below that I was just adding that I don't agree about the "can't really explain", that is not correct, and between us we can certainly explain a bit more about Grant and (indirectly) Jung. On the diagram, it is reliably cited and readily justifiable, so the use of emotive "messing up" language is once again unhelpful. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 11:53, 17 March 2024 (UTC) reply

(Edit conflict) On Grant's Jungian view of Galadriel's relationships, I never said I couldn't explain it, just that I didn't want to put words in author's mouths, and that on the whole I felt it wasn't appropriate to go in depth into Jungian psychology in an article which is not mainly psychological, let alone Jungian. I did not claim to be the sole authority on such matters, quite the reverse; but I do note that Grant has received respectful treatment from multiple Tolkien scholars, and to my knowledge nobody has seriously challenged his interpretation. That is not to say that there aren't other, independent interpretations: those are summarised in the article in other sections. In other words, Tolkien scholarship tolerates multiple viewpoints, and the Wikipedia articles do their best to summarise the multifold analyses of almost every Tolkien topic. That is almost the opposite of anyone's thinking a particular point of view is the only correct one; and I don't find any single academic position on a character such as Galadriel particularly attractive, though often there are several positions on such topics which all seem to have some merit. Since you feel so strongly about it, I'm happy to add a couple of glosses (something you could of course have done yourself since you're familiar with the literature). Chiswick Chap ( talk) 11:50, 17 March 2024 (UTC) reply

I've added glosses and direct quotations from Grant to explicate his view of Jungian archetypes as he applied them to Tolkien's characters. Clearly these may differ in some aspects from Jung's own formulations. If you want to tweak anything, or add a footnote on what Jung actually said, that would be fine; obviously inviting the reader to note errors in Grant's interpretation is straying quite close to the boundary of the acceptable, but a factual statement in a footnote should be all right. All the best, Chiswick Chap ( talk) 12:11, 17 March 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Tolkien and antiquarianism you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Tolkien and antiquarianism for comments about the article, and Talk:Tolkien and antiquarianism/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 Heavy Grasshopper -- Heavy Grasshopper ( talk) 15:03, 19 March 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Fish you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Fish for comments about the article, and Talk:Fish/GA2 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 Reconrabbit -- Reconrabbit ( talk) 17:22, 22 March 2024 (UTC) reply

	The Million Award
	For your contributions to bring Fish (estimated annual readership: 1,170,000) to Good Article status, I hereby present you the Million Award. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers! Reidgreg ( talk) 14:04, 26 March 2024 (UTC) reply

That's very kind of you, thank you very much! Chiswick Chap ( talk) 14:07, 26 March 2024 (UTC) reply

The article [Cattle]] you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Cattle for comments about the article, and Cattle/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 Wolverine XI -- Wolverine XI, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

The article Orange (fruit) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Orange (fruit) for comments about the article, and Talk:Orange (fruit)/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 750h+ -- 750h+ ( talk) 13:44, 27 March 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Philology and Middle-earth you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Philology and Middle-earth for comments about the article, and Talk:Philology and Middle-earth/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 Averageuntitleduser -- Averageuntitleduser ( talk) 11:02, 28 March 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Anachronism in Middle-earth you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Anachronism in Middle-earth for comments about the article, and Talk:Anachronism in Middle-earth/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 Kusma -- Kusma ( talk) 17:01, 28 March 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Pauline Baynes you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Pauline Baynes for comments about the article, and Talk:Pauline Baynes/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 Simongraham -- Simongraham ( talk) 01:03, 31 March 2024 (UTC) reply

I was trying to put all the archives in the list because they weren't showing but then you also started editing. Anyways, I might was well leave it up to you since you are quite an experienced editor. Okmrman ( talk) 17:53, 29 March 2024 (UTC) reply

OK, I've (I think) sorted out the mess, all I've done is renamed the archive and made the archive box point to it; the archive file is called Archive 1 so the next one will be Archive 2, etc. I can't see any sign of other archive files - I was concerned there might be dozens of mini-archives but it seems there was just one, let's hope so. If you find any more, I can merge them. All the best, Chiswick Chap ( talk) 20:13, 29 March 2024 (UTC) reply

/info/en/?search=Talk:Last_universal_common_ancestor/Archives/2012/March

/info/en/?search=Talk:Last_universal_common_ancestor/Archives/2012/April

/info/en/?search=Talk:Last_universal_common_ancestor/Archives/2013/May

/info/en/?search=Talk:Last_universal_common_ancestor/Archives/2014/March

/info/en/?search=Talk:Last_universal_common_ancestor/Archives/2015/May

/info/en/?search=Talk:Last_universal_common_ancestor/Archives/2016/September

/info/en/?search=Talk:Last_universal_common_ancestor/Archives/2018/October

/info/en/?search=Talk:Last_universal_common_ancestor/Archives/2019/January

/info/en/?search=Talk:Last_universal_common_ancestor/Archives/2019/August

/info/en/?search=Talk:Last_universal_common_ancestor/Archives/2021/August

/info/en/?search=Talk:Last_universal_common_ancestor/Archives/2021/December

/info/en/?search=Talk:Last_universal_common_ancestor/Archives/2022/May

/info/en/?search=Talk:Last_universal_common_ancestor/Archives/2022/October

Okmrman ( talk) 21:22, 29 March 2024 (UTC) reply

There are like 13 more extra archive pages that I linked. Okmrman ( talk) 21:14, 30 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Fixed. That was one of the maddest bits of archive design I've ever seen, tho' I admit I don't go about seeking such things. Let's hope that's the end of it. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 15:38, 31 March 2024 (UTC) reply

The article A History of English Food you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:A History of English Food for comments about the article, and Talk:A History of English Food/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 Viriditas -- Viriditas ( talk) 08:42, 1 April 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Illustrating Tolkien you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Illustrating Tolkien for comments about the article, and Talk:Illustrating Tolkien/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 Cocobb8 -- Cocobb8 ( talk) 13:23, 4 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi. I just read some of the definitions again at the Yoga-page; I was struck by the text from the Katha Upanishad: "They consider yoga to be firm restraint of the senses. Then one becomes un-distracted." The oldest Buddhist sutras say almost exactly the same; they keep hammering on sense-restraint. Noted of course many times by scholars, but Buddhism was not that different from other sramana-traditions from that time. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 07:14, 7 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Not the same, but from the same cloth. I hope the yoga pages and articles on yoga texts make the many connections evident. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 07:43, 7 April 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Meat you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Meat for comments about the article, and Talk:Meat/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 Tim riley -- Tim riley ( talk) 13:43, 10 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Hello, I just wanted to better explain why I think that the Alyosha (tank) article is necessary. Like I said earlier, The purpose of the article is to tell the history of the tank similarly to other articles about named tanks such as Eagle 7 or Bomb. I also understand that there has been a lot of Disinformation in the Russian invasion of Ukraine from both the Russian and Ukrainian side. An example that I can think of from the Ukrainian side is the Ghost of Kyiv which the Security Service of Ukraine claimed had downed six Russian jets. Later it was found to be a myth however it was a moral booster for Ukrainian servicemen and women. An example from the Russian side is when they claimed to have killed 13 "French Mercenaries" in an airstrike on Kharkiv. However, unlike those two instances, there is video evidence of Alyosha in combat. Please feel free to comment. Salfanto ( talk) 15:52, 11 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Two wrongs do not make a right. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 15:59, 11 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Agreed Salfanto ( talk) 17:28, 11 April 2024 (UTC) reply

What exactly makes Laura Bishop noteworthy but not Moongates Guardian? Granted, it is an obscure genre, but it can be verified and is relevant to the article. I can't even find the version by Laura Bishop... (unsigned cmt 16:19, 16 April by 2024‎ 2a0a:a549:f2d8:0:c803:bb67:d278:3fae)

MG appears not to have attracted any reviews for this album, let alone for the song. What is done with other stuff may be right or wrong but is not relevant to the MG issue. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 17:56, 16 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi Chiswick Chap, saw you had nominated Rice-fish system at GAN. In some work I've been doing offline I have found a bit on the Philippines which may be of interest, including a few paragraphs on history ^[1] and some recent stats ^[2]. Best, CMD ( talk) 15:35, 29 March 2024 (UTC) CMD ( talk) 15:35, 29 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Narutolovehinata5 ( talk · contributions) 10:08, 14 April 2024 (UTC) reply

sorry not well atm. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 11:45, 14 April 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Organism you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Organism for comments about the article, and Talk:Organism/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 Esculenta -- Esculenta ( talk) 00:02, 16 April 2024 (UTC) reply

		The Feathered Quill Barnstar
		Just a token of appreciation from one Tolkien fan to another!

Niggle1892 (
talk) 
17:03, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
reply

Thank you so much, that's really appreciated. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 17:23, 22 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Hiya, I see that you brought Bioluminescence up to GA status. I was thinking about updating the article with information from a recent study, " Evolution of bioluminescence in Anthozoa with emphasis on Octocorallia."

The study would change the lede slightly: "evidence that bioluminescence has arisen over 40 times" to "evidence that bioluminescence has arisen over 100 times." It would also impact the evolution section substantially. I wanted to see if you had any thoughts on the study's importance.

Best, -- Classicwiki ( talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 17:45, 25 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Classicwiki That's a very new paper! Haddock is among the authors, so it has a good pedigree. Ideally we'd choose a (systematic) review article for such a major change, rather than relying on a single research article, but the work has much of the nature of a review so I think we can trust it for the number of occurrences. Your "substantially" isn't much to go on for what may need to be done to the evolution section; I hope any changes will be conservative and consist mainly of additions. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 17:50, 25 April 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Rice-fish system you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Rice-fish system for comments about the article, and Talk:Rice-fish system/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 Simongraham -- Simongraham ( talk) 16:04, 27 April 2024 (UTC) reply

If you think there should be no new stuff in Animals, maybe rather delete the stuff that is actually no really relevant, such as the section on "Historically, Aristotle divided animals ...." -- because that doesn't say anything of importance to animal biology or use. Peteruetz ( talk) 17:08, 28 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Many thanks for discussing. The point is, rather, that the subject of 'Animal' encyclopedically consists of the history of human understanding of animals, the taxonomy and evolution of animals, the biology of animals, and so on. That, like it or not, is the subject. Biology is one aspect of that, not the totality. All the best, Chiswick Chap ( talk) 17:39, 28 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Hey! I had this realization today and thought you would probably be a good person to as for feedback on the matter. At the moment, ram and ewe are both redirects which end up leading to sheep. This is fine enough, but I can't shake the feeling that rams and ewes might be encyclopedically notable subjects splitable from discussion of sheep, generally. Bull and Ox are separate articles from Cattle after all, and there are certainly differences in agricultural context and behavior between the animals. Just wanted to hear your thoughts! Generalissima ( talk) (it/she) 16:57, 30 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Well, it could be fine either way. My feeling is that Ram is a much smaller topic than Bull, much further from the public consciousness: and the same goes for Ewe compared to Cow. A Ram article would go into the characteristics of the males of different breeds, which could be worthwhile. A Ewe article would do ... what? The ewe's characteristics are, well, those of sheep; I think we might be struggling with CFORK there. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 17:26, 30 April 2024 (UTC) reply

		The Completionist Barnstar
		You might have done more to complete the encyclopedia than any other editor. You are relentless in your production of high-quality articles. Keep it up! ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 15:16, 2 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Thank you very much! Chiswick Chap ( talk) 15:18, 2 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi! You were recommended to me as someone who might be interested enough in the Middle Ages history to give the center sections of this article a once over. I would like to see it go FA. I have never had one, but this is a kind of "flagship" article and I think it should be among the best - but I need help! Any comments at all will be deeply appreciated. Thank you! Jenhawk777 ( talk) 18:11, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Jenhawk777: well, I'm not a medievalist (even if I've read my Beowulf), nor much of an FAC denizen (even if I have some little bronze stars). The effort to attain an FA is probably at least 10 times that needed for a GA, though the ratio has perhaps become less with changes at GAN. The main things that I imagine I know about FAC are that there is an exceptional amount of attention paid to polish: small details of style, punctuation, phrasing, layout; that there is a concern for 'comprehensiveness', whatever that might be on a topic that may have had hundreds of lengthy books written about it; and that there is ferocious attention given to every citation. These are most easily mitigated by choosing a topic that is rather well-circumscribed; by starting from scratch and writing the whole article yourself, or in a small team of collaborating editors; and by adding each sentence with its source open in front of one, and following a rigid policy for citation, such as only using books and putting every book used into the 'cite book' template with all parameters filled at once.

The corollary of all that is that a topic that has been edited by many hands, that may contain many doubtful or obsolete statements, may have a wobbly division into sections, and that may be incompletely cited, cited to doubtful sources, or cited with poorly-formatted and incomplete references, is a recipe for a great deal of hard work to check everything, or else a great deal of trouble at FAC.

History of Christianity is an exceptionally long article at over 287,000 bytes. The body of the article (minus the lead, references, sources) is around 16,000 words or 36 pages of A4. That might take an hour to read. There are a terrifying number of references — almost 700, and an equally alarming number of sources. Those could raise serious concerns at FAC.

At a glance, the sources look extremely solid, as one might expect for such a subject, and they include some of recent date.

A small thing: the images occupy very different amounts of the screen (area, X times Y pixels). There are some tiny little maps in 'Africa', which I agree are readable in a general sort of way at such a small scale; there are conventional thumbnails; and there are some much bigger images, like the one of Pius XI. FAC might well wonder why this was. My policy is to use the default thumbnail size for landscape images, and "|upright" thumbnails for portrait images; I then make maps and diagrams sometimes much bigger so as to make any text they contain readable without a hand-lens; but all such rational choices can be criticised.

On the Middle Ages, well, there are four chapters Early-Middle-High-Late, adding to some 6,000 words of text. There obviously needs to be some coverage of this period; I note that you have a 'main' article in Christianity in the Middle Ages, just as you do on Reformation and so forth, so it would be possible to provide much less coverage here and just summarize each of the 'main' articles in a few paragraphs. Of course that would be a radical transformation here, which might cut the article's size quite dramatically, and so ease the article's passage through FAC.

If that approach isn't acceptable, I can say that the Middle Ages text is very readable and that it certainly looks richly cited. I notice that 'With civil authority' has statements cited to 3 or in one case 4 sources: that might well attract attention at FAC; near the start of 'Late Middle Ages' there's one with 6 sources and a note, which would certainly get commented upon. A statement like "Christians were dhimma." might well be thought somewhat wikt:Delphic, too: a brief gloss of the unusual term might be helpful. I see you've kept the table of contents to a minimum number of levels: with the odd exception of 'In Mesopotamia and Egypt', which incidentally makes the 'With Islam' section unbalanced, as there's one unnamed subsection and one named one.

I hope these brief jottings may be of some use. The other thing you might consider is picking a small article in a good state, and working it up to FAC standard first, so as to get practice (and with any luck a bronze star) before you go for the big one. All the best, Chiswick Chap ( talk) 21:01, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Clash of the titansposter.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Steel1943 ( talk) 01:00, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Argie-bargie here. Don't know if that's in your parish. Johnbod ( talk) 13:39, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Many thanks! It's not far away, maybe I'll get down there sometime and give the article a once-over. The editor in question has accidentally got him/herself indeffed on the first attempt, and it doesn't look as if they've read the notice explaining how they can appeal and change their username. If I ever see them, I'll lend a word of encouragement. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 13:47, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Thanks! I left a mild complaint on the indeffer's talk. Johnbod ( talk) 20:05, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply

This user is prolific LTA User:علي_أبو_عمر. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:32, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Many thanks. They didn't get anything from me, and I saw they got blocked soon after asking here. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 17:38, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The article J. R. R. Tolkien's ambiguity you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:J. R. R. Tolkien's ambiguity for comments about the article, and Talk:J. R. R. Tolkien's ambiguity/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 Rachel Helps (BYU) -- Rachel Helps (BYU) ( talk) 08:22, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply

I hope all is well. Have not been keeping up with the latest article developments (sorry). I have just read through Tolkien's prose style and enjoyed it very much (I think the name changed at some point). Is there an easy way to see the chronological development of your article work in this area? I suppose a starting point would be the dates of articles that you created, but that would miss the editing you did on already-existing articles? Probably not a high priority, but I did wonder. Carcharoth ( talk) 23:42, 25 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi, thank you. There is a GA tool that lists all a person's GAs with dates, so that offers a compact history. My Articles page doesn't do dates but groups my GAs thematically. There won't be many more as I've about caught up with current Tolkien research, and there are probably more Analysis GAs on JRRT than on any other author ... and that's not including the in-universe-style GAs, which obviously have some analytic content. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 02:54, 26 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Translating The Lord of the Rings you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Translating The Lord of the Rings for comments about the article, and Talk:Translating The Lord of the Rings/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 Kusma -- Kusma ( talk) 09:02, 27 May 2024 (UTC) reply

MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 06:12, 16 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Do you can change it, please? I can not.

{{Rue Buffon (Paris)}|fr}}, a{{Rue Buffon (Paris)}|fr}}, Lkirsteng ( talk) 20:08, 2 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Sorted. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 01:05, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Dear Chiswick Chap,

I have recently read an essay on The Lord of The Rings which dealt with Frodo's plot arc, and identified his personal climax as the Field of Cormallen. It made much of the ring of laburnums around that location. Despite searching many relevant journals (I don't think it was a blog post, but I can't be certain) I have failed to identify it. I wonder if you have read it, and if so can you bring the source to mind?

And while I am here, thank you for your continuing work on all articles Tolkien and Middle-earth. I am delighted by both your scholarship and your energy!

-- Verbarson   ^talk _edits 16:42, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

I have found it here: 'Peak Middle-earth' by Michael Ward. It is a blog post, which I copied, but failed to recognise it from the filename, because I omitted the sub-title. -- Verbarson   ^talk _edits 17:15, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Laburnums, hmm. They do sound suburban, wonder why T chose those. Peak for Frodo ... hmm, well, yes, it was peak happiness, all downhill after that (and mostly downhill before that, actually). Chiswick Chap ( talk) 17:51, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Potato you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Potato for comments about the article, and Talk:Potato/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 Adri-at-BYU -- Adri-at-BYU ( talk) 19:01, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Maybe this book, Karen O'Brien-Kop (2022), Rethinking 'Classical Yoga' and Buddhism: Meditation, Metaphors and Materiality, is on interest to you. Regards, Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 05:34, 5 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Many thanks. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 06:16, 5 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi i will ask you , can you check this article please User:Journalistinsaudiarabia/sandbox and give me your opinion to improve this article and put your edits there and thanks Journalistinsaudiarabia ( talk) 06:59, 5 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Thanks for asking, but it's out of my area, and last time I did this it turned out to be a sockpuppet. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 07:01, 5 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm new here and I'm learning to create articles - I don't understand what you mean Journalistinsaudiarabia ( talk) 07:02, 5 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Aha. In that case, I wish you all the best with your editing. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 07:33, 5 June 2024 (UTC) reply

you too Journalistinsaudiarabia ( talk) 07:37, 5 June 2024 (UTC) reply

And an hour later you're blocked as a sock, well well fancy that. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 10:56, 5 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi Chiswick Chap,

We had an interaction on the tree page and it spurred me to look into your contribution history and editing style, which I found inspiring.

I'm a fairly new editor, but a long time reader, with an interest in improving articles in my realm of knowledge and interest as much as possible, and I was curious if you had interest in providing some light mentorship.

I'm an experienced Arborist with a deep interest in ecology, biology, trees etc, and I am irked by the quality of some of the related articles such as Pruning but I'm a bit overwhelmed and unsure how to go about raising the quality of them.

I'm mostly looking for an experienced editor that is welcoming of general questions and giving feedback occasionally.

Thanks, have a nice day. Infectedfreckle ( talk) 14:16, 5 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Hello Chiswick Chap, I noticed you have an article listed at WP:GAN. I recently started a project, Good Article Review Circles, and thought you might be interested. This initiative helps articles get reviewed more quickly through collaborative efforts. By joining, you'll review others' articles and get your own reviewed in return. Check out the page for more details! — GMH Melbourne ( talk) 09:36, 7 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Done. Happy to hear any comments you may have. DYK and probably GA noms to follow soon. — Kusma ( talk) 10:38, 9 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Hello Chiswick Chap, You have been paired at good article review circles to review Margaret Carroux. At the same time, another user will be reviewing the article you nominated. Please wait 24 hours or until all users have accepted their nomination before starting your review in case a user in your circle decides to decline their invite.

To accept or decline this invitation to review the article, visit WT:GARC/Circles#Circle #3.

GMH Melbourne ( talk) 15:31, 9 June 2024 (UTC) reply

The article The Defence of Duffer's Drift you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Defence of Duffer's Drift for comments about the article, and Talk:The Defence of Duffer's Drift/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 Hawkeye7 -- Hawkeye7 ( talk) 23:44, 15 June 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Biological determinism you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Biological determinism for comments about the article, and Talk:Biological determinism/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 Wolverine XI -- Wolverine XI ( talk) 18:23, 16 June 2024 (UTC) reply

story · music · places

Nice to see Escher on the Main page today, on his birthday, - thank you for what you put into the article. I picked my story today around him. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 09:06, 17 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Thanks Gerda! Chiswick Chap ( talk) 11:04, 17 June 2024 (UTC) reply

The article The Etymologies (Tolkien) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Etymologies (Tolkien) for comments about the article, and Talk:The Etymologies (Tolkien)/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 Remsense -- Remsense ( talk) 11:21, 22 June 2024 (UTC) reply

I note your edit [1]. You may not have seen an answer as they were busy with [2].

The reason I am contacting you is that you might be able to comment on the issue that gave rise to the above: my query of the over-confident attribution of the arrival of the banana in Africa to Austronesian seafarers [3]. To be clear, I am looking for the opinion (formal or informal) of an editor who works in this subject: is there any evidence that Austronesians (specifically) translocated bananas from Western ISEA/Sri Lanka to Africa? They were probably involved in other parts of the journey, but not, as far as I can see, proven to be the seafarers in the last leg. (Nor the first step out of New Guinea - see Pre-Austronesian dispersal of banana cultivars West from New Guinea: linguistic relics from Eastern Indonesia, Denham and Donahue 2009 [4]).

I take the view that the Wikipedia article should, at a minimum, use the carefully guarded language that you find in this subject review paper [5]. I don't see that a bit of speculation in a research paper [6] (i.e. a primary source, used to support text in Austronesian peoples) warrants the language found in the Wikipedia article. What I am asking for is your opinion.

Incidentally, I have already detected a likely instance of a related subject where an error in Wikipedia has been recycled through a research paper [7] and back to Wikipedia, as explained here [8]. This seems to be a reason for Wikipedia to take extra care to get things right in the first place.

Not a problem if this is not the sort of thing you want to tackle. If you want to pass, is there anywhere else you could suggest that I look for an opinion?
Thanks, ThoughtIdRetired _TIR 15:09, 23 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Well, 1) you should feel completely at liberty to make the language more guarded, specially if you could cite the article you mention as evidence 2) I have noticed some likely Austronesian POV'pushing, so if you see any of that, feel free to revert it and warn the editor concerned. If they persist it should go to ANI. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 15:57, 23 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm very sorry that I wasn't able to reply, real life commitments had taken up a lot of time and I eventually stopped checking WP for awhile. Best, Lord Theoden ( talk) 12:46, 24 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Not to worry, real life must take precedence. Glad you're back now. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 12:47, 24 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Thank you! -- Lord Theoden ( talk) 12:41, 26 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi. I'm curious about Special:Diff/1230718080. That information is in the logs. What is the value in duplicating it with an in-line comment? RoySmith (talk) 15:54, 24 June 2024 (UTC) reply

So that those of us unfamiliar with log searches (and who wouldn't think of trying there in the normal run of events) can see this key bit of history, in the event that asking for protection in some form becomes necessary, i.e. make an informed request at some stage in the future. Some agriculture articles have had quit a surprising level of vandalism ... and in BE, rubber duck rhymes with ...., so anything is possible. All the best, Chiswick Chap ( talk) 16:48, 24 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Modified "primorial" method, called   nabla-deltorial

A modification of the "primorial" method was created, called nabla-deltorial, symbolically designated as ∇Δ(pₙ), and although the initial measurements of the "primorial" were ambitiously aimed at breaking (among other things) also cipher codes, it is still far from that. However, factoring large numbers with divisors of "intermediate" size, i.e. not too high - is supposed to go "surprisingly" smoothly.

The "paper" is available here: https://www.1universe.gpe.pl/prime/deltorial.html

I will soon start writing an entry about it on Wikipedia, its name will be nabla-deltorial ∇Δ      - I recommend it to your attention, and greetings to the titans of work...

~~~~ BaSzRafael ( talk) 11:06, 27 June 2024 (UTC) reply

The article The History of Middle-earth you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The History of Middle-earth for comments about the article, and Talk:The History of Middle-earth/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 Kusma -- Kusma ( talk) 12:05, 27 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi, I was going by the William Hill prize style at the foot of Gary Imlach. Is your change an improvement? Ericoides ( talk) 18:53, 2 July 2024 (UTC) reply

It's more British, at least, which might be a consideration in her case; and it's less of a mouthful, as we say, of the "Robbery suspect arrest law court challenge drama" sort, one gigantic noun-phrase... Chiswick Chap ( talk) 20:22, 2 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the reply and rationale. I had this in mind, but you may be right. Ericoides ( talk) 04:43, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Domestic duck you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Domestic duck for comments about the article, and Talk:Domestic duck/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 RoySmith -- RoySmith ( talk) 23:02, 2 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Morning CC - just querying why you redid the move the of the above page when your prior move has been contested. Per WP:RMUM the next step is to seek a formal WP:RM discussion to formnalise the move, not to simply reinstate the contested move. Please could you self-revert. I've also reverted your undiscussed split out into a separate "List of..." page. THis is unnecessary given the length of the page, it's perfectly normal to include the list itself at the bottom of the prose in such cases. Again, a split would need a discussion and proper consensus before re-enacting. Cheers  —  Amakuru ( talk) 10:05, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply

( talk page stalker) @ Amakuru: The split has been discussed and more or less approved at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of translations of The Lord of the Rings. — Kusma ( talk) 10:06, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply

@ Kusma: the split should be discussed before it goes ahead, not after. Please seek consensus and provide justification for why that might be necessary. I see absolutely no reason for a split, the page is only 30kb long in prose and the list isn't particularly long either.  —  Amakuru ( talk) 10:07, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply

@ Amakuru, your merge does not fully align with the most recent consensus in the AfD discussion, so it is up to you to "seek consensus and provide justification". The current status quo is the split version, and the standalone list-free prose has recently passed GA. — Kusma ( talk) 10:11, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Agree. I just wrote a detailed reply here that the edit conflict thingy failed to flag as such, and it vanished into the ether. Never mind, you've stated the position concisely. BTW: The page is 86,000 bytes, not short by Wiki-standards, and the list is another 30,000 bytes, which is quite long enough for a list and occupies multiple pages of printout already. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 10:18, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Pseudotranslation in The Lord of the Rings you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Pseudotranslation in The Lord of the Rings for comments about the article, and Talk:Pseudotranslation in The Lord of the Rings/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 Generalissima -- Generalissima ( talk) 04:45, 5 July 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Christian light in Tolkien's legendarium you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Christian light in Tolkien's legendarium for comments about the article, and Talk:Christian light in Tolkien's legendarium/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 SnowFire -- SnowFire ( talk) 10:01, 6 July 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Cassava you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Cassava for comments about the article, and Talk:Cassava/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 Simongraham -- Simongraham ( talk) 17:43, 7 July 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Latymer Upper School you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Latymer Upper School for comments about the article, and Talk:Latymer Upper School/GA2 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 UndercoverClassicist -- UndercoverClassicist ( talk) 19:20, 7 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Hey, there. Thinking of picking up some GANs for review. You have some out there that interest me. Any preference for which of yours I choose first? – Elizabeth (Eewilson) (tag or ping me) ( talk) 22:14, 9 July 2024 (UTC) reply

That's great. I think you should pick whichever interest you most, really, that usually works best. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 05:30, 10 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Okay, I'll pick something up later today. – Elizabeth (Eewilson) (tag or ping me) ( talk) 10:31, 10 July 2024 (UTC) – Elizabeth (Eewilson) (tag or ping me) ( talk) 10:31, 10 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Mental illness in Middle-earth interests me, but I'm not a Tolkien expert. I've read The Hobbit and seen the movies. Do you think I would be able to review it effectively?

I'm sure you'll do fine. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 12:00, 10 July 2024 (UTC) reply

I'm also interested in the three grains/pseudograins. Depending on how many I do, I may look at one or more of them. I'm not new to plants articles. – Elizabeth (Eewilson) (tag or ping me) ( talk) 10:35, 10 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Super. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 10:52, 10 July 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Christopher Tolkien you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Christopher Tolkien for comments about the article, and Talk:Christopher Tolkien/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 MSincccc -- MSincccc ( talk) 11:45, 14 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Hello Chiswick Chap, You have been paired at good article review circles to review 2022 Highland Council election. At the same time, another user will be reviewing the article you nominated. Please wait 24 hours or until all users have accepted their nomination before starting your review in case a user in your circle decides to decline their invite.

To accept or decline this invitation to review the article, visit WT:GARC#Circle #6.

PCN02WPS ( talk | contribs) 17:05, 18 July 2024 (UTC) reply

^Complex/ _Rational 00:02, 19 July 2024 (UTC) reply

^Complex/ _Rational 00:03, 19 July 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Banana you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Banana for comments about the article, and Talk:Banana/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 Broc -- Broc ( talk) 12:24, 19 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi, I know in the past you edited some articles on physical culture, I created many articles myself for famous physical culturists. Recently two new articles have been created Western physical culture and Indian physical culture. The problem is that these articles contain a lot of WP:OR and many of the sources do not specifically mention "physical culture". Although there were some antecedents - physical culture started in the 19th-century. The western physical culture article contains a lot of odd material for example a photograph of Bin Laden and a section on "Muscular religious nationalism" which is not sourced to content on physical culture. I believe that these articles need to be deleted and or merged to physical culture (which needs expanding). Do you have any suggestions about this? As a historian I have done a lot of research into physical culture, I am generally disappointed with these new articles. They contain misleading content. Psychologist Guy ( talk) 12:13, 20 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Thanks for asking. My approach to PC was largely limited to its relationship with Yoga as exercise, which it certainly influenced. It sounds as if the Western and Indian articles are more or less worthless, so deletion or merging are appropriate. Yoga as exercise#History sets out and cites the basics of PC's influence in India. The material is not repeated in Postural yoga in India#Indian practices for independence, which could certainly be extended with an account of the historical background including PC in India. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 12:29, 20 July 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Oat you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Oat for comments about the article, and Talk:Oat/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 Rollinginhisgrave -- Rollinginhisgrave ( talk) 09:05, 23 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Hey, I recently published an update to River similar to that of Island, but I was asked to find a talk page consensus for the rewrite. I will try not to elaborate any further, besides to ask for your opinion on the talk page discussion and if you have any advice for next steps. ForksForks ( talk) 21:44, 23 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Gosh, quite a situation. The article as it now is obviously needs a lot of citing; it seems to read well at a glance but anything so largely unsourced will be hard to defend. Your approach of making one very large edit to an established article is unfortunately open to the single-revert strategy. The assertion that a decade ago things were great is a pretty weak argument: for one thing, research must have moved on in that time, and threats like climate change have sharpened. So there are certainly facts on both sides. Best now will be to agree the principle of update, starting with the indisputable - paragraphs must be cited. From there, work in small but definite updates. Then ensure images and text work together. If there us still more to do after that, try it in stages. All the best, Chiswick Chap ( talk) 04:57, 24 July 2024 (UTC) reply

I am trying to figure out how I can attract talk page discussion for this. The page has some watchers, but it seems more like I will be trying to run each section by that one fellow in order to get it published. If there were a few people around it would be a lot easier to figure out a consensus but my worry is it's just going to be crickets. Would an RFC be out of process? ForksForks ( talk) 12:59, 24 July 2024 (UTC) reply

That sounds a bit extreme. Try posting a note on each of the relevant WikiProjects' talk pages first. I've often felt I was "crying in the wilderness" like John the Baptist or something, but actually there are folks out there (if not too many in July and August when the Northern Hemisphere goes on holiday!). Good luck with it, and try one step at a time. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 13:04, 24 July 2024 (UTC) reply