I have declined your move request pending a new move discussion. Re-post after the conclusion of the discussion. - FlightTime (open channel) 19:49, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@FlightTime Okay, thank you. I will make a request on the talk page. Strugglehouse (talk) 11:46, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The WOW! Awards, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page WOW Film Festival.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:55, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, 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 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:39, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I've removed the refname <ref name="LutonRisingTrade" group=nb /> from your recent edits at Luton Airport, because the formatting was broken and I couldn't tell what you intended. Please do re-add it, but please use Preview. Thanks! Jessicapierce (talk) 16:02, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jessicapierce Hi, thanks for this. It seemed to work fine on my preview, but I have had another look at the edit and seen the error it gave. I have added it back in a better manner. Strugglehouse (talk) 18:59, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Enjoy your day/night.

ZayKitty Wiki (talk) 13:11, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. ElKevbo (talk) 22:18, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to Brian Quinn (comedian). No, a social media post saying how old he is does not necessarily mean that that day is his birthday. Provide a reliable source or leave it alone. Meters (talk) 07:12, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion, the post quite clearly means he turned 49 that day. Additionally, social media posts themselves are reliable for claims like name or birth date per WP:ABOUTSELF and WP:SELFSOURCE.

Quinn posts a similar message each year on the same date, so it's quite obviously what it means. I'll add some additional sources, as well as one that actually says it was his birthday. Strugglehouse (talk) 07:30, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's not clear at all. What would be clear and would satisfy WP:SELFSOURCE would be a post where he explicitly mentions his birthdate. Please read WP:SYNTH and WP:OR. Meters (talk) 09:24, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Strugglehouse. Thank you for your work on 2025 Bicester Motion fire. Another editor, Noleander, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Marking "reviewed" for WP:NPP .... but adding more sources & details in the coming months (as they become available) will be essential, to make sure that the article does not run afoul of WP:NOTNEWS and WP:COOKIE.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Noleander}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Noleander (talk) 22:00, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Noleander: I 100% agree. The page can be updated as information comes out, which I am sure will happen over the next few months as the investigation continues. Strugglehouse (talk) 10:58, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers mate, it's a German legal thing that the company name (German: Firma) must reflect a comapny's legal form (German: Rechtsform). It can thus be omitted or shortened if the subject is the company rather than its name. Imagine if we did something like Kommanditgesellschaft auf Aktien mit einer Aktiengesellschaft als Komplementärin if BMW was an AG & Co. KGaA (which exists under German trade law). It would be huge trolling. So please, do me a favour. Thanks, --Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 16:18, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Johannes Maximilian Hi. I'm not sure exactly what you're asking me to do here. Yes, if the company name was extremely long, it would be a little inconvenient. But, as I said, per Wikipedia's guidelines, we include the full company name, including any abbreviations or lack thereof. See MOS:FIRSTCORP (which reads "Regardless of the page title, the lead sentence of an article on a company or other organization should normally begin with its full legal name"), and Template:Infobox company/doc (which says that the |name parameter of the infobox should be "The full, legal name of the company, correctly reproducing punctuation and abbreviations or lack thereof."). Most companies that use the long names you suggest do not use the full words in their name, so we don't include them. But, BMW had the choice, and they chose for their company name to include the full word "Aktiengesellschaft". Therefore, we include it. Strugglehouse (talk) 16:48, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm asking you to be reasonable. BMW don't have a choice, they must include AG or Aktiengesellschaft in their Firma, but it is not part of their full legal name. The full legal name is Bayerische Motoren Werke, and their Firma is Bayerische Motoren Werke AG. Best, --Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 17:00, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Johannes Maximilian Full legal company name includes the AG or Aktiengesellschaft, as it includes, for example, LLC and Inc in the U.S., or Limited and PLC in the UK. We extend these if the company chooses as well, such as extending Inc to Incorporated, or PLC to Public Limited Company. We include all abbreviations, or lack thereof. BMW had the choice to either be AG or Aktiengesellschaft, and they chose the full word. Per guidelines, we include it. AG was already on the page, I simply corrected it per the citation. Strugglehouse (talk) 17:12, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

North American legislation cannot be applied to German companies. As I said, the full legal name does not include the AG, this is only the Firma. Best, --Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 19:35, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Johannes Maximilian It's not legislation, it's Wikipedia's guidelines. AG is the equivalent of PLC in the company name. Whether you want to say that it is or isn't "part of the name", it's still included when the company name is written in full. Strugglehouse (talk) 11:08, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The legal form (Rechtsform) is not part of the name. When the name is written in full, it is omitted. When the legal form is included, this is called Firma. The Firma is not the company, it is what the company is referred to in a legal context. Wikipedia is not a legal context, it is Wikipedia. Therefore, the legal form is also omitted. Comprehensible? --Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 10:24, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Johannes Maximilian I understand the technicalities of the name, but I still believe it should all be included. I think it is very reasonable to assume that Wikipedia's reference to the "full legal name" means "what the company is referred to in a legal context". That's just the same thing in more words. As I said, AG was on the page already, all I did was extend it per the company's legal name. Strugglehouse (talk) 11:05, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Strugglehouse. Regarding your revert at Trisha Paytas regarding children's birth dates, I've been editing for some time and have never seen birth dates of children reverted when edited out, usually without a reference as I provided. Note, in general, that (1) Wikipedia is an encyclopedia ("An article should not be a complete presentation of all possible details, but a summary of accepted knowledge regarding its subject..."), it is "not a ... social network", and it is "...not the place to add indiscriminate information..." (see, WP:NOT and subsections); and (2) "...a description of isolated events... related to one subject may be verifiable and impartial, but still disproportionate to their overall significance to the article topic" (see, WP:PROPORTION). Now, in particular, note that (3) "...birth and death details should only be included AFTER A NAME if there is SPECIAL contextual relevance." (see, MOS:BIRTHDATE; you should read the entire paragraph); (4) if "...the person is borderline NOTABLE err on the side of caution and simply list the year..." (see, WP:DOB, but note WP:BIOFAMILY obviates most children being themselves notable); (5) "The standard for inclusion of personal information of living persons is higher than mere existence of a reliable source that could be verified." (see, WP:DOB); (6) an editor should "...exercise restraint and include ONLY material relevant to the person's notability..." (see, WP:NPF, and note that a child is not itself usually notable); and, of primary importance, (7) as to "...the minor children of celebrities..." "DO NOT name or OTHERWISE IDENTIFY the person..." (see, WP:NONAME) (emphasis supplied). Quaerens-veritatem (talk) 03:15, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

NatWest has an RfC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. 2A00:23C7:C9C6:BD01:3090:F690:71B8:2E1E (talk) 09:22, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently edited a page related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia's norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template. tony 14:48, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently edited a page related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia's norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 16:05, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Just wanted to say thanks for all the info you provided on Impractical Jokers and the guys on the show. Do you have any voice recordings of the rest of the Jokers since you provided a quick voice recording of Murr? GanjaWeasel69 (talk) 21:31, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, no problem! I have now added ones for Joe and Sal, the only one I can't find is Q! Strugglehouse (talk) 23:25, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, thanks! Also, could you tell that I got my username from an Impractical Jokers challenge? ;) GanjaWeasel69 (talk) 23:26, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:Minecraft Live Logo.png has been proposed for deletion. The proposed deletion notice added to the file should explain why.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This is an automated notification. Please refer to the page's history for further information. DatBot (talk) 00:30, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of lawsuits involving MrBeast is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of lawsuits involving MrBeast until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Originalcola (talk) 19:32, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, 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 2025 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:47, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Scuderia AlphaTauri shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing a page's content back to how you believe it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree with your changes. Please stop editing the page and use the talk page to work toward creating a version of the page that represents consensus among the editors involved. Wikipedia provides a page explaining how this is accomplished. If discussions reach an impasse, you can request help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution such as a third opinion. In some cases, you may wish to request page protection while a discussion to resolve the dispute is ongoing.

If you continue edit warring, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, or whether it involves the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also, please keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule— if things indicate that you intend to continue reverting content on the page. ~2025-33247-40 (talk) 12:46, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I notice you recently updated the word count for LeBron James. Could you please tell me how to run a word count for an article? Thanks in advance. OrdinaryOtter (talk) 16:11, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@OrdinaryOtter: Hello! I used XTools to find out the readable prose size of an article.

You can use visit that link directly, type in the article title, and read the Prose section under General Statistics. On the Wikipedia website, you can also view this for the current article your on by clicking "View history", and then "Page statistics" after "External tools:" near the top.

You can also install the WP:Prosesize gadget - info on installation and usage can be found on its page.

Hope this helps! Strugglehouse (talk) 13:19, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. Could you please clarify where exactly the word count is listed when I bring up the Page Statistics? I'm scrolling through the stats and don't see it. There is a "Prose" section, but there are only a few graphs measuring edits. Edit: I did find the word count through XTools, but it would be nice to know if the Page Stats option does indeed work! OrdinaryOtter (talk) 13:46, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. Navigate to an XTools page, such as this one for LeBron James. The first section is General statistics. Within this section is a few subsections. There are a couple at the top with no headings, with info such as "ID", "Page size", "Minor edits", etc. After this is an "Edits:" subsection (with stats such as "Average time between edits (days)"), then a "Links:" subsection, then finally a "Prose:" subsection.

You can see WP:RPS for additional info. Other options, such as WP:Prosesize and User:Shubinator/DYKcheck can be used, and more info can be found at Template:Very long § Usage. Strugglehouse (talk) 14:09, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]