Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2

I removed your contribution to the reception section because you only put three references but no text at all, which does not meet Wikipedia guidelines. However, I still saved them in the talk page, as they could be quite useful. However, I do not have access to the texts, so if you still do, it would be really helpful if you could provide what these sources say about the novel. Thank you. Julen Artano (talk) 09:09, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Julen Artano The problem with that is that the article is unreferenced again so it does not show notability and someone will try to delete it. And yes, I do, but I don't have the time. PARAKANYAA (talk) 09:13, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. For the moment, I will put them in the intro. Julen Artano (talk) 09:15, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine. No clue why I put them in an empty section. Thank you for dealing with the overly long plot. PARAKANYAA (talk) 09:18, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Thank you for providing sources to this rather obscure novel, I could not find any myself. Julen Artano (talk) 09:20, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Zug massacre you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of All Tomorrows No Yesterdays -- All Tomorrows No Yesterdays (talk) 05:42, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On 6 January 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Corinne Rey-Bellet, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the murder of skier Corinne Rey-Bellet led to a change in Swiss gun-control regulations? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Corinne Rey-Bellet. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Corinne Rey-Bellet), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:02, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 11,911 views (992.6 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of January 2025 – nice work!

GalliumBot (talk • contribs) (he/it) 03:28, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Can you please explain your criticisms with the categories you proposed for deletion?

I do not understand your rationale for submitting them over the holiday period.

I would like to understand better as I am trying to contribute meaningfully here.

There is some correlation to occupation and suicide and fields of intersectional research that has explored this. With relation to certain sports-- https://chesterrep.openrepository.com/handle/10034/315057 this is what led to the creation of these categories you proposed for deletion.

I'm trying to understand a bit more about why it does not fit within the realm of appropriateness on this site, because the "discussion" that took place was very minimal and appears to try to keep the site in the past with little evolution. Could you shed some light on this please? Nayyn (talk) 21:36, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Nayyn Because for Wikipedia’s purposes they are not defining. They have also been deleted in the past and recreated with no discussion. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:49, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A "discussion" is not a discussion if it involves only 2 people over a holiday period. Nayyn (talk) 23:56, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was referring to prior discussions on the sportspeople categories. PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:17, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

		The New Page Reviewer's NPP Barnstar Award
		This award is given in recognition to PARAKANYAA for conducting 140 article reviews in 2024. Thank you so much for all your excellent work. Keep it up! Hey man im josh (talk) 18:31, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See [1] and [2] Doug Weller talk 15:12, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller Thank you for the reminder. I will get back to that sometime. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:30, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't recognize my name, I was working on the Zug massacre article and put it up as a WP:DYKN. I just wanted to tell you (since you're the top contributor on the article) that I'm not going to be active on this account anymore so, if you were to send me a message about the article or anything else, my new account is User:Akeph. Il5v (talk) 14:24, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. If you are who I think you are, I really don't know why you keep switching accounts. PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:13, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do you recognize me from a vanished account? If you do, I made that account to make some spoken articles but I kinda regretted my contributions and vanished. I rejoined but now I've made this account since I didn't wanna wait for a WP:UNC process. Akeph (talk) 13:54, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if I were you I would do that going forward, since it gets confusing. PARAKANYAA (talk) 16:21, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, PARAKANYAA. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Cults, Religion, and Violence, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 23:06, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes#Requirements to accept an edit, when to accept an edit
  

charlotte ^👸♥ 20:54, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Queen of Hearts Thank you! PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:59, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats! All Tomorrows No Yesterdays (Ughhh.... What did I do wrong this time?) 10:47, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article Zug massacre you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Zug massacre for comments about the article, and Talk:Zug massacre/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 All Tomorrows No Yesterdays -- All Tomorrows No Yesterdays (talk) 11:05, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I hope this was an isolated case! Johnbod (talk) 19:33, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Isolated case of what? PARAKANYAA (talk) 19:51, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have rewritten it as, I think, a decent article. Please re-rate, I don't think that I should. (Not yet ready for a GAN, maybe I will do that in a few weeks.) Ldm1954 (talk) 21:59, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know why you're asking me I am not very familiar with the standards for this kind of thing. But I will look at it. PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:08, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for deleting your comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elon Musk's arm gesture. We were editing at the same time and I intended to preserve other editors' changes, but I messed up. Sorry. —Anomalocaris (talk) 03:44, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Anomalocaris As long as it was not on purpose I take no issue, all is fine. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:44, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, here's the spelling of "gaffe" in the sense you meant. Cheers! —Anomalocaris (talk) 03:49, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lol, thanks. My bad. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:50, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reviewing the draft I submitted, but I did want to quickly mention that a lot of the mistakes you said I made are actually very common place on Wikipedia articles regarding civilian attacks. While I do agree that it's not perfect, List of mass shootings in Germany, Italy, and France all contain the error of having a very weak lead followed by a fairly comprehensive and well sourced list. So if I'm in error, so are they.

For your other concerns, I am fortunate that stabbing incidents across the globe are usually discussed in a group so finding sources there won't be difficult. But since we're at that, it should be noted that there already exists a page on Wikipedia that groups every mass stabbing in the 2020s together (which is every mass stabbing incident that occurred during this decade across the entire world, something you implied is not within the scope of Wikipedia) but it's extremely sloppy and I don't have enough edits on Wikipedia to change it up and neither do the editors on that page ever read the talk page where I've expressed my concerns of how the page is getting too large and needs to be fragmented into smaller articles. It's also missing numerous notable incidents, including the 2022 Apple River stabbings, a fatal 2023 Brazil school mass stabbing, a Train stabbing in Tokyo as well as at least two fatal Chinese mass stabbings in 2024. If I dug deeper into it, I'd probably find more. But anyway, we already have lists of terrorist incidents every single year across the world (example). I think as long as one single nation can't heavily define the number of mass stabbings/shootings in a single year, (like if we did every mass shooting in the world, then obviously that's going to be dominated by the United States) then it should be fine. Stabbings are incredibly diverse in terms of where they occur across the globe.

So while I do agree you had good points, I just don't see what's so different. One of my common personal criticisms of Wikipedia is that Wikipedia unevenly enforces their own rules. The existence of the Wikipedia page on Ryan Wesley Routh for example is an extremely obvious WP:BLP violation but it's never going to go down even though Arthur Leigh Allen's page went down a few years ago because he was never convicted of his alleged crimes. So while you have a stricter view of this page's existence, most editors will either support it or give no opinion.

My overall plan is to simply fragment List of mass stabbing incidents (2020-present) as the rate of mass stabbings have grown so much in recent years. January 2025 alone has already had 9 (known) mass stabbing incidents in 8 different countries. That is literally almost as many stabbing incidents that occurred in the entire year of 2020 alone.

Again, thank you, but I disagree and I think you would too if you read through that messy decade recap. The reason we transformed List of mass shootings in the United States into a yearly basis thing in 2017 is because the crisis grew so much in recent years that it became necessary to fragment them into other years. That has now become necessary and if this draft is approved, I will begin a 2025 version and potentially look backward as well. MountainJew6150 (talk) 17:17, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@MountainJew6150 "Common practice" does not mean it is correct. I did actually check and all those country lists do have enough coverage on the topic to pass NLIST (except the Soviet Union but that's just a weird split out from the Russia list) which is why I have not AfDed them. The 2020s list is also weird but that exists as basically a containment list for articles people did not want to AfD, which we will have to deal with eventually

And by year lists, I mean for the whole world. We have never had simply a "list of mass shootings in [year]" for the whole world. That is what your list is trying to do. The terrorist incidents articles are strictly limited to individual incidents with their own articles, under which your list would have very few entries. Also there are publications that discuss terrorist incidents by year, which makes it pass NLIST, unlike stabbings. Doing such a list with stabbings is not a great idea, and also again no evidence it passes NLIST PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:02, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, I'm interested in learning how I can make the page more up to code. I know we don't do mass shootings per year for the whole world but that's a much more complex subject in my opinion. Mass shootings have regions where they're more prevalent than others. A place like Chicago is going to have more shootings than downtown London. Stabbings can occur literally anywhere because knives are not difficult to acquire. Mass stabbing patterns are different from those for mass shootings, so to say it's for the whole world is not in itself, an outlandish thing.

I do believe you might be right about the source thing as I can't find anything besides a couple sources that directly examines mass stabbings as a whole and not on just a regional basis. My memory failed me in that regard as I vaguely remember such a thing existing in the past. I'm assuming not but am I allowed to use these sources and just combine them to illustrate the global impact of mass stabbings as there are multiple sources that consider mass stabbings a "crisis" in their respective region? (Germany and China are the most prominent examples) MountainJew6150 (talk) 22:41, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The root issue is just finding sources that discuss the group as a topic. I see no particular issue with the formatting. This is fulfilled for, as you noted, Germany and China, which have specific problems with it, but due to the nature of the topic you would have to find sources that discuss it as a group to prove notability. If the sources covering China and Germany discuss it in a context not specific to the countries, at least somewhat, maybe. PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:58, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please, before reviewing pages like Killing of David Maland, make sure that it complies with WP:SUSPECT. Fram (talk) 08:26, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Fram Suspect says an editor must "must seriously consider not including" such material. I seriously considered it, but was unsure how much it mattered to remove the one sentence especially in a world where we have Luigi Mangione as an article, and we often include names of charged persons as a matter of editorial discretion. I would not have written it that way myself, but it did not seem a reason to not review it. PARAKANYAA (talk) 08:30, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Fram I wish we had clearer guidance because WP:SUSPECT is the vaguest thing. "seriously consider" is not enough - where we can have full articles about people who haven't been convicted but also including the name of someone who has been charged in a single sentence is revdellable, but also sometimes it's completely fine. This is why I avoid current events. PARAKANYAA (talk) 08:34, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Our Friends from Frolix 8 you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Kusma -- Kusma (talk) 09:42, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That title doesn't resolve the ambiguity. MW (Indian magazine) is also a men's magazine. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 22:58, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Pppery Hm, true. There has to be something else to disambiguate by, considering two things 1) how much commentary there is on that magazine specifically and 2) if we don't have something else to point it to, the only redirect that is specific to this magazine is Man's World (2021 magazine), which is what that page used to be at. It doesn't apply to anything else on the DAB, so we can't retarget it there, but it feels weird to have this terrible name basically be the only existing redirect at that title that points to the page, if you understand me? If we can't retarget that redirect to the DAB page I feel like there should be a better alternative than letting its 'primary' redirect be inaccurate. I may not be explaining this the best. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:09, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Man's World (Passage Press magazine)? * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:38, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Pppery Sounds good to me. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:42, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article Our Friends from Frolix 8 you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Our Friends from Frolix 8 for comments about the article, and Talk:Our Friends from Frolix 8/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) 00:23, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your observation; it prompted this. Jclemens (talk) 07:45, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I have seen a few people exhibit that very similar pattern of behavior so I wondered if there was socking going on. Can't remember if that was the person I noticed, though. PARAKANYAA (talk) 07:51, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have the feeling that we've been dealing with one person for years, and they just keep getting wiser to us every time we catch them. That may just me being old, crotchety, and paranoid, though. Jclemens (talk) 08:07, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jclemens The person I was thinking of last time was User:Ryan barnes 1963 and his den of socks. But there is some time overlap with the new accounts so I would think a checkuser would have caught those. PARAKANYAA (talk) 08:09, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As a former checkuser, I can attest that what's catchable and what's actually caught are two very different things. Jclemens (talk) 20:07, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On 22 February 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Serpent's Walk, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the fantasy writer M. A. R. Barker wrote the neo-Nazi novel Serpent's Walk in 1991, but his authorship was only confirmed in 2022? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Serpent's Walk. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Serpent's Walk), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

—Ganesha811 (talk) 00:03, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I have re-submitted Draft:Visakhapatnam Drug Bust for review, after making necessary changes as you suggested. Since you have already reviewed it earlier, can you please go through the draft once again. Truth Layer 123 (talk) 13:07, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Parakanyaa, I got the source you requested but it's too big for Discord; please send me a wiki-mail so I can email it to you. Since you mentioned that you don't always get notifs there, I thought I'd leave a message here too. Also, let me know if you need help translating any German or Swiss German sources, including this one. Toadspike [Talk] 21:06, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Toadspike Emailed! Thank you very much. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:34, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I believe that Vernon Dursley is a significant enough character to have his own article on Wikipedia.

There are some articles that mention him specifically, but as I wrote, he is a very important character who appears in every single Harry Potter book. And he doesn't just appear "in passing"—he plays a serious role in the story.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3137963/Revealed-Harry-Potter-s-mean-Uncle-Vernon-hated-boy-wizard-JK-Rowling.html

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/jun/24/jk-rowling-reveals-history-dursleys-harry-potter

https://bookriot.com/who-said-it-donald-trump-or-vernon-dursley/

https://screenrant.com/harry-potter-dursley-facts-trivia/

If you approve, let me know, and I'll rewrite the article. Of course, I'll add much more information that I haven't included yet—I was in the middle of working on it. Xeno Lovegood (talk) 08:47, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Xeno Lovegood Forgot to respond to this, my bad.

The issue is we have generally particular recommendations for characters, it requires out of universe content about them, so it is not just a plot reception. Also, the sources you linked are mostly not good for this. The Daily Mail is forbidden as a source and screen rant is not good for notability. There could very well be sourcing, but it would have to be of a far higher quality. PARAKANYAA (talk) 05:02, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ugh, what a bummer... I'll try to find better sources, or I might just drop it altogether. Xeno Lovegood (talk) 09:34, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

thanks. Xeno Lovegood (talk) 09:35, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings,

the Draft:2025 Setia City Mall shooting has been resubmitted for review, and the sources used in the draft have been replaced as per your request, and I also wish to address some of your comments:

1. Notability: It's in my opinion that this event is notable, as gun crimes are rare in Malaysia and it's even rarer in Malaysia for an individual to commit multiple carjacking, robbery, and firearms crimes in a short span of 10 days just after the main shooting incident. This incident has also received widespread coverage by established local and international news media, with the events described in details, therefore it should be qualify under the general notability guidelines.

2. Section arrangement: It's also in my opinion that the article should be broken down into more than one section, as the subsequent events happened after 8 Feb 2025 is not the shooting itself, but they are still directly and closely connected to the shooting, therefore they deserve to be allocated a different section.

Thank you. Wolfiewhite (talk) 03:13, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On 10 March 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Vatican murders, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that one incident in Vatican City caused it to have the highest murder rate in the world in 1998? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Vatican murders. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Vatican murders), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

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

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 42,480 views (1,770.0 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of March 2025 – nice work!

GalliumBot (talk • contribs) (he/it) 03:27, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Great article and DYK, @PARAKANYAA! ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 00:31, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:52, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just for your information, there is no fully-automated way of nominating multiple categories for CfD at once. With a large number of categories it may be useful to prepare the list in advance in Excel, and to tag the category pages with WP:AWB. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:33, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On 15 March 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Our Friends from Frolix 8, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Our Friends from Frolix 8 could be Philip K. Dick's "most sterile" novel? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Our Friends from Frolix 8. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Our Friends from Frolix 8), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 12:03, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do you do JW stuff and do you have infinite amounts of energy and time? Also do you speak Polish (I know you speak French)? Polygnotus (talk) 09:18, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also are you a superhero whose goal in life is to rescue weirdos? Polygnotus (talk) 09:24, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Polygnotus I am currently away from my computer so I cannot do much that I would not be able to do on a mobile device (including access to lengthy, more academic sources) but after that sure. Assuming you mean Jehovah's Witnesses, I never really looked into that topic, but it seems pretty interesting.

I basically do have infinite amounts of energy and time (but also a very short attention span, regrettably, hence my hopping around from topic to topic for my entire time editing). Do not speak Polish sadly.

"Weirdos" is probably the most broadly accurate way to describe my interests, yes. Anything where a strong belief makes people do weird things. PARAKANYAA (talk) 17:53, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am currently away from my computer I am so jealous... The weirdo in this case would be me. I think this will require a bigger screen than a mobile phone; maybe ping me when you return to the uncivilized world. Thanks, Polygnotus (talk) 17:57, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, thanks. Also hey, here we're probably all some kind of weirdo. PARAKANYAA (talk) 17:58, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Polygnotus Hi yes I now have computer access. What do you need my help with? Is it some kind of Jehovah's Witnesses in France or Poland article? I've always been surprised we don't have one in France because they've certainly had drama there which a lot of sources talk about. IIRC someone made a draft on that but it seemed problematic to me PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:37, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! The last time I tried to understand French was decades ago, and it isn't a happy memory.

There is a bit of a backstory, as always, so maybe just start over at Draft_talk:Persecution_of_Jehovah's_Witnesses_in_France and then look at Draft:Jehovah's Witnesses in France.

The goal is to create one "JWs in France" article and not have a "Persecution of-" article because of POVFORK concerns.

One of the things I ran into is that I can't find RS to confirm or deny the #Prohibition_of_its_publications and #Opposition_to_the_construction_of_their_meetings (they mean Kingdom Halls) sections. If that is true and we can find independent RS then we may be able to incorporate that information into the JWs in France article. And of course the story about the taxes should be mentioned, but the way it is written now has serious NPOV problems.

Another problem is that the organisations who claim to be unbiased and only care about religious freedom are anything but.

Polygnotus (talk) 02:27, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]