Talk:Andrew Artiaga

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Bruxton talk 16:21, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Created by Johnson524 (talk). Self-nominated at 04:54, 29 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Michael Artiaga; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

@Narutolovehinata5: Oof, sorry for the delay in this information. Thanks for taking up the review, cheers! Johnson524 02:54, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I've just made a slight change to both hooks to make them less redundant. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:30, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is a review for both articles. Both articles are new enough and long enough at the time of the nomination. Everything is sourced and the hook facts are cited inline and verified in the source. I didn't find any close paraphrasing. Two QPQs have been provided. I have no preference for a hook so I am leaving the choice to the promoter. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:48, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]


move page to PixelAndy

I copied this from Fractal's talk page, because it follows the same logic:

Move page to Fractal (gamer)

When people in the Tetris community talk about, or to Fractal, nobody refers to him as Justin, or, only rarely when introducing him in a YouTube video.. In this talk page I use the name "Fractal", because it would honestly be impolite to do so otherwise. All his social accounts go by "Fractal". To refer to him as Justin Yu, like on a Wikipedia page is just poor manners. Not only that, it doesn't follow Wikipedia's policy of using common names. We don't default to the government name of living people, we use the name they actually go by in the field they're known for. This is true for pen names (J.K Rowling), stage names (Marylin Monroe), ring names (Hulk Hogan), and yes, gamertags, like with Faker and Turbopolsa. Using their government names violates Wikipedia policy, prior precedent and its just kinda weird. Stolenshortsword (talk) 09:33, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See Talk:Willis Gibson#move page to Blue Scuti for centralized discussion. Johnson524 02:45, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA review

Passed. —Kusma (talk) 12:08, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Andrew Artiaga/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Johnson524 (talk · contribs) 08:15, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Kusma (talk · contribs) 15:33, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Will take this one. —Kusma (talk) 15:33, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Kusma: Thank you so much for taking on this review! I've completed all of the content and prose suggestions, and commented below them if there was an issue. You had some really good suggestions and catches, and I truly appreciate the in in-depth review. Cheers! Johnson524 17:47, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Johnson524, I think we're 99% there, just a few responses below. —Kusma (talk) 07:54, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Content and prose review

I will comment on anything I notice, but not all of my comments will be strictly related to the GA criteria, so not everything needs to be actioned. Feel free to push back if you think I am asking too much, and please tell me when I am wrong.

  • Lead: The high score doesn't seem to be part of "beating the game", so perhaps it should be in a separate sentence
 Done
  • "became the third player to "beat the game" by triggering a game crash on January 4, 2024" not sure this is important enough to be mentioned twice in the lead; certainly the date does not need to be mentioned twice.
 Done
  • What is "DAS Masters"?
 Done
  • Not a fan of the many participial phrases. Beware of dangling modifiers. (This is an issue throughout).
  • Personal life: " as well as practiced " grammar seems off. Better "He also practiced"
 Done
  • Tetris career: At 15 and 13-years-old respectively I think it should just be "13 years old" here.
 Not done I feel like the distinguishing helps the sentence read better, if you still disagree though I'll change it in my next edit Johnson524 17:47, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is incorrect grammar: 13-year-old with hyphens is an adjective, but that is not what you are using here. (I am not a native speaker so I am not always right about English usage, but both Google's search suggestion AI and Microsoft Copilot agree with me). —Kusma (talk) 21:59, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Sorry, I thought you were arguing to remove the "15 year old part". Johnson524 11:41, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • After beating fellow competitor Nenu Kariko, Andrew made it to the final round with his brother, Michael, where they competed against each other in the same house due to COVID-19 restrictions Did Michael also beat Nenu Kariko? (Why is it "with his brother" instead of "against his brother"?) "Where" relates to the round, I guess, but is then followed by a description of the location. It is a bit confusing what this has to do with COVID.
 Done There was a lot to unpack here so tell me what you think!
Better now, but "Andrew was placed against his brother Michael, where they competed against each other" could still be improved. Perhaps just split into two sentences and drop the "where". —Kusma (talk) 21:59, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • but celebrated the achievement with him by giving him a high five wouldn't we expect competing brothers to celebrate in this way? The high five seems trivia.
Comment: I can't personally relate but I know sibling rivalries are real. The brother might have gotten frustrated and stormed off after being defeated by his younger brother, so I wanted to include this bit to show that they were all cool. Johnson524 17:47, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • all within a monthly competition in May all in the same competition? You use "within" again in the following sentence.
 Done
  • Artiaga placed sixth in his qualifying seed but lost in the quarterfinals Is "sixth" so good that we expect him to do better than quarterfinals overall?
 Done
  • Shortly afterward on January 11, comma after afterward?
 Done
  • From June 8–9 to when? Do not use dashes with "from" (see MOS:RANGE).
 Done
  • Playing style: I don't play speed tetris, but I don't think "rolling the back of the controller" is a good description of what happens without some hint that "roll" is as in "drumroll" or something like that. The main point seems to be that people don't press the direction buttons with their thumb, but hit the back of the controller to move it into the thumb instead?
Comment: Roll is actually the correct terminology, with Rolling (Tetris) eventually getting its own redirect for how often its used in these articles. For some reason this link wasn't in the article before, and has now been added. Thanks for bringing this up! Johnson524 17:47, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A link is good. I understand that "rolling" is the technical term, but as an explanation for the technical term it is better to use other words (like at the redirect target, which has "the other hand's fingers are drummed across the back of the controller" and "flicking the game controller from behind ("rolling") with as many successive fingers as needed". —Kusma (talk) 21:59, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Johnson524 11:39, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Competitive record: An intro sentence would be nice, and maybe an explanation of what "score" means or what "DAS Masters" means -- do players there have to use the DAS technique or can they play any way they like?
 Done but I didn't think it was needed to describe DAS again now that its described in both the lead and playing style sections.
You do not need to describe DAS, but you could mention that DAS Masters enforces this playstyle. —Kusma (talk) 21:59, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Footnote a: I think you can drop the "While no exact date is given". The explanation for the age is that we know he was 15 on a specific date.
 Done

First pass done! I will look at sources and comment on the GA criteria tomorrow. —Kusma (talk) 20:44, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source spotchecks

Numbering from Special:PermanentLink/1282419263

  • 1: a,b ok.
  • 1c does not seem to have "dogplayingtetris", only "Dog". I also see "Pixel Andy", not "P1xelAndy". I can't see the famiclones? (They seem to be in the Guardian article).
 Done
  • 1d: ok. 1e: I can't see any mention of Artiaga hypertapping either here or in 15.
 Done It was in source [7], oops.
  • 2d: ok
  • 2e: As I understand it, Andy did not get the highest losing score, but he won the game that featured the highest losing score.
 Done VERY good point, I never read it like that!
  • 2f: ok, but they do explain rolling by drumming your fingers, which makes clear it is not about quickly rotating the controller or something like that.
  • 3abcd: ok
  • 3e: the version of the article that I can access says "He taught them about coding when they were still in elementary school [...] They also liked playing Tetris on their dad's original Nintendo Game Boy." so there is nothing about the NES during elementary school and it was dad who owned the Game Boy.
 Done
  • 3k: ok
  • 4a,b: fine; there is actually more here that you can use to fix some of the issues above.
 Done
  • 5: ok
  • 6: ok
  • 7: look ok
  • 8: could not access
  • 9a,b: ok
  • 10: ok. This one actually has "P1xelAndy".
  • 11: fine.
  • 12 through 14: these are all primary sources? Is there no secondary source for this?
Comment: Unfortunately not, and its so weird too because some years have tons of sources reporting on the CTWC and other years only primary ones. Johnson524 17:47, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Game stats look fine.

Main issue is that there are a few things not in the sources given (but they are in other sources). —Kusma (talk) 09:13, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

General comments and GA criteria

  • Prose: Some suggestions for improvement above.
  • No major MoS issues, but see suggestions for lead section above.
  • Source formatting is fine, and sources are reliable (but it would be nicer to use secondary sources).
  • No original research, but the correct sources need to be cited (see above)
  • No copyvio/paraphrasing issues detected.
  • Do we know anything about his current life? Is he a student? (If no RS reports on that it is fine not to mention, please don't dig up any personal Facebook pages or something like that).
Comment: Nothing that I could find. He's been off the grid in terms of RS for some time now, but I did mention he still is playing and doing well in DAS in the lead. Johnson524 17:47, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • DAS Masters isn't introduced or explained, just listed in lead and table.
 Done
  • No undue over-focus (except perhaps in the stats table, but that is ok)
  • No issues with neutrality or stability.
  • Images are correctly licensed, relevant to the article, and captions are fine. You could consider crediting the photographer in the caption, but I think you don't have to.

Overall not a huge amount to do, but some copyedits and a bit of careful checking which sources support which content will help make this better. I had fun learning about speed Tetris! Will put on hold while you fix the small issues. —Kusma (talk) 10:08, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
allikas: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Andrew_Artiaga