User talk:Teratix

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archives (Index)

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Letterpress FAC[edit]

Regarding that discussion, do you have the full text for The Telegraph? Thanks, TWOrantulaTM (enter the web) 18:58, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TWOrantula, I've sent you an email with the full text. – Teratix ₵ 04:55, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2024 March newsletter[edit]

The first round of the 2024 WikiCup ended at 23:59 (UTC) on 27 February. Everyone with at least 30 points moved on to Round 2, the highest number of points required to advance to the second round since 2014. Due to a six-way tie for the 64th-place spot, 67 contestants have qualified for Round 2.

The following scorers in Round 1 all scored more than 300 points:

In this newsletter, the judges would like to pay a special tribute to Vami_IV (submissions), who unfortunately passed away this February. At the time of his death, he was the second-highest-scoring competitor. Outside the WikiCup, he had eight other featured articles, five A-class articles, eight other good articles, and two Four Awards. Vami also wrote an essay on completionism, a philosophy in which he deeply believed. If you can, please join us in honoring his memory by improving one of the articles on his to-do list.

Remember that any content promoted after 27 February but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, feel free to review one of the nominations listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:41, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Heath Irwin review[edit]

User:Teratix, you have clearly misstated the content of the Heath Irwin article. You have stated that the career section, which is 6 sentences long, is 2 sentences. His uncle is discussed for 3 sentences. I assume you are lieing to pick a fight. Is that your intention. WP:WIAGA is based on whether the subject is presented in a fairly complete manner, not whether it is lengthy. That is a pretty complete summary of his career unless you can point out something that is missing.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 13:29, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello TonyTheTiger sorry, I was just in the middle of quickfailing another of your nominations. I will get back to this comment shortly. – Teratix ₵ 14:00, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, to answer your questions: You have stated that the career section, which is 6 sentences long, is 2 sentences. In fact, this is not what I said. I said "Irwin's entire NFL regular-season career is summed up in two sentences", which was true. Not all of the career section is devoted to his regular season – of the six sentences in the section at the time I reviewed the article, in order, the first was dedicated to his drafting, the second and third were dedicated to his regular-season career, the fourth was dedicated to his post-season performance, the fifth was dedicated to an unsuccessful attempt to continue his career with Denver, and the sixth was dedicated to his teams' play-off performances.
WP:WIAGA is based on whether the subject is presented in a fairly complete manner, not whether it is lengthy. Correct! Irwin's NFL career was not presented in a "fairly complete manner" – his seven-year regular-season career was covered in all of two sentences.
I assume you are lieing to pick a fight. Is that your intention. No, that wasn't my intention. In fact, I didn't lie at all. Hope that helps! – Teratix ₵ 14:18, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
First of all. Summarizing 6 sentences in 2 sentences is a reasonable thing to do in a WP:LEAD. Second there is not really more than 6 encyclopedic sentences worth of content for his pro football career. To fail for lack of breadth there has to be significant content missing. The fact that a section is short does not mean encyclopedic content is missing. The sentence that I have added to his professional career section is not something I really think was missing. If I could find content about him graduating, that would maybe have been an ommision, but not at the quickfail level. I have added a sentence about him pursuing a degree, but I can't find evidence of him graduating.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:29, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Summarizing 6 sentences in 2 sentences is a reasonable thing to do in a WP:LEAD. Huh? This was in the article body.
Second there is not really more than 6 encyclopedic sentences worth of content for his pro football career. Frankly, I don't believe you. How can a player have more years in professional sport than sentences covering what he did in these years? In my view the most likely scenario is, considering Irwin was active in the Internet's nascent era, the relevant sources only exist offline.
In the unlikely alternate scenario where it's really true Irwin had fewer years in professional sport than sentences covering what he did in those years, (a) I might have to question whether he is notable for Wikipedia's purposes and therefore whether the article should be deleted or merged, considering the current sourcing is mostly databases or passing mentions; and/or (b) Irwin might be Wikipedia-notable but there just aren't enough sources available for an article that adequately "addresses his main aspects" to GA standard, and the best we can hope for is a permanent start-class article. – Teratix ₵ 14:59, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • User:Teratix Offensive linemen are not that interesting. Campare him to other non All-star offensive linemen that I have done in the past like say Patrick Omameh. There is quite often very little to say other than that they changed teams. No matter how many seasons they play, if they do not win Super Bowls or change teams, there is little to say.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:05, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Then maybe there is a systematic problem with your articles on offensive linemen. I wouldn't have passed Omameh's article in its current state. – Teratix ₵ 15:10, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The systematic problem is the media's attention to statistics (scoring, yards, sacks, etc). There are no interesting feature stories done on offensive linemen because they do not produce stats. WP is for summarizing secondary sources. There are not interesting secondary sources for offensive linemen because of this systematic problem. Thus, the articles on offensive linemen tend to be about them changing teams and or being injured.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:18, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    We're not here to right the media's great wrongs. If the sources for GA standard don't exist – they don't exist, and the article does not become a GA. – Teratix ₵ 15:24, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Have you read the footnote at WP:WIAGA regarding breadth addressing short articles? It specifically covers this type of topic.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:27, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, I have. It states shorter articles are not disqualified provided they are adequately broad. Irwin's article is both short and inadequately broad. – Teratix ₵ 15:31, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Inadequately broad in this context would mean that there is significant encyclopedic content missing, not years unaccounted for due to more sentences than years played.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:34, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Indeed, there is significant encyclopedic content missing – summaries of those "years unaccounted for". – Teratix ₵ 15:43, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do either of you use Newspapers.com? There appears to be plenty of stories on him there. I'm sure some of it could be used to expand the article if current length is an issue. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:28, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • I do not use that. I use ProQuest from the Chicago Public Library. I have gotten tired of the amount of press he gets for being overshadowed by his uncle. Sifting through this leaves little other encyclopedic content.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:32, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • Newspapers.com is an excellent resource with many more newspapers than ProQuest, from my experience. I think you'll easily qualify for access through the Wikipedia Library. Are you sure you can't add anything else from, e.g., this source? BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:38, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        • Well, all those claims about "No matter how many seasons they play, if they do not win Super Bowls or change teams, there is little to say" and "There are no interesting feature stories done on offensive linemen" seem to have just gone up in a puff of smoke TonyTheTiger? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:42, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
          • To be fair, it seems Tony has never used Newspapers.com, which has a wealth of newspaper resources not available anywhere else. For the majority of historical athlete articles I've written, generally there's only really good coverage there. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:45, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
            • That article does not give us a lot. I think I saw it in Proquest and after the first three paragraphs just seemed like a new way to write about how he is related to a famous golfer, I went to the next one. I might have stopped at paragraph 2. We already have his kids names. I guess we get birth years. He played golf as a kid. He got signed because someone knew him. As I mentioned above injuries are a main encyclopedic topic for linemen.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:51, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
              • I think it is fairly clear that you are now "lieing to pick a fight", TonyTheTiger. Everyone here can see clearly that using that one article would triple the length of Heath Irwin#Professional career. You give six words to his Dolphins career, they give two paragraphs; you give six words to his Rams career, they give six paragraphs. Do us all a favour and grow up. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:05, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
                • Not really triple. I have added what little encyclopedic content there is from those sources.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 16:52, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
                  • No, you've added the barest minimum of content you think you can get away with TonyTheTiger. Stuff in just that one St Louis source you don't mention: the number of games and precise position he played for the Patriots, by what time he had become a starter what injury he suffered at Miami and when (ironic, considering your soliloquies on how sources only mention injuries, that you can't be bothered to even cover that), who beat him to a starting spot at Miami, how many games he played there, how he left and what amount of money he lost, what contract he signed with the Rams, what positition he aimed to get, or the basic qualities of his play. I can't quite get over that last one: you think how a sportsperson plays their sport is not encyclopedic coverage?? WTF are you playing at??? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:06, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Since I'm also having this same convo on Tony's talk page and just now noticed this one, I asked these same questions and was able to find sources to help beef up the article pretty easily. We have him winning the 1999 training camp guard battle, as well as him signing for four years with Miami, both help the article and took me almost no time to find. Wizardman 15:46, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1000M[edit]

Similarly, 1000M seems just to need to have a section removed, which I have done. Quickfail is not for easily correctible flaws. I have corrected the flaw.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:13, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, if you read WP:QUICKFAIL, there is no requirement the flaw not be easily correctible. – Teratix ₵ 15:20, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know why Tony, formerly "one of the outstanding mathletes in the nation", needs his hand held to this extent, but let me spell it out:
  • There was a section with no citations in 1000M.
  • A section with no citations in it is eligible to be tagged with {{unreferenced}}
  • WP:QUICKFAIL states that an article which is eligible to be to be tagged with {{unreferenced}} is eligible to be quickfailed.
  • Thus, 1000M is eligible to be quickfailed.
Is that clear or not? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:31, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2024 April newsletter[edit]

We are approaching the end of the 2024 WikiCup's second round, with a little over two weeks remaining. Currently, contestants must score at least 105 points to progress to the third round.

Our current top scorers are as follows:

Competitors may submit work for the second round until the end of 28 April, and the third round starts 1 May. Remember that only competitors with the top 32 scores will make it through to the third round. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAN, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs. As a reminder, competitors are strictly prohibited from gaming Wikipedia policies or processes to receive more points.

If you would like to learn more about rules and scoring for the 2024 WikiCup, please read Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring. Further questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges (Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), Epicgenius (talk · contribs), and Frostly (talk · contribs)) are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:06, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Teratix&oldid=1218927157"