User talk:Cukie Gherkin

{{safesubst:require subst|template=New Page Reviewer granted|1=

Hi Cukie Gherkin. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group. Please check back at WP:PERM in case your user right is time-limited or probationary. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encyclopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page or ask via the NPP Discord. In addition, please remember:

• Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging pages for maintenance so that they are aware.
• You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
• If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
• Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page. Steps such as checking for copyright violations using Earwig's copyright violation detector, checking for duplicate articles, and evaluating sources (both in the article, and if needed, via a Google search) for compliance with the general notability guideline are mandatory and will take a few minutes per article.
• Please review some of our flowcharts (1, 2) to help ensure you don't forget any required steps.
• Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. If you can read any languages other than English, please add yourself to the list of new page reviewers with language proficiencies. ~~

Do you have a paywall-bypassed version of it or the full text? All the sites I'm trying don't bypass the wall. Unfortunate as it seems to be a very fitting source (thanks for finding it), but I'm not going to pay just to be able to cite it. Talking about this article in case you forgot: https://www.mothership.blog/hollow-knight-silksong-hornet-compassion/ TheSilksongPikmin (talk | contribs) 20:46, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

@TheSilksongPikmin: I have a subscription to the website Cukie Gherkin (talk) 13:57, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Mega Man X characters, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Mega Man X characters until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:03, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

I just wanted to clarify something, since you'd brought this up in the Purah dispute resolution:

I'm not really sure why you wouldn't address comments from people outside of the DRN? What do you benefit from not explaining why you believe your desired outcome for this discussion is good? No one can force you to respond to someone asking for an explanation of a policy-based reason to remove content, but in my opinion, it's concerning that you think it is better to not. I do think this is a valid concern!

I was not responding in that thread for two reasons:

• I was not sure if you were 'supposed' to be in that thread, since I hadn't seen a dispute resolution where somebody who wasn't named in it was responding. I was wrong about this!
• I was not sure if DRN Rule A applied even if you were 'supposed' to be there, since you were not originally named in the dispute resolution. I believe it still did?

No harm intended; I'm perfectly willing to talk about it, but I was erring on the side of caution within the dispute resolution. Splitpunched (talk) 19:41, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

I'm glad we could settle this. I'm of a mind that while sensitivity to the discussion of sexual topics in areas where children will be expected to be reading about said subject is valuable, I also believe that such content should be discussed to some extent, so long as it is cited to reliable, secondary sources and is not some random throwaway comment. I am not opposed to tweaking the text in some way, but with the portion you proposed be removed, I did not think flat-out removal was an acceptable solution, so wanted to know what your rationale was for deletion instead of tweaking. Cukie Gherkin (talk) 19:46, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Sorry about the delay in responding.

Let me be clear - I am not saying "oh, we should never be talking about sexuality with video game characters at all". I think it is entirely reasonable to talk about that with some characters; I think it would be really weird, for example, to talk about Tifa, Bayonetta, or Lara Croft in-depth and just never bring that up, or even acknowledge it.

I am going to do my best to explain my point of view, let me be up front that what I'm saying is basically me trying to translate WP:ENCYCLOPEDIC into something that's actually useful. I am not an experienced Wikipedia editor, and I'm not fluent in Wikipedian, so I may not have "oh this is the exact policy"; I have a sense that it's not right, and I'm trying to articulate that.

I think it's inappropriate for Purah, not from a 'gross! no sex!' viewpoint, it's because I think it's putting WP:UNDUE on something that is basically trivia. I don't think there's anything that suggests that Purah is an enduring sex symbol (or created as a sex symbol) in the ways that the characters above were, and I think that just because there are technically sources that say that people were very thirsty for her at one point in time, doesn't mean it's a necessary thing to include (or if it is, it's relatively minor, not presented as a key element like I think it currently is).

I think WP:RECENT also kind of covers it? I'm not sure if that's clear enough, and I could write more and go into specific sources and my problems with them, etc. but I did want to at least make my point of view clear. Splitpunched (talk) 23:46, 16 May 2026 (UTC)

Hello Cukie Gherkin,

Backlog update

At the time of this message, there are 15,282 articles and 32,951 redirects awaiting review.

After the January–February drive the article backlog was reduced to 15,179 articles and the redirect backlog to 19,053 respectively. Great job! However, both queues are growing rapidly and any additional reviews are highly appreciated.

2024 and 2025 NPP Awards

JTtheOG was selected as the NPP reviewer of the year for both 2024 and 2025, for reviewing the most articles amongst all reviewers.

Hey man im josh and MPGuy2824 won the Redirect Ninja Master Award for 2024 and 2025 respectively, for reviewing the most redirects.

Overall in 2024, one Platinum, two Gold, eight Silver, 12 Bronze and 45 Iron Barnstars were awarded. Additionally, 66 reviewers got the NPP barnstar for doing more than 100 reviews through the year. In 2025, one Platinum, ten Silver, 13 Bronze and 38 Iron Barnstars were awarded. Additionally, 38 reviewers got the NPP barnstar for doing more than 100 reviews through the year.

BoyTheKingCanDance, Rosiestep, SunDawn, and Vanderwaalforces were inducted into the NPP Hall of Fame for having two separate years of 2,000+ article reviews.

January–February backlog drive

The experimental two-month long backlog drive concluded with 183 reviewers patrolling over 27,761 articles and 35,309 redirects, earning over 36,836 points. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 6,484.6 points in this drive.

May backlog drive

An article-only backlog drive is currently underway. We are hoping to make a big dent in the backlog. You can read more about it or join at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Backlog drives/May 2026.

PageTriage

An attempt was made to get the New Pages Feed to sort by date marked as reviewed instead of date created. However we had to revert it due to bugs. We may try again in the future. You can subscribe to the Phabricator ticket if you're interested in following along.

Reminders:

• You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
• Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:37, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Good article nominations | June 2026 Backlog Drive
June 2026 Backlog Drive: Do you want to become more experienced in the GA process? On 1 June, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles reviewed. Mentors are available, and new reviewers (<6 reviews) get bonus points! Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talk page.
You're receiving this message because you have participated in a good article review this year or participated in the previous backlog drive.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:58, 25 May 2026 (UTC)