User talk:Rhain

Your good article nomination of the article The Celestial Toymaker has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. 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. Please also consider reviewing somebody else's nomination to help keep the backlog down. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of ExcellentWheatFarmer -- ExcellentWheatFarmer (talk) 00:48, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

... since it's been a long time since we've really properly crossed paths here on Wikipedia. I see you've been doing well helping develop the Grand Theft Auto VI article, and hope you are eagerly awaiting more on Intergalactic: The Heretic Prophet, where I hope to eventually aid you in developing content concerning the score by Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross. And of course when The Last of Us season 3 draws close, I'll try to contribute to the material that Santaolalla and Fleming draw up. In the meanwhile though, I was hoping to get your input on an article I've just promoted to GA status, Inferno (Boards of Canada album), because it has profoundly confounded me.

For the life of me, I'm not seeing any tidbit written down that catches my eye as a prime contender for WP:DYK. Maybe it's because my brain is fried from the heatwave. Maybe it's because the band has done zero interviews in promotion for the album, which is where you'd expect to see content that would make for a good DYK hook. But I know you're a pro at DYK, so I thought, "y'know, of those on Wikipedia I'm familiar with, if anyone could find gold dust in a river of content, I bet it'd be Rhain". I would appreciate it if you'd take a gander at the article with your 'good eye-for DYK' if you find the time. With warm refreshingly chilly regards, BarntToust 17:47, 3 July 2026 (UTC)

Good to hear from you! Never a bother at all—it's nice to see what you've been working on. I'm certainly not a master at DYK or anything, but there are a few things that immediately caught my eye:

• ... that unsolicited VHS cassettes were mailed to past customers of a record label to promote Inferno?
• ... that an Inferno song references the Antichrist and Osama bin Laden before sampling a Christian televangelist's sermon?
• ... that a song from Inferno featuring a woman describing embryo development was used at the end of Backrooms?
• ... that Inferno samples buzzing flies, an Islamic scholar, Hare Krishna, The Jesus Trip, and a woman describing embryo development?
• ... that the marketing for Inferno was described as a "noisy anti-campaign"?
• ... that reviewers could only listen to Inferno three times?
• ... that the White House's social media accounts posted a video incorporating a song from Inferno without permission?
• ... that a reviewer thought an electronic album served as an investigation of faith, human biology, and existential doubt?

Possibly not all usable, but hopefully a good place to start! Please never hesitate to drop a message if you ever need anything, even if it's just to share something you're working on—again, never a bother. Hope you're coping alright with the heat! – Rhain ☔ ^he
_him 23:12, 3 July 2026 (UTC)

Whoa, thank you Rhain! I had figured the best contenders for DYK would likely come from the sampling content, and the three concerning that, they are definitely my favorite of the ones you've suggested here. I shouldn't complain about the AC being out at my building, since stronger souls (the greater part of Europe) deal with this sort of thing as just the norm, after all. Once again, I really appreciate your help with this one. I would keep in touch, it's always a pleasure crossing paths. Be seeing you around! BarntToust 01:12, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

The old sentence was a run-on that was a mouthful and excessively wordy. My version was split up into three. I think you might want to re-read it, and I petition for the restoration of my version. IPhoneEnthusiast (talk) 11:17, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. I've re-read it several times, but I just don't think this version is an improvement; the three-sentence structure interrupts the flow and seems a bit wordier to me (and I assume the duplicated refs were VisualEditor's fault). I've added parentheses and removed a semicolon, which should help a little. – Rhain ☔ ^he
_him 11:33, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

Very well, but I think that the original lasted for too long and I had trouble reading it. Either way, I won't contest it. Thank you for the reply IPhoneEnthusiast (talk) 11:38, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

Even if the first two paragraphs are cited later in the page, shouldn't it still have a cite on front? Endemaster (talk) 11:41, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. Per WP:LEADCITE, there's generally no need to cite uncontroversial information in the lead if it's already referenced in the body. – Rhain ☔ ^he
_him 11:43, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

i see ende (talk) 11:47, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For your dedication and completion of all First Doctor stories. I've enjoyed reading every single one, as I'm sure countless others have as well. Can we expect to see the Second Doctor next in the future? (eyes emoji) :-) – zmbro (talk) (cont) 18:27, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

Thank you, this is very kind! I've thoroughly enjoyed working on them. A lot of the Second Doctor's serials (especially from his season season) are already in great shape, thanks to the tireless work of many others, though I may dip my toes in a little to help fill some gaps. It would be very satisfying to see the complete collection of 1960s/B&W serials, at the very least. – Rhain ☔ ^he
_him 07:36, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

@Rhain congratulations! Impressive work on getting quite literally an entire era done, this is genuinely probably the highest quality section of the project as a whole! If you ever decide to do some Second Doctor stuff I'm happy to help with working on the wider topics if you need anything. Fantastic work and all the best for whatever you choose to work on next. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 04:54, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

Thank you kindly! That's some very high praise. You've already been doing really great work with some Second Doctor articles (and elsewhere, of course) so I may join the fun at some point too! – Rhain ☔ ^he
_him 05:08, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

Thank you so much! It means a lot hearing that from someone who's already done some pretty impressive work himself. That reminds me that I really need to get started on Doctor Who season 5 at some point once I find some time. After that and The Enemy of the World, Season 5 will be entirely improved, which will be exciting to see given that's about a third (give or take) done of the Second Doctor's content already.

Best of luck for if you decide to hop into the Second Doctor articles. I've had some fun working on them myself, a lot of them are very interesting developmentally and within the wider series as a whole, so I hope they'll be fun for you as well. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 05:38, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

On 20 July 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Celestial Toymaker, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the fourth episode of The Celestial Toymaker cost £1,449, making it the cheapest Doctor Who episode ever recorded? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Celestial Toymaker. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (The Celestial Toymaker), 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 nominate it.

—TechnoSquirrel69 (talk) 00:03, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

hi there Rhain, haven't chatted in a while, I was just slacking off and decide to type "best TV shows" for the heck of it, and colour my face shocked when I found that Empire has a new list of the best TV shows, it meets criteria for that page and I need you to help me by adding it to the list, please! link below. https://www.empireonline.com/tv/features/best-tv-shows/ RengokuKyojuroFan (talk) 09:37, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. That looks like a suggestion for the talk page, where you've got a new response. – Rhain ☔ ^he
_him 21:10, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

Hi Rhain! :) I've been collecting sources for RedShift (software) on my sandbox. But there is a already a software with that name. Do you know what I should call it? (There has been multiple of these RedShift software)

What I found (There is more stuff on Newspapers.com and the Gale site)

• https://web.archive.org/web/20040408054018/http://www.maris.com/content/index.php3?id=4
• https://web.archive.org/web/20250728083641/https://www.newspapers.com/article/syracuse-herald-journal/171478601/
• https://web.archive.org/web/20201027072418/https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-08-26-ls-31307-story.html
• https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-oregonian/197770680/

Timur9008 (talk) 08:27, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

RedShift (astronomy software) or RedShift (1994 software), perhaps? – Rhain ☔ ^he
_him 23:41, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

RedShift (astronomy software) sounds good. Thanks! :) Timur9008 (talk) 04:57, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

hi Rhain, sorry for wasting your time, but I checked the Russian Wikipedia article for Kanobu, translated it into English by myself, and found out it was temporarily owned by a company named Rambler, which was a very messy era for the publication, so then they became independent again for a whole decade, since they became independent again (until 2025), and the article implies there was an editorial policy (key word, was) and became more focused on broader media and "hype", but then a editor-in-chief moved to another Russian publication, and the new editor was fired just a month later, so it appears a specific era of this website could be considered reliable or even situational. Internet Archive is currently down on my computer, so I'll check it later. if you want to check for more info, I'll leave the link below, (this isn't me bothering you to change consensus, just giving a update).

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9A%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B1%D1%83 RengokuKyojuroFan (talk) 04:56, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

btw here's something I found in the Internet Archive http://web.archive.org/web/20191228090236/https://kanobu.ru/ please go check on it. RengokuKyojuroFan (talk) 01:38, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

An archived version of the website's home page is not new evidence. The site has been listed as unreliable; it's time to move on. – Rhain ☔ ^he
_him 01:50, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

wait Rhain, I think the source might have been valid for a short period of time, it's just like Valnet sources before Valnet acquired them, and please don't shut this thread immediately, I promise, also I can't access the Wayback Machine, so I'll have you check it to give Kanobu a last chance before finally burying it for dead and we will all move on. RengokuKyojuroFan (talk) 02:04, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

how about we just stop judging each other and I personally accept the independent era as situational. I mean I trust this era much more than Dexerto and any site owned by Valnet, but anything after IFSI bought it is dogwater. RengokuKyojuroFan (talk) 02:23, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

You need to actually present evidence explaining why the site would be reliable for that period. Summarising the Russian Wikipedia article and linking the 2019 homepage is not new evidence. Please re-read the reply here. Reopening discussions and making demands just to get Bayonetta 2 added to a list is disruptive. You're welcome to personally judge the site however you please, but several experienced editors have analysed it and come to the consensus that it is unreliable for Wikipedia; I urge you to listen to them. – Rhain ☔ ^he
_him 02:28, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

I no longer care about adding the games I like to the list, also I told you my internet is crappy so I can't access the archived source. RengokuKyojuroFan (talk) 02:33, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

@Rhain, I've left them a talk page warning. This has entered WP:DTS territory and I think the ability to AGF has run out of steam. @RengokuKyojuroFan, I've only just come across this discussion, but it seems Rhain has said here what I've already just said on your talk page. Please listen. Continuing this behaviour will inevitably lead to a block. 11WB 💬 03:06, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

ok, I'll just wait for my internet to recover, I'll check the archived page to look for evidence, then I'll drop the stick and log out. RengokuKyojuroFan (talk) 03:09, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

You have said this numerous times already. Please make sure you do so this time. 11WB 💬 03:10, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

https://web.archive.org/web/20201224151132/https://kanobu.ru/community-rules/ here's something from 2020, it's the community guideline list, I think the community guideline serves as kind of both the user and editor policies. RengokuKyojuroFan (talk) 09:42, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

The same link was shared last month; those are user contribution rules, not an editorial policy. They had similar rules from around 2014 to at least 2024. – Rhain ☔ ^he
_him 10:00, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

I think I saw some author bios using the Wayback Machine that confirmed that the authors were also on other Russian sites, btw I think is all because of a WP:NONENG issue, also while it is highly likely that they do have an editorial process in place, there appears to be a significant lack of transparency regarding that process. I don't believe having no editorial policy means zero reliability with a few exceptions, freaking Valnet sources have editorial policies, also Russian Wikipedia mentions only editorial materials can be used, and yet many articles of Kanobu don't feel like churned out AI generated Valnet-tier schlock, I lean toward situational, go ask some Russian users their thoughts, I'm dropping the stick and leaving. RengokuKyojuroFan (talk) 10:09, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

This is getting ridiculous, @RengokuKyojuroFan. This has been discussed already and a consensus has formed. Haranguing participants on their talk page to revisit the same things borders on WP:HARASSMENT. Please drop the subject and edit elsewhere. The next step is WP:AN/I, and I don't think anybody wants to end up there. 11WB 💬 10:12, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

ok, I'll stop, I'll only talk about Kanobu again when substantial evidence is found, I'll buzz off. RengokuKyojuroFan (talk) 10:15, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

"Substantial evidence" does not open the doors to reposting in a week or even a month from now. Dropping the stick means ceasing this subject entirely. You are welcome and encouraged to edit literally anything else. 11WB 💬 10:17, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

I mean dropping the stick for now, I'll move on from this source until something new is found, goodbye. RengokuKyojuroFan (talk) 10:31, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

As has been mentioned, how the Russian Wikipedia determines its reliable sources is their business; we are a different project, and our users have their own processes. Thank you for agreeing to move on—I look forward to seeing you contribute constructively elsewhere. – Rhain ☔ ^he
_him 10:19, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article The Price (The Last of Us) is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Preferwiki -- Preferwiki (talk) 01:28, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi Rhain!:) Do you know if Tonka Dig’n Rigs is a video game or a toy? Someone added Dig’n Rigs to the main Tonka page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tonka#Other_games but I'm not sure if it's really a video game. I also can't find a source that says Media Station developed it.

Based on these sources:

• https://web.archive.org/web/20230525043458/https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2000-nov-30-tt-59086-story.html
• https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-idaho-statesman/203290231/
• https://www.newspapers.com/article/newsday-nassau-edition/203290242/
• https://web.archive.org/web/20021016195207/http://www.funkidsgames.com/games/tonka_digs/
• https://web.archive.org/web/20141114130723/http://www.allgame.com/game.php?id=27047

Timur9008 (talk) 10:07, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

At a quick glance, it looks like educational software, so possibly a video game depending on one's definition? It looks fairly similar to the Tonka Workshop Playset, so I doubt there'd be much opposition if you listed it similarly. – Rhain ☔ ^he
_him 10:25, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

Do you see a source that says Media Station worked on it? All Game Guide lists a different developer. (ImageBuilder Software). Their website lists it under their products.

@User:DigitalIceAge What do you think? Timur9008 (talk) 10:37, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

Based on the opening credits, it looks like it was developed by ImageBuilder Software and KID Interactive (see also this interview). FWIW, there's also a review in The Complete Sourcebook on Children's Software. – Rhain ☔ ^he
_him 21:03, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

@Timur9008: No hits for "Dig'n Rigs" and "Media Station" on any of the research databases I have access to. DigitalIceAge (talk) 03:24, 8 August 2026 (UTC)

@DigitalIceAge I meant what Dig'n Rigs can be classified as. Timur9008 (talk) 15:24, 9 August 2026 (UTC)

Tonka Digs N Rigs now created. Made it similar to Tonka Workshop Playset article. Timur9008 (talk) 08:38, 16 August 2026 (UTC)

On 10 August 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Doctor Who season 3, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that 26 of the 45 episodes in Doctor Who's third season are missing? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Doctor Who season 3. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (Doctor Who season 3), 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 nominate it.

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:03, 10 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi Rhain,

There is an ongoing Request for Comment (RfC) at Wikipedia:Good article nominations/August 2026 RfC, which you may be interested in because in the past year, you have nominated or reviewed more than one good article nomination. This message has also been sent to all subscribers to the Good Article Gazette. The RfC contains many proposals (33 at the time of writing), which are split into the following categories: nominators, reviewers, reviews, volunteer roles, reviewing initiatives, and others. However, you are more than welcome to add any proposals of your own that you wish to put to the community.

By the end of September, all the proposals will have been closed by an uninvolved editor, either as a consensus for one of the options or with no consensus. At this point, editors will be invited again to develop these proposals into coherent policy and implement them.

Thank you for your contributions to the good articles project, and I look forward to your input! (in solidarity), JacobTheRox^{(talk|contributions)} 16:03, 11 August 2026 (UTC)

I am not sure if I should reply on my own page or reply here, so I can do both.

So none of the sources actually contain the video (tbf, I am not sure how to cite it, I can find it on YT in Japanese, but uh), one source had it actually posted apparently, but the video was removed. I don't think in the video he really comments on if he will use AI or not. He says he doesn't want to incorporate what is shown to him, not that he doesn't want to incorporate AI per se, especially at its current state years later. Even the quote from the source shows the context in which the line was said: "Whoever creates this stuff has no idea what pain is whatsoever. I am utterly disgusted. If you really want to make creepy stuff you can go ahead and do it. [But] I would never wish to incorporate this technology into my work at all.” Also it is slightly mistranslated, the actual translation is closer to this, which doesn't mention using "technology" at all: "If you want to do such disgusting things you can go right ahead but I utterly cannot think of connecting our work to this" -- Also both sources mention the context surrounding the video, which was him being shown a creepy zombie. While I agree what I said is still a bit of an interpretation, it is fairly neutral as well pointed out in both the video and in the sources. So I don't really... see a problem. The part about him not wanting to use "the technology" in the Wikipedia article (which can be read as AI as a whole) at all is misleading (especially since like I said the original Japanese doesn't even use the word technology, and it is clear by the context otherwise what he means which is not as clear in the Wikipedia article). -- I would say adding the video as source would be nice, but yeah. My edit is fairly neutral either way. GreaterIce (talk) 04:50, 12 August 2026 (UTC)

👀 Replied over yonder. ☔

Your good article nomination of the article The Price (The Last of Us) has been placed on hold, as the article needs some changes. See the review page for more information. If these are addressed within 7 days, the nomination will pass; otherwise, it may fail. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Preferwiki -- Preferwiki (talk) 06:47, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article The Price (The Last of Us) has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. 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. Please also consider reviewing somebody else's nomination to help keep the backlog down. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Preferwiki -- Preferwiki (talk) 06:27, 16 August 2026 (UTC)

I'll give you a couple choices, we can either take this article to intermediaries, to the requisite talk page, or work on it together. It is grammatically incorrect and other things too.Stately2 (talk) 05:58, 18 August 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for starting a discussion instead of reverting again with explanation. What are your issues with the article? I don't see any grammatical errors in the current revision, whereas I did notice some errors in your edit. – Rhain ☔ ^he
_him 06:02, 18 August 2026 (UTC)

You don't see them because you created them. I will go back and edit one by one what is wrong. You can discuss each one here.Stately2 (talk) 06:07, 18 August 2026 (UTC)

No, I did not write most of that article (not that it would prevent me from noticing errors anyway). Now that you have been reverted, it's generally accepted that you should explain your requested changes, not force them back in and expect others to explain them. – Rhain ☔ ^he
_him 06:13, 18 August 2026 (UTC)

I clearly explained each edit. I am not saying you don't have some ability, just you are not catching some of the material which would not be printable anywhere.Stately2 (talk) 06:17, 18 August 2026 (UTC)

Considering your recent edits did not reintroduce most of the errors from your first one, I feel pretty confident in my own capability of catching errors. To break down your recent changes, though:

• "Deaf" is neither overlinking nor improper capitalisation; see the lead here
• There's no need to split this sentence, nor introduce an abbreviation that's never used again (though your initial edit removed the unabbreviated form entirely)
• "HBO" is not overlinking, and was lauded is not an improvement over critical acclaim
• second-youngest should be hyphenated
• Keivonn, not Kevionn

Hope that makes sense. I've made some changes. – Rhain ☔ ^he
_him 06:38, 18 August 2026 (UTC)

You're wrong! Except for his name, why would I know the spelling of that?Stately2 (talk) 09:22, 18 August 2026 (UTC)

By looking at the title of the article you're editing, probably. ☔

I am sure you meet people who are bettter at editing or perhaps in writing than you are. Do you debate with them too?Stately2 (talk) 09:33, 18 August 2026 (UTC)

Lauded is another way of saying received praise, acclaim, etc. You're boringly saying stuff in only one way ALL the time. Don't be so monotonous.Stately2 (talk) 09:34, 18 August 2026 (UTC)

If you were to go around here and change all of the references of deaf to Deaf, it would be ok, per the lede or lead (if you knew it or not both spellings are right). But, you'll get pushback on here. They'll let you know Wikipedia doesn't do that.Stately2 (talk) 09:37, 18 August 2026 (UTC)

You're wrong! is usually followed by an explanation, not attempts to insult. I explained myself, so I hoped you'd do the same. Allow me to do so again:

• HBO should be linked upon its first instance outside the lead (just like The Last of Us, Sam, etc.) per MOS:DL.
• It seems logical to capitalise Deaf in this instance since Woodard is Deaf from birth. I'm not attempting to change it on every other article, so I'm not sure I see the relevance; we're only talking about this one.
• I know what lauded means but critical acclaim seems more fitting as it actually explains where the praise came from. Your comment about repeating it ALL the time seems misplaced, since it's only used once in this article.
• second-youngest should be hyphenated as it is a compound adjective. The internet is generally not known as a reliable place for grammar, so I'm not sure why you would cite it; instead, I would recommend checking, for example, the reference used in the article, which correctly hyphenates the term.

Hope that makes sense. I'm comforted by the continued lack of evidence of grammatical errors to begin with, in any case. – Rhain ☔ ^he
_him 10:40, 18 August 2026 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ni no Kuni mobile games is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be merged into Ni no Kuni.

The article is being discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ni no Kuni mobile games until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may still edit the article, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the AfD notice from the article until the discussion is closed.

ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:42, 18 August 2026 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article The Last of Us season 2 is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Vestrian24Bio -- Vestrian24Bio (talk) 13:28, 21 August 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Naughty Dog logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:41, 26 August 2026 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article The Last of Us season 2 has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. 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. Please also consider reviewing somebody else's nomination to help keep the backlog down. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Vestrian24Bio -- Vestrian24Bio (talk) 07:49, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi Rhain! I hope you are doing well. I've just wrapped up the bulk of my edits for my planned rewrite of Doctor Who season 5, which can be found at User:Pokelego999/sandbox/Doctor Who season 5 rewrite. I still need to do some light copyediting in places, some citation and overall condensing in the broadcast section, and to add a promotion section (Which I missed when drafting this), and additionally need to adjust a few tables I wasn't able to easily import from the main article, but otherwise this is mostly reflective of the final draft. I would greatly appreciate it if you could take a look and see if there is anything egregious formatting or content wise that you feel needs to be addressed or altered before it goes live. No worries if not, but I figured it would likely be good to at least ask for some advice since you are as of now the expert on this kind of article rewrite. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 04:49, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

@Pokelego999: Good to hear from you! This looks great so far, and is bound to look even better post-copyedit; I definitely don't spot anything egregious. I suppose the biggest difference with, say, my season 3 rewrite would be § Critical response (§ Reception on your draft): I tried to group paragraphs by thematic element (audiences, writing, performances, production), whereas your second and third paragraphs are ordered chronologically. There's certainly nothing wrong with that—I think you've done it better than the season 2 article—just an observation.

Other than that, I guess I would personally consider condensing § Scrapped stories and/or combining it with one of the two previous sections, but that's fairly minor. Again, great work! Looking forward to having a closer look once it's published. – Rhain ☔ ^he
_him 23:40, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

@Rhain Thank you for the overview! I do quite like your suggestion for the scrapped stories; I've incorporated it into the article and did one or two minor text adjustments. I feel it definitely looks and reads far better than it did before. For reception, I was unsure of how to emulate your style since there weren't a lot of common threads in story criticism I could find beyond the overall legacy of the season. I'd appreciate any suggestions you have on that since I'm not sure how to group stuff up with what is currently here. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 03:21, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

That's definitely fair enough. I'm not sure I have any specific suggestions there; you're far more familiar with the reviews, and there's no point trying to force the content to fit a template that underserves it. FWIW, I think you've done a great job summarising the overall reception/legacy—there's frustratingly few sources discussing the early seasons as a whole, but I like your approach. You could always consider mentioning DWM polls too (including on individual articles) but understandable to just stick with critics instead. – Rhain ☔ ^he
_him 03:53, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

@Rhain That is fair, I believe; I'll leave reception as it is but if a reviewer finds issue with it I'll see about restructuring it. For now I have gone ahead and added your suggestion to include some DWM polls; I feel it does a good job indicating fan consensus for the season's stories overall, which combined with the legacy bits in the first para of reception should do a good job showing the overall influence of the season. Let me know your thoughts on that, as otherwise I think after another round of copyediting to make sure I didn't miss anything I'll mainspace it and set to work on patching up the tables (Most of it should be easy, though I'll have to go through and do a bit of cleanup on "In print", I imagine) Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 21:25, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

Looks good! I'm always a fan of mentioning DWM polls, if only briefly. On several occasions, I've considered adding an excerpt from the table within the articles to avoid summarising complex results in prose, though it does make me hyper-aware of WP:CRUFT, WP:WEIGHT, and especially WP:DONTHIDE; I think the concise sentence/s are a suitable alternative, at least, with more specific results within individual articles.

Yep, you'll definitely want to check the DVD/Blu-ray, VHS, and novelisation lists to ensure everything is transcluded correctly (especially references) but thankfully they're mostly in good shape anyway. Looking forward to seeing the article in mainspace! – Rhain ☔ ^he
_him 01:10, 3 September 2026 (UTC)

@Rhain do you have any suggestions for sources for the DVD/VHS releases? Complete History covers little outside the British BBC release, despite what I thought it covered. Additionally, do you have any idea where I could find "Based on the Popular British Television Serial"? It was free online but the download link on the website doesn't seem to load anymore. This is mostly so I can double check based on the unsourced audiobook column in the otherwise well-sourced in print section.

I've otherwise ported everything to mainspace, just need to patch up the citations issues on those tables and this should be relatively ready to go for GAN. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 04:31, 4 September 2026 (UTC)

Additionally, how would I go about even editing these tables? They seem to be transcluded from the home media articles (Which, frankly are clusterfucks that should probably be nuked off this website, but that's neither here nor there) and I'm not quite sure how to adjust them. Do I edit them on their home pages, and that change is reflected back in season 5's article? Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 04:34, 4 September 2026 (UTC)

Doctor Who Magazine is by far the most useful resource for release dates, if you're able to track down the specific articles, but their records for non-UK releases are shoddy at best; otherwise, The TARDIS Library is a decent alternative. Looks like Smith's book was taken offline because of his upcoming version—that would be a great resource in the future, but for now I'm happy to send you a copy of the 2021 edition if you want to shoot me an email. And yeah, the tables are transcluded from the DVD/Blu-ray, VHS, and novelisation lists (the same way that the episodes lists are transcluded from the individual seasons, for instance) so they'll need to be edited directly. – Rhain ☔ ^he
_him 04:56, 4 September 2026 (UTC)

@Rhain What is the reliability of the TARDIS Library? It seems to be a fansite connected to another fansite, Timelash, so I'm not seeing the reliability there. Otherwise I'll shoot you a message about Smith's book. As for DVDs, would the Classic Doctor Who DVD Compendium have coverage on this? I see it listed on the home video page but I'm not sure if we have access to it anywhere. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 20:24, 4 September 2026 (UTC)

The longevity of The TARDIS Library alone is enough for me to consider it fairly reliable for this purpose, even if it is a fansite; it's been around for every single DVD release, so that catalogue is great, though I understand the concern. The Classic Doctor Who DVD Compendium looks great but AFAIK only covers UK releases. – Rhain ☔ ^he
_him 22:04, 4 September 2026 (UTC)

@Rhain I am a bit hesitant even still since other, similarly long-running fansites are traditionally not considered reliable sources on-wiki. I'm not quite sure it'd fly in a GAN review, honestly, as much as the catalogue is comprehensive and admittedly helpful. I did a brief look to see if it qualifies under Wikipedia:Subject-matter expert status, and its original founder, Richard Atkinson, might count since he has done some extensive further Who and journalistic work, but I'm getting no hits on O'Malley at all, and he was the one who ran the site predominantly since its inception according to the about section. I'd appreciate your input on this, though. Shame on the DVD Compendium, though, as it seems like it would have been an insanely helpful resource. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 04:53, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

Depends on the reviewer, I suppose; I've referenced the website in at least two GAs, for instance. I understand the caution, and wouldn't be surprised to see it challenged, but I personally consider it enough of an expert source for its specific (and basic) purpose. – Rhain ☔ ^he
_him 05:28, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

@Rhain I'll use it if I can't find anything else on a given date, since I want to just finish up these last few edits and get the ball rolling for this article's nom, but I'll let you know if it gets challenged at the eventual GAN. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 16:43, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

@Rhain hate to be a bother on further information, but I did want to check: What is the reliability of using storefronts for release date info? I see Amazon is listed as unreliable but others are not; is there a consensus on this? Additionally, where can dates be accessed on The TARDIS Library? I see only month and year with no specific date on there. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 23:30, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

Amazon isn't unreliable for this purpose, so I'd consider other reputable storefronts the same. Looks like The TARDIS Library removed specific dates for some listings, though it appears some can still be found in archives. – Rhain ☔ ^he
_him 23:54, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

@Rhain I see, I was unaware of that consensus, thank you! I'll see what I can do for the other release dates. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 03:23, 6 September 2026 (UTC)

I hope you realize my edits were in good faith and not vandalism. I saw the page history where it said "Twinkle" in your edit summaries. Yes, I know what that word "Twinkle" means and I saw the article for it. I was not vandalizing the article, so you're just coming off as a bit of a nitpick. Cut it out. You even dismissed the word "also". Again, a bit of a nitpick, but whatever. Thenostalgiaman (talk) 23:32, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

Of course—I always assume edits are in good faith unless stated otherwise (if I thought you were vandalising, I would have reverted the first time and left you a message saying so). Twinkle is simply a tool and does not imply, in any way, that your edits were seen as vandalism. Yes, a lot of small, precise edits like this are nitpicky. Sorry if you feel you've been disrespected in any way; your edits are appreciated. – Rhain ☔ ^he
_him 23:46, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

Hey, why doesn’t Edge 2007 meet the criteria? DJordan18 (talk) 23:32, 3 September 2026 (UTC)

Never mind, I see that it’s partially reader-submitted. However, it might be worth reevaluating since the article says that it was also drawn from industry insiders and their own editorial team, so there might be some merit to it. DJordan18 (talk) 23:36, 3 September 2026 (UTC)

Sure, there's certainly nothing wrong with reevaluating it; it's been mentioned a few times before, but there's no harm in a more significant discussion. – Rhain ☔ ^he
_him 23:41, 3 September 2026 (UTC)

Hey, do you have any interest in working on getting an FAC ready for this? Cukie Gherkin (talk) 00:18, 4 September 2026 (UTC)

Hey! Hope you've been well. I generally consider GA to be a pretty good finish line for most content (it's been more than a decade since my last FAC) but I'd be happy to help wherever possible if it's something you're interested in. FWIW, I expect we'll see a lot more new content to add to the article next year... – Rhain ☔ ^he
_him 00:46, 4 September 2026 (UTC)

Oh, that's true! In that case, I'll hold off until season 3 is out just to avoid instability. :) Cukie Gherkin (talk) 01:30, 4 September 2026 (UTC)

Hello!

I was curious about this revert. Why is left better for this image? In addition to right being the default, she is facing slightly to the reader's left, which would mean, all things being equal, we should place the image on the right per MOS:PORTRAIT. OrdinaryOtter (talk) 22:06, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. In this instance, I think the left alignment looks better with the text—right alignment is fine but I find it awkward below the infobox. MOS:PORTRAIT is a logical point but I'd say it applies a little less here, since young Hayao is still facing the text anyway. – Rhain ☔ ^he
_him 22:22, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

Hello, Rhain. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Kena: Scars of Kosmora, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five 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) 02:07, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Ni no Kuni Daibouken Monsters.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:38, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

On 15 September 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Last of Us season 2, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the first script for The Last of Us season 2 was submitted about 90 minutes before the 2023 Writers Guild of America strike? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Last of Us season 2. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (The Last of Us season 2), 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 nominate it.

Launchballer 00:02, 15 September 2026 (UTC)