User talk:Masem

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15 Archive 16 Archive 17 Archive 18 Archive 19 Archive 20 Archive 21 Archive 22 Archive 23 Archive 24 Archive 25 Archive 26 Archive 27

I'm getting very, very tired of having every edit I contribute to this site reverted by someone who thinks it contains "unnecessary" detail. If you people are going to treat me with such disrespect, never again ask me to contribute money to this site. I will NOT help pay for a site whose senior members repeatedly disrespect me. Finance your site yourselves. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Continental46 (talk • contribs) 16:16, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm stumbling upon this comment because I've made one Wikipedia entry in my life, it was very well sourced and relevant, and the same editor you're complaining about undid it based on silly reasoning. It happened years ago and it still irritates me. I haven't contributed or donated since. Muiy (talk) 10:35, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why exactly is it too much detail. The reason Auto closes the holo dectetor is alse a false statment. TheManTheyCallAdam (talk) 14:19, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I know CC2 is still operating. The Gematsu news article/source clearly stated that its Montreal-based studio/branch of CC2 is shutting its doors by the end of July 2023. -Prince Silversaddle (talk) 19:29, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm asking for your advice regarding this discussion you've been involved with. It has been two days with no further comments, and from the little experience I have with NORN, I don't expect any more editors to comment. One of the two editors involved in the dispute has apparently backed off, and the other is clearly acting in bad faith. Should I just remove the material again and reference the NORN discussion? Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 11:49, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would do that, the discussion clearly has weight in your favor. Make sure to add a talk page section (if not already) to discuss why you did it and see if they use that. Masem (t) 12:37, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Will do. Thanks! Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 13:06, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It was inevitable UltimateGamer9000 (talk) 07:10, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Masem: Just letting you know about Talk:Second generation of video game consoles#The 1992 debacle as a courtesy since it seems to be what this is about. It might not matter now since the OP's victory lap turned out to be a bit premature. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:16, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This guy has been making this same edit for 3 years. His IPs are an easy to follow history, but even though its public, I'm not gonna connect the dots right now as it's not necessary. The last residential IP is still under a pblock from the article. -- ferret (talk) 00:38, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Spacechem 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 fair 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) 17:22, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mystery Science Theater 3000, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page WTOP.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:40, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Esports, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gran Turismo.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:30, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Top-chef-season-2.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair 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) 02:48, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Top-chef-season-3.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair 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) 02:49, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Top-chef-season-4.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair 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) 02:50, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Masem, I noticed on the Bostock v. Clayton County Wikipedia page you do not recommend Gerald Bostock has his own page. I think he meets the notability standard as I have found a great deal of research on his story. Could you let me know why you reverted my edit? Thank you. Serenewilliams (talk) 16:45, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

IT WAS NOT A GAME GUIDE SO STOP GrEgOrYiSnTaRoBoT (talk) 12:14, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If there's an issue with the sources then why don't you let me know or help out? I can't keep trying to genuinely improve the article and add sources when it's getting reverted by you for doubting sources.

Now it's back to the old version which is messier and doesn't even have one source. Sintlepond (talk) 13:16, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Two source issues: that Techwiki is not a reliable source, and we should not use primary sources (like Nintendo's policy) to support these facts. The other factor is that we avoid having sources in the ledes, see WP:LEDECITE). I also think your wording is more clunky and adds too many details in the lede (eg we don't need to explain one-click cheat codes at that point). Some of the other sources are better later in the article. Masem (t) 13:33, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'll try make another revision changing the Techwiki and Nintendo sources. Also I think you're mistaken about the too many details: I actually saw that problem and decreased it, e.g. I removed ' greater performance, clearer quality, click cheat codes' from the first paragraph. --Sintlepond (talk) 13:38, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the Nintendo source with a reliable third-party one so hope that's sorted. I have checked the others and they're not primary. I've removed the Techwiki source and put a 'citation needed' for now - keep in mind that sentence about ROM/ISO files was already there before I started editing. --Sintlepond (talk) 14:03, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have no opinion on whether this should be on the frontpage, but your rationale appears to be faulty. Presidential assent is when the bill became law; you must have conflated the content of the draft bill in March with what was on the statute book in March in coming to the conclusion that assent largely ‘maintain[s] the status quo’. ‘[A]dopted in March’ means approved by parliament in March, but the text approved did not enter law because Museveni returned it for reconsideration: see Article 91 of the Constitution of Uganda. Only now is the death penalty on the statute book.

Since I don’t care about the front page, I only ask that you should be more careful. But if you care about the frontpage, you may, if possible, wish to reopen the discussion, which appears to have been closed only on the basis of that faulty rationale. Docentation (talk) 19:21, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

we happy few is a survival horror game and is shown in the articles 46.70.111.21 (talk) 15:30, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You said "in judgment" is standard, but the court uses "in the judgment". So I'm a little confused. Can you explain? Slovebz (talk) 17:25, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I know the slip opinions say "in the judgement" but "in judgement" is clear when used as a partial phrase in the infobox. It doesn't change anything about the writing. Masem (t) 21:19, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

TheNewLayoutReallySucks (talk) 02:22, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a Discord account? - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 20:56, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the lead on Klete Keller was vandalized yet again :( not sure if anything can be done. 129.222.222.20 (talk) 20:17, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, not by this block evader, certainly. Wes sideman (talk) 14:16, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Masem, just checking in. Do you have any thoughts regarding the proposed trim to the Workplace misconduct lawsuit subsection? As we discussed initially, all of the information is included in the breakaway article, so this is just a matter of keeping the main points on the page for reference, and leaving the details to the separate article. I look forward to your input. Sh-abkcomms (talk) 22:02, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sh-abkcomms: can you provide a version of your draft with the struck text removed? (but keeping the references within the struct text?), or if you want to edit that directly, I would support that as a fair cutback from the COI issue. Masem (t) 17:35, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a clean version of the text to the draft as you requested. Thanks again. Sh-abkcomms (talk) 14:33, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Exploration video games has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:05, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

soibangla (talk) 02:50, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Right, those that want to restore boldly added material the was removed should be discussing it. The reason I reverted is that there was no need to break out the information already present in the article to its own section and add original research. I am watching for legal sources to describe to what degree the fake client material was used/not used in the decision as to properly cite that but we can't reach that conclusion ourselves. --Masem (t) 02:56, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, just wanted to mention that I'm planning to nominate the page for GA. Is there anything you'd recommend improving before I submit? --FlyingKangeroo (talk) 22:47, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Don't revert it if it's wrong. Willbb234 14:02, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Ghost Trick Phantom Detective screenshot.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair 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) 02:10, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think the picture might be useful to explain it. יאצקין52 (talk) 18:48, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That picture doesn't help. Calling the change of Twitter to X as the "death of twitter" is a subjective matter so that picture is not really appropriate at this point. Masem (t) 18:50, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Masem. I would like to bring October 1 to FAC and saw that you're willing to mentor folks on film articles on the FAC mentor page. I've requested a peer review for the article and would be very grateful if you could take a look. Best, voorts (talk/contributions) 18:53, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

hey what should i cite? i have reddit post from the community manager and tweets from the official owlcat account about the subject as well. would those work? S silth (talk) 12:42, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We would need a third party, non forum source for inclusion. Neither of those would work. Masem (t) 13:29, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

genuine question why is that not ok here, but some other pages use tweets or reddit posts (from certain people) as citations? (example i will give is the owl house page which cites both the above sites) i would like to understand the difference as while i am guessing there is one i don't see it and i want to understand it so i don't make the same mistakes. S silth (talk) 13:54, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Masem. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Squid Game: The Challenge".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:05, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 01:47, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have left a couple of discussion on Talk:List of best-selling video game franchises and wondering if you would like to get involved P+T Fan Of Lion King 🦁 (talk) 22:33, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think I read that statement wrong for E3. I do apologize. I also need to look at Wikipedia:Good faith. If I read the statement better, I probably would have said the statement better. Cwater1 (talk) 14:14, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Convictions are nothing like what we talked about yesterday. When someone is convicted, there are clear consequences. Say the target article is a living voice actor and the crimes she committed carry a minimum eight-year prison sentence. Right there, we know we won't be hearing her in anything new (except maybe documentaries) until at least 2032. If the mandatory minimum is swift execution, that's the end of her career trajectory and everything else, definitively.

In Lack's case, she wasn't even part of it, consensually or otherwise. The settlement only affects descendants she never met and a company she hadn't heard of. The suit involved the relatively famous eponymous cells that affected her over 70 years ago, but there's absolutely nothing even suggesting their future use is or will be affected at all by whatever explicitly private agreement was reached the other day.

Anyway, I know I've been quite like a badger with you lately. I don't mean it in a malicious way, we've just run in the same circle so long that I can't help but notice you seem a bit "off" lately, relative to who I'm beginning to remember as "Classic Masem". Maybe it's a broader social problem or something entirely else pull-asides like these can't (and shouldn't try to) solve. But I'll lay off now and quietly hope you find your own way back toward those much clearer elucidations of the reasons you believe things are appropriate to blurb. Take care and have fun! InedibleHulk (talk) 19:33, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Very few convictions have any long term effects beyond the person convicted, and do not change the past. Sure, something like Rodney King would be an exception in that case causing the infamous riots. But to take the most predominant example right now, being Trump, that should he actually be convicted, there is not going to be change of anything he did while president, and it won't eliminate him from running for the 2024 election. While there will be some fallout (and that's not considering possible violence from the MAGA side) it really doesn't have an effect. But we do want to report that, hey, he was found guilty, and explain why his conviction at least matters.

I'm not saying we shouldn't post convictions, but it is that we're not posting them because of the impact on the future, simply as closure. Same with the Hernietta nom I made, its closure on the past. Masem (t) 01:10, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing can change the past, of course, so I'm glad that's not a criterion. I wonder why you mention it. I do get what you're saying about convictions having a limited impact. There are also the convict's friends and family to consider, plus the lawyers, guards and cellmates (among others). Next to a natural disaster or general election, it pales in comparison. But next to a public reminder that a dead person once lived (which may be all the family in your nom gained), it...whatever the opposite of "pales" is. I'm not at liberty to discuss what's-his-name, but am glad this response of yours makes more sense than the last one. Cheers to freedom, from prison, incomprehensibility and bodysnatchers! InedibleHulk (talk) 16:46, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of fallout, it's live from New York! InedibleHulk (talk) 21:05, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I removed that sentence fragment based on the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Notability#Confusing_passage. I'd admit the discussion was shallow, but I saw one !vote for removal. If you disagree, feel free to contribute there. Cheers, Ca ^{talk to me!} 00:07, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I never mentioned that Metaverse is fully connected to the US game market. The reason I included the Metaverse title was because it showed the growth of the industry and how tech companies are trying to break into the industry. I mentined mostly American tech companies. I can change the language I used there if you want, but it is not fair to ignore the metaverse topic, considering the large investments made in the US game market because of the metaverse. Ryan York (talk) 21:19, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

For one, the metaverse as a concept has not really taken off to dedicate a whole section to it. Now, that said, the inclusion of non tradition players in the video game market like Apple and Google (via mobile gaming) and Meta (for VR) makes sense but should be positioned simply as other important companies. Masem (t) 21:57, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It was written in a way to show how both used cloud gaming as tool for sales and revenue generation in the 9th gen. The remove of the first sentence makes it sounds as if just Microsoft has used cloud gaming while PlayStation has been doing it longer it just wasn't a main talking point or a compelling feature as it was a part of the stand-alone service PlayStation now GonzoBlue (talk) 22:20, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sources all point to the fact that MS had starting pushing cloud gaming far sooner than Sony. Sony has a solution but they aren't heavily marketing it. Masem (t) 22:32, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I reworded it to show how Sony didn't start pushing it till 2022 with its revamp of plus, but I kept the mention of both companies in the first sentence to show how both are using it. As Without mentioning Sony in the first sentence, it makes the part about Sony in the last 2 sentences feel out of place and makes it easier to miss that both of them are currently using cloud gaming as a marketing push for their console. GonzoBlue (talk) 22:36, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Video games in the United Kingdom, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 3D video game.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Masem. I see that you reverted my list edits on Guitar Hero and Rock band, and while you didn't keep it on Guitar Hero, you did on Rock Band.

The way I see it, using a table means that there are a lot of "No" choices, and just a few with "Yes". For Guitar Hero, most of the "Yes" goes to four systems: PS2, PS3, Xbox 360, and Wii. Other platforms get four or less "Yes", and some only get one.

For Rock Band, again, the dominant platforms are: PS2, PS3, Xbox 360, and Wii. Everything else only shows up once or twice.

I get that the list format can take some time to get used to, but I think it's the best format for Rock Band. Guitar Hero has a little more variance in terms of platform availability, but a list format should work there, too. What do you think? LABcrabs (talk) 17:50, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This seems excessive, but? [1]. Doug Weller talk 11:29, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There's no hard limit on words, but what should be quoted should be enough to get the point across in the speaker's POV without excessive fluffery, which that really long quote on that page is definitely out of scope. Two or three sentences in that case seem sufficient. Masem (t) 12:39, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Doug Weller talk 13:22, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Nine years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:01, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

hello,

I think that you've removed one of the additions on this page Blockchain , as you said it's a promotional addition, may I know the reason that you specify this addition as a promotional? Noha Mokhtar (talk) 09:41, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

First, it was added to a section about general impacts of blockchain that had nothing to do with specific conferences. Second, it used the conference page itself as a source (primary work), and looked like it used language directly from the conference's page as the addition. It basically looked like trying to advertise the conference on Wikipedia, which is promotion and just not allowed. Masem (t) 13:14, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Supergiant games 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 fair 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) 17:40, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

		The Original Barnstar
		Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia (u t c m l ) 🔒 ALL IN 🧿 18:50, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, recently you reverted my cities skylines 2 info. How exactly is it too much detail? What, should I put them into subcategories? I thought Wikipedia was for, you know, providing information. And also, you said I didn't use "encyclopaedic writing", please tell me how this is not like, ok. Also you reverted the grammar improvements I made. Please elaborate why you did this?in addition you stated I used too many 1st party sources, I don't see how this is bad.SK55555 (talk) 13:19, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the issues:

• On language, you have added this sentence " Now, you still indirectly need milestones to unlock services,..." which is not how we write gameplay per MOS:VG. It would be more appropriate to say "Players need to indirectly unlock services..."
• On detail, this same section is far too detailed on what a tech tree is (when the link to technology tree explains the basics, and we only need to explain how the player moves along it, which is via achieving certain milestones in game. It doesn't need to anywhere as long as you added.
• And we try to avoid using primary sources, particularly for commercial releases, since they are not independent sources. There is coverage of C:S II's features from third-party sources and we should use how they summarize the features for our articles.

Masem (t) 00:40, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Loot box, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 12:26, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, how are you? I recently re-expanded all articles related to singer Madonna's first album with more relevant, previously missing information. I'd like to take "Borderline", my favorite song from said albun, to FA status. It would be my first FAC, so I'm looking for a mentor who can assist me :) If you're interested, please let me know Thanks in advance! Christian (talk) 13:49, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Masem, I recently made edits to the Atari 2600 page to reflect the continuation of the Atari 2600 series with the introduction of the 2600+ model in 2023. These edits were based on official sources, specifically from the Atari company itself and the developer's statements. The primary basis for this edit is the official announcement by Atari: "The legendary console that started it all - the grandfather of living room arcade gaming - is back and better than ever! With over 40 million units sold globally" This statement from Atari clearly indicates that the 2600+ is a continuation of the original Atari 2600 series. I understand the importance of maintaining the accuracy and integrity of Wikipedia. Therefore, I want to open this discussion to ensure that all perspectives are considered. The intention is not to mislead or provide false information but to accurately represent the evolution and continuation of the Atari 2600 series. Given that the 2600+ is described as an "updated version of the iconic Atari 2600," it seems fitting to consider it within the same lineage, much like how updated or "slim" variants of other consoles are still considered part of their respective series. I welcome feedback and insights from the community. If there are additional sources or perspectives that should be considered, please share them. Together, let's ensure that the Atari 2600 page accurately reflects the rich history and ongoing legacy of this iconic gaming console. Sources:

[1]https://discord.com/channels/866714430208213002/866715614687789056/1143534227820916897 [2]https://atari.com/products/atari-2600-plus?_pos=1&_fid=6a6b44687&_ss=c [3]https://forums.atariage.com/topic/354609-atariage-atari/ ItIsNERD (talk) 15:11, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I hope you are doing well. It seems there is some discussion going on regarding adding blurbs to recent deaths, and another discussion to include non-human recent deaths. Do you think if it would be a good idea to start a formal discussion, or an RfC to change MOS of ITN entries with regards to the archive bot? The proposed changes in my head are not actually visible, and they would be inside the invisible html comments. That way, nothing visible is actually changed from what it is currently, but it would make it pretty straight forward to the bot to distinguish entries from events/news blurbs, recent deaths, and ongoing events. I am thinking adding invisible comments similar to:

• *<!--OE Mar 09 2022--> [[Russian invasion of Ukraine]] (OE for "ongoing event", or CE for "current event")
• *<!--RD--> <blurb if required> [[Dianne Feinstein]]
• *<!--RD--> {{nowrap|[[M. S. Swaminathan]]}}

Kindly let me know what you think. —usernamekiran (talk) 15:00, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there is a need to worry about tagging RD blurbs as RDs here. Tagging being blurbs and RDs would be nice , and even if the ITN stuff changes the bot you have should still be working. The goal is just to be able to search the changes on the ITN template, and thus having the diff between blurb and RD is not essential. But thats why if we can link to the mist-recent diff at ITNC associated with the template change should be good. Masem (t) 15:06, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Moody v. NetChoice, LLC, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page WFLA.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Any chance you will be able to dig in for a detailed file by file image review regarding Wikipedia:Media_copyright_questions#FUR_issues_at_Campbell's_Soup_Cans.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:51, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for reengaging.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:45, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My name is Laura and I work for Joanna Shields, Baroness Shields, a baron, businessperson, and former British politician. The page about her was recently tagged for COI and advert issues due to some poor edits made years ago. I posted here regarding my desire to address the substance of the tags with a re-write or heavy trims, to remove the promotional content. I was hoping you might be willing to chime in on the proposed trims and/or the suggestion for a rewrite. Let me know. Best regards.~~~~ LauTad89 (talk) 14:48, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have been trying to get this on here for a good few weeks and that was probably the best the page had been written. There are other examples of YouTube videos being included as sources such as for YouTubers coryxkenshin markiplier and penguinz0. And secondly all of the videos included on the page have atleast over a million views. 2603:6000:B800:EB4:5D85:A65F:224D:E373 (talk) 04:07, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

At which point does Andrew’s behavior begin to become less simply annoying and more genuinely disruptive? It’s a constant parade from him of misrepresentation, blatant disregard for guidelines (including the classic “but it’s got massive readership!!!”), bad faith arguments, and in general very few positive contributions to ITNC.

When would be appropriate to bring it to ANI or similar and try to get a TBAN? The Kip 17:39, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Masem,

I’m reaching out as part of a Cornell University academic study investigating the potential for user-facing tools to help improve discussion quality within Wikipedia discussion spaces (such as talk pages, noticeboards, etc.). We chose to reach out to you because you have been highly active on various discussion pages.

The study centers around a prototype tool, ConvoWizard, which is designed to warn Wikipedia editors when a discussion they are replying to is getting tense and at risk of derailing into personal attacks or incivility. More information about ConvoWizard and the study can be found at our research project page on meta-wiki.

If this sounds like it might be interesting to you, you can use this link to sign up and install ConvoWizard. Of course, if you are not interested, feel free to ignore this message.

If you have any questions or thoughts about the study, our team is happy to discuss! You may direct such comments to me or to my collaborator, Cristian_at_CornellNLP.

Thank you for your consideration.

--- Jonathan at CornellNLP (talk) 17:41, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Masem,

There have been a handful of times that I have removed something saaying SCOTUS "certified" a case (where it granted certiorari), and it seems that you were the one who wrote that in each instance. Note that certification is a different procedure than certiorari, and I don't think grants of certiorari by SCOTUS are referred to as certification. If you can find some source saying that is correct terminology, I would be interested to see it. I would suggest instead "granted review", "agreed to hear", etc. SilverLocust 💬 18:07, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's probably my fault, I thought I might have seen it in a few places, but can't find anything. Masem (t) 00:17, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Masem. Do you think the first three logos (the red and yellow ones) in Beijing Guoan F.C.#Crest history are simple enough to be {{PD-ineligible-USonly}} for local use on Wikipedia? Otherwise, I can't see how they can be kept as non-free per WP:NFC#cite_note-4 or WP:NFG. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:43, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would lean on them being too complex to qualify for TOO in the US or in China, and agree that maybe only one can be kept, since the key part of the logo remains constant on all four them. Masem (t) 00:04, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking a look at this. All four are currently being used in a gallery which makes even less sense for a single logo. So, any ideas on which of the four probably should be kept and where (if possible) it can be inserted into the body of the article. The most recent of the four (the green one) is not too different from the current logo; so, I think that one is probably not needed at all. So, that leaves one of the three red and yellow logos, at least it does in my opinion. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:58, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey alright so this is probably going to be the last attempt to get this mentioned on the page (Unless for example a article gets published on AV club or something.) There is a 2 articles that mentions the video I'm trying to put in (If it appears black you have to scroll down.) https://chattymatters.com/9761/previous-articles-videos/the-rise-of-the-video-essay/ and another one https://thesciencesurvey.com/arts-entertainment/2020/06/19/bored-try-watching-some-youtube-video-essays/ Both mention the creator of the video. Now I understand TV tropes is user generated however I have found examples of it being used on other pages (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_films_and_TV_programs_containing_corporal_punishment_scenes The TV tropes source is on the third reference link.) And the cult following it has received is also mentioned here (https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/VindicatedByHistory/AnimatedFilms Click on "dreamworks animation." And it will show you it.) (https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Trivia/SchaffrillasProductions When you find the words "Sleeper hit." It will mention the video.) The creator is mentioned on both IMDB and ironically av club (https://www.avclub.com/tv/reviews/schaffrillas-productions-2015) (https://m.imdb.com/title/tt15028658/) here are the memes it has received aswell https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Memes/Megamind 2603:6000:B800:EB4:7DEA:F575:1ACB:A534 (talk) 16:19, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Read this and it will give you a idea of what I tried to make the page like https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Megamind&oldid=1180201171 2603:6000:B800:EB4:7DEA:F575:1ACB:A534 (talk) 21:24, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've posted an edit request over on Talk:Vimeo and see that you've typically responded to past requests about the article. If you're available, I'd welcome your feedback. Cheers! BINK Robin (talk) 21:17, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

When you have a moment, could you head over to this article (it’s Dutch Survivor) and weigh in on the never-ending rigamarole with the colors on the voting table. Thank you! Bgsu98 (Talk) 17:28, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

BangJan1999 22:39, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Could you please confirm you've seen my email? BangJan1999 16:27, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes, I got it. I'm taking it into consideration. Masem (t) 01:29, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there. I noticed that this IP appears to have been blocked indef. It appears to be unintentional as this page states, and I quote, “IP addresses should almost never be indefinitely blocked.”, especially when the IPs get reassigned to different users. Also, the IP[v6] address mentioned in the block reason (the one beginning with 2603:6000) is blocked 366 days, so the same length could also be applied to the former as well. -GeniusWorkbench4622 14:59, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	For your valued contribution to the Five Nights at Freddy's (franchise) Article. ^w^ Keagen J. Cole (talk) 19:22, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I noticed that in this edit in Pong you added the book source, but not the page numbers. Could you please add page number? Thank you! 深鸣 (talk) 04:23, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I can't, I have it as an electronic book, so the best I can do is narrow it to the chapter. Masem (t) 05:19, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Thank you for your reply. 深鸣 (talk) 05:24, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, could you please send the electronic book to me via email? I want to translate this article into Chinese, so I need to verify every source. Thanks! 深鸣 (talk) 10:41, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Masem! I was looking through the FAC mentors list and apparently you are the only one with a specific interest in video games. I've just opened a PR for OneShot, currently a GA, to possibly make it my first FA. Any kind of help would be appreciated! Skyshifter ^talk 19:47, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I can help, let me know what you are looking for. Masem (t) 01:35, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know exactly how it works... I guess for now, any kind of comment regarding the state of OneShot, if it's too far from FAC or what can be done to improve it, would be helpful. I guess in particular, I know FAC has very high standards for sources, so I would like to know if the article has high-quality sources. It also uses some primary sources and interviews that FAC reviewers might not like, but I'm not sure. Skyshifter ^talk 19:37, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Gotcha. So here's a few things to start:

• You should make sure to get a copyedit of the prose done. That can be requested at WP:GOCE
• You do have a lot of "proseline", which are sentences that go "On (date), (something happened). One of these in a paragraph is fine, but your release section has multiple instances of this.
• In your reception section, I don't think you need to repeat the work associated with each reviewer - identifying who they write for on the first time is good, but not on subsequent ones.
• I do think you are okay on where the primary sources come in, but I'd suggest preparing for trying to replace them if possible, that could come up at FAC.
• You may want to spruce up the non-free image rationals for the gameplay. for example, on the second one, you should indicate that the dark atmosphere was an element picked up by reviewers. The more you can explain why you need the image in those rationals, the better.

Everything else seems to be ready to go for FAC, but I can say that having that copyedit done first is going to help with FAC. Masem (t) 20:40, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the third point I really wanted to follow what articles like Viva Piñata: Trouble in Paradise did, but I think I'm gonna remove it since it doesn't seem to be very common indeed. I will ask for a copyedit at GOCE and try to sort the other stuff out. Thank you for your comments! Skyshifter ^talk 22:04, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Copyedit done!
• I've tried to fix a few of these proseline sentences
• Removed work for each repetition
• Will try to look for replacements or at least already form an argument to keep these primary sources.
• Added more info to the rationales.

Thank you for your help so far! Should I close the PR and go with FAC already or should I still get some opinions there? Skyshifter ^talk 18:47, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would let the PR play out for its time period (30 days? Can't recall) and then move to the FAC, rather than jumping the gun. Masem (t) 01:37, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've opened the FAC at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/OneShot/archive1, feel free to participate! Skyshiftertalk 03:30, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can you create a page for PUBG Global Championship. like this https://liquipedia.net/pubg/PUBG_Global_Championship — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2400:56A0:8A3:43A:EF58:2328:DBC9:197A (talk) 18:32, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. So you know, the UK & Ireland and Europe were all split Nindendo/Sega across secondary schools and colleges in late 80s/early 90s. There was rivalry way way way beyond US & Canada. --Dock Mock (talk) 23:02, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The point is that most sources that talk about the console war between Nintendo and Sega frame it around the US market, not the international one. Masem (t) 03:45, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do you want to go along with 'international (mainly North American)' or something similar? I think it's good to reflect just how far-reaching the rivalry was, with people like me myself jumping on the Sega bandwagon. Dock Mock (talk) 20:09, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

	The Editor's Barnstar
	I was surprised to find you were the main contributor behind Mandatory Fun. I've been using this article as a point of reference for my endeavors in writing about music, such as how to structure them and how to present the information. So thanks for that article! Panini! • 🥪 06:11, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Masem. You recently reverted one of my edits on the page 2023 in video games. I added the New York Game Awards to the sub-section "Major awards", and you removed it on the grounds that they weren't significant enough. However, the New York Game Awards have been included on every "20xx in video games" page since 2013, and I see no reason why they should be excluded here. If you have no further argument, I'll soon be re-adding it. Thank you. ThanatosApprentice (talk) 23:53, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I talked to the user that added those on the previous years (after the fact) and that we agreed that they shouldn't have been added, they just haven't been removed. the NY Critics awards are very minor relative to the 5 on there now. Masem (t) 00:28, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Masem.

You recently reverted my edit where I used Forbes Contributor as a source. Would it be acceptable to repost the edit citing the youtuber's video as a source, as I am talking about findings he claims on the topic, not ascribing any validity to them. Domedusa (talk) 17:50, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not unless the YouTube is considered an expert and a reliable source, which i don't think qualifies here. Masem (t) 20:17, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Surely when discussing criticism of a topic, I can use a high-profile individual's criticism as a source for them criticising it? So long as I am not saying their criticism is correct. Domedusa (talk) 20:25, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly if the person was high profile, but this HOUNGOUNGAGNE doesn't seem to be a high profile individual. Masem (t) 20:51, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Masem. You recently reverted an edit I made last night on the Rock Band 3 Setlist page. I only added that one category on the table for the Rock Band 3 setlist because the export has been expired since 2020, and it helps newcomers who don't have the patience to sift through the list of downloadable content for the Rock Band series due to it having repeated entries and over 2000+ entries, especially since Rock Band's database on Rewind DLC has not been updated since 2020. It might not be necessary for people who already exported the setlist, but it is necessary for newcomers and latecomers who missed out on the export period, and want to see what songs are still available as DLC if they missed their chance with the export period or just got started on the series as of Rock Band 4. Would like to hear a reply on why you believe it is unnecessary. Thanks 2601:647:8100:B7B0:30F9:1FCE:CDF1:2BD7 (talk) 20:14, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Could you please clarify your reversion of my edit on Brain Age? Of course the source given was academic, but not secondary (at least, for the methodology and results of the study). Guidelines such as WP:SCHOLARSHIP advise "extreme caution" when citing primary sources, and to me it seems like directly citing a study that has (seemingly) not been discussed in any reliable secondary sources over the past decade is somewhat undue. Do you think my reasoning is off-base? ~Bluecrystal004 ^{(talk · contribs)} 00:29, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

For that specific article, that article is secondary to the game of Brain Age, since it is discussing the impact of the game from a scientific study. Further, the inclusion is written in a very careful phrase to not imply the study is wholly inclusive or true. If we were talking an article about brain improvement, that article would then be primary to that topic, and we'd definitely want to see it discussed more in further scholarly articles to see it included. Masem (t) 00:40, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Happy adminship anniversary! Hi Masem! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of your successful request for adminship. Enjoy this special day! The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:46, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thanks for adding Warcraft to the highest grossing franchise page but are sure the $17 billion video game revenue figure from The Motley Fool [2] isn't just a case of WP:CITOGENESIS? They probably got the figure from the earlier version of the page which had the inflated figures. I think we should use this source [3] since it almost predates the article itself. Timur9008 (talk) 17:02, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

^ I went ahead and added this source instead [4] Timur9008 (talk) 08:32, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]