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 In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion.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. ~~

Thanks for uploading File:Bidoof.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) 17:05, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, how can I draftify it? And how can I find better/more reliable sources? I tried to heavily improve the page from its previous incarnation in 2021 so am down to keep improving it.Eh! Steve (talk) 18:05, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Eh! Steve: Draftifying is just a term for putting it in a "Draft:Giratina" page or in a user page, as you've done with User:Eh! Steve/Sandbox/Giratina. As far as reliable sources go, there are various avenues you can take. Firstly, you could use this "tool" I made: [1] (just copy each line starting from "site:" and search that, followed by the term you want to search). You can also check magazine archives ([2]), Google Scholar ([scholar.google.com]), or Google Books (books.google.com). On top of all this, it's paramount that whatever you add as part of the Reception section be significant coverage. Ie, not just a line here, line there. Significant coverage doesn't entail that Giratina need be the primary subject of the article, but it helps. It also is important that the coverage not be routine coverage (ie, only done as part of routine coverage, though if they have something unique to say, like if an article was written about Giratina's Platinum reveal, that's an exception) or excessively game guide content (for example: [3]). I'd also caution about using sources that don't say much unique stuff, like in this case: [4] Here, while they do offer commentary, it's more focused on plot summary than anything else. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 18:11, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good, thanks! I'll probably work on it over the next few days until it's been further polished to satisfaction. For the current draft, I merely followed the sources from the old page and used Google News, so it's going to take some work.Eh! Steve (talk) 18:13, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Mawile you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Pokelego999 -- Pokelego999 (talk) 17:06, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article Mawile you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Mawile for comments about the article, and Talk:Mawile/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! 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. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Pokelego999 -- Pokelego999 (talk) 23:04, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:54, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or 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 Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 12 § Pokémon species introduced in Pokémon X and Y on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Web-julio (talk) 04:19, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Puff-puff (onomatopoeia) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Pokelego999 -- Pokelego999 (talk) 20:04, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]