User talk:TarnishedPath

Unified login: TarnishedPath is the unique login of this user for all public Wikimedia projects.

Pending changes backlog (review log) Level 5 Very low backlog [view • purge • update] 0 pages according to DatBot 13:15, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

AfC Backlog Level 1 Next-to-nothing at AFC. There are currently 440 pending submissions. [view • purge • update]

Your GA nomination of Avi Yemini

The article Avi Yemini you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Avi Yemini for comments about the article, and Talk:Avi Yemini/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 Chetsford -- Chetsford (talk) 14:44, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

A bowl of strawberries for you!

Thanks for helping address that disruption. Enjoy a few berries! ~ Pbritti (talk) 04:34, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

@Pbritti it's Friday afternoon here so I'm off at happy hour. Enjoy your weekend. TarnishedPath^talk 04:43, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

@Pbritti, have a peak at the finalised investigation at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/AnExtraEditor. TarnishedPath^talk 03:06, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

I had saw and wasn't going to say anything at the risk of coming across as grave-dancing, but I can't say I'm surprised. Not to BEANS, but I'm going to keep tabs on a few things in the event that this disruption isn't over. ~ Pbritti (talk) 03:33, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Good idea. TarnishedPath^talk 03:37, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ben Roberts-Smith

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Ben Roberts-Smith 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 GMH Melbourne -- GMH Melbourne (talk) 07:42, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

DYK for Avi Yemini

On 5 May 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Avi Yemini, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Avi Yemini is one of seventeen children who were raised in an ultra-Orthodox Chabad family? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Avi Yemini. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Avi Yemini), 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 suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

—Ganesha811 (talk) 00:02, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ben Roberts-Smith

The article Ben Roberts-Smith you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Ben Roberts-Smith for comments about the article, and Talk:Ben Roberts-Smith/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 GMH Melbourne -- GMH Melbourne (talk) 01:22, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

A Barnstar for you!

		The Civility Barnstar
		Thank you for your work in keeping cooler heads cool at in the Pope Leo XIV date format RFC! Horse.staple (talk) 14:48, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for your contributions, support and level headedness at Talk:Pope Leo XIV/RFC: Date format. Edl-irishboy (talk) 15:50, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: European Australian Movement has been accepted

European Australian Movement, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Theroadislong (talk) 09:03, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Cave Johnson Couts on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(trialing replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (talk|botop) 06:30, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:No legal threats on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

(trialing replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (talk|botop) 17:31, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

Asking for advice on article improvement for potential good article nominations

Hey! Hope all is well.

Recently I submitted my first DYK article Greater Western Sydney vs Brisbane Lions (2024 AFL season) which you reviewed a while back (thanks!) and was needing a bit of advice. With enough care and attention, I think that I could improve it to a good article. Having never done this before, I was wondering if you could look through it and give me a list of things to work on (large or small) so that I could at the very least make a start. Obviously I am not asking for every little thing, but if you could just pick out some stuff that are big red flags or things that need major improvement that would mean the world.

Kindest regards, Joecompan (talk) 19:33, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

@Joecompan, I'll try and have a look after dinner tonight. What you also might want to consider, prior to nominating it for GA, is requesting peer review. TarnishedPath^talk 23:23, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

@TarnishedPath thank you that would be great. Thanks for letting me know tho I will do that next time. I'm also happy to just submit a request for peer review if that is easier for yourself. I appreciate the response either way. Joecompan (talk) 05:08, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

@Joecompan, I can have a look later like I stated. I think it would also be a good idea to submit it for peer review though. TarnishedPath^talk 05:15, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

@TarnishedPart That would be much appreciated thank you. I will do peer review too. I appreciate your help a lot. Joecompan (talk) 05:37, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

@Joecompan, once I've had a look I'll start a discussion on the article's talk page. TarnishedPath^talk 07:06, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

Text that is not supported by the references given.

I amended this page because the previous text was false and not supported by the references. Even when a reference asserts something, this is not a fact and short be correctly stated as an assertion by the author. Please actually read the references before removing my edits and you will see they are appropriate. The previous text was just someone's opinion. SequiturBlur (talk) 04:20, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

@SequiturBlur no where in the source given did it state anything along the lines of "However, its campaign efforts proved a humiliating failure with the copycat party attracting less than one percent of the vote and forfeiting its election deposits." Please take discussion to Talk:Democratic Labour Party (Australia, 1978). TarnishedPath^talk 04:37, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

The reference cited for the edited text shows the election result in which the copycat party received 0.94% of the vote and accordingly as this is below the threshold of 4% required for a return of the election deposits, it is implicit that the party forfeited its election deposits.

Since the goal of the party cannot have been this outcome, it logically follows that its campaign is a failure.

I am however happy to remove the word "humiliating" as while true, this is admittedly editorialising. SequiturBlur (talk) 06:31, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

@SequiturBlur, the whole lot was editorilsing. Please read WP:OR. We don't do our interpretations of WP:PRIMARY data here. We summarise WP:SECONDARY sources. TarnishedPath^talk 07:05, 2 July 2025 (UTC)