User talk:Engineerchange

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4

Hi. What I could find is on the talk page here. Semper Fi! FieldMarine (talk) 13:31, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

The third round of the 2025 WikiCup ended on 28 June. This round was again competitive, with three contestants scoring more than 1,000 round points:

• BeanieFan11 (submissions) with 1,314 round points, mostly from articles about athletes and politicians, including 20 good articles and 48 did you know articles
• Gog the Mild (submissions) with 1,197 round points, mostly from military history articles, including 9 featured topic articles, two featured articles, and four good articles
• Sammi Brie (submissions) with 1,055 round points, mostly from television station articles, including 27 good articles and 9 good topic articles

Everyone who competed in round 3 will advance to round 4 unless they have withdrawn. This table shows all competitors who have received tournament points so far, while the full scores for round 3 can be seen here. During this round, contestants have claimed 4 featured articles, 16 featured lists, 1 featured picture, 9 featured-topic articles, 149 good articles, 27 good-topic articles, and more than 90 Did You Know articles. In addition, competitors have worked on 18 In the News articles, and they have conducted more than 200 reviews.

Remember that any content promoted after 28 June but before the start of Round 4 can be claimed in Round 4. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, feel free to review one of the nominations listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:49, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

		Citation Barnstar
		This award is given in recognition to Engineerchange for collecting more than 37.0 points during the WikiProject Unreferenced articles's JUN25 backlog drive. Your contributions played a crucial role in sourcing over 9,500 unsourced articles during the drive. Thank you so much for participating and helping to reduce the backlog! – DreamRimmer Alt ■ 15:54, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

On 6 August 2025, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article George Nigh, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. PFHLai (talk) 14:11, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

The fourth round of the 2025 WikiCup ended on 29 August. The penultimate round saw three contestants score more than 800 points:

• BeanieFan11 (submissions) with 1,175 round points, mainly from sports-related articles, including 17 good articles, 27 did you know articles, and 9 in the news articles
• Arconning (submissions) with 1,090 round points, mainly from articles about athletes and politicians, including a featured article on Philippines at the 1924 Summer Olympics, 9 good articles, 28 did you know articles, and a wide assortment of featured and good article reviews
• AirshipJungleman29 (submissions) with 854 round points, mostly from a high-scoring featured article on the Indian leader Rani of Jhansi and two good articles, in addition to 13 featured and good article reviews

Everyone who competed in Round 4 will advance to Round 5 unless they have withdrawn. This table shows all competitors who have received tournament points so far, while the full scores for Round 4 can be seen here. During this round, contestants have claimed 9 featured articles, 12 featured lists, 98 good articles, 9 good topic articles, more than 150 reviews, nearly 100 did you know articles, and 18 in the news articles.

In advance of the fifth and final round, the judges would like to thank every contestant for their hard work. As a reminder, any content promoted after 29 August but before the start of Round 5 can be claimed in Round 5. In addition, note that Round 5 will end on 31 October at 23:59 UTC. Awards at the end of Round 5 will be distributed based on who has the most tournament points over all five rounds, and special awards will be distributed based on high performance in particular areas of content creation (e.g., most featured articles in a single round).

Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, feel free to review one of the nominations listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges – Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), Epicgenius (talk · contribs), Frostly (talk · contribs), Guerillero (talk · contribs) and Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) – are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck!

If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:47, 30 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi. I am the primary source. I am the secretary for the Masonic lodge in question. I am currently writing a book on our lodge history and updating info as I go. We have original minutes and original source materials written in Bro. Maulsby’s own handwriting. So, this is as legit as it gets. I’ll be glad to jump through whatever hoops. But in this case that information belongs there and removing it is an error. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.117.63.9 (talk) 2 October 2025

Hello, I have undone the middle name reversion, but was wondering if I'm missing something - The previous president Munson's middle name did not need to be cited. Regardless, I have added two citations for them, feel free to make them the proper format. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheOnlyWiki (talk • contribs) 20:10, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

@TheOnlyWiki: I've wikified the cites. If you are new, I definitely recommend reading WP:Citing sources and learning how to use the citation templates, so you don't have to ask for help each time. I'm happy to help, but generally good to learn these skills. Any information added to Wikipedia should be cited, but perhaps that detail got overlooked for Munson. I can take a look later. --Engineerchange (talk) 21:40, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

Have you taken a look at Munson's page yet? My question is moreso, are you aware of any page that has a name cited? TheOnlyWiki (talk) 17:16, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

@TheOnlyWiki: I took a look a bit the other day but hit a roadblock. A lot of famous people articles do a fair job of citing on the full name, Ulysses S. Grant is a good example. If I'm unable to find a source for Munson's, I'll remove the middle name and make a note on the talk page. Citing names, just as citing birth dates, or other information is necessary for any article, even if it had been added before without a cite. WP:WHYCITE does a fair job of explaining this. The mistakes you see sometimes are historically people can get names wrong in obituaries or, in more recent years, someone can add something without providing a source and it can be incorrect. Hope this helps, --Engineerchange (talk) 19:15, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

I see, I'm a bit confused, where exactly is Grant's full name cited? I just see a pronunciation. TheOnlyWiki (talk) 06:50, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

@TheOnlyWiki: His full birth name and his nickname are cited in the first section, Ulysses S. Grant#Early life and education. His nickname from West Point is cited in the second section. --Engineerchange (talk) 15:00, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

It seems like it's only just cited because of it talking about how he got his name. Most articles don't do this, so I'd assume this is a special case and unless I'm still missing something, middle names are never usually cited like you had me do for Sanders's article. TheOnlyWiki (talk) 15:52, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

@Engineerchange And like I could go around to so many articles, is Bill Gates' full name cited? Are you going to remove that now? I am sorry if I come across as rude but your logic just doesn't make sense to me respectfully. TheOnlyWiki (talk) 15:55, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

@TheOnlyWiki: _Any_ information you add must be verifiable and cited on Wikipedia. That's what WP:WHYCITE says. If you need more recent examples, Donald J. Trump and Joe Biden both have citations referencing their middle name in the first statement in their first section. This sort of thing is incredibly common. If you add a middle name that is not cited, it can be removed. Any information that you add without a citation can be removed. Citations are the foundation of this encyclopedia. If you think I am wrong, ask the question at Wikipedia:Teahouse. --Engineerchange (talk) 16:01, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

@Engineerchange Oh fair enough, so I guess your point is that you don't have to cite everything individually, but your cited sources anywhere in the article need to include the information you add if I understand this correctly. Thanks for the clarification!

Also, FYI the Munson citation you added is incorrect, Munson is still alive and that obituary is for a different person - I'll remove it but no need to replace it, if you search for Munson in citation 4 you will actually find his middle name. As for Sanders' page, I actually found another source which I'll add. TheOnlyWiki (talk) 16:50, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

@TheOnlyWiki: It's the obituary of his father and cites the fact that it is his father. Please keep the citation. --Engineerchange (talk) 16:52, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

OH my bad, thanks for reverting it TheOnlyWiki (talk) 16:55, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

@TheOnlyWiki: His middle name is cited from my previous edit. The issue remaining is his birth place is not cited, just to be clear. --Engineerchange (talk) 16:57, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

One question, why does it say citation needed after #7 for Sanders? TheOnlyWiki (talk) 17:20, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

@TheOnlyWiki: You can read the reason in edit mode or hovering over in read mode, the reason stated is "date of bachelor's and master's". The fact he has the degrees is cited, but not the years as stated. --Engineerchange (talk) 17:26, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

@Engineerchange Thanks! It actually works out - I moved the citation you thought was unnecessary for the middle name to replace this citation needed.

(by the way no need to keep mentioning me I subscribed to this section) TheOnlyWiki (talk) 17:38, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

I just cited a Sanders source, does that citation look good? I looked through the citation article but wasn't sure how to find templates. TheOnlyWiki (talk) 17:08, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

@TheOnlyWiki: I think it's unnecessary. It already had two citations you added. The third citation isn't needed, in my opinion. --Engineerchange (talk) 17:11, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

Perhaps, but having a text source can be nicer I feel like. TheOnlyWiki (talk) 17:14, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

Actually I found the citation templates article which is helpful. TheOnlyWiki (talk) 17:10, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

@TheOnlyWiki: On the Bill Gates topic, his full name is in the second cite (link) in the first sentence of the first section. --Engineerchange (talk) 16:02, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

On 29 September 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Nereus Mendenhall, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Nereus Mendenhall (pictured) led a delegation to the Confederate States Congress in April 1862 to allow military exemption in the Confederate Army for Quakers? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Nereus Mendenhall. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Nereus Mendenhall), 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.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:02, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

	The Original Barnstar
	For your swift rescue of Robert Woods Bliss after it had to be cut down to a stub as copyvio. Thank you! asilvering (talk) 00:04, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

On 20 October 2025, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Charles J. Otto, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 22:06, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

The 2025 WikiCup has come to an end. Our top scorers, based on the tournament point rankings (which can be seen here), are:

1. BeanieFan11 (submissions) with 1,604 tournament points, will receive the 1st place award.
2. Gog the Mild (submissions) with 1,075 tournament points, will receive the 2nd place award.
3. Arconning (submissions) with 860 tournament points, will receive the 3rd place award.
4. History6042 (submissions) with 804 tournament points
5. Sammi Brie (submissions) with 635 tournament points
6. TheDoctorWho (submissions) with 386 tournament points
7. AirshipJungleman29 (submissions) with 373 tournament points
8. Thebiguglyalien (submissions) with 362 tournament points

Our high scorers in the final round were:

• BeanieFan11 (submissions) with 1,035 round points, mostly from 19 good articles and 21 did you know articles about athletes
• vigilantcosmicpenguin (submissions) with 819 round points, mostly from 13 good articles and 11 did you know articles about a wide range of topics from abortion topics to African cities
• TheNuggeteer (submissions) with 508 round points from 9 good articles, 4 good topic articles and 6 did you know articles mainly about Philippines topics, along with 19 good article reviews

The final round was very productive, and contestants had 2 featured articles, 4 featured lists, 106 good articles, 5 good topic articles, 178 article reviews, 76 did you know articles, and 9 in the news articles. Altogether, Wikipedia has benefited greatly from the activities of WikiCup competitors all through the contest. Well done everyone!

The top eight scorers will receive awards shortly. The following special awards will be made, based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. These prizes are awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field during the competition.

• Gog the Mild (submissions) wins the featured article prize, with 12 featured articles total, and the featured topic prize, with 9 featured topic articles in total
• Hey man im josh (submissions) wins the featured list prize, with 10 featured lists total
• AirshipJungleman29 (submissions) wins the featured picture prize, submitting the only featured picture in the entire contest during round 3
• History6042 (submissions) wins the featured content reviewer prize, with 127 featured content reviews. He will also share the ITN prize, with 20 in the news articles in total.
• BeanieFan11 (submissions) wins the good article prize, with 100 good articles total, and the DYK prize, with 147 did you know articles in total. He will also share the ITN prize, with 20 in the news articles in total.
• TheDoctorWho (submissions) wins the good topic prize, with 16 good topic entries in total
• Arconning (submissions) wins the good article reviewer prize, with 68 good article reviews in total

A special mention also goes to these users who scored the highest in a particular category in a single round:

• Sammi Brie (submissions), with 27 good articles in round 3, and 45 good article reviews in round 1
• Tails Wx (submissions), with 10 in the news articles in round 3

Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate. The WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2026 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement!

On behalf of the judges, Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email), Epicgenius (talk · contribs · email), Frostly (talk · contribs · email), Guerillero (talk · contribs · email) and Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs · email):

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:24, 1 November 2025 (UTC)

If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.

Welcome, welcome, welcome Engineerchange! I'm glad that you are joining the November 2025 drive! Please, have a cup of WikiTea, and go cite some articles.

Cielquiparle (talk) 05:23, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

On 9 November 2025, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Marshawn Kneeland, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. PFHLai (talk) 22:51, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2025 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

Excuse me, but you apparently failed to notice my edit summary. I explained that Find-a-Grave had an exact birthdate for Mr. Archer (including a photograph of his gravestone with that date on it) and a birth location. That should have been more than adequate documentation, considering that this was an Infobox edit and I don't see any footnote links there. Rontrigger (talk) 08:15, 3 December 2025 (UTC)

@Rontrigger: Hello, my edit summary following yours stated why I reverted your edit. You cannot "cite" a gravestone. Gravestones can be wrong. And WP:RSPFINDAGRAVE states that findagrave is an unreliable source since it is user-generated, and it cannot be used as a citation. An infobox change also requires appropriate citation. Hope this helps explain. Cheers, --Engineerchange (talk) 13:14, 3 December 2025 (UTC)

You have recently edited a page related to living or recently deceased subjects of biographical content on Wikipedia articles, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia's norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:48, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello Engineerchange, please keep WP:BLPRESTORE and WP:ONUS in mind. If including the content is a good idea, finding a quick consensus to do so on the article's talk page should be simple. It will then persist as the page is now semi-protected. Thanks and best regards, ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:50, 10 December 2025 (UTC)