This is an archive of past discussions with User:Chicdat. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hey there Chicdat. I can tell you’re passionate about tropical cyclones and editing Wikipedia. There are a few articles the project needs that I wondered if you’d be interested in. One is tropical cyclones in 2013 and other yearly global articles. We only have the past few years, but it wouldn’t be helpful from a global perspective having them further back. Another option is a location list article, such as List of Alabama hurricanes, or any other location affected by tropical cyclones regularly. Would either of them be at all interesting to you? Either way, happy editing! :) Hurricanehink mobile (talk) 13:52, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
Hi. Thanks a lot for creating List of Alabama hurricanes, but HURDAT alone won't do as a source. HURDAT does not contain information on things like how much the damage cost, how many died, how many were injured, or measurements. It also is silent on whether storms that did not outright have their centers pass over the state count as "affected". Would you be willing to add more third-party reliable sources for each storm? Thanks.--Jasper Deng(talk)00:27, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
How did you like working on the Alabama hurricanes list? Sure, it isn't 100% done (you need to add specific damages/deaths if you want to take it to featured list), but it's certainly better than what we had! (which was nothing) Are you looking for other list articles, or perhaps other storm articles that are doable? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 14:08, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
Make sure you work on "Herold", not "Harold" :P Also, newer storms tend to be a little difficult to write, especially when you have to search in French (Madagascar, Reunion, and possibly for Mauritius/Rodrigues). Here are some sources that might help (in English!) Aside from Herold, you might be interested in another Alabama article, like Effects of Hurricane Ivan in Alabama. Or maybe something older, like this storm that struck Alabama as a Category 2. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 14:33, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
Great! Today I added some more to the Madagascar impact section, and I'm hoping to have it done by the first week of April. I've got a lot more time now because of the coronavirus lockdowns. 🐔Chicdat (talk) 14:19, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
A lot of us have been editing more due to Covid. So that's one positive out of this whole situation! I left some comments about Herold on the talk page, but decent job for your first storm article. How was the writing process for you? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 15:23, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
Pretty hard, to tell the truth! But I'm glad that I was able to create an actual storm article. (Even if it IS Start quality and Low importance!) 🐔Chicdat (talk) 18:14, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
Hey, we all gotta start somewhere! Eventually you'll develop a preference for certain types of storms. Older storms have more sources available. Storms in certain countries might be easier if they're wealthier (meaning they have more people to manage the storm). The Australian region is all in English, so that might make things easier. As you probably noticed w/ Herold, Madagascar and Mauritius speak French. There are also other types of articles that are needed, more along the lines of Alabama hurricanes, such as a List of intense tropical cyclones (in SWIO), List of extremely severe cyclonic storms (in north Indian), or List of Category 2 Atlantic hurricanes. The most fun part of Wikipedia is when my curiosity gets the best of me, and I can't help but want to research a certain storm that catches my interest. I hope this helps! Keep up the good work and happy editing. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:34, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
Hiya Chicdat. I hope you're not too worried about the message below (that you shouldn't copy and paste in the future). It takes time to learn the rules of Wikipedia. The most important rule is ignore all rules. If you're more worried about breaking some rule, and that disrupts the spirit of Wikipedia's openness, then you should ignore those rules. You're already getting a good handle on sources and writing. I'm sure in the future, your writing will rise to "good" level, but that takes time and practice. This was my first article, rather short by comparison to what you'd expect to see nowadays. So I just wanted to check in and say happy editing! ^_^ ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 01:22, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
Hey Chicdat, don't feel bad about the state of your RfA. I'm glad you're interested in sticking around Wikipedia long-term! But there is a lot to learn. One of the most important parts about being an admin is understanding the process, how to mediate conflict, and how to work with other users. Seeing as you're still on the new side, I wanted to reach out. Are you working on any articles these days? What about any collaborations with other users? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 15:40, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
Good job so far on intense tropical cyclones. If you want it to make it a featured list, then you'll need to improve the table. Check out List of Category 3 Pacific hurricanes, and view it from the edit window to see how to sort the intensity, or damage, or deaths. No need to list injuries. And be to sure to cite every death and damage figure (you're missing it for Andry 83. You might have to change how you report 0 deaths. Otherwise, you're on the right track. I see you're up to the 90's. Just 83 more to add :P ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:04, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
Hey Chicdat, I hope there's no hard feelings over the nicknamed TC page getting deleted. Wikipedia strives to be the best possible resource online. That means everything needs to be reliable, well-sourced, and not prone to any original research. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 14:22, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
Wikipedia holds a rather high standard, which is why I (and other users) try and guide newer users to make sure their contributions are always productive. Your work on intense tropical cyclones, I'm guessing, largely consists of you copying the data from one Wikipedia page to the draft page. It's different when you're making an article from scratch. You have to provide sources to back up the claim for notability. Normally, that means the damage/deaths, which usually the NHC has in their tropical cyclone reports, or otherwise you can get it from news articles or government sources. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 14:59, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
Great job Chicdat! That's a great feeling when you finish a large article, when you can look back at your work with a sense of accomplishment. Did you have any issues doing the article? It's a huge benefit to the project having that kind of list article, especially once we get them for each basin worldwide. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:30, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
Dont be upset but I have been forced to take a few of the ITC's out, as the data is not there from IBTRACS or Reunion to back them up being ITC's yet. I also think it is better to use the whole name for a system rather than 1/2 a name as it saves confusion and I believe the BoM does it that way as well.Jason Rees (talk) 20:46, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for your understanding and tackling both the intense TCs and extremely severe lists. With regards to the Extremely Severe List I will give you a massive hint and tell you to look at the IMD BT here for all systems since 1982 assuming you can download Excel files.Jason Rees (talk) 17:41, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the award Chicdat! I haven't always been so welcoming of new users (mostly because in the past I was more concerned with writing than welcoming new users), so I'm glad you're sticking around. Hopefully you're still finding editing "fun", and worth your time. The biggest frustration for new users is learning the unofficial rules, or how to cite, or how to even make articles, and I'm glad you're managing all of that. There's still a lot to learn (I learn more with every article I do!), but I'm glad you're getting the hang of it :) ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 14:16, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
Nice job again! At this point, are you getting a good feel for what articles require? I imagine you're mostly using Wikipedia's information from one article and repurposing it for another article, which isn't a bad approach. That's why User:Jason Rees has been making so many edits, as he's correct pointing out that we might've had the wrong information for some intensity estimates, especially basins outside the Atlantic, and especially SHEM/NIO pre-1985. You might've noticed that there are no NIO season articles for a 10 year stretch. I hope you're getting a sense now that some parts of Wikipedia have really good tropical cyclone coverage, but there are also a lot of gaps, and, as you noted, articles needed/requested. I saw you tagged it as inactive. I think the request page does as good of a service as it did in 2006, it just needs to be updated, so people know that it's still be active, and there are still topics we could use articles for. Taking that note, I updated it with some of the suggestions from the WPTC talk page. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:49, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
I'm impressed you've done these articles! Good luck with C2 Atlantic hurricanes. I did C3, and there were hundreds, so that could take a while, especially since you'll be going back to 1851. You might want to reach out to another user (not me :P) to help with the project so it'll get done quicker - maybe one of you start at 1851 and the other in the current day, and you'll meet in the middle? Just a suggestion. Trying to do giant articles all by yourself can be a great accomplishment, but it can also lead to burnout. Just ask {U|Hurricane Noah}}, who did most of the EPAC list articles, and who I'm guessing is getting some form of PTSD from doing all of them :P XD ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 13:22, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
Yea it’s good to know your limits for how big an article you can handle. Just reach out to other users in the project. Some (including me) will say no, but you might find someone. Maybe Typhoon2013? Or someone who regularly edits the Atlantic? Hurricanehink mobile (talk) 16:55, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
Sorry Chicdat. There are some rules on Wikipedia, including rules on rollbacking. Do you understand what you did and why the tools were taken away? It doesn't mean you won't ever get them back, it just means you need to continue being a productive editor. I can't reinstate those tools, not at this time, but I can encourage you to keep trying and to be a good editor :) ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 13:19, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
I guess you're right (... C2 list really is hard. AC5230 said he would help, but I'm doing all of it - it's hard. Already at 30 KB and only in year 1870). With list of category 2 Atlantic hurricanes, I am doing absolutely awesome! I love it! not so awesome. At the end it will be crazy long. 🐔ChicdatChickenDatabase10:39, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
LOL, I know a thing or two about big projects, especially when you're in the middle of them. But think of it this way. Getting to 1863 means you're 7% of the way done. You're also 14% of the way to the halfway point (1931). That's not nothing. For comparison, check out List of Florida hurricanes, which I largely wrote (along with its subarticles), covering 500 storms. See also List of Category 1 Pacific hurricanes, or Hurricane Elena, or Hurricane Andrew. These are some giant articles, and I'll bet they took a lot of time from those editors (those being Noah, JC, and GC, respectively). You know what? When you finish a project that takes an enormous amount of time, you can look back on it with pride. Sure, the List of Florida hurricanes probably has a lot of broken links, and is out of date (I wrote it in 2007). It's good to have someone to share the workload for Cat 2 hurricanes. It may not be easy, but I'll tell you what, I wouldn't have written so many articles if I didn't keep in contact with other editors, who encouraged me, or fixed a typo, or a broken link, or they added a source I didn't think about. It's that collaborative spirit that has kept me editing all these years. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 20:49, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
Sorry Chicdat, real life got a bit busy! I saw you're working on C2 hurricanes with JavaHurricane, hope that will help with that huge undertaking. As for tyop, yes, I meant to write that :P ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 15:44, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
Yea, I did. Do you want to be the editor for this month's newsletter? You've already done storm of the month. You just gotta write updates about the project, find someone to write a column for the newsletter, and pick someone for Member of the Month who hasn't gotten it yet. I'm a little busy these days, or I'd try and do it. Hopefully it'll go out on June 1st, first day of the 2020 AHS (officially). ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:49, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
Hello, I did not create vandalism in the article Jamia Millia Islamia Attack. According to my thoughts the article was trying to create vandalism by stating the entry "forceful". And the police does have the right to enter a government property. If there are some malicious activities (in this case hiding of the protesters). Now about the edit, I accept it was my fault that I changed it without any source. Thank You Shaurya Uniyal (talk) 10:08, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
June 2020
Thank you for trying to keep Wikipedia free of vandalism. However, one or more edits you labeled as vandalism, such as the edit at Legbar, are not considered vandalism under Wikipedia policy. Wikipedia has a stricter definition of the word "vandalism" than common usage, and mislabeling edits as vandalism can discourage editors. Please see what is not vandalism for more information on what is and is not considered vandalism. Thank you. Passengerpigeon (talk)10:50, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
My bad. They're short but they are often there. I see you are doing a lot vandalism reversion too. As for Huggle, have you read over the page WP:HUGGLE? You have to download the software to use it, and you have to request rollback first. That's the key first step. --David Tornheim (talk) 10:55, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
I have to agree with the admin. that you are both too new and are making edits that are concerning, for you to have the privileges necessary for more advanced editing tools. I do think you need to differentiate vandalism from good faith edits. I would suggest spending a little time watching one or more very controversial articles, like say Trump, and just watch but don't edit or speak and the talk page. Just watch what happens when editors disagree, what happens when they are reverted. When you feel an editor has really crossed the line, look at the editor's talk page to see if they got warned, and what the warning was.
It takes time to learn when reverting and warning other editors is okay, and when it is too aggressive. Assuming good faith is very important, so accusing someone of vandalism when they are vandalizing, is something you'll want to avoid.
With regard to edit-summaries, saying "unconstructive edit" is sometimes okay, but sometimes I saw you say it when a clearer explanation was probably necessary. I believe it was an edit like that that an editor recently warned you about. Anyway, hope you get the hang of it.
Against my suggestion is to do a little more watching to see how others handle problems. Also, you might want to take a look at WP:AN/I. You definitely want to make sure no one takes you there.
Also, one of the reasons I probably said above to try to use edit-summaries, is that your summaries could use more explanation. In this edit you didn't say what the problem was. The problem is there is no WP:RS. You should say that, not just leaving what the undo button says "reverted to previous version." It was likely a good faith edit, and the person may have read it in a reliable source. When I see an edit like that, I often do a Google search, look for a reliable source and see if I can add it. Then I tell the editor that was what they should have done.
In this case, you reverted, but you didn't really say what the problem was. I actually saw merit in the copyedit, so reverting it as if it were vandalism is not really appropriate either.
Vandalism is things like using swear words, changing dates for fun, saying hi to your neighbor, deleting sourced material without explanation. Adding material without a source is a problem, but not as bad as the others. New editors need to be told that they need to use WP:RS, not just gruffly told, "Don't do that. No good."
Glad to hear it. I added just a little to the comment while you were reply. Just wanted to let you know if you didn't see it. Okay, end of lecture for today. We can can chat another time. Keep up the good work. --David Tornheim (talk) 12:27, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
When a discussion is archived, it is considered closed and shouldn't be edited further. This means that any further comments on the issue raised needs to be done in a new section, which has the effect of breaking up the discussion and making it difficult to follow. Archiving discussions also makes existing consensus (and the processed by which consensus is reached) less visible. This is why archiving usually isn't done until the page becomes really large and difficult to load (the recommended size is 75,000 bytes), and sections are left up for as long as possible. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 11:00, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
Before deeming tropical cyclones to be non-notable please check things out. You will find that Sigma is notable for its death toll - 30 odd in Australia is rare as well as its damage to Townsville. It has also been through WP:AFD before (as advertised on its talkpage), so you should have opened a discussion if you really wanted to merge it. As for Cat 2 hurricane, you need to go through it and make sure that all deadlinks work, write more of a lead and background introducing the subject. Tropical cyclones that were previously rated as Cat 2 before the reanalysis project would be worth chucking into an Other systems section as well as any other potential systems from the reanalysis project. A good going through of the deaths and impacts to ensure that they are correct would be good.Jason Rees (talk) 11:36, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for making those articles. Unfortunately, per WP:UP#NOTSUITED, you may not add content categories to any userspace pages, even if done indirectly. Users who wish to list the articles they created have a list of wikilinks, not transclusions, of them. Therefore I have removed all transclusions of articles on this page. Please be mindful of this in the future. --Jasper Deng(talk)21:48, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
"Hello, I'm Chicdat. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Fox News controversies have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. Chicdat ChickenDatabase 10:38, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices."
This is confusing since I have not edited ANY page on Wikipedia for many, many years. It's been at least a decade, and probably a lot longer when I think I edited a few beer pages. I'm a professional beer writer and have worked in the industry for 25+ years. I did have an account but again have not used it for many years. And I wouldn't go near anything on Fox News even if I would edit anything. I'm not sharing an IP address with anyone, so I don't think it's that. So I'm left scratching my head as to why I received this message.
Please add clear, inline references to this article.
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Boleyn}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.
Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
Why have you up and disappeared? That's awfully mysterious of you, especially knowing your consisten edit history before the 18th. ~ AC5230 talk23:53, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
The Hurricane Herald: Special Hurricane Season/New SHEM Cyclone Year Edition!
The Hurricane Herald is the semi-regular newsletter of WikiProject Tropical Cyclones. The newsletter aims to provide in summary the recent activities and developments of the WikiProject, in addition to global tropical cyclone activity. The Hurricane Herald has been running since its first edition ran on June 4, 2006. If you wish to receive or discontinue subscription to this newsletter, please visit the mailing list. This issue of The Hurricane Herald covers all project related events from May 1–July 1, 2020. This edition's editors and authors are Chicdat and Hurricanehink.
Please visit this page and bookmark any suggestions of interest to you. This will help improve the newsletter and other cyclone-related articles. Past editions can be viewed here.
WPTC 15th Anniversary push: some goals for the 15th year of WPTC (October 5, 2020!) include the creation or improvement of many other articles listed in the first section on the WPTC talk page.
Project Goals & Progress
The following is the current progress on the three milestone goals set by the WikiProject as of this publishing. They can be found, updated, at the main WikiProject page.
Hurricane Noah recently announced an initiative to get a featured topic for the year of 2018 with complete subtopics. The Eastern Pacific portion is very close to achieving a featured topic, and the Atlantic and North Indian Ocean are around a B-class average. The Western Pacific, Southern Hemisphere, and the global article for 2018 need your help! A lot of work is needed to get those three items up to par. For more information on which articles need specifically, please check out the project talk page. Getting a featured topic for an entire year would be an impressive feat for our project.
I want to invite you all to sing Auld Lang Syne with me and open up the egg nog with me as today July 1, 2020, marks the formal start of the 2020-21 tropical cyclone year, as well as the start of the season in the South-West Indian Ocean. As a result, it is a good chance to look back at the previous TC year and look forward to the season starting on November 1. As things stand, it appears that the status of the El Nino Southern Oscillation will either be La Nina or neutral conditions leaning towards La Nina. As a result, I would expect more activity to occur within the Coral Sea, near Queensland rather than out towards French Polynesia. On a social basis, the biggest question this year will be how will the island nations deal will Covid 19 and a major tropical cyclone - assuming it's still around in November. We got an early taster of how Vanuatu, Fiji and Tonga will deal with it thanks Severe Tropical Cyclone Harold.
Atlantic - Tropical Storm Arthur started the 2020 Atlantic hurricane season early for the sixth year in a row. It affected North Carolina before turning extratropical on May 19. Tropical Storm Bertha formed, made landfall in South Carolina, and dissipated — all on May 27. Bertha killed one person and left US$200 million in damage.
Eastern Pacific - Tropical Storm Amanda struck Guatemala in late May. Its heavy rainfall killed 33 people and caused US$200 million in damage. Amanda later reformed in the Bay of Campeche as Cristobal.
Western Pacific - Typhoon Vongfong devastated the Phillipines and made the 2020 Pacific typhoon season have the sixth-latest start on record in the basin. The typhoon killed 5 people.
North Indian Ocean - In addition to Amphan, a depression formed and dissipated near the coast of Oman, producing heavy rainfall that killed three people.
More information can be found here. This list lists members who have joined/rejoined the WikiProject since the release of the last issue. Sorted chronologically.
To our new members: welcome to the project, and happy editing! Feel free to check the to-do list at the bottom right of the newsletter for things that you might want to work on. To our veteran members: thank you for your edits and your tireless contributions!
Featured Content
From May 1 to present, two featured articles were promoted:
When a new storm undergoes rapid intensification and makes landfall, the members of WikiProject Tropical Cyclones try hard to create an article for it. Suddenly, the storm goes back out to sea again and makes landfall somewhere different. In one 20-kilobyte edit, Hurricaneboy23, let's say, adds in more information about this landfall, but not before the storm undergoes a cyclonic loop and makes a third landfall. As the article gets huge and bloated, it's split.
The story above is fictional, but things like it happen often, like in Cyclone Amphan's revision history. For Wikipedia to have an accurate coverage of tropical cyclones, there need to be enough members to put the new information — boosted by reliable sources, of course — into the article. So, if you haven't already, go to WP:WPTC/MEMBER and add your name! 🐔ChicdatChickenDatabase
Burnout - an opinion piece by ♫ Hurricanehink (talk)
I've been editing Wikipedia for a while. I've retired a few times, thinking I would be done for good, but something kept drawing me back. It might be the thrill to be the first one to post an advisory, or if you found a damage total that wasn't in the article, or the thrill of publishing an article and making it the best source of information on a given storm. Those are all great reasons to edit and to continue editing. But while the text we write is just computer code, we all are humans, subjected to outside stresses and the dreaded real life (RL).
When you edit for too long, you might find that you can't finish that list of projects you wanted to work on. It is better to take a break from what you were working on, and try something different (maybe not even weather-related) so that editing becomes enjoyable again. There's no sense getting burned out and stressed. The work will eventually get done on Wikipedia. Some projects are in much worse shape, but improving slowly but surely. The WPTC has a leg up on other projects because we have such a passionate group of editors and writers. It's better for the long run to take a break, focus on RL, get some sun, have a laugh, and do whatever you can to stay sane these days.
Current assessment table
Assessments valid as of this printing. Depending on when you may be viewing this newsletter, the table may be outdated. See here for the latest, most up to date statistics. As of this issue, there are 157 featured articles and 70 featured lists. There are 135 A-class articles, and 1,002 good articles. There are only 65 B-class articles, perhaps because because most articles of that quality already passed a GA review. There are 369 C-class articles, 736 start-class articles, and 151 stub-class articles, with 31 lists, and 8 current articles. These figures mean that slightly more than half of the project is rated a GA or better. Typhoon Warren was the 1000th GA in the project.
Storm of the month and other tropical activity for June
Tropical Storm Cristobal formed on June 1 in the Bay of Campeche from the remnants of Amanda in the eastern Pacific. Cristobal looped over the Yucatán peninsula before progressing northward, striking Louisiana on June 7, marking the second-earliest landfall on record in the state. The system moved through the central United States, eventually becoming extratropical over Wisconsin. Cristobal killed four people and left US$343 million in damage.
Atlantic - in addition to Cristobal, Tropical Storm Dolly formed in late June off the east coast of the United States. Originating as a subtropical depression, Dolly transitioned into a tropical cyclone over the Gulf Stream, and became extratropical on June 24.
Eastern Pacific - there were two short-lived tropical cyclones in the basin in late June. Tropical Storm Boris formed on June 24 and was a minimal tropical storm, and Tropical Depression Four-E formed at the end of the month off of Baja California.
Western Pacific - one tropical storm - Nuri - formed in the South China Sea, and killed one person when it struck southern China.
North Indian Ocean - Cyclone Nisarga formed on June 1 off India's western coast. The storm intensified into a severe cyclonic storm before it made landfall south of Mumbai. The cyclone killed 6 people and caused US$665 million in damage.
Please do not move or otherwise touch RFAs outside of voting...this was not an appropriate move in the slightest. The solution is creating a REDIRECT with the current name, not moving it to the current name. Leave it to crats and experienced users. Praxidicae (talk) 11:40, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
I see you've had your bollocking from Praxidicae. It's saved me the trouble, for which you should be enormously grateful. Nick (talk) 11:48, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
Farewell, DPL. I've banned you from my talk page forever and ever and ever, so you can never notify me about your dablinks again. Fix them yourself, little robot! 🐔 ChicdatChickenDatabase10:09, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
Would you please stop relisting. Without a meaningful relisting comment such as to refocus discussion, it is pointless and annoying. Relisting is an administrative action and should not be done by anyone not qualified and prepared to close the discussion. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:35, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
Relax. This is not remotely an ANI matter. A please, my advice. At MfD relisting only shuffles the order, which I find annoying. Also, relisting removes things from the backlog and that can be counterproductive, because some start with the backlogs. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:45, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Cyclone Owen 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 Legobot, on behalf of Jason Rees -- Jason Rees (talk) 19:02, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
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 Legobot, on behalf of Jason Rees -- Jason Rees (talk) 19:02, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
User:Chicdat/G13 supporting !vote, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Chicdat/G13 supporting !vote and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Chicdat/G13 supporting !vote during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Cabayi (talk) 18:40, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
