Jump to content

User talk:MediaKyle

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
This user helped get "The Republic of Nothing" listed at Did You Know on the main page on 1 August 2025.
This user helped get "Literature of Nova Scotia" listed at Did You Know on the main page on 18 July 2025.
This user helped get "Helen Kendall" listed at Did You Know on the main page on 9 June 2025.
This user helped get "Joy Laking" listed at Did You Know on the main page on 31 May 2025.
This user helped "Charles Bruce Fergusson" become a good article.
This user helped "Kaleigh Trace" become a good article.
This user helped "Atlantic Insight" become a good article.
This user helped "Joy Laking" become a good article.
This user helped "Mace of Nova Scotia" become a good article.
This user helped "Order of Nova Scotia" become a good article.
This user helped "Order of New Brunswick" become a good article.
This user helped "The Republic of Nothing" become a good article.
This user helped "Freak Lunchbox" become a good article.
This user has autopatrolled rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has extended confirmed rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has new page reviewer rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user is Canadian
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 13 days ago by MediaWiki message delivery in topic Wikimedia Foundation Bulletin 2026 Issue 18

User Talk Contributions Ideas Library Sandbox Toolbox

Welcome to my talk page!
  • If your message is related to a specific article, please leave your message on that article's talk page so that others may see it and contribute to the discussion.
  • If I reviewed and declined your draft article, I usually will not review it again. After I decline a draft, I prefer to leave it for another reviewer. I'm only one editor, and others may feel differently about your draft. I am happy to provide extra feedback.

The Signpost: 2 August 2026

[edit]
  • On the bright side: The beautiful game
    2026 Men's FIFA World Cup, Wikimania music, and wikipress.
  • Traffic report: Odyssey and Oyarzabal
    To take you in the sun to (Ithaca), to show you the World Cup, it's the time of the season for editing!

Nomination of Adaption AI for deletion

[edit]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Adaption AI, which you previously marked as reviewed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted. The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adaption AI (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and you are welcomed to contribute to the discussion. SodiumBot (botop|talk|contribs) 21:29, 3 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

These updates are delivered by SodiumBot. To opt out of these messages, add {{User:SodiumBot/NoNPPDelivery}} to your talk page.

Same nonsense

[edit]

I tried to dip my toe back into helping here, and the same user just mass-reverts everything - now claiming WP:THESIS disallows theses as a source (it doesn't); it's a historic thesis on the history of religion on the islands being used for non-controversial claims, quoting 200-year old letters between NB politicians and bureaucrats at the time about religion and smuggling and such on the island. I have no doubt he'd have the same complaint if, instead of reffing the thesis, I reffed the footnote in the thesis as "Letter between Lord Hilton and Lord Beaverbrook, May 17 1814" or whatever as WP:PRIMARY. He just mass reverts it all across every article - it's bad-faith and I'm sick of it. New Yathrib - Fundy Historian (talk) 21:19, 4 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

New Yathrib - Fundy Historian, I had a look at the situation and I can sort of see both sides... I don't think Magnolia677 is acting in bad faith, I think you both have the same goal of providing good articles to our readers, but differing ideas on how to get there... It is true that citing a thesis is usually not ideal, for a number of reasons... Reliability is one thing, but one also has to wonder if information which can only be found in a Masters thesis actually belongs on Wikipedia? In most cases, I'd say it doesn't, but that's something that has to be determined by editors on a case-by-case basis... I cited a BA Honours thesis on Toponymy of Nova Scotia (Kemp 2021) because coverage of Mi'kmaq toponymy in the province is a bit lacking but I felt including more detail about the suffixes was important. I doubt anyone will ever take issue with that.
It seems like this disagreement may have fizzled out on its own, but in the future, if you're encountering an issue like this across a wide variety of articles I suggest posting at WT:CANADA for input from others. You can follow the trail at Wikipedia talk:Canadian Wikipedians' notice board/Archive 34#French translations to see what a resolution might look like. If no one comes to your defence after posting there, it's generally a safe assumption that you're either wrong or nobody else cares and you should move on. Try your best not to take this stuff personally, or at least, don't let on that you're taking it personally -- keeping cool will make it a lot easier for others to take you seriously. Hope that all makes sense, let me know if you have any questions. Cheers, MediaKyle (talk) 17:31, 5 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
Eh, I don't get it - and I hate farming things out to committee; I mean if I use an unconventional source to claim the city was attacked by dragons - got it, that's far-fetched so remove it - if I claim someone owned a certain farm on a small island, unless there's dispute about the fact then it shouldn't matter...I mean realistically most historic people's birth/death dates on Wikipedia are being pulled from "unconventional" sources like genealogy websites, gravestones, etc...should be fine unless there's some dispute or it's a controversial claim. But if a gravestone says "And his daughter Lucretia" and CNN and CBC never mentioned such a daughter...I'm going with adding a reference to the daughter to preserve information even if it's unconventionally sourced. New Yathrib - Fundy Historian (talk) 18:54, 5 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
The way I see it, editing Wikipedia is a great privilege. The reason we put our work here and not on our own website is because here people actually read it. Part of maintaining the privilege of editing Wikipedia is figuring out the community norms, and doing your best to adhere to them. It's important to know the rules, and even more important to know how the rules are actually applied... I think you may need to reassess your approach to editing if you want to avoid continued scrutiny. "Farming things out to committee" as you put it is kind of the entire model for settling disagreements here, so not being able to deal with that is going to be a problem. If I were you, I'd spend some time trying to follow "the rules" as closely as you can, even if only to get some heat off you, and later on you'll figure out where you can bend them. MediaKyle (talk) 20:10, 5 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Wikimedia Foundation Bulletin 2026 Issue 14

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 22:24, 4 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Concern regarding Draft:Bearly's House of Blues & Ribs

[edit]

Information icon Hello, MediaKyle. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Bearly's House of Blues & Ribs, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 18:06, 8 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Good article nominations RfC

[edit]

Hi MediaKyle,

There is an ongoing Request for Comment (RfC) at Wikipedia:Good article nominations/August 2026 RfC, which you may be interested in because in the past year, you have nominated or reviewed more than one good article nomination. This message has also been sent to all subscribers to the Good Article Gazette. The RfC contains many proposals (33 at the time of writing), which are split into the following categories: nominators, reviewers, reviews, volunteer roles, reviewing initiatives, and others. However, you are more than welcome to add any proposals of your own that you wish to put to the community.

By the end of September, all the proposals will have been closed by an uninvolved editor, either as a consensus for one of the options or with no consensus. At this point, editors will be invited again to develop these proposals into coherent policy and implement them.

Thank you for your contributions to the good articles project, and I look forward to your input! (in solidarity), JacobTheRox(talk|contributions) 16:02, 11 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Wondering why

[edit]

you removed so many references (including ones from entertainment business sources like Variety and Deadline) in this edit from Joslyn Rose Lyons. - Shearonink (talk) 17:48, 12 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

I think you should take a look at the preceding edits. You're welcome to add back good sources that may have been inadvertently removed; I expect the prior edit by a TA was block evasion. MediaKyle (talk) 18:16, 12 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Updated versions

[edit]

Hi Kyle, a few months ago you voted to delete the sidebar Template:Moses. The closer of the discussion stated I can see a world where a more narrowly-defined sidebar is recreated, as this was the primary concern of those in favour of deletion., so I've updated and significantly trimmed User:Wikieditor662/Template:Moses and User:Wikieditor662/Template:Abraham . What do you think of the updated versions? And any farther suggestions will be appreciated. Wikieditor662 (talk) 11:01, 14 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

I think you should read the room and don't put those back, so we don't have to waste our time deleting them again. No one wants sidebars. MediaKyle (talk) 11:25, 14 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
No one wants sidebars. That's definitely not true... for example for these ones, from the quotes I showed you for this one, as well as some other replies. In general, sidebars like for Jesus (Template:Jesus) or Genghis Khan (Template:Genghis Khan) have not been deleted what-so-ever. Wikieditor662 (talk) 18:08, 14 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

physics

[edit]

our lady of ligts ~2026-44545-72 (talk) 11:06, 14 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Growth/Newsletters/36

[edit]

13:17, 18 August 2026 (UTC)

Wikimedia Foundation Bulletin 2026 Issue 15

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 19:23, 18 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judy_Dietz

[edit]

Dear MediaKyle: Could you read this article when you get a chance? It's about an exceptional Art Gallery of Nova Scotia staff member. Thank you, Joan arden murray (talk) 23:06, 19 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Concern regarding Draft:Frank Gott

[edit]

Information icon Hello, MediaKyle. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Frank Gott, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 12:06, 20 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leroy_Zwicker

[edit]

Dear MediaKyle:

Thanks for your help. Could you also look over this article? Thanks! Joan arden murray (talk) 15:04, 21 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your excellent help, as always!Joan arden murray (talk) 22:18, 21 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

The Bugle: Issue 244, August 2026

[edit]
Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:13, 22 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

The Signpost: 24 August 2026

[edit]
  • On the bright side: The great outdoors
    Blue Angels, Indigenous Peoples' Day, and the Perseids meteor shower.
  • Opinion: Are we embarrassed yet?
    One editor wants to find out more about a Department of Justice investigation of Wikipedia and its editors.
  • Comix: WP:FAOWN
    "Explaining civilly" probably should go both ways...

New pages patrol September 2026 Backlog drive

[edit]
September 2026 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
  • On 1 September 2026, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin at a particularly important time for NPP.
  • The backlog has now passed 30,000 unreviewed articles, a level that has been described in current NPP discussions as exceptionally high and potentially difficult to overcome through normal reviewing alone. Backlog drives are one of the few measures that have historically produced a noticeable reduction in the backlog, so the participation of as many active patrollers as possible will matter this month.
  • If you can review during September, please make articles your priority. Every article that is reviewed is a meaningful reduction in the backlog. With the queue at its current size, even a relatively small increase in the number of articles each patroller reviews can add up to a substantial difference over the course of the month.
  • This is a hybrid drive, so redirect reviewing is still included. Redirects can be a useful way for newer patrollers to get comfortable with NPP and can help people build up to reviewing articles. However, the main goal of this drive is to tackle the article backlog, and experienced patrollers are particularly encouraged to spend as much of their available reviewing time on articles as they can.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled.
  • Each article review will earn 1 point, while each redirect review will earn 0.2 points.
  • Streak awards will be given out based on consistently hitting point thresholds for each week of the drive.
  • Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive.
  • If you have been thinking about doing more NPP, this is an especially good month to jump in. Whether you can review a few pages or hundreds, every review helps. And if you are already an active patroller, please consider whether you can put in some additional time during September to help bring the backlog back under control.
  • Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:49, 24 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

RfC

[edit]

I have created an RfC about what image to use for Mark Carney. Because you were involved in the prior discussion, I encourage you to share your thoughts on the RfC. Thanks, Cyrobyte (talk) 19:30, 27 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Wikimedia Foundation Bulletin 2026 Issue 16

[edit]