User talk:Figaro

Moulder has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk pages. Happy editing!

The Minor Barnstar For all of those minor edits to Brisbane related articles and tirelessly working to improve the quality of said articles. Factoid Killer 17:29, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Original Barnstar I'm awarding you the original Barnstar for all of the Brisbane related articles you've started and contributed to. I'm very surprised that you haven't received one before now! Factoid Killer 20:40, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		For dedication to improving and expanding Wikipedia. Good job! Sharkface217 02:47, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please let me know whether it is compulsory for archived user talk pages to be linked to the user's talk page. Thanks.

No. Its not. :) Glen 12:39, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify, you can "remove" messages from your talk page at your leisure. After all, its all in the history - in fact, some administrators remove messages from their talk pages without even archiving at all! And, you're welcome. Glen 12:46, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Further, other users doing this is unnacceptable. If you remove content from your talk page, we can safely assume you've read it - and other users reverting your removal is not on. As such, if you find this happening again, please contact me; however, I presume my comments should be enough that you wont be bothered about this again. Talk care, Glen 12:55, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've commented here Glen 13:24, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And I've updated WP:ARCHIVE to delineate this. - UtherSRG (talk) 13:58, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Figaro! I would like to nominate you for adminship, let me know if it's ok for you ;-) Happy editing, Snowolf ^(talk) _CON ^COI - 13:44, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Very nice job on the template, Figaro -- it was much needed. Hope you don't mind but I've taken the liberty of expanding it a bit. Jimmy Pitt talk 14:26, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Figaro, listing the individual screen adaptations is a good idea: I have Brian Taves's "P G Wodehouse and Hollywood" and will try to add more from that as time permits.

I've made a few changes that I hope you'll agree with:

• I've renamed "BBC Radio 4" back to "Radio"; I'm fairly sure that when I dig into my reference material I can find radio performances on other radio channels, and the Briers/Hordern series was definitely re-broadcast elsewhere.
• I've renamed the Briers/Hordern series to the generic title, "What Ho, Jeeves!", that was used for the series and wikilinked it to the Jeeves article.
• I've added (and wikilinked) the radio adaptation of "The Code of the Woosters". There are quite a few other radio adaptations; I'll try to dig out the details when I have a spare moment.
• I've added in "The World of Wooster" TV adaptation: the BFI website indicates that this was the title for the series of 20 J&W adaptations in 1965-67 and that "The World of Wodehouse" was the title for a series of 6 Blandings and 7 Ukridge stories, broadcast in 1967-68. Jimmy Pitt talk 12:15, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure you might know this, so if this is old news feel free to ignore (I just don't want things to fall between the cracks). The State Library of Queensland just recently donated 50,000 historic photographs to the Wikimedia Commons, and all of them are in the public domain. I used one for Southern Cross (aircraft), an entry in which you appear to be an active editor. Anyway, the SLQ photographs are a great opportunity to add images to Australian related articles, and since you're (obviously) an Aussie you'll have more expertise in using them than I ever could. Here's some of my (probably clumsy) attempts to integrate these photos into wikipedia. I was particularly proud to add a photo of William MacGregor where one previously didn't exist. Hope you find this useful and the SLQ photos are just worth browsing for the fun of it all. I'm still trying to figure out where this interesting photograph could be used. Cheers! --Quartermaster (talk) 17:28, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the "autopatrolled" permission. This won't affect your editing, it just automatically marks any page you create as patrolled, benefiting new page patrollers. Please remember:

• This permission does not give you any special status or authority
• Submission of inappropriate material may lead to its removal
• You may wish to display the {{Autopatrolled}} top icon and/or the {{User wikipedia/autopatrolled}} userbox on your user page
• If, for any reason, you decide you do not want the permission, let me know and I can remove it

If you have any questions about the permission, don't hesitate to ask. Otherwise, happy editing!HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:58, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Someone has nominated your Lyrebird article to be published in the Encyclopedia of Earth. If you are agreeable, please forward your actual name, and the Encyclopedia will proceed. Here is a link to another bird article on the EoE so you can evaluate whether you are interested in this matter. http://www.eoearth.org/article/American_kestrel cheers. Berberisb (talk) 15:33, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Science lovers wanted!

Hi! I'm serving as the wikipedian-in-residence at the Smithsonian Institution Archives until June! One of my goals as resident, is to work with Wikipedians and staff to improve content on Wikipedia about people who have collections held in the Archives - most of these are scientists who held roles within the Smithsonian and/or federal government. I thought you might like to participate since you are interested in the sciences! Sign up to participate here and dive into articles needing expansion and creation on our to-do list. Feel free to make a request for images or materials at the request page, and of course, if you share your successes at the outcomes page you will receive the SIA barnstar! Thanks for your interest, and I look forward to your participation! Sarah (talk) 02:00, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Figaro! So happy that you came by the Smithsonian Institution Archives project and signed up to participate! We've got a great list of subjects that need to be improved upon or written about. I do hope you'll visit the to-do list and dive in - do let me know if you need anything. And of course, your contributions can earn you the official oh so fancy SIA barnstar :) Thanks again! So happy to have you on board! SarahStierch (talk) 23:06, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for tweaking the appearance on the Sugar glider page :) ~Eric F 74.60.29.141 (talk) 19:23, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply] Okay ... WikiLove for you →

Hello Figaro, 74.60.29.141 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

WP:AURD (Australian Roads), is inviting comment on a proposal to convert Australian road articles to {{infobox road}}. Please come and discuss. The vote will be after concerns have been looked into.

• Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian Roads/RfC:Infobox Road proposal

You are being notified as a member on the list of WP:AUS

Nbound (talk) 22:39, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Figaro,

Quoting the article: "In Australia, sugar gliders can be kept in Victoria, South Australia, and the Northern Territory. However, they are not allowed to be kept as pets in Western Australia, New South Wales, the Australian Capital Territory, Queensland or Tasmania."

Either edit the article about sugar gliders, if the information above is incorrect, or allow it to be added to category "Pets in Australia".

I am mostly aiming to collect those native to Australia species which can also be kept in Australia as pets, to show that cats-and-dogs are not the only kind of pets kept in Australia. Before this category was created, the only way to look for the animals which can be kept as pets in Australia was to search by keywords.

Best wishes.

Wikiwide (talk) 23:38, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiwide has given you a salamander! Salamanders promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Your salamander must be fed daily and will be your faithful companion for life! You can brighten someone's day by giving them a WikiCritter on their talk page with a friendly message, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
To give a salamander: {{salamander|message=Your message here. ~~~~}}

Hi. I'm not really convinced about the naming of these articles, but I certainly think that having the subject (ISIRTA) first was better than having the letter of the alphabet first. Is there a reason for your current set of changes? Perhaps you could stop until there is agreement about what they should be called? --Mirokado (talk) 13:18, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I won't rename any more of the pages until a decision has been made (I have only renamed five of the pages so far).

There is one problem - if it is decided to return to the previous names for the pages, there will be some difficulty doing this (because of the names having already been used). I apologize for any problems or inconvenience I may have caused by renaming the pages. Figaro (talk) 13:34, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(please let's keep the conversation in one place, it will be easier to refer to it elsewhere if necessary)

There is no need at all to apologise, particluarly if you stop and discuss when asked to do so!

There will be no problem with the redirects unless somebody edits them subsequent to the move (in which case an admin would have to do any reverse move for us).

I have started a section Talk:I'm Sorry, I'll Read That Again#Related article names etc. It is better to discuss article improvements on the article talk page, then others can contribute and an evolving consensus is clear.

Thanks for your quick response. --Mirokado (talk) 14:48, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No response to the thread at Talk:I'm Sorry, I'll Read That Again#Related article names etc. I have updated that with a detailed suggestion for merging and explain that I will leave any further action to you since I'm not convinced the prod or AFD would be defensible. --Mirokado (talk) 22:20, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for requesting feedback on may talk page following your merge of A–C. Nicely done so far... Please see the update to Talk:I'm Sorry, I'll Read That Again#Related article names etc --Mirokado (talk) 22:59, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. The renames to the remaining articles are fine (clearly I got the table wrong while counting in from either end!) Thanks for doing that. I will be away for a while now, so I'll wish you good luck with any further changes you are able to make. --Mirokado (talk) 18:44, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is a note to let the main editors of koala know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on August 16, 2013. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or one of his delegates (Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), Gimmetoo (talk · contribs), and Bencherlite (talk · contribs)), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/August 16, 2013. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:

The koala is an arboreal herbivorous marsupial native to Australia, and is recognised worldwide as an iconic symbol of the country because of its distinctive appearance. It is the only extant representative of the family Phascolarctidae and its closest living relatives are the wombats. It is easily recognisable by its stout, tailless body, round, fluffy ears and large, spoon-shaped nose. It is popularly known as the koala bear because of its bear-like appearance. The koala has a body length of 60–85 cm (24–33 in) and weighs 4–15 kg (9–33 lb). Pelage colour ranges from silver grey to chocolate brown. Koalas typically inhabit open Eucalyptus woodlands, and the leaves of these trees make up most of their diet. Because this eucalypt diet provides them with only low nutrition and energy, koalas are largely sedentary and sleep for up to 20 hours a day. They are asocial animals, and bonding only exists between mothers and dependent offspring. They have few natural predators and parasites but are threatened by various pathogens, as well as by bushfires and droughts. The biggest threat to their existence is habitat destruction due to agriculture and urbanisation. (Full article...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to understand this edit [1]. "coauthors" is not a parameter that can be used like that, it creates a cs1 error, which my edit fixed. --Atethnekos (Discussion, Contributions) 21:17, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Answered comment Figaro (talk) 09:47, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem at all. I was just trying to understand. You don't have to apologize to me. Yes, they are normally called coauthors, but the "coauthors" parameter for the cite template doesn't work by itself like that. --Atethnekos (Discussion, Contributions) 09:49, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your upload of File:Bowen-Park-sign.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:02, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There are some issues with proposed parameters for {{Infobox television episode}}. I've left a message at WT:TV about this but unfortunately the templates used in the TV project draw little interest, even though they often cause us grief. Because of this I'm approaching experienced editors directly, with a view to getting some more input. The discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television#Infobox television episode provides an introduction to the issues. Your attention would be greatly appreciated at the discussions. --AussieLegend (✉) 12:51, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, can you review the edits made to Seven Brides for Seven Brothers by Spencer Maverick? The editor has made a lot of edits without any edit summaries and without ever talking to another editor. I reverted them at Edge of Tomorrow (film) out of POV concerns, but I was not sure if the edits made to Seven Brides were valid. Thanks, Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 01:04, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for letting me know what is happening. I will check out the page. Once again, thank you. All the best. Figaro (talk) 10:10, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have now checked the page and found that, while some of his edits were good, there was also POV edits, which I have now removed (citing them as POV). I also changed his POV heading of 'Accolades' back to the previous correct heading of 'Awards and nominations.

I would like to take this opportunity to apologise for the edits I made to your own talk page - where I originally made my first comment. When I was about to make my second comment, to give an update about what was happening, I noticed that you had requested replies to your comment to be made on my own talk page. Then, when I transferred my original comment to my talk page, I left a comment apologising for what had happened - only to discover that my apology was unfortunately 'tacked onto' the end of another discussion altogether (so I removed my apology comment as well). All the best. Figaro (talk) 10:56, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, it's alright! :) I just like for other editors to reply to me in the same place since it makes for a coherent discussion. If it doesn't happen, that's fine. Thanks for checking on Seven Brides. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 11:30, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for explaining. All the best. Figaro (talk) 06:48, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Close to Brisbane. Since you had some involvement with the Close to Brisbane redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. - TheChampionMan1234 11:54, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Figaro! As a Steward I'm involved in the upcoming unification of all accounts organized by the Wikimedia Foundation (see m:Single User Login finalisation announcement). By looking at your account, I realized that you don't have a global account yet. In order to secure your name, I recommend you to create such account on your own by submitting your password on Special:MergeAccount and unifying your local accounts. If you have any problems with doing that or further questions, please don't hesitate to ping me with {{ping|DerHexer}}. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 23:44, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop removing the short section about the film adaptation from the article The Man from Snowy River (poem). That a movie adaptation was made of the poem is highly notable, and there are plenty of reliable sources for the film.

In fact, you twice removed the brief section entitled 'Film adaptation' along with a short sentence about it in the lede (here and here). The fact that the article about the 1982 film is linked to from the nav template at the bottom of the article is certainly no justification for not including something about it in the article body. Films and other adaptations are routinely mentioned in articles about literary works, typically in sections called 'Film adaptation' or the like, regardless whether a nav template also has a link or not. This article is no different.

Despite your edit summary stating the films etc are mentioned in the template 'the poem and its adaptations'. The article is about the poem, not the 1982 film, so the film should not be part of the article, mentioning the film in the article is completely in line with the convention of mentioning notable derived works and adaptations, and is totally appropriate for this article.

Please revert your last change to The Man from Snowy River (poem) to restore the last version containing the Film adaptation section (or change it to 'Film adaptations', if you prefer to mention both films).

Cordially, Mathglot (talk) 21:56, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Btw, I'll just add a note of appreciation and commendation for those who don't already know: virtually anything having to do with The Man from Snowy River on Wikipedia, including the disambig page, the poem, the 1982 and 1920 films, sequels, spectaculars, and tv series, and three soundtrack articles were all created by User:Figaro along with tireless follow-up modifications to improve those articles. Thanks! Mathglot (talk)

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:1951-Australian-florin-obverse.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination.

ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 23:55, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! I'm having some trouble getting people to understand that being a national champion is notable. Could you help with this draft page for Draft:Malcolm Norwood (runner)? (corrected link!) Comm260 ncu (talk) 22:32, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

{{user WikiProject Australian biota}}

This user is a participant in WikiProject Australian biota.

Hi! I am a student at the University of Sydney and currently enrolled in a course about writing on Wikipedia. I am currently writing in the stub article 'Disabled sports in Australia'. I am looking for any advice/suggestions as this is my first time writing on wikipedia. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Beantownboys (talk • contribs) 02:25, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Black swan emblems and popular culture has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Steelkamp (talk) 06:25, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:23, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day! Hi Figaro! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of the day you made your first edit and became a Wikipedian! The Herald (Benison) (talk) 04:53, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:The Desert Song (Max Liebman Presents). Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 09:25, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

There are no independent sources? IMDb and Pinterest cannot be used either.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:The Desert Song (Max Liebman Presents) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Theroadislong (talk) 10:58, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have tried my best, again, to do as you have requested, for the article - trying to find acceptable information to add to the article. As I keep saying, I need somebody to actually help me with this article - not just criticize it for shortcomings on my part, for what is considered a lack of reliable sources and references for it. As I have already said, I only have a DVD of the operetta and I need help to find the reliable references and sources which Wikipedia require for the article to be accepted.

It is interesting that the 1943 and 1953 film versions, which are not as close to the original operetta as the live television production is, are considered as more notable and acceptable than the live television broadcast of the operetta is, as they have both been published on Wikipedia, irrespective of the number of major changes in the plot in both the film versions. Wikipedia is supposed to be an encyclopedia, so the non-publication of the article will have some people assuming that a production of the operetta, itself, does not exist. The operetta version, with Nelson Eddy and Gale Sherwood, happens to be a rendition of the original operetta story, albeit abridged and adapted for the live television broadcast.

Could you please let me know if there is anything else wrong with what I have done with the article, so that I can try to improve it. Thank you. Figaro (talk) Figaro (talk) 05:10, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Figaro! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Theroadislong (talk) 10:58, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

== About my article "The Desert Song" (Max Liebman Presents) ==

I have just discovered, as I am an autopatrolled member of Wikipedia, that I have the right to put my articles onto the mainspace without having to submit them for reviews by other people. Figaro (talk) Figaro (talk) 10:03, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I guess you've since figured how to move that draft to main space. The ability to move pages has nothing to do with autopatrolled; you have to be autoconfirmed to be able to move pages. See WP:AUTOCONFIRM what that is.

I see that you were assigned autopatrolled in 2011. You haven't been active since 2016. Things have moved on considerably since 2011 (even since 2016). Looking at the state of the article that you moved into main space, you'd never get autopatrolled with work of that quality. To that end, I've removed the autopatrolled flag from your account for the time being.

I hope you become active again and catch up with what the community expectations are today. With a reasonable level of activity, you'd quickly gain the skills required these days for things like autopatrolled. Schwede66 10:13, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please explain *why* I am no longer an autopatrolled member of Wikipedia - and when this happened. Thank you. This is the first time that I have been told this.

Could you also please tell me whose decision it was to do this. Thank you. Figaro (talk) Figaro (talk) 10:18, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to mention that, unlike you have accused me of to the editor Theroadislong, I actually *have* listened to everything which everyone (the reviewers etc.) have 'said' to me. I don't like being falsely accused of something of which I am blameless (please check before making such accusations in future about other editors - what you wrote about me is defamatory).

I would also like to say that I would never have moved the page to the mainspace if I had known that I was no longer considered an unpatrolled member of Wikipedia who no longer had the right to do so. Finally, as I have requested several times, I would very much appreciate help, from *somebody* in improving the article to the standard *now* required of Wikipedia, not just instructed to do so - which I tried to do, but have been unable to do, mentioning this several times (please check out my comments on Theroadislong's 'talk page'. Figaro (talk) Figaro (talk) 00:24, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, perhaps you can help me to improve the quality of the article - and what is wrong with it. Thank you. I only have access to the DVD of the operetta and what I have found on the internet - so I am not able to list anything further.

I would also like to know why I was not informed, before, about the decision to remove my autopatrolled rights - especially as I have been a member of Wikipedia since July, 2005. Figaro (talk)

The reason was given above by User:Schwede66 namely "Looking at the state of the article that you moved into main space, you'd never get autopatrolled with work of that quality. To that end, I've removed the autopatrolled flag from your account for the time being." Perhaps they would like to comment further? Theroadislong (talk) 02:37, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia articles are based on what independent sources have reported, the DVD is NOT an independent source so cannot be used to establish any notabilty. Moving the draft to main space when it clearly isn't up to standard is the reason your autopatrolled rights have been removed. Theroadislong (talk) 11:17, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Figaro, Theroadislong is right on the button. In addition, you should not worry whether you are autopatrolled or not. It has zero impact on your ability to edit Wikipedia. The only group of users that are affected by you being autopatrolled are new pages reviewers. Please read Wikipedia:Autopatrolled if you'd like to know more. And you keep being confused about your ability or otherwise to move pages. It has nothing to do with being autopatrolled. Anyone who is autoconfirmed can move pages. I've already explained this above; maybe follow the link and read up what exactly that is.

You were first told about this yesterday at the time that I removed the flag. Schwede66 03:12, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Start a discussion with Figaro

Talk pages are where people discuss how to make content on Wikipedia the best that it can be. Start a new discussion to connect and collaborate with Figaro. What you say here will be public for others to see.

Start a discussion