Hello, Mrfoogles, andwelcome to Wikipedia! Thank you foryour contributions. I hope you like this place and decide to stay.

• Pleasesign your name ontalk pages, by using four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically produce your username and the date, and helps to identify who said what and when. Please do not sign any edit that is not on a talk page.
• Check out some of these pages:
  • Contributing to Wikipedia
  • Introduction to Wikipedia
  • How to create your first article (using theArticle Wizard if you wish)
  • The five pillars of Wikipedia |Cheatsheet of WikiCode

• If you have a question that is not one of the frequently asked questions below, check out theTeahouse,ask me on my talk page, or click the button below. Happy editing and again, welcome!Rasnaboy (talk)17:28, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

==References=={{Reflist}}

Hey, Mrfoogles. Here on WP we have a very specific definition ofWP:Vandalism, and it doesn't includeinserting a joke into a discussion. Please don't edit war with people over attempts to inject mild levity into policy discussions.Valereee (talk)21:12, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I guess that was probably a bit unnecessary.Mrfoogles (talk)02:12, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. Alleligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia 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 imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add{{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)00:54, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you have been editing some health-related articles, and I wanted to say that a bunch of us hang out atWikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine. You're welcome to join us if that's an area of editing that interests you. It's a good place to ask questions about findinggood sources for medical content orwriting style. Feel free to put the group's page onyour watchlist, or stop by to say hello some time.WhatamIdoing (talk)22:31, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently editedBrent Cotter, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageCBC. Such links areusually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles.(Read theFAQ • Join us at theDPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk)06:51, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mrfoogles. Thank you for your work onSlim Pezin. Another editor,North8000, has reviewed it as part ofnew pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with{{Re|North8000}}.(Message delivered via thePage Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk)18:20, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I saw that you have forked the jersey (clothing) article. Wouldn't it be better if the article remained as is and kept all types of jerseys on one article? they all fall under the umbrella term clothing. if it were a totally different thing, then i'd split. for example, if someone put jersey (the island) with jersey (clothing).

on the other hand sports jersey on its own could probably be expanded further. what do you think?Adenosine Triphosphate (talk)08:52, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I split them because even though they’re referred to by the same term, they’re different kinds of clothing; very few sports jerseys are traditional knit jerseys like are shown on the jerseys (clothing) article. I was also planning to add some of the content fromuniform, maybe, which I am also trying to split. I think it definitely could be expanded, like most articlesMrfoogles (talk)15:50, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission toArticles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Mgp28 was:

The proposed article does not have sufficient content to require an article of its own, but it could be merged into the existing article atHibernation factor. Since anyone can edit Wikipedia, you are welcome to add that information yourself. Thank you.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

I liked this article a lot but I cannot currently find enough sources to convince me that it meets Wikipedia's notability criteria. Given the protein is only recently discovered, I suspect it could meet the criteria in the future. In the meantime, I suggest you merge this text intoHibernation factor (which you also created), then split it off once there is enough coverage in reliable sources.

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 resubmitafter they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go toDraft:Balon (protein) 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 andmay be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced anyuntoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at theArticles for creation help desk, on thereviewer's talk page or useWikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Mgp28 (talk)15:37, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's pretty much what I thought also. I already have a section inHibernation factor on Balon, only it's not as long because it's not its own article. Do you mind marking it as a promising draft? I figured I'd leave it there for when the protein does get some coverage (probably in several years, but I imagine it will eventually)Mrfoogles (talk)16:09, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've added thepromising draft template. I think you could still add more to the Hibernation factor article without it being too long.Mgp28 (talk)16:23, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I maybe could, but I'll probably leave it condensed so that there's space. The important information is already in the article.Mrfoogles (talk)16:45, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,Mrfoogles!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 theArticles for creation help desk. If you have anyother questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at theTeahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there!Mgp28 (talk)15:37, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedia/Assessment. You definitely should join WikiProject Wikipedia.FloridaMan2101:48, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I try to review a couple articles when I put one in. It's pretty much just me occasionally, Ktkvtsh, and you, but it's surprisingly not-dead for all that. Probably not going to join any wikiprojects, though.Mrfoogles (talk)02:28, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello andwelcome to Wikipedia. When you add content totalk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, such as atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joël André Ornstein (2nd nomination), (but never when editing articles), please be sure tosign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add fourtildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you.jlwoodwa (talk)05:42, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I do know, I just forgot. Thanks for telling me I missed one, though.Mrfoogles (talk)14:54, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did atLivermore, California, without citing areliable source. Please review the guidelines atWikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you.Magnolia677 (talk)13:09, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions toList of cities and towns along the Tennessee River. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time becauseit has no sources.I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information atHelp:Unreviewed new page.When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back.Significa liberdade(she/her) (talk)13:49, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I understand spices being helpful, but I’m not sure you’re right here, because this is a list article. For example,List of cities and towns along the Potomac River also has no sources. Most list articles don’t have sources. You could say the grouping is less obvious because you can’t tautologically say an arbitrary city is along a river, but they can be easily verified by looking at a map: I could cite google maps, maybe? How would you feel if I added that source and then undraftified? (The AFC process takes months and I’d rather avoid it for a tiny article like this one).

I pretty much copy-pasted it from a list in the article, so I wasn’t worrying too much about sources.Mrfoogles (talk)15:15, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Re: last comment: just realized you said you were ok if it was moved back, added apple maps as a source and spot-checked a random sample and did so.Mrfoogles (talk)15:26, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. As part ofNew Page Review I've restored the redirect ofNature tourism toEcotourism. I saw you cite a Vox.com article that points to differences, but enough sources (including ones you cited in your Nature tourism stub, such asthis one,this one, andthis one basically say they're overlapping or identical concepts. To avoid creating aWP:CONTENTFORK, the best place to explore this difference (to the extent there is one) is in the much-better-established Ecotourism article. If you disagree, feel free to revert my redirect, but know that if it is reverted I will nominate the page at Articles for Deletion to restore a stable redirect. Thanks!Dclemens1971 (talk)14:28, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The second and third ones there don’t actually present them as identical; the 2nd says they “overlap” and the 3rd, if you scroll down a couple paragraphs, explains the difference. The 1st also has a section on ecotourism and explains the differences (basically, while ecotourism can just be a marketing term, it is supposed to include environmental education and conservation, not just nature). The two concepts definitely overlap, but all the sources you mentioned clearly distinguish them, except in the case where ecotourism is only used as a marketing term.

While they are similar, I think the key difference is ecotourism adds education. A lot of info that just applies to nature tourism in general is in the ecotourism article and would probably need to be moved (or maybe ecotourism should be a subsection), but that said I think the articles should be separate.Mrfoogles (talk)15:08, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Given the argument over the term (seeEcotourism#Definition), maybe it would be better to just have a nature tourism article with subsections.Mrfoogles (talk)15:11, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dclemens1971 I have reverted your edits; if you're still interested in nominating it for AFD please do so.Mrfoogles (talk)05:55, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, if you do, would you mind linking my talk page post explaining my reasoning? I would put it on the AfD but for obvious reasons cannot yet.Mrfoogles (talk)06:01, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies that my reversion was a little too speedy; will leave you to it :)Jonathan Deamer (talk)17:46, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On26 October 2024,Did you know was updated with a fact from the articleEddie Canales, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was... thatEddie Canales set up nearly 200 water stations along an area of the US–Mexico border to save the lives of undocumented immigrants? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/Eddie Canales. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page(here's how,Eddie Canales), and the hook may be added tothe statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on theDid you know talk page.

RoySmith(talk)00:02, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thishelp request has been answered. If you need more help, you canask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on theiruser talk page, or consider visiting theTeahouse.

Regarding your feedback onEdward Tynte, I added some more information, but admittedly there seems to be a lack of sources regarding Tynte. Do you know any Wikipedians specializing in history who could perhaps help me find some more sources on him? Thanks,TarheelBornBred (talk)17:12, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @TarheelBornBred, I'm here because you put up the "help me" template. It looks like you actually just wanted to ask Mrfoogles this question, so I've turned the template off. (It's basically a wikipedian Bat Signal and will call in unrelated people from all over.) I am also a wikipedian who specializes in history, so I'll have a look for you in a moment. --asilvering (talk)17:32, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, for someone who wasn't governor for very long, I don't think you're going to find a whole lot, since there simply isn't much to say. But I don't think you've exhausted the limits of basic web checks like google scholar and google books. (eg, gschol:[1]) Most of them seem to be talking about his death, but again, hardly surprising. If you're paywalled out of any of those sources, tryWP:WPL orWP:RX.WP:RDH is a good place to ask if you have any specific questions about a historical fact. --asilvering (talk)18:16, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I have noticed that youoften edit without using anedit summary. Please do your best toalways fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box inyour preferences. Thanks!DMacks (talk)08:22, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree it's important to have edit summaries, but in this case (rating large numbers of chemistry list articles as lists to try to clean them up) it'd slow down the process a lot to have to type out the edit summary every time, so I chose not to. It does make it more inconvenient if you're trying to figure out who rated the page, but when making that number of edits it's not worth it. It might be worth writing edit summaries for the higher (B,C) rated articles, I acknowledge.Mrfoogles (talk)08:48, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I actually first became aware while looking at article-space viachloropyridine, where a factual mistake was introduced. That mistake itself is no big deal, easily fixed. Then a few of the talk-page edits were on my watchlist, and I agree that they are fine edits, but it wasted my time because I had to read to decide if there was a talkpage comment I wanted to respond to. That's not a potential inconvenience looking back later if someone is interested in ratings, but an actual inconvenience for everyone who has it on watchlist at the time you make each such edit. It seems like a main item is "add class=list to talkpage of articles in a setlist category", which sounds like an easy bot-task to request.DMacks (talk)09:30, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I saw you added an "Independent sources" tag to theRichard Flagan article which I created. Its notability is based onWP:NACADEMIC criteria #1, #2, #3, #5, and #8. Most academics don't have articles written about them in independentWP:RS which is why (based on my understanding ofWP:NOTABILITY) thatNotability (academics) has its own policy. Note the "Independent sources" tag states that "This article may rely excessively on sources too closely associated with the subject, potentially preventing the article from being verifiable and neutral." But I don't think there's anything in the article that isn't verifiable or neutral. Are there particular points you are concerned about? I'm inclined to remove the tag but wanted to hear from you first.Nnev66 (talk)01:15, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I added the tag to say that it would be better to have sources independent of him (organizations he is not a board member of, i.e.), not that he wasn't notable. Looking at it the policy does say "Once the passage of one or more notability criteria has been verified through independent sources, or through the reliable sources listed explicitly for this purpose in the specific criteria notes, non-independent sources, such as official institutional and professional sources, are widely accepted as reliable sourcing for routine, uncontroversial details.", I guess. Still, I'm not seeing any sources on the article that go into detail on him that aren't bios written by organizations he has major influence in -- this can make articles have kind of a one-sided perspective when controversial issues are involved; it would be better to have independent sources. Given there aren't any concrete problems, though, and it's per policy, I'll remove the tag. I wonder if there really aren't any independent sources, though.Mrfoogles (talk)01:45, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your response and for removing the tag. I did look for sources using search engines, Proquest, and Newspapers.com. For academics, there just aren't mainstream publications that write in-depth articles about them for the most part. This article would failWP:GNG because of this. I agree that universities/institutions are likely going to publish positive things about their professors, but I just tried to get information about this subject from these sources to include additional details, e.g. his relationship with his collaborators. I spent more time on this article than I intended because I was trying to write an article beyond the perfunctory.Nnev66 (talk)02:18, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. Alleligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia 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 imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add{{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)00:51, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome, welcome, welcome Mrfoogles! I'm glad that you are joining theNovember 2024 drive! Please, have a cup of WikiTea, and go cite some articles.

Cielquiparle (talk)03:33, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

HelloMrfoogles (talk)08:17, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

		Citation Barnstar
		This award is given in recognition to Mrfoogles for collecting more than 56.0 points during theWikiProject Unreferenced articles'sNOV24 backlog drive. Your contributions played a crucial role in sourcing over 8,000 unsourced articles during the drive. Thank you so much for participating and helping to reduce the backlog! –DreamRimmer Alt (talk)17:39, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mrfoogles. Thank you for your work onWilliam Mendenhall. Another editor,North8000, has reviewed it as part ofnew pages patrol and left the following comment:

nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with{{Re|North8000}}.(Message delivered via thePage Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk)13:27, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mrfoogles, I am very grateful for the various recent edits that improve clarity and formatting on the draft Rarefied Gas Dynamics page.Ingrid wysong (talk)01:13, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, just going around fixing typos and messing with things. Looking at the page again I think you should maybe put in more frequent citations -- on Wikipedia you generally want to be able to figure what most nontrivial sentences are cited to, and it's not as easy to go "oh, the last three sentences are clearly cited to <this ref at the end>", because not everyone means to say that the source at the end of the three sentences cites all three, so it creates ambiguity whether all of the info is cited unless you go and read through all the references to see what they say (plus, maybe there were originally two sentences, but someone added some new stuff in the middle not related to that source at all).Mrfoogles (talk)02:07, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mrfoogles. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know thatDraft:Branches of government, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six monthsmay be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, pleaseedit it again orrequest that it be moved to your userspace.

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

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.FireflyBot (talk)22:07, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mrfoogles. It has been over six months since you last edited theArticles for Creation submission ordraft page you started, "Branches of government".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you canrequest its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing.Liz^Read!Talk!21:47, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently editedAlberto Musalem, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageAxios.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk)07:58, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently editedCrimplene, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageUnifi.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk)07:56, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Saturated alcohols (sugars, ethanol, glycol, ...), like saturated hydrocarbons (gasoline, diesel, kerosine) are colorless. I cannot think of exceptions. We, or at least I, mention when compounds are colorless-white in the lede for hundreds or maybe thousands of articles. Finding for a source on all these statements, I guess, is possible. The colorless nature of these things is obvious to chemists, but not so for nonchemists.

Now, a common issue that even chemists raise is that many colorless things in everyday life appear in fact "colored", often amber or yellowish or even brown. Gasoline, sugar that I use for tea, most cooking oils, motor oil. In those cases, the compound(s) of interest is still colorless, but thesamples are contaminated with colored junk. So in such cases, a distinction exists between samples and the real thing.

So, that is a belabored answer to your query about octanediol (any isomer) is colorless. Cheers, --Smokefoot (talk)20:20, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would be handy to have a citation saying that all (or almost all) saturated hydrocarbons are colorless generally though, because this isn't an intuitively obvious fact for most people. And if there is a source for that, it could be used in all such places.Mrfoogles (talk)20:06, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, a source is also needed to say that it is a solid in normal conditions, I think.Mrfoogles (talk)20:07, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

When the melting point is above room temperature, the material is a solid under normal conditions. Right? I mean, there's careful, and then there is obvious.--Smokefoot (talk)13:50, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure (didn't notice that in the infobox), that's not what I meant -- it would be handy to have a citation for the melting temperature, is what I mean. I agree it's not a huge problem.Mrfoogles (talk)17:57, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited155 West Washington Boulevard, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageAsphalt.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk)19:56, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

	TheCave Rescue Award.
	Thanks for the help at the FLC!Kingsmasher678 (talk)04:43, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, had fun tracking down refs. I think you meanOutline of caves, though? In either case I did not know that was an award, but I'll take it.Mrfoogles (talk)04:54, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	For creatingtexting etiquette, good work & a very constructive response to something being at AfDTheLongTone (talk)15:44, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, it seemed like a good idea, so I figured it would be easier to just make it than try to vote for creating a page and then merging to it.Mrfoogles (talk)15:45, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The articleChloronitramide anion you nominated as agood article has failed; seeTalk:Chloronitramide anion for reasons whythe nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article.Message delivered byChristieBot, on behalf ofPi.1415926535 --Pi.1415926535 (talk)02:44, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

		The Citation Barnstar
		This award is given to Mrfoogles for accumulating at least 90 points during the first quarter of 2025. Your contributions have helped reduce the backlog of unreferenced articles by ~5000 since the beginning of the year. Keep going and thanks for your citations!Cielquiparle (talk)22:08, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rachelevey has given you aSugar cookie! Sugar cookies promoteWikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a Sugar cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Thank you so much for your review of myfirst article! While I am new to the community, your comments and encouragement to submit it for a good article review gave me the confidence to keep editing and improving.

Rachelevey (talk)03:39, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your message, I felt so alone...BEFOR01 (talk)16:27, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, I guess? Mostly, I was just coming in and saying what I thought about the whole thing.Mrfoogles (talk)16:34, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey,

I understand your perspective and appreciate your contribution to the discussion. However, I want to point out that you’re removing some important information that could be crucial for people experiencing similar symptoms. I personally spent almost a year believing I had Visual Snow Syndrome (VSS), and it drove me crazy and ruined my life. I spent a lot of time studying it, and you know what I realized? I don’t have VSS. I had OCD and GAD, and I thought that seeing noise in the dark automatically meant I had VSS, which is a rare, untreatable disease.

Yes, you added the Mimics section, and I understand it’s important to show people that there are many other conditions that can cause similar symptoms. And honestly, that could prevent people from self-diagnosing incorrectly. I would like the “Common Misconceptions” section to stay because it helps people with mental health disorders understand that they are healthy and don’t have this disease. Without this information, they could easily go insane reading just the Mimics section, which might make them worse.

I personally even thought about suicide when my GAD worsened. I really hope you understand how vital it is to leave this information so others don’t go through what I went through, and they can make sense of their condition without unnecessary fear.

Thank you for your understanding.

• I get your point, but just because something is important to have on a page doesn't mean we can justify having something there without having anything to cite to prove if it is true or not. Wikipedia fundamentally operates on the model that its editors can't be trusted as sources of information, but reliable sources can -- if the truth can be added without a source, so can essentially anything else. Personally, I ended up editing this page because someone I know was seeing visual snow (all the time) and I wanted to learn more about it. The Ganzfield effect being the cause of natural visual static seems a bit dubious to me, although I don't really understand it? Wikipedia is one resource to help people get good information on the topic and dispel misconceptions, and it's good if you want to improve it and that it can be helpful to people, but that doesn't mean you don't need to provide evidence that what you're contributing to the resource is correct, if you want people to be able to trust it.Mrfoogles (talk)22:27, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Personally, I think that the "distinction from the symptom" paragraph is pretty good about explaining the difference. Wikipedia kind of fundamentally can't help people make accurate self-diagnoses because the concept is inherently flawed -- to understand what's happening it's necessary to talk to an actual doctor. Anyways, if you're going to reply, please do so on the talk page -- that's where discussion about the article is supposed to take place. My main point is that I don't disagree it would be good for the article to talk more about it, but if you think adding some information to an article is important and want to do it, you need to find reliable sources backing your information so people reading Wikipedia can trust it.Mrfoogles (talk)22:31, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mrfoogles. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know thatDraft:Balon (protein), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six monthsmay be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, pleaseedit it again orrequest that it be moved to your userspace.

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

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.FireflyBot (talk)00:11, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mrfoogles, I just wanted to let you know that I have added thenew page reviewer user right to your account. This means you now have access to thepage curation tools and can start patrolling pages from thenew pages feed. If you asked for this atrequests for permissions, please check back there to see if your access is time-limited or if there are other comments.

This is a good time to re-acquaint yourself with the guidance atWikipedia:New pages patrol. Before you get started, please take the time to:

• AddWikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers to your watchlist to follow NPP-related discussions
• If you useTwinkle,configure it to log your CSDs and PRODs
• If you can read any languages other than English, add yourself to thelist of reviewers with language proficiencies

You can find a list of other useful links and tools for patrollers atWikipedia:New pages patrol/Resources. If you are ever unsure what to do, ask your fellow patrollers or just leave the page for someone else to review – you're not alone!Sohom (talk)22:20, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!Mrfoogles (talk)00:05, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I saw you reviewed my page, thanks! I just saw a little small comment about the music video for Je me sens si seul. I did find a music video, but its a small clip from Apple Music. I would easily just find one from Youtube, but there is only live performances of the song. I'm guessing it got taken down or its just blocked from where I live. Should I rewrite the third paragraph and or keep it as is? You are a veteran editor, so I would figure to ask you.Ieslie (talk)18:04, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I don’t know if I’m that veteran —- it looks like you have 2 GAs, which is more than I have. But I’d say keep it and tag it as citation needed, and maybe explain on the talk that it would be helpful if someone could double-check it and cite it (or if you wrote the paragraph in the first place, you can add whatever you used as a source, even if it’s not online).Mrfoogles (talk)18:09, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, also, generally discussion about the article is supposed to happen on the talk page so people can see it, so you should probably respond on the talk page next time (although you might have gotten here from your talk page which makes sense, I forgot the automated tool did that). Anyway, thanks for your message.Mrfoogles (talk)18:11, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mrfoogles,

I wanted to let you know that I just taggedSteve Jobs and the Influence of LSD for deletion, because it's a redirect to a non-existent or deleted page.

If you don't want Steve Jobs and the Influence of LSD to be deleted, you cancontest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note onmy talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via thePage Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

~ ToBeFree (talk)12:23, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi.here andthere you say that articles are promotional but that you are still moving them to article space. Please be careful with that, because promotional language is often the tip of a rather large iceberg, you know? It is often frustrating for people who write an article to have it "accepted" and then either stripped for parts or thrown in the bin.Polygnotus (talk)21:12, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, is not being overly promotional part of AfC criteria? I wasn’t sure, and I couldn’t find it anywhere, so for the photographer I figured I‘d just mainspace it since it seemed notable and AfC takes forever anyway.

As for BetterSleep I think I put it back, given I thought it was notable after it got draftified, because AfC takes forever and I thought the topic was notable.

I agree it’s important people get feedback on their work, but is it really better to leave a notable topic stuck in draftspace, though, as long as it’s not too bad? Also, what do you mean by “a very large iceberg”? Obviously the photographer article was COI, but I’m not sure if that’s what you mean.Mrfoogles (talk)23:25, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The flowchart can be foundhere, promotional text would fail the "neutral point of view" node. The instructions are over atWP:AFCRI. But my point is more that, in my experience, promotional text is often an indicator of further (perhaps more serious or fundamental) problems like LLM stuff, bad sourcing, fake refs et cetera et cetera. When an iceberg floats in the water, only a small percentage is visible above the water and about 90% is below the water (and therefore invisible). The iceberg thing means that often when you spot one problem (the tip of the iceberg/it being promotional) it is an indication that there may be many more problems lurking beneath the surface (the other 90% of the iceberg).wikt:tip of the iceberg explains it better than I can. I wish AfC was a lot faster but unfortunately there is a serious backlog! Keep up the good work,Polygnotus (talk)23:37, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

is it really better to leave a notable topic stuck in draftspace, though, as long as it’s not too bad? This is a very complicated question, and not everyone agrees. I'll say "it depends".Polygnotus (talk)23:40, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and with stuff likethis, the point is that, because no reliable sources have mentioned it, inclusion in Wikipedia isWP:UNDUE. It is just a PR story, it is not encyclopedic content worth mentioning. Wikipedia summarizes reliable sources. We don't care if it is true or not, we exclude it because it is UNDUE, not because it is incorrect.Polygnotus (talk)23:52, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Cielquiparle (talk)03:35, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just started a review of Sentient and I would like to incorporate your feedback intoTalk:Sentient (intelligence analysis system)/GA2, but I'm not comfortable representing your POV. I would appreciate it instead if you would briefly comment there about the issues you perceive with the current version. You are welcome to add any comments to the review linked above. Thank you.Viriditas (talk)23:26, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looks a lot better in the Features section, I think. I’m inferring it uses AI to detect the unusual patterns or phenomena, and maybe to integrate different modalities of information? I think it should explicitly say where it uses machine learning (if it is known of course, which it may not be), because that would be useful foe understanding how it operates. And maybe a brief mention of where the AI shows up in the system in the lead would be quite useful. Feel free to copy this to the GA review, tech for commenting there is not working right now for me.Mrfoogles (talk)01:28, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will do.Viriditas (talk)21:42, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mrfoogles. Thank you for your work onPhysiphora insulaepaschalis. Another editor,MPGuy2824, has reviewed it as part ofnew pages patrol and left the following comment:

please add a mention of this species in the target page

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with{{Re|MPGuy2824}}.(Message delivered via thePage Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

-MPGuy2824 (talk)08:01, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@MPGuy2824 I don't think it needs to be mentioned for the redirect to exist, because it's clear why it redirects there -- this is just the genus the species belongs to. Mentioning it in the article would not provide much additional information. A full species list would be useful, but I'm probably not going to do it right now.Mrfoogles (talk)15:04, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioning this species in the genus article would lead to readers beingsurprised. -MPGuy2824 (talk)15:15, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm saying they wouldn't be surprised because they'd understand they were looking at the page for the genus, which is an unsurprising place to end up when searching for the species by the scientific name.Mrfoogles (talk)16:11, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

	The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
	This award is given in recognition to Mrfoogles for accumulating at least 10 points during the May 2025 NPP backlog drive. Your contributions played a part in the 17,000+ articles reviewed during the drive. Thank you so much for taking part and contributing to help reduce the backlog!Hey man im josh (talk)19:45, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, just a courtesy message to notify you in case you haven't seen theWikipedia:The World Destubathon contest update in the last few days that we've decided to run the full month until the 16th of July. For those who have been too busy to contribute, we would love some help in reaching 4000 articles by Wednesday night! At present we're about 480 articles short!♦Dr. Blofeld16:39, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

		Citation Barnstar
		This award is given in recognition to Mrfoogles for collecting more than 10.0 points during theWikiProject Unreferenced articles'sJUN25 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■15:59, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, this is an automated reminder as part ofGlobal reminder bot to let you know that your permission "patroller" (New page reviewers) will expire on 00:00, 26 July 2025 (UTC). For most rights, you will need to renew atWP:PERM, unless you have been told otherwise when your right was approved.To opt out of user right expiry notifications, add yourself tom:Global reminder bot/Exclusion.Leaderbot (talk)19:42, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mrfoogles. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know thatDraft:Edwina Streeter Dixon, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six monthsmay be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, pleaseedit it again orrequest that it be moved to your userspace.

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

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.FireflyBot (talk)20:05, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

September 2025 Backlog Drive |New pages patrol
On 1 September 2025, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. 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 yourselfhere.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk)15:31, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mrfoogles, I just wanted to let you know that I have added thenew page reviewer user right to your account. This means you now have access to thepage curation tools and can start patrolling pages from thenew pages feed. If you asked for this atrequests for permissions, please check back there to see if your access is time-limited or if there are other comments.

This is a good time to re-acquaint yourself with the guidance atWikipedia:New pages patrol. Before you get started, please take the time to:

• AddWikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers to your watchlist to follow NPP-related discussions
• If you useTwinkle,configure it to log your CSDs and PRODs
• If you can read any languages other than English, add yourself to thelist of reviewers with language proficiencies

You can find a list of other useful links and tools for patrollers atWikipedia:New pages patrol/Resources. If you are ever unsure what to do, ask your fellow patrollers or just leave the page for someone else to review – you're not alone!_signed,Rosguill^talk15:23, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi and thanks for your recent participation in AfD. I would like to hear your thoughts about the process. Please checkthis survey if you are willing to respond. FYI I found your participation via XTools.Czarking0 (talk)02:25, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Cielquiparle (talk)06:33, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mrfoogles. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know thatDraft:David Fine (chemist), a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six monthsmay be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, pleaseedit it again orrequest that it be moved to your userspace.

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

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.FireflyBot (talk)05:06, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. Alleligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia 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 imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2025 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add{{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)00:55, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

This submission's references do not show that the subjectqualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not showsignificant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject inpublished,reliable,secondary sources that areindependent of the subject (see theguidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (seetechnical help and learn aboutmistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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 resubmitafter they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go toDraft:David Fine (chemist) 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 andmay be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced anyuntoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at theArticles for creation help desk, on thereviewer's talk page or useWikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

 Vanilla Wizard💙21:31, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedians who have received a Teahouse invitation through AfC