Welcome to my talkpage! Clickhere to leave me a new message at thebottom of my talk page. IfI leave you a message on your talk page, please reply there. You can put{{re|Headbomb}} at the start of your message to make sure I see it in case I have unwatched your talk page. Likewise ifyou leave me a message, I will reply here, and will typically use{{re|USERNAME}} to get your attention. Headbomb User:AAlertBotstatus: Y Daily run finished without issue! (As of 22:20,17 Feb 2026UTC) [refresh]

Top 10	Top 10 Medical Editor Barnstar
	You were one of the top medical editors on English Wikipedia in2025. Thank you for your hard work! -Mvolz (talk)10:38, 17 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you just editedBotCon. Do you think the entire "event history" is justWP:NOTDIRECTORY? Seems kinda cruft to me, but I'd appreciate your opinion. Cheers.Magnolia677 (talk)20:27, 17 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I got no strong opinion on it. It's almost a list type article. Personally, as long as BOTCON itself is notable, I'd be fine with it. When, where, and who attended are important things about these events.Headbomb {t ·c ·p ·b}20:29, 17 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciate your opinion. Cheers.Magnolia677 (talk)21:34, 17 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Aproposyour edit atThe Cenci, I suspect you're not aware of the advice atTemplate:Cite_journal#Periodical which allows for special titles of issues. Cheers,Michael Bednarek (talk)03:24, 24 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect10.69469 has been listed atredirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets theredirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect atWikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 February 1 § 10.69469 until a consensus is reached.Plantdrew (talk)03:48, 1 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

HelloHeadbomb, Thank you for your recent edits to the article. I am always looking for another set of eyes to see things I missed. Your trimming of the publisher of one of the journal articles was helpful in conforming to a Wikipedia styleguideline of which I was unaware.

However, for the article citation for "Constraints on Charon..." I think I would prefer having the original page numbering. Your page (67) does not seem to conform to my copy of the article. My copy has page numbers from 1 to 16. This is the copy that is downloadable from your bibcode and DOI links as well. You may have a copy of higher precedence you could point me to, in which case I would reverse it back. (I notice that your page number is the same as the volume number so perhaps this is a typo. We all make mistakes. I'm glad you took the time to help out.)Joe Cerniglia (talk)16:49, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]