Thanks for the note. Agreed that we shouldn’t interpret or “parse” legal arguments in Wikipedia’s voice—doing so runs afoul ofWP:OR andWP:SYNTH. For clarity, though,WP:PRIMARY does allow limited use of primary sources like briefs to support simple, descriptive facts (e.g., who filed, when they filed, the exact words quoted), while analysis, significance, and characterization should come from independent secondary sources perWP:SECONDARY andWP:RS.

Proposed approach for this article:

* Keep cites to briefs only where they verify non-analytic facts: “On 3 March 2025, X filed an amicus brief” or a short, attributed quote from the brief, with a pin cite. SeeWP:V andWP:PRIMARY.* Add/replace with reliable secondary coverage (e.g., law reviews, treatises, SCOTUSblog, major outlets) wherever we summarize or weigh arguments, to avoidWP:UNDUE andWP:OR.* Avoid using party or amici filings to establish contested propositions of law or fact about living persons; use court opinions and high-quality secondary sources instead (seeWP:BLP andWP:RS).

If you’re seeing places where a brief is being used for interpretation rather than straightforward verification, please flag with{{better source needed}} and we can swap in the appropriate secondary sources. This keeps the article precise (via the primary for “what/when/who/quoted text”) and neutral/encyclopedic (via secondary for “what it means/why it matters”).

IndyNotes (talk)15:05, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are two problems. First is with amicus briefs, because we should not be picking and choosing ourselves which briefs to present as that otherwise is favoring sides. In the article, the lower court brief is included because third party sources highlighted it, and I know for other major cases, as we get closer to argue date, we'll see more sources likely outlining those briefs. Second is that broadly that even dissecting the basic arguments of any party's filing or brief is a matter of being knowledgeable in law, which purposely WP editors are not supposed to be. We rely on what other sources say and then summarize those. Now, if this is handled like the recent VRA case (and I see no doubt it will considered a high profile case), in the week ahead of the orals (that is, next week) we will see many sources come out with their analysis of their positions including major players in the amicus briefs. So this is more a situation to wait a bit more and sources will be there to help us summarize the arguments in the days ahead of the case, so we shouldn't try to get ahead of that. We have external links to the docket that a more curious reader can review to find these if they need yo see them.Masem (t)15:31, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On 23 October 2025,In the news was updated with an item that involved the articleYang Chen-Ning, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on thecandidates page. —Bagumba (talk)07:17, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just stating for the record I have some trepidation about using images from that trailer, especially given the Brazilian Overwatch account'supload isn't under a free license. Even the main US uploadlacks the free license.Kung Fu Man (talk)13:20, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I don't like the idea that material that is clearly copyright in most countries, but posted by an office outlet in a different language is claimed to be CC. The page that is linked on the version of the trailer on Commons[1] does have the CC text on it, but not the version you have linked fro the OW brazil community.Masem (t)17:31, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Kung Fu Man: I've raised the question over at the commons village pump on copyright questions.Masem (t)19:29, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have started a new discussion on whether Aeroroutes is a reliable source, if you wanna join the discussion to mention on if its a reliable source feel free to do so, the discussion is atWP:RSN#WP:AEROROUTESMetrosfan (talk)07:04, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. While I'm still working on trying to getEmily Neves up to B-class or GA-class as per the ongoing discussion atTalk:Emily Neves#B-class/GA-class efforts, can you please take a look atTalk:Peanuts#GA/FA? andTalk:Charles M. Schulz#GA/FA plans, if you are interested in joining these discussions? I'm planning on on getting thePeanuts andCharles M. Schulz articles up for GA or FA in the future. Thanks,sjones23 (talk -contributions)07:18, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion atWikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga § Voice actor GA/FA drive?.sjones23 (talk -contributions)13:43, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Masem. This message is being sent to remind you of significant upcoming changes regarding logged-out editing.

Starting 4 November, logged-out editors will no longer have their IP address publicly displayed. Instead, they will have atemporary account (TA) associated with their edits. Users with some extended rights like administrators and CheckUsers, as well as users with thetemporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will still be able to reveal temporary users' IP addresses and all contributions made by temporary accounts from a specific IP address or range.

How do temporary accounts work?

• When a logged-out user completes an edit or a logged action for the first time, a cookie will be set in this user's browser and a temporary account tied with this cookie will be automatically created for them. This account's name will follow the pattern:~2025-12345-67 (a tilde, year of creation, a number split into units of 5).
• All subsequent actions by the temporary account user will be attributed to this username. The cookie will expire 90 days after its creation. As long as it exists, all edits made from this device will be attributed to this temporary account. It will be the same account even if the IP address changes, unless the user clears their cookies or uses a different device or web browser.
• A record of the IP address used at the time of each edit will be stored for 90 days after the edit. Users with thetemporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will be able to see the underlying IP addresses.
• As a measure against vandalism, there are two limitations on the creation of temporary accounts:
  • There has to be a minimum of 10 minutes between subsequent temporary account creations from the same IP (or /64 range in case of IPv6).
  • There can be a maximum of 6 temporary accounts created from an IP (or /64 range) within a period of 24 hours.

Temporary account IP viewer user right

• Administrators may grant thetemporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right to non-administrators who meet thecriteria for granting. Importantly, an editor must make an explicit request for the permission (e.g. atWP:PERM/TAIV)—administrators arenot permitted to assign the right without a request.
• Administrators willautomatically be able to see temporary account IP information once they have accepted theAccess to Temporary Account IP Addresses Policy viaSpecial:Preferences or via the onboarding dialog which comes up after temporary accounts are deployed.

Impact for administrators

• It will be possible to block many abusers by just blocking their temporary accounts. A blocked person won't be able to create new temporary accounts quickly if the admin selects theautoblock option.
• It will still be possible to block an IP address or IP range.
• Temporary accounts will not be retroactively applied to contributions made before the deployment. OnSpecial:Contributions, you will be able to see existing IP user contributions, but not new contributions made by temporary accounts on that IP address. Instead, you should useSpecial:IPContributions for this (see a video about IPContributions in a gallery below).

Rules about IP information disclosure

• Publicizing an IP address gained through TAIV access isgenerally not allowed (e.g.~2025-12345-67 previously edited as 192.0.2.1 or~2025-12345-67's IP address is 192.0.2.1).
• Publicly linking a TA to another TA is allowed if "reasonably believed to be necessary". (e.g.~2025-12345-67 and ~2025-12345-68 are likely the same person, so I am counting their reverts together toward3RR, but notHey ~2025-12345-68, you did some good editing as ~2025-12345-67)
• SeeWikipedia:Temporary account IP viewer § What can and can't be said for more detailed guidelines.

Useful tools for patrollers

• It is possible to view if a user has opted-in to view temporary account IPs via theUser Info card, available inPreferences →Appearance →Advanced options →Enable theuser info card
  • This feature also makes it possible for anyone to see the approximate count of temporary accounts active on the same IP address range.
• Special:IPContributions allows viewing all edits and temporary accounts connected to a specific IP address or IP range.
• Similarly,Special:GlobalContributions supports global search for a given temporary account's activity.
• The auto-reveal feature (see video below) allows users with the right permissions to automatically reveal all IP addresses for a limited time window.

Videos

• How to use Special:IPContributions
• How automatic IP reveal works
• How to use IP Info
• How to use User Info

Further information and discussion

• For more information and discussion regarding this change, please see the announcement from the Wikimedia Foundation atWikipedia:Village pump (WMF) § Temporary accounts rollout.

Most of this message was written byMz7 (source). Thanks, 🎃SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk)02:48, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently editedLearning Resources v. Trump, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageABC News.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk)19:58, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion atWikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga § Merging defunct WikiProjects.sjones23 (talk -contributions)18:56, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I know we usually (though not always) disagree, but I have to say that you're possibly my favorite editor to argue (and occasionally discuss) policy nuance with.

It's apparent to me that I often come across as highly aggressive and sarcastic, and while Iam very sarcastic, my aggression is usually just a matter of mannerisms, and isn't reflective of the way I feel.

But I really enjoy being able to engage with someone who expresses themself very clearly and is capable of finding subtle nuances worth exploring and maintaining a constant logic. And you very much do all of that.ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPantsTell me all about it.16:07, 13 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)00:22, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I was sent to you recommended from theWikipedia:Mentoring for FAC, I'll copy-paste the same request. Thank you in advance!

I've been working on a bunch ofThe White Stripes articles and, earlier this year, got theMeg White article promoted to a good article. In light of the band's recent induction to theRock and Roll Hall of Fame, I was able to add more to the article and use new sources to max out the information available. I think I've covered every important aspect (with early help from GA reviewers, too) and want to work on possibly promoting this to a featured article. Would you be able to help?Watagwaan (talk)19:56, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You said on the Rog Ally Xbox X that the "YouTube video" debunking the article is not a reliable source. I used it as a source because it has visuals indicating how the article is incorrect.

Beyond that, the article uses also uses a random, non-reliable source. And that video is an outright lie. If you look at the video you see on Windows it's actually at 17w tdp. Look at bazzite it says 20/21w tdp. TDP being Thermal Design Power in watts, and it's a measure of performance.

That video above is not a fair comparison at all and should not be used as proof.

I want this to be clear: There might boost in using other operating systems, but that video is not proof of it.The Library Attendant (talk)04:10, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

you can delete this after you see it, i just wanted to say i figured out what i did wrong with my recent edit you reverted (thanks), when i go to a wikipedia article by name in my browser, it goes through the search page on wikipedia which drops the special capitalization, so i ended up on Gaas instead of GaaS, oops.Mikachu42 (talk)18:23, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Masem. I've been working on the article for indie gameRain World solo for a while now and am planning on nominating it to FAC soon. I've already put it through Peer Review, but before I actually nominate it, I just want one more pair of eyes to read over it and name anything that you think needs improvement. I'm not asking you to do anything too in depth (although I would be really glad if you did anyways), just a check that the article has a good chance of passing at FAC. Thank you for considering. Good luck with whatever work you're doing.Tarlby^{(t) (c)}20:42, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Considering you've been making edits in the meantime and also left another editor asking for FA help earlier unanswered, I assume you'll also not respond to this. I'll find someone else. Thanks.Tarlby^{(t) (c)}19:57, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I look at my talk page but tend to forget to reply immediately. I can certainly help to give it a second look before you nominate.Masem (t)20:06, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you. I have the same habit too to be honest, lol.Tarlby^{(t) (c)}20:06, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Tarlby: this is just a quick first pass read, as I'm not seeing any major issues, but within the release section, I would not worry too much about when announcements and trailers were released (though you do want to keep the discussion about trailer and pre-release reception). Like in the first paragaph there:

A final trailer was posted on March 8, 2017, revealing its release date to be March 28[6] for PlayStation 4 and Windows and to be published by Adult Swim Games.

That being future tense, its a bit weird, instead possibly

Rain World was released on March 28, 2017, published by Adult Swim Games for PlayStation 4 and Windows.

There's a few other places like that in that section.

Only other immediate issue I see is the start of the Downpour section in the plot, the text "This section is in chronological order." is confusing and I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. (And I have only briefly actually played the main game, so I'm seeing this as one w/o knowledge of the the DLC). Maybe you're trying to say "Downpour takes place across five chronological chapters." or something like this. I'm looking at the size of this plot section and it seems large relative to the main game, so I'm making sure you have it clear why you need that much to describe it.

And just trying to search on stuff,this is a newsletter from Simon Carless who is an industry expert and would be an RS (probably with attribution), that has some details on at least player count in response to certain events in the game's marketing. I was hoping to find hard sales numbers but had no luck.Masem (t)20:29, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• I've dealt with this example and plan on looking through it more thoroughly soon
• Due to some peculiar creative decision by the devs, the five slugcat stories (or "chapters" if you wish) are actually played in non-chronological order; Gourmand -> Artificer -> Rivulet -> Spearmaster -> Saint. I felt it'd be clearer and easier to just have it in chronological order for the section, which is why I included this sentence. I've added a clarifying bit now. Regarding the plot length, I assure you I've trimmed each chapter down as much as I can. Downpour has a much more defined narrative than the original game, so it would have more detail.
• I'll see how I can add this in later. Thank you!

Tarlby^{(t) (c)}21:40, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, on the Downfall, say something that "The individual chapters, while presented in a non-linear order within the game, are presented below in chronological order." or like that. Look toMemento (film) for another possible approach.Masem (t)22:31, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]