User talk:Rjjiii/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Rjjiii, for the period 2022. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
A belated welcome!
Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Rjjiii! I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:
Need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.
If you don't already know, you should sign your posts on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) to insert your username and the date.
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! pandakekok9 (talk) Resist internet censorship in the Philippines! 08:21, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks! I appreciate the welcome, and it's good to see others with an interest in the technologies that underpin the web. Rjjiii (talk) 09:15, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
September 2022
Hello, I'm Mr.weedle. I noticed that you made a change to an article, K-Meleon, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Mr.weedle (talk) 05:10, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
The article K-Meleon you nominated as a good article has failed 
; see Talk:K-Meleon for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Aoidh -- Aoidh (talk) 04:02, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
Hey Rjjiii. Thanks for doing a GA review of Talk:Protests against SOPA and PIPA/GA1. It looks like a thorough review so that's great. Usually if the reviewer thinks that the article can be fixed by the creator within one week, the GA review is put "on hold" and the nominator is given a chance to fix the article, using the feedback from the reviewer. It's kind of like a peer review process, and there is usually a couple rounds of back-and-forth involved. Then the reviewer re-evaluates and considers passing the article. Do you think that this article could be fixed with one week of work by User:Pichemist? If so you may want to give them a chance to do so. If not no worries, they can fix it up then renominate. Hope this helps. –Novem Linguae (talk) 05:02, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for reaching out! What you are describing is what I expected. I "failed" the article after User:Pichemist commented that they wanted to withdraw the nomination. ( https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:Protests_against_SOPA_and_PIPA&diff=prev&oldid=1130468676 ) If there is anything confusing about how I handled that, feel free to let me know. It seemed strange to use "fail" for withdrawal and there may be some standard action that I was meant to take and was unaware. Thanks again, Rjjiii (talk) 05:32, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Awesome. Thanks for the details. I went ahead and added a note about the withdrawal to the GA. Adding a note before using GANReviewTool is often a good way to handle it. Thanks again for reviewing. –Novem Linguae (talk) 20:05, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks! Rjjiii (talk) 20:06, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Awesome. Thanks for the details. I went ahead and added a note about the withdrawal to the GA. Adding a note before using GANReviewTool is often a good way to handle it. Thanks again for reviewing. –Novem Linguae (talk) 20:05, 31 December 2022 (UTC)