User talk:Dizzycheekchewer

Your nomination of James Baker has failed

Your good article nomination of the article James Baker has failed. See the review page for more information. If or when the reviewer's feedback has been addressed, you may nominate the article again. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Z1720 -- Z1720 (talk) 02:39, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Dizzycheekchewer. Thank you for your work on Cobb (play). Another editor, Mariamnei, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice start!

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

Mariamnei (talk) 08:26, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Vinson Cunningham has been accepted

Vinson Cunningham, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

grapesurgeon (talk) 19:03, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

A polite request

Hi. When you fail GAs, could you please either 'archive' the nomination (for example at Talk:Niggas in Paris/GA1) or explicitly state "I'm failing this" in your closing comment? I accessed Talk:Hyperpop/GA1 via a wikilink rather than the talk page and assumed your "I've given a lot of time and space to this review" comment was a warning, so went through Hyperpop removing all the unreliable sources. (I was hoping to run this as a double DYK nom with Kim Petras - see WT:DYK#Trans Day of Visibility for context - but the WP:COATRACK violations tell me the whole article might need a rewrite and I'm not sure I've got long enough.)--Launchballer 07:10, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

@Launchballer Thanks for the heads-up and sorry for the confusion! I didn't realize it didn't auto-archive or something when failed on the talkpage. Either way, nice work on the Kim Petras GA/DYK. For what it's worth, I don't think it suffers from the lack of hyperpop GA connection. Dizzycheekchewer (talk) 22:39, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

DYK for A Place with the Pigs

On 15 March 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article A Place with the Pigs, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that A Place with the Pigs was based on a real-life World War II deserter who hid in a pigsty until 1985? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/A Place with the Pigs. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, A Place with the Pigs), and the hook may be added to the 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 nominate it.

HurricaneZeta^C 12:03, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

DYK for Cobb (play)

On 20 March 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Cobb (play), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Lee Blessing called his baseball play Cobb a "one-man play for four men"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cobb (play). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Cobb (play)), and the hook may be added to the 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 nominate it.

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:44, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

DYK for Vinson Cunningham

On 2 April 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Vinson Cunningham, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Vinson Cunningham based his novel Great Expectations on his work for Barack Obama's presidential campaign? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Vinson Cunningham. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Vinson Cunningham), and the hook may be added to the 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 nominate it.

HurricaneZeta^C 00:03, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

A polite request

Hello, thanks for your contributions to Fashion Institute of Technology. Please exercise caution and diligence to merge content when reverting on pages with other successive non-disputed edits, so as not to undo the edits beyond the scope of what you are reverting. —BrechtBro (talk) 15:58, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Please exercise the same caution. When you are changing something that you know is a matter of dispute, as you did there, it may be best to centralize your successive edits, so as not to result in unintentional issues like this. Otherwise it's like layering good faith edits over something you know is a controversial edit (your change of FIT's classification) to make it harder for people to properly address the controversial edit.

Also, I've asked you this before, but please try and not be a jerk about following my edits. I have seen pages that you've changed before that I don't agree with, but have, with our past disputes, avoided engaging, so as not to raise any issues. I got involved with the SUNY RMs because I have a strong opinion there and it's naturally a discussion, but now you've gone into the FIT talk page, which unlike Modern clowning, you can't have had a watchlist on, disagreed with my comment in responding to a month-old comment and then reverted my changes. That's frankly jerk behavior, even if you may be doing it based on a belief in good faith that one version is better. Dizzycheekchewer (talk) 16:11, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

You may wish to look at the revision history of Fashion Institute of Technology. —BrechtBro (talk) 16:16, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

I genuinely don't get what you mean. I see you categorized it as a community college days before I classified it as that in the lead? That doesn't seem to have any bearing on anything else.

You also didn't do the courtesy of trying to engage with what I said here in a meaningful way. I don't know why you see value in this type of behavior. It's just a waste of everybody's time. Dizzycheekchewer (talk) 23:08, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

You could have easily merged the content by changing only the single disputed sentence back to your preferred version. I'm only asking you consider such conservative action in the future. See WP:REVONLY. That edit in question was executed on its own without any other changes in the article and described in the edit summary, easy to find. If I seem terse in my reply above, consider that you have made serious allegations about my behavior in both of your responses here. —BrechtBro (talk) 03:08, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

I changed something. Then I made a talkpage post. Then you made your own comment to a different (inactive) comment in that same thread, disagreeing with the change. I try to incorporate your feelings into the changes and then you just revert it all. Then you have the gall, when I miss a small portion of your bundle of individual edits, to come to my talkpage and make a meal of it. Especially after our previous disputes where you exhibited WP: Game and wikilawyering tendencies (each time I tried to challenge a given interpretation of a policy you cite, suddenly you have a different policy).

Then you put a "disputed" tag on information that isn't disputed and hours after someone came in the talkpage and agreed with myself and another person about it being a community college, the tag's still there. So yes, I'm starting to wonder whether this is the behavior of someone who operates in good faith in these disagreements. I'm sorry if that makes you feel like terseness is the remedy, but frankly, you've done nothing in the past months to dissuade me and you continue to unduly revert edits and then refuse to allow any reasonable middle ground or resolution. It's a big website and there are plenty of issues out there (plenty of worse issues in that same article even). Who does this reversion-of-every-possible disagreement help? Dizzycheekchewer (talk) 04:52, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

One Riot, One Ranger

I notice that you made an extensive series of edits to One Riot, One Ranger. I think the edits are very well-written and have improved the page substantially, but the section on Jay Banks' involvement in the Mansfield incident is a bit long, and has (ironically) become much more detailed than the Mansfield school desegregation incident article that it references. I suggest that this content should be merged with the article about the desegregation incident and the explanation in the article about the statue pared back. Additionally, I think that Jay Banks (which is a redlink as I write this) should target the Mansfield school desegregation incident page after the edits are done. I feel that your recent edits prove that his involvement is encyclopedic under WP:GNG, but as a public figure, he probably falls under WP:BIO1E. Carguychris (talk) 19:12, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

User:Carguychris Thanks for the feedback, I appreciate the outside look. I've definitely waffled a bit about how long that section is. I lean toward it adding proper context, since a good part of the controversy (which is for better or worse the main notability of the statue) concerns him and his role at Mansfield/Texarkana. Definitely noticed the unfortunate gaps in the Mansfield page (and absence of a page for Texarkana and other civil rights movement in Texas pages). Once I finish with this one, I'll try and circle back and build out the Mansfield page. I also think that the Ranger portion would be a relatively small piece of each of those articles, just a few sentences about the Rangers being called and their disinclination to support the students. Their involvement is a controversy for the Rangers and for the statute, but they didn't change the course of the events so much in Mansfield/Texarkana as far as I can tell.

It also got a bit long since I tried to add extra context to a fuller picture, given the other pages' current issues. I kind of think he would merit a page (his national TV appearances don't seem directly related to Mansfield/Texarkana, he has the statue controversy, and he was covered consistently in the press until his death (often with mentions of various Ranger operations, not just Mansfield/Texarkana—this article from 1978, unfortunately only available as a low-res screenshot, gives an idea)) and if he has one, that section could be halved easily. That said, it's not really on my list rn. Either way, thanks again! I'll see what pruning I can do.

Also if you happen to live in DFW and/or might go to a Rangers game, the article could desperately use a higher quality picture of the statue. There might be one out there that's usable, but haven't been able to find one yet. Dizzycheekchewer (talk) 20:08, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

DYK for Hannah Cruz

On 3 May 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Hannah Cruz, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Lin-Manuel Miranda showed Hannah Cruz a tunnel to her husband? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hannah Cruz. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Hannah Cruz), and the hook may be added to the 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 nominate it.

~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:03, 3 May 2026 (UTC)

13,833 page views. Not bad! Viriditas (talk) 00:13, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

@Viriditas Thanks for your help with all the improvements! Dizzycheekchewer (talk) 01:21, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 10

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mansfield crisis of 1956, a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mansfield High School was added.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:58, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

DYK for Seven Guitars

On 20 May 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Seven Guitars, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Seven Guitars was the last collaboration between August Wilson and his long-time director? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Seven Guitars. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Seven Guitars), and the hook may be added to the 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 nominate it.

Dclemens1971 (talk) 00:03, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

DYK for One Riot, One Ranger

On 24 May 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article One Riot, One Ranger, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a statue at a baseball stadium has been criticized for connections to racial segregation? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/One Riot, One Ranger. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, One Riot, One Ranger), and the hook may be added to the 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 nominate it.

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:03, 24 May 2026 (UTC)

June 2026 GAN Backlog Drive

Good article nominations | June 2026 Backlog Drive
June 2026 Backlog Drive: Do you want to become more experienced in the GA process? On 1 June, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles reviewed. Mentors are available, and new reviewers (<6 reviews) get bonus points! Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talk page.
You're receiving this message because you have participated in a good article review this year or participated in the previous backlog drive.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:58, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

DYK nomination of James Baker as Secretary of State

Hello! Your submission of James Baker as Secretary of State at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Morogris (✉ • ✎) 19:46, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

Mason City

Thanks for your advice on the article. I’ll continue to refine it with your advice and make sure it is in accord with the instructions provided. I won’t plan on submitting it again until then, and that probably won’t be for a long while anyway. It’s my hometown and I wanted to get it to a more comprehensive place since most rural towns don’t get the attention most larger towns do, so I may have been overly eager to get it out there. Thanks! Gcardinal101 (talk) 18:17, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

No problem, definitely get the impulse. Besides checking it against the GA criteria, I do think looking at other pages for cities that have received GA/FA status would help you calibrate. And Wikipedia:What the Good article criteria are not could help you with the gradations at play. Happy editing! Dizzycheekchewer (talk) 18:27, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

DYK for The Pittsburgh Cycle

On 9 June 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Pittsburgh Cycle, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that August Wilson completed his ten-play Pittsburgh Cycle only months before his death? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Pittsburgh Cycle. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, The Pittsburgh Cycle), and the hook may be added to the 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 nominate it.

Dclemens1971 (talk) 00:02, 9 June 2026 (UTC)