Before you remove an edit (which is actually breaking news, as you will find out soon), I suggest you check more thoroughly (perhaps with his agent?) You will become the laugh of the town for removing this bit. I leave it up to you to restore it. YakiD (talk) 14:51, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If it were “breaking news”, I wouldn’t need to look “more thoroughly” or “check with his agent”. Besides, it is not my responsibility to check for sources for an unsourced addition by someone else; it lies within the responsibility of the editor making this change. Feel free to re-add it though if you have a reliable source. FrB.TG (talk) 15:20, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Will do. I do have a reliable source. The news will be out this month. YakiD (talk) 15:51, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Great then add it as and when you have a reliable source accessible to the public/published by a reputed newspaper/magazine/website (this month as you say). FrB.TG (talk) 15:56, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, FrB.TG! The list you nominated, List of roles and awards of Oscar Isaac, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best lists on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured list. Keep up the great work! Cheers, PresN (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, and nice to see him on the Main page today, introduced: "Oscar Isaac has been part of Marvel films/shows, Star Wars sequel trilogy and several high-profile films, yet it's the underrated gems like Inside Llewyn Davis, A Most Violent Year and Ex Machina where he truly shines." - On Debussy's birthday, - and he is also pictured :) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:29, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Gerda, and fine work on yet another music article (like always). :) FrB.TG (talk) 18:44, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there,

I was wondering if you could proofread the 94th Academy Awards for featured list consideration. I would greatly appreciate the feedback.

--Birdienest81talk 23:59, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Birdienest81, I’ll happily take a look at it. Meanwhile, do you think you could conduct a source review (for formatting and reliability) for my ongoing FAC? FrB.TG (talk) 05:31, 18 August 2022 (UTC) FrB.TG (talk) 05:31, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reverting my edits on Tom Holland for i did not see that other page. But I think it would be helpful if we could link that page somewhere on the Tom Holland page. Thank you! Cherrell410 (talk) 03:25, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cherrell410, hi it’s already linked twice in the top section (lead and infobox) and in § Career. FrB.TG (talk) 05:43, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, i didnt see that, thank you! Cherrell410 (talk) 17:26, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, FrB.TG! The article you nominated, Bad Romance, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:05, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Amazing work, FrB.TG. You rock! GagaNutella^talk 00:34, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, GagaNutella. I'm glad that you're still around. :) FrB.TG (talk) 08:31, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I also wanted to congratulate you on this promotion. I know I have said this a few times already, but I have a lot of respect for you for working on such a well-known song, and you had done an excellent job with it. I am looking forward to your next FAC. Aoba47 (talk) 01:12, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Aoba. It gets a little challenging sometimes to work on popular articles as you have to consider so many aspects, but overall it's fun to give important articles quality status. FrB.TG (talk) 08:31, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Really commendable work and your dedication is exemplary —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 10:04, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot, IB. :) FrB.TG (talk) 11:18, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations on your first non-BLP FA! What a milestone! Here's to more!! . Pseud 14 (talk) 14:57, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

While I'm at it, could I perhaps get your second opinion on a media review I had done. Only if you have some time to spare. I've consulted Marano and Aoba on this as well, and thought I could get your perspective too, so I can complete it approriately. (very minor ALT text issue) Pseud 14 (talk) 14:57, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pseud 14, thank you. I have a couple more non-BLP FACs in mind. Regarding the ALT texts, they need to be descriptive, in the sense that they add something not already present in the caption. Something as simple as "Billie Eilish looking toward the camera" should suffice, but if ALTs don't do more than just repeat the caption, they should be removed altogether (they're not FAC requirements after all). Another thing I would ensure is consistency. The article in question uses a very detailed ALT for the film poster but elsewhere it's the exact opposite. If I do that for the poster, I would try to describe other pictures in the same manner. I hope what I'm saying makes sense. FrB.TG (talk) 16:10, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		The Music Barnstar
		Congratulations on getting an article about a true modern classic to FA status, this is no small feat and we are all very proud of you. Keep up the good work!--NØ 18:11, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, Marano, for this and for your valuable input that helped propel the article to FA status. FrB.TG (talk) 18:24, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Btw, I was wondering if you may want to trade source reviews for our current FACs. Since they are similar in size and I remember both of us struggling to find SRs for our last ones. Regards--NØ 07:59, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah sure. Let me finish a few other reviews I have recently committed to, and I’ll get to yours within a few days. FrB.TG (talk) 08:06, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good! Hope it's okay I've added a placeholder. I'll get to it sometime within the week.--NØ 08:15, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, if it's not too much to ask, can you add a placeholder as well to affirm the QPQ and signal to potentional source reviewers that this one's taken?--NØ 01:16, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. I have noticed that you are doing FACs for The Fame Monster singles, and I was curious if you were going to do all the songs related to the EP or particular ones? Apologies for the super random question btw lol. This EP, as well as The Fame, is just so nostalgic for me. When I listen to certain songs, I can remember very specific locations and people and it feels like I am right back there. It is bittersweet in a sense. Anyway, rambling done (at least for now lol). Aoba47 (talk) 20:15, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Aoba. I am planning to at least go for "Telephone" and "Alejandro", but I would like to tackle most (if not all) of The Fame Monster tracks, as well as The Fame singles "Just Dance", "Poker Face", "Paparazzi" and "LoveGame". While researching "Bad Romance" in all those books and journals, I found lots of info on other TFM and TF singles and thought I might as well do the whole album LOL. Plus, seeing all those FAs in pop musicians' Wiki-projects, I thought I should do the same for Gaga considering how much she dominated the music industry in the first few years of her career and the fact that I must've listened to these two albums a thousand times by now LOL. FrB.TG (talk) 21:11, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome! Best of luck with those nominations. I look forward to your work on them and I will do my best to participate in all of the future FACs. I agree that it would be nice to see Gaga more represented in the FA space. It is interesting to see which songs were taken through the FAC process and were successfully promoted as FAs. I would honestly love to read what a musicologist or an academic focused on music would say about the current crop of song FAs. You are definitely inspiring me to go back these songs lol. I'd be curious to see where Gaga goes next musically, but I'd imagine her attention is focused on the next Joker film. Aoba47 (talk) 23:08, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I would love to hear such commentaries from professionals. I remember reading a post from years ago where experts rated FAs from their field and gave constructive criticism. Reading such criticism would certainly help a lot in making these articles even better. FrB.TG (talk) 19:59, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That would be interesting. I was actually more so thinking of academics analyzing different factors about the song FAs (such as genre, artists, time periods that are well represented) and discussing how and why this may have occurred, but constructive feedback is always helpful! Aoba47 (talk) 19:39, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to add another response to this topic, but I was wondering if you could review my DYK nomination for an article called The Random Years. I am honestly just so incredibly burned out with Wikipedia at the moment that I really need to take an extended wikibreak (and a real one for a change) so I want to get this DYK nomination done. Apologies for the super randomness of this request. I hope you are doing well! Aoba47 (talk) 03:30, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah sure. I'll take a look at it. And I think you really have earned a break from this place. I myself am starting to doubt my ambitious plan to turn TFM and TF singles to FA LOL. I have been collecting sources and reading the journals/books in the background, but I don't know if I can do it for all of them. Even though I was away for around 13 months before 2022, I'll take it a little slowly so I don't burn myself out. "Dance in the Dark" is already my sixth FAC this year and I've never gone beyond 4 before. FrB.TG (talk) 16:28, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the response. I completely understand your doubts. You have already done a lot of really amazing work on those articles so I would be proud of that. I believe the best thing to do is to take it slowly and at your own pace and have breaks for yourself as this site and the work and time put into it can be a lot of a lot. It is good that you are aware of that. I know that I need to be better about that and it is something that I am still actively working toward being better about for myself. If it helps at all, it looks like "Dance in the Dark" is heading toward a promotion. I wish you the best of luck with "Telephone" or "Alejandro", depending on which one you choose or if you go for a completely different one altogether. I hope you have a great weekend! Aoba47 (talk) 16:48, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Alejandro" is next. The good thing about picking these songs is that most of the academic/journal sources are the ones from "Bad Romance", which is understandable since no academic would mention TFM songs without "Bad Romance". Anyway, you too have a great weekend. FrB.TG (talk) 17:11, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I do have a soft spot for "Alejandro". I remember that song came out when I was in high school and one of my friends would always refer to me with that song title because my name is Alex (and in my Spanish classes, my Spanish name was Alejandro). And yes, I am super old lol. I look forward to seeing your work on it. I remember the music video getting some blowback at the time. Aoba47 (talk) 22:23, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Just wanted to come by to express my appreciation for your work on Gaga's articles. I somehow relate myself to you in that I am actively contributing to articles on Taylor Swift's country-era songs and albums, which remind me of such a simpler time. Best of luck with your future FACs and I am more than willing to support :) Ippantekina (talk) 16:13, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the kind words, Ippantekina, and for your helpful reviews of these articles. I must say your work with Swift articles are also very impressive. I remember when I wrote the FA-class biography of Swift (can’t believe that was six years ago; time goes by really fast), there was no activity in the FA area concerning Ms Swift. It’s great to see that has changed drastically over the years thanks to users like you. Seeing all these FAs in Swift Wiki-project was one of the reasons I aimed to churn out FAs for Gaga songs. FrB.TG (talk) 19:45, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nice going so far with the Dancer in the Dark nomination. I've recently nominated a popular culture FAC for Yuzuru Hanyu Olympic seasons and thought to ask if you might have time for any support/oppose comments at FAC for this article? ErnestKrause (talk) 19:52, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, ErnestKrause. Although I know nothing about Olympic seasons, I'll take a look at your FAC within a few days. I saw your request at the DitD FAC, but just haven't been able to finish all of my current reviews to take a new one. I will at least leave a placeholder very soon so that I don't forget. FrB.TG (talk) 16:28, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for getting back. You had mentioned that you might be able to take a look at doing some support/oppose comments the sports article at FAC for Yuzuru Hanyu Olympics here: [1]. The coordinators are requesting added reviewer comments sometime over the next couple days, if you might be able to find the time. ErnestKrause (talk) 17:35, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Unfortunately, I’ll be traveling until Friday with no access to a notebook/PC so I won’t be able to get back to this until at least then. However, it looks like your FAC is getting a certain amount of attention, where it’s no more at the risk of getting archived due to inactivity. FrB.TG (talk) 16:11, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There's no rush on this and good travels in the meantime. If you have time when you get back, then maybe you could leave some comments at that time. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:14, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, If you are interested to leave comments on the Shefali Shah FAC, please do. No pressure, it's just been submitted. So there's a lot of time. Shahid • ^Talk2me 18:54, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing :) FrB.TG (talk) 07:22, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, FrB.TG! The article you nominated, Dance in the Dark, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Hog Farm (talk) via FACBot (talk) 12:05, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, FrB.Tg. I'm just posting to let you know that List of awards and nominations received by Anne Hathaway – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list for October 24. The TFL blurb can be seen here. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008 (Talk) 00:42, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. I was wondering if you could do a source review for my current FAC since you helped with one of my past FACs (here) which was also about a television series? I completely understand if you do not have the time or interest, but I wanted to reach out and ask. I know the nomination is still very new, but I always find it helpful to get the source review done earlier than later. I hope you have a great weekend! Aoba47 (talk) 19:05, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah sure FrB.TG (talk) 21:13, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you! Aoba47 (talk) 21:54, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 27 November 2022. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/November 27, 2022, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/November 2022. I suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:07, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, FrB.TG! I hope you're good. I've recently nominated two Gaga's articles for GA (Born This Way and One Last Time: An Evening with Tony Bennett and Lady Gaga) and I'd like to know if you have time to review them. I know you're working hard on TFM's articles, but it's a try. GagaNutella^talk 01:21, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I'll take the BTW nom in the next few days unless someone beats me to it. FrB.TG (talk) 09:21, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's amazing! Thank you so much. GagaNutella^talk 15:26, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I've got a peer review open for the Natalie Portman article at Wikipedia:Peer review/Natalie Portman/archive1 and was wondering if that's something you'd be interested in commenting on? Thanks! -Kj cheetham (talk) 21:02, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah sure. Give me a few days and I'll review the article. FrB.TG (talk) 07:47, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, much appreciated, though no need in the end. Seems I stepped on another editors toes who wanted to take it forward, so I've closed the PR and will leave it up to them to request a review if they want to. Thanks again in any case. -Kj cheetham (talk) 09:23, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! First of all, I'd like to say that I very appreciate your work on Lady Gaga's song articles, it probably takes a lot of your your time, so thanks! :)
However, I see that you still tend to remove EarOne as a source, even though while conversating on Talk:Bad Romance#Release history you said that it was okay, did anything change or something? infsai (talkie? UwU) 22:50, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, you’re right. I see that I removed it from "Alejandro" despite previously saying it’s okay for use. I’ll restore it. FrB.TG (talk) 16:42, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there,

I was wondering if you could review List of accolades received by CODA (2021 film) regarding its pending featured list promotion. I would greatly appreciate the feedback.

--Birdienest81talk 11:23, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, FrB.TG! The article you nominated, Alejandro (song), has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 12:05, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations on getting "Dance in the Dark" displayed as Today's Featured Article. It looks very good on the main page!--NØ 03:17, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, it really does. :) FrB.TG (talk) 05:50, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

November songs

I agree, thank you today for the article, introduced: "Another nomination of a Lady Gaga song from her EP The Fame Monster by me. Unlike "Bad Romance", my previous nom, this did not enjoy much popularity and was released as a single only in France."! - Congrats also to the new FA! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:35, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Gerda. :) FrB.TG (talk) 17:44, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for piling on to this discussion, but I also wanted to congrtulate you on the TFA. You have done awesome work on here and it was nice to see this article being celebrated on the main page. Aoba47 (talk) 22:54, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Aoba, I really appreciate it. FrB.TG (talk) 07:02, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi FrB.TG. You've added a reference for "Shone 2022" to Christopher Nolan. I'm guessing you meant "Shone 2020" The Nolan Variations: The Movies, Mysteries, and Marvels of Christopher Nolan, but I thought ninwould check. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 16:40, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Yes, 2020 is right. I’m currently working with several books so it gets a little confusing sometimes. Thank you for identifying this error. FrB.TG (talk) 16:50, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There are error messages for this, but they are hidden by default. If you interested in turning them on see the somewhat unclear details here Category:Harv and Sfn no-target errors, or otherwise just ask an I'll explain. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 16:55, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done, thank you for showing me this useful script. FrB.TG (talk) 16:58, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi FrB.TG, congrats on getting the article promoted to FA! Just wanted to apologize as I could not commit to thoroughly reviewing the article to the end as I had limited time. I also noticed you have wiped your userpage... Hopefully it's not a sign you're retiring soon? Best, Ippantekina (talk) 07:10, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. No need to apologize - you did more than it was required on your part. You gave me enough pointers on how the article could be further improved and that was very helpful. Also many congrats on getting the "Love Story" song to FA status.

As for the deletion of my userpage, I'm not planning to retire. :) FrB.TG (talk) 12:38, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, FrB.TG! The article you nominated, Christopher Nolan, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:05, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, FrB.TG. I'm just posting to let you know that List of accolades received by Inside Out (2015 film) – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been submitted as a candidate to be featured on the Main Page as Today's featured list. The proposed content can be seen here. You are more than welcome to post your thoughts on the nomination. Regards, Chompy Ace 15:03, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good to see you still here Frank. Hope you're doing well (I see Chris Nolan is FA because of you! Congrats!). I'll be checking in on Wikipedia from time to time. Will be back to active editing in a short while.  — Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 08:59, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Sven, it’s great to see you back. I was gone for a long time myself but returned last year and wrote a few more FAs. Nolan's article was already in a good shape when I took it - I just did a lot of book research to strengthen the sources. I’m glad it finally made it to FA. I look forward to seeing what you’ll work on as and when you fully return. FrB.TG (talk) 10:25, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's nice. I'll focus again on film articles as usual but will branch out more into video games and pro wrestling articles as well (Particularly Pay-per-view events). Will begin once I come back full time. What are the other FAs you made recently may I ask?  — Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 11:11, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Video games sound fascinating, although wrestling doesn't particulary interest me. I wrote FAs in different areas, my first was a return to Bollywood (Katrina Kaif). I wrote two other actor BLPs (Tom Holland and Oscar Isaac) and branched out into song articles by Lady Gaga ("Bad Romance", "Alejandro" and "Dance in the Dark"). I'm currently planning another Gaga song for FA ("Telephone") and if time allows, I might write more FAs on film directors (maybe Quentin Tarantino?). Oh, and I also tried Leonardo DiCaprio at FAC but it failed due to sourcing issues. I would have to reexamine the sources at some point and use the biography book more in the article. FrB.TG (talk) 12:28, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wrestling is scripted, not fake! Lol sorry for unleashing the wrestling fan in me. As for video games, I feel Jedi Fallen Order might be a nice place to start as it is the first PS4 game I played (And the most I've played. I played it 3 times). Tarantino is an interesting choice and a good one. Gotta be thorough with that one. As far as Gaga goes, you can try taking Poker Face to FA sometime.  — Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 08:44, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Poker Face is definitely in the cards alongside a few other Gaga songs. If I ever did a gaming article, the first would be Counter Strike. I’ve spent hundreds of hours playing that damn game. :D FrB.TG (talk) 09:21, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's great (For you lol coz regrettably shooter games are not for me. Not that interesting imo. For me, 3rd person games with a lot of story and character involved pique my interest like Assassin's Creed series, Red Dead Redemption, Ghost of Tsushima, God of War series, Uncharted series, Horizon Zero Dawn, Horizon Forbidden West, Last of Us 1 & 2 etc.) Also idk if Jaguar is still around but Darkwarriorblake has done a fair share of gaming articles so I might get his advice for starting a gaming article to take to GA/FA.  — Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 09:53, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think Spider-Man (2018 video game), Vampire: The Masquerade – Bloodlines, and South Park: The Stick of Truth are still solid FAs, though after several years of learning if I had the time I'd probably go back to Bloodlines just to reinforce the sources as I have higher standards now after the efforts to get so many film articles through. I agree Fallen order would be a good one, as would God of War/Ragnarok, and The Last of Us Part II, which is a good game but gets overlooked because of that opening. If you haven't played it, I will just say I had no interest playing the game more than once after it and I think many people were the same as the discourse just kind of died off. If you ever get into film articles, Roger Rabbit is long overdue for an uplift. I like wrestling but I couldn't work on the articles, it feels like, especially for the wrestlers, you will never get enough reliable sources to fully complete their articles. Darkwarriorblake / Vote for something that matters 12:22, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Darkwarriorblake: As far as hollywood film articles go, they're quite a lot of work compared to Indian film articles (More references and sources to read lol). Me either as far as TLOF 2 goes (maybe a second time after a year or two lol). The part about wrestlers biographies is true which is why I'll focus more on PPV events. I had already worked on Money in the Bank (2018) before so I'll start there again soon enough.  — Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 08:01, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 12 March 2023. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/March 2023, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/March 2023. I suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from two days before it appears on the Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work!—Wehwalt (talk) 17:01, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Wehwalt: possible to move this to 21 July (to coincide with the release of Oppenheimer)? It was also requested at WP:TFAP by Sheila1988. Although I prefer the 21 July date, we can also opt for 30 July, Nolan's 53rd birthday, if it doesn’t work. FrB.TG (talk) 15:12, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's too far ahead. I can remove it for 12 March (Oscars day), but I can't schedule July. I would suggest that the birthday would be better, scheduling it for the release of a commercial movie might strike people as promotional.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:39, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

		The Reviewers Award
		By the authority vested in me by myself it gives me great pleasure to present you with this award in recognition of the thorough, detailed and actionable reviews you have carried out at FAC. This work is very much appreciated. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:05, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Gog, I appreciate it. :) FrB.TG (talk) 16:44, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi FrB.TG. You have an article at TFA Potential for 22 May. If you wish to nominate it at TFA Requests, the time window for this is now open. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:44, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Shshshsh: since it's your article, would you like to nominate it yourself at WP:TFA/R? FrB.TG (talk) 14:58, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@FrB.TG: WOW, thank you so much for this kind gesture! I haven't noticed it! If you have time and energy, please do it for me, because I'm too busy at the moment. If you are busy yourself, then I'll do it as soon as I get more free time. Thanks a million for being so thoughtful, my friend. Shahid • ^Talk2me 18:24, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I can do it, no problem for me. I just thought of pinging you first as I know a lot of people find immense joy in nominating their work for their glorious day on the main page. :-) FrB.TG (talk) 19:52, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I can't thank you enough! Shahid • ^Talk2me 14:53, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Don't mention it. :) FrB.TG (talk) 16:14, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 22 May 2023. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 22, 2023, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/May 2023. I suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:39, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there! Regarding my edit on the "Telephone" article about the Romanian peak, and according to "what the sources say", "Telephone" did peak at #14 on the respective chart. It says that Romanian and international positions are rendered together by the number of plays before resulting an overall chart, so the correct way of "reading" that chart is by the number of plays, Rihanna at #1 with 207 plays, Deepcentral at #2 with 188 plays, Black Eyed Peas at #3 with 183 plays, and so on. That means, while "Telephone" did peak at #4 on the International songs-only chart, on the overall airplay chart it reached #14. Hope this bring some light to it. Best of luck with the FAC nomination! — TabooMatters94 (talk) 09:05, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are right there. Even the template confirms that. I have corrected the position to number 14. Thank you for clarifying this. FrB.TG (talk) 19:30, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, FrB.TG! The article you nominated, Telephone (song), has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:06, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Great news, congrats. Shahid • ^Talk2me 12:10, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, my friend. It certainly wouldn’t have happened so fast without your participation in the FAC. :) FrB.TG (talk) 15:12, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 1 June 2023. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/June 2023, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/June 2023. I suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from two days before it appears on the Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work!—Wehwalt (talk) 15:59, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

June songs

my story today

Thank you today for the article, introduced: "Having recently watched a lot of Marvel films, I chose Holland's article to improve due to my lack of time to undertake a bigger actor's article."! -- (and then forgot to sign)

My pleasure, Gerda. :) FrB.TG (talk) 10:48, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Jörg Widmann is 50 today, and I began Stockholm pics. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:11, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, FrB.TG. I'm just posting to let you know that List of accolades received by Inside Out (2015 film) – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list for June 19. The TFL blurb can be seen here. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008 (Talk) 21:18, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary

Precious

Seven years!

Congratulations! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:46, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you today for your share in Katrina Kaif, introduced: "Katrina Kaif's success could very well be the plot of a Bollywood film. Born in Hong Kong, she started modelling in London and impressed a filmmaker who cast her in his disastrous film. She soon became one of the most well-known faces in India. What she lacks in acting abilities, she makes up for by being a fantastic dancer, which is crucial in being a successful Bollywood heroine. In case you forget her name, you can get your answer here; it seems 200 million people did forget it."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:59, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers Gerda FrB.TG (talk) 18:23, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I can wait until new poster album drops in tomorrow on Monday. 185.172.190.0 (talk) 15:17, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is to let you know that the Christopher Nolan article has been scheduled as today's featured article for July 30, 2023. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page blurb, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 30, 2023, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so. If you wish to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article, you can do so at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/July 2023.

I suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks and congratulations Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:14, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wohoo! Katrina & Nolan as TFA in the same month! True versatility! :) Krimuk2.0 (talk) 07:20, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, yes! Very excited for his TFA and ''Oppenheimer''. :D FrB.TG (talk) 14:34, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

July songs

my story today

Thank you today for the article begun by a missed user, introduced: "Christopher Nolan is one of those rare filmmakers who make highly intelligent blockbusters, which ponder the bigger philosophical questions. His films leave you thinking for days. Nolan's work with IMAX technology and insistence on minimalising the use of CGI have been highly influential. One of his films (which BTW is also at FAC currently) redefined the modern superhero genre as we know today and is the third highest-rated film on IMDb. I could go on and on, but I think you get the point."! - My story today is about a 20-hours "opera" that was filmed. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:55, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You’re welcome, Gerda! :) FrB.TG (talk) 10:12, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey FrB.TG hope all is well with you. I've been meaning to come back to your last DiCaprio nomination when I realized it had already been archived without you getting to it. Hopefully you'll be back at it in the future, as it'd be nice to get that article to FA. But also congrats on Nolan, as well as your non-BLP FAs!

On another note, if you're not too occupied at the moment, I wanted to request for your help with my current BLP FAC. Didn't quite get some traction as I'd hope for after over a week. I fully understand if you do not have the time and busy IRL. Have a great rest of your week. Cheers! Pseud 14 (talk) 16:43, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Pseud 14, I have left comments on the FAC. As for the DiCaprio FAC, it was ridiculous seeing it get archived after three days without even so much as a warning. I literally just finished collecting the academic sources and was ready to add them in the article (I still have the document in my desktop LOL). Maybe I'll give it another try some day when I have the time and motivation for this place. FrB.TG (talk) 11:03, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your time and leaving comments FrB.TG! Really value your inputs in BLPs and they've helped improved it tremendously. It's a bit of a bummer, after you did an extensive research and waded through online sources. I was hoping third time's the charm for Leo, and I def feel your frustration after not being able to address it when you were finally ready. Here's to seeing it back in the FAC space in the future, I'll def look out for it, and anything that you will put forward in the future. I hope things are well on your end and you enjoyed seeing Oppenheimer. Cheers! Pseud 14 (talk) 13:43, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't watched Oppenheimer yet. I intend to watch it next week, along with Barbie and the new Mission Impossible film. That's a whole lotta films - let's see how many of them I get done. :D FrB.TG (talk) 17:38, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm 1 of 3 on that list. Saw Mission Impossible last week. Intend to do the same thing soon, hopefully I get to it :) Pseud 14 (talk) 19:35, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy sir! Me again. I know I've asked you for a favor in reviewing my FAC already, but thought I'd asked. I was wondering if you have time to do spot-checks on it? It has already completed a source review and another editor requested for a little more spot-check. Totally cool if you are busy IRL. Pseud 14 (talk) 18:23, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Pseud 14: I can do it sometime around the weekend. However, if there's been concerns about source-to-text integrity, I suggest you go through every source before I do further spot-checks and then give me a nudge. This would save us both an additional check; that is unless you're absolutely sure there aren't any further issues with source-to-text fidelity. FrB.TG (talk) 19:46, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much. I've reviewed it source by source over the last couple days, and may have a look at it again to be sure. I initially pinged the source reviewer if they'd be willing to do it. If I don't hear from them, I'll give you a nudge by then. Really appreciate it. And also good luck to your FAC. Glad it has made a comeback :) Pseud 14 (talk) 20:42, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and congrats on being one of the new FAC coords! Very well-deserved! Had a bit of a break and I was going to have my hand at reviewing your FAC nom, but realized it has gotten thorough reviews at this point. I usually only do this as a last option, as I generally tend to exhaust my QPQs first, however, no luck yet lol (which I don't take personally of course as it is in fact not a requirement). I was wondering if it's not outside the realm of possibility and if you still do reviews from time to time, could I perhaps ask for some feedback on my current FAC given your expertise on BLPs. This one is on the shorter side of word/character count. I completely understand if it is too soon to ask. Hope all is well with you. Pseud 14 (talk) 16:24, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, thank you. I'll look at your nom soon. FrB.TG (talk) 16:24, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you and no rush. Much appreciated as always :) Pseud 14 (talk) 16:46, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Let me be the first to congratulate you on this! Very glad the nomination passed. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 16:41, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, SNUGGUMS. The sourcing on this article was a nightmare but I'm glad I decided to renominate it. FrB.TG (talk) 16:45, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure, and your hard work was bound to pay off sooner or later. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 16:46, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to congratulate you as well. I was going to add the fifth support soon if the article didn't get promoted today. Congratulations!--NØ 20:35, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Marano. I'm glad that you found it FA-worthy. :) FrB.TG (talk) 07:52, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Finally, and long overdue! Congratulations! :) Krimuk2.0 (talk) 07:32, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hard to believe that this took almost four years. :D Thank you for your help in getting it to FA. FrB.TG (talk) 07:52, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar

For your tireless and laborious efforts of finally getting Leonardo di Caprio to FA status. I've seen you work undeterred as you went through all the hoops in each nomination you've put forward, and despite taking a short breather in between, here we are finally getting to see it get its well-deserved and rightful bronze star. I am happy to see it finally paid off. Congratulations! Pseud 14 (talk) 18:44, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the kind words and for your constant participation in the process. :) FrB.TG (talk) 07:52, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, FrB.TG! The article you nominated, Leonardo DiCaprio, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:06, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats on this, FrB.TG! It took multiple attempts but I'm glad you didn't give up and you saw it through. Moisejp (talk) 06:01, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, my friend. It certainly wouldn't have been possible without your contirbutions to the process. :) FrB.TG (talk) 03:57, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 11 November 2023. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/November 11, 2023, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/November 2023. I suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:37, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Sorry if your feeling like your getting a bit of a bashing on the nom...perhaps sometimes unfairly (from me, I might strike a lot of it shortly): Mike's stats certainly show how active you have been. I might have been too dismissive without firm ground (never seem him around...but then that shows Ive not been around enough), and frankly its not as if we have an abundance of people volunteering for the -very necessary- position. My advice is hang on in there; the discussion is really more meta than your eligibility, and that this stage, least of all your integrity which is see now is impeccable. Ceoil (talk) 21:50, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. As long as the criticism is constructive, I don't take it personally. And thank you for the encouraging words. :) FrB.TG (talk) 18:36, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again! I was just curious if you could do a source review for my current FAC (Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The One (Tamar Braxton song)/archive1)? The nomination is still incredibly recent and has not even been active for a week, but I saw your source review for Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Photograph of Mary/archive1 so I thought I might as well reach out as ask. I completely understand if it is too soon to ask. Hope you are doing well, and have a great rest of your weekend! Aoba47 (talk) 00:29, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing. And my weekend is going very well so far; I hope yours is too. FrB.TG (talk) 09:18, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I am glad to hear your weekend is going well. Mine is too. Aoba47 (talk) 15:35, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations on your appointment as a FAC coordinator, and thanks for taking on the role. Thanks, also, for promoting Sad Eyed Lady of the Lowlands. As the bot only notifies one nominator, would you mind posting an appropriate message on my co-nominator Mick gold's talk page? (I could do something like that myself, I know, but I think it's more special coming from a coordinator.) Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 16:24, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. And I've posted on Mick gold's talk congratulating him on the promotion. :) FrB.TG (talk) 16:31, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A very deserved appointment! I'm sure you'll serve the role quite well. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 13:28, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, SNUGGUMS. I'll try my best. FrB.TG (talk) 05:37, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

November songs

my story today

What I saw you doing looks good, thank you! - Hevenu shalom aleichem is my story today. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:37, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you today for Leonardo DiCaprio, introduced: "With a career spanning over three decades, he's proved himself to be a titan(ic) of the industry. From a Romeo with a heart of gold to a conman with a devilish grin, he's a rare actor who has hardly gone wrong with his choices of roles."! - I love the puns there ;) - I understand that it isn't only his birthday, but Veterans Day, and for me St. Martin's day, matched as short as I could in a 2010 DYK remembered, - basically about sharing. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:49, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Gerda :) FrB.TG (talk) 13:16, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

More thanks for promoting The Firebird! - I uploaded vacation pics, if you like, - click on songs. I have a pianist among the RD today, so my story is about him. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:51, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Gerda. I'll check them out. FrB.TG (talk) 17:47, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

the reason i removed that assertion is because it is impossibly ridiculous as written, scientifically.

should have clarification, as it's patently absurd.

thanks for keeping my encyclopedia accurate, That'sHedley (talk) 18:22, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why is it "impossibly ridiculous as written, scientifically"? In the source, the claim is made by quoting DiCaprio himself. How DiCaprio remembers or has this information is not clarified but as stated in my edit summary, it must've been his parents who probably filmed the moment or told him about it later on or he just remembers it himself? Some people do remember important events that occurred early in their life. FrB.TG (talk) 19:41, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

per behavioral science, no one remembers, contextually, events at two years old.

as written, it sounds like he was already looking for an agent, so i removed it as self or parent invented mythology.

you seem to have special knowledge about early toddler memories, whereas I'm surprised this patent nonsense is in an encyclopedia.

have a wikipedia day, That'sHedley (talk) 20:09, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"as self or parent invented mythology". Literally everything in early life section is recollections from the actor himself. How else would you have this information? Should I stick an "According to DiCaprio" at the beginning of every sentence? Or do you expect that a journalist documented every moment of his life as a child but didn't verify this? In any case, I have added "According to DiCaprio" at the beginning of the sentence so the readers know from whom the claim stems and decided for themselves whether or not they choose to believe it. FrB.TG (talk) 20:14, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

indeed, that was my second choice. the reason i didn't similarly couch the claim was due to the featured article status.

i thought removal was less disruptive.

thanks for considering my niggle, That'sHedley (talk) 22:31, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats! This article is one of the only ones I read through just for fun, so that means you did good.

Before it went on the front page I made edits to remove the ((official website)) template; I guess something happened to it and an error message shows instead. Is there another official website of his you can link to? Panini! • 🥪 22:29, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Panini, I'm glad that you had fun reading it. I had just as much fun writing sourcing it. I'm not aware of any other website run by DiCaprio. FrB.TG (talk) 08:17, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for doing that! My suggestion is to wait to see how it behaves on the next FAC launch, before adding it to FAR; the only reason I say that is I'm unsure if the variable dates will work through the substring correctly.

And overall, although I never got back to you from the time you were named Coord, as your long and thoughtful response was in a discussion that was closed before I returned, I do hope you know that I'm most impressed by and appreciative of your dedication, communication and responsiveness. Overall, my answer to your response to me would have been a reminder to "teach 'em to fish for themselves" rather than giving them a seven-course meal on a page clogging platter :).

Anyway, your responsiveness to concerns, and willingness to listen and engaged honestly (which hasn't happened for years, as concerns are ignored and shut down), and clear and timely engagement, give me hope, on a page where years of effort perhaps lead me to care too much :) All the best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:49, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sandy, too late for that as I did that for FAR too before you posted here but the good news is I tested them both at different times, and they worked as desired every time.

Thank you so much for your kind words! It's truly heartening to know that my efforts are noticed and appreciated. I believe in fostering a space where everyone feels heard and valued, and your encouragement reinforces my commitment to that. I truly admire just how passionate you are about the FAC project. And given how long you have been part of this, there's obviously a lot of wisdom and knowledge reflected in your comments there so I will always be receptive to and appreciative of your feedback. And regarding your "'teach 'em to fish for themselves' rather than giving them a seven-course meal on a page clogging platter" comment, I will keep that in mind. Thank you for that. And with the upcoming RfC, I am pretty hopeful that things will improve around here.

On an unrelated note, I recently updated the FA stats originally done by you but I forgot to credit you so apologies for that. (I was hoping that it would kickstart some sort of discussion but it hardly went anywhere but since I didn't give any specific topic to discuss to begin with, it should've hardly been a surprise.) FrB.TG (talk) 06:38, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I realized after my post that you had installed at FAR, and it works-- thanks again so much. No need to credit me on things like stats ... I may be passionate about the functioning of the process, but I hope it's not driven by ego. The issue with those stats is that, for example, medical FAs used to be a huge part of the process and now they're gone. We can't buy a review. Anyway, I know I'm repeating myself, and verbosity/repetition are my middle name, but you are truly a breath of fresh air, and your participation inspires hope. Bst, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 11:09, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. Hope you’re keeping well. It’s been a while since we worked together. I was wondering if you’d be interested in reviewing my GA nominee Joanna Kulig? ArturSik (talk) 00:29, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Huge Thank You for reviewing this one so quickly. I’m really pleased with the final look of the article after your comments. Much appreciated. ArturSik (talk) 12:37, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, and congrats. It is a nice little article. FrB.TG (talk) 17:30, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

	A very happy Christmas and New Year to you!
	Have a great Christmas, and may 2024 bring you joy, happiness – and no trolls, vandals or visits from Krampus! Cheers SchroCat (talk) 18:39, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Schro. Also wishing you a Merry Christmas and a very happy new year. :) FrB.TG (talk) 22:18, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Per my discretion as an admin, outlined on WP:APAT, I have decided to give you the autopatrolled user right. This means that pages you create will be automatically marked as "patrolled" and will not required a manual, human reviewer to approve. Please ping me if you have any questions or concerns. Z1720 (talk) 01:49, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you :) FrB.TG (talk) 10:08, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As Sammyjankis88 says in this edit summary, Globes don't list individual producers as the recipient of a Best Picture win/nom. Take a look at Cooper's GG page, even though his article counts his Best Picture noms. What are your thoughts? Krimuk2.0 (talk) 07:12, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should go with Cooper's GG page. Funnily enough, the career section doesn't discuss any of the Best Picture nominations but the overall count does consider them. FrB.TG (talk) 08:22, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think so too. Someone added a GG win for Margot Robbie because she technically did pick up the award and Guardian says that she won. Should it also be removed? Krimuk2.0 (talk) 09:00, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think it should receive the same treatment since her GG page likewise doesn't count this as her win. FrB.TG (talk) 13:21, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just informing you about this because I believe you got the wrong idea based on what was on WP:Featured article candidates/William Utermohlen/archive5. I did not forget about the nomination, if you saw the article history, Ceoil's "Hello?" comment was from January 15th, and after that I made an edit to the page yesterday, at 9am. I don't want the nomination to be un-archived, I frankly am done on doing anything for William Utermohlen featured article wise, for the sole reason that I hate the idea of seeing "archive6" failing and having to resort to "archive7" and I think continuing this Sisyphus-like situation is a stupid decision on my end. Realmaxxver (talk) 19:27, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I didn't see your response from yesterday. In any case, sometimes archiving a nomination is the fastest route to promotion, especially a nomination where reviewers express major concerns right after a day it was opened. Best of luck with the article. FrB.TG (talk) 20:00, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Butting in, but Realmaxxver, as somebody that was nearing support, your problem what more that you didn't attend to comments on time, and suffered a lack of interested reviewers. Re the latter, there were some bites pre-the last nom from medical editors that you didn't cultivate. AND FAC is a for better or worse a community, and if you try again, it might be worthwhile building goodwill and giving back to the process by reviewing some other candidate articles. Overall, I think it was a fair close. Ceoil (talk) 00:51, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, FrB.TG! The article you nominated, Speechless (Lady Gaga song), has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, David Fuchs (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:05, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 11 March 2024 (second appearance). Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/March 2024, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/March 2024. Please keep an eye on that page, as comments regarding the draft blurb may be left there by user:dying, who assists the coordinators by making suggestions on the blurbs, or by others. I also suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from two days before the article appears on the Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work!

Also please be aware that this will be TFA on Oscar night. I have placed proposed language to cover each combination of Oscars that Cooper might win (including none) and if everything goes smoothly the blurb will be altered right after each award (if any) is given to Cooper. See the ongoing discussion here—Wehwalt (talk) 16:47, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for keeping the alternatives ready although I think his chances of winning in any of the categories look pretty slim. FrB.TG (talk) 19:54, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

story · music · places

Thank you today for the article, introduced (in 2016) as about "the recipient of People's 'Sexiest Man Alive' in 2011, though it's more of 'Sexiest White Man Alive'. Aside from the so-called accolade, he is a talented actor, having found his breakthrough in his mid 30s in late 2000s. - Did you see [[Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Infoboxes#MOS:FORCELINK|the discussion about infobox entries such as "full list"]] that I don't really understand, - I mean: is there a better way to summarize someone's achievements than an early link to all his works? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:51, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rossini's Petite messe solennelle was premiered on 14 March 1864, - when I listen to the desolate Agnus Dei I think of Vami_IV. - Rossini is the composer where the question about the list of works came up first. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:30, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Gerda. I once tried to summarize the number of wins in that link in the info box but I was reverted for the reason that it won't always be up to date and it's not sourced in the main article. FrB.TG (talk) 21:52, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The suggestions to say "x operas and y other works" came up but I think the neutral list is the best summary of someone's works, without editorial. I think that demanding "no link" to the achievements is kafkaesque, but don't have the language to be understood. I have tried for years. The Rossini discussion was archived. - On a brighter note: vacation pics uploaded, at least the first day, - and Aribert Reimann remembered: so rich music for voices! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:42, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some days later, a calf in the mist and chocolate cake, and a story of collaboration --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:30, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, FrB.TG. I'm just posting to let you know that List of roles and awards of Oscar Isaac – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been submitted as a candidate to be featured on the Main Page as Today's featured list. The proposed content can be seen here. You are more than welcome to post your thoughts on the nomination. Regards, Chompy Ace 19:28, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, FrB.TG. I'm just posting to let you know that List of roles and awards of Oscar Isaac – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list for March 8. The TFL blurb can be seen here. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008 (Talk) 22:34, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FYI regarding your question here on a "cousin once removed", this is based on which generation descendants family members are. When two siblings each have children and their kids are first cousins, a grandchild of one sibling would be a first cousin once removed of the other sibling's kids and vice versa. The grandchildren of each sibling would be second cousins to one another. If my words alone aren't enough, then you can view a helpful chart here that lays out different types of cousin connections. On another note, while I do agree that the addition you reverted was poorly sourced, I have no objections to restoring it with a stronger reference. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 00:49, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarification, SNUGGUMS. FrB.TG (talk) 14:13, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]