User talk:Rhain/2022 January–June

This is an archive of past discussions. 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.

talk

2011 · 2012 · 2013 · 2014
2015 (Jan–Jun · Jul–Dec)
2016 (Jan–Jun · Jul–Dec)
2017 (Jan–Jun · Jul–Dec)
2018 (Jan–Jun · Jul–Dec)
2019 (Jan–Jun · Jul–Dec)
2020 (Jan–Jun · Jul–Dec)
2021 (Jan–Jun · Jul–Dec)
2022 (Jan–Jun · Jul–Dec)
2023 (Jan–Jun · Jul–Dec)

newsletters

image: Oren Rozen

The article The Web Planet you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:The Web Planet for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of SL93 -- SL93 (talk) 02:40, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

The bot didn't add a GA template to the article or notify you while doing everything else. I passed the article and I took care of the icon. SL93 (talk) 01:05, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Space Museum you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Aoba47 -- Aoba47 (talk) 04:20, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

The article The Space Museum you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Space Museum for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Aoba47 -- Aoba47 (talk) 04:41, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Chase (Doctor Who) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kusma -- Kusma (talk) 10:40, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Crusade (Doctor Who) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 21:20, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

The article The Chase (Doctor Who) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:The Chase (Doctor Who) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kusma -- Kusma (talk) 23:40, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

The article The Chase (Doctor Who) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Chase (Doctor Who) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kusma -- Kusma (talk) 15:01, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Cheers! Thanks for all your recent work on the season 1 and 2 Doctor Who serial articles! DonQuixote (talk) 15:17, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

The article The Crusade (Doctor Who) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:The Crusade (Doctor Who) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 17:20, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

The article The Crusade (Doctor Who) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Crusade (Doctor Who) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 08:01, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

On 17 January 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Space Museum, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that before writing The Space Museum, Glyn Jones had never seen Doctor Who? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Space Museum. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, The Space Museum), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Kena Bridge of Spirits - Rot.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

On 19 January 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Romans (Doctor Who), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that The Romans was the first Doctor Who serial with a humorous tone? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Romans (Doctor Who). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, The Romans (Doctor Who)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 12:02, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

I'm sure you know a lot about video games, and have spent a great deal of your life on them, but please skip the kneejerk reversions on grammar/style if your grasp of English is mediocre. Thanks! 2A00:23C5:FE18:2700:71BD:1542:4C3:E70B (talk) 06:50, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

"goes through adventures" ☔

Why are you trying to re-write history, and remove the Gamerankings score for this game? You said you're "just adhering the guideline", which states that Gamerankings is "useful for older games" (which this 18-year old game is). This is harmful to the article. Jericho735 (talk) 21:49, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

@Jericho735: There's no re-writing history here, and I see no harm being done to the article. In a 50-year-old industry, 18 years is not particularly "old". The original discussion about the guideline determined that GameRankings should only be used when it adds value atop (or in the absence of) Metacritic—68 on Metacritic vs. 70% on GameRankings is nearly identical, so I see no added value in the latter's inclusion. – Rhain ☔ 23:15, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

@Rhain: You are removing links to reviews of the game. The scores on GameRankins and Metacritic are typically similar for any game. The site was always included, until recently, when the website became defunct. I'm not sure wot sure what there is to gain by removing it pretending it never existed - it seems that you removed it simply because you don't want it there. Jericho735 (talk) 19:38, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

On 25 January 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Web Planet, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the fifteen bags of seaweed used as set dressing for the Doctor Who serial The Web Planet emanated an overpowering vegetable smell under the hot studio lights? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Web Planet. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, The Web Planet), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:03, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

On 27 January 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Crusade (Doctor Who), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that depictions of a sexual relationship between Richard the Lionheart and his sister Lady Joanna were cut from the script of the Doctor Who serial The Crusade? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Crusade (Doctor Who). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, The Crusade (Doctor Who)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:03, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

On 29 January 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Chase (Doctor Who), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Doctor Who serial The Chase was to feature the Beatles dressed as old men, performing as part of a fictional 50th-anniversary concert, but the idea was rejected by their manager? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Chase (Doctor Who). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, The Chase (Doctor Who)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Time Meddler you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Simongraham -- Simongraham (talk) 10:00, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

The article The Time Meddler you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:The Time Meddler for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Simongraham -- Simongraham (talk) 11:20, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

The article The Time Meddler you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Time Meddler for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Simongraham -- Simongraham (talk) 20:01, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi Rhain,

Can you give me some insight as of why you reverted my TLOU2 edit about multiplayer? This has been an important projeect, and even on the TLOU section they made reference.

Thanks in advance! — Preceding unsigned comment added by José J Encarnación Saiter (talk • contribs) 15:26, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

@José J Encarnación Saiter: Your edits added incorrect information—there was never a "cancelled" multiplayer mode, just a decision not to include multiplayer in the game. Regardless, the information is not relevant enough for that article—the section is intended as a brief overview of the sequel, and the exclusion of multiplayer is not significant enough for a mention. Whenever Naughty Dog officially announces the game, a separate mention will probably be warranted. – Rhain ☔ 15:35, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi Rhain! I don't know if we've ever actually 'met' one another (excepting a revert or two), but my name is Gen. Quon and for the last decade or so, I've worked largely on articles about The X-Files, The Office, and Adventure Time. IRL, I'm a PhD student working on a dissertation about the information behaviors of fan editors. (Here's a more detailed outline of my project, if you'd like to read about it!) My work is largely reflexive/autoethnographic, but I'm also wanting to chat with fan editors and get their perspective. Given all your work on video game articles, I figured you would be an excellent 'insider'! Would you be interested in chatting with me about your information experiences? I'm more than happy to provide more info if you'd like, or we can move to email, if that would be more comfortable.--Gen. Quon_[Talk]^{(I'm studying Wikipedia!)} 23:01, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

@Gen. Quon: Thanks for reaching out! Sounds like a fascinating project. I'd definitely be open to having a chat; feel free to shoot me an email. – Rhain ☔ 23:11, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Awesome to hear! I'll shoot you an email tonight with some more details!--Gen. Quon_[Talk]^{(I'm studying Wikipedia!)} 23:21, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

OK, I just sent you an email with more details!--Gen. Quon_[Talk]^{(I'm studying Wikipedia!)} 14:19, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

@Rhain: I just wanted to check to see if the email went through!--Gen. Quon_[Talk]^{(I'm studying Wikipedia!)} 19:28, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

On 14 February 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Time Meddler, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that after being wiped by the BBC, all four episodes of the Doctor Who serial The Time Meddler were discovered in Nigeria in 1984? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Time Meddler. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, The Time Meddler), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:03, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Hey Rhain, I'd like to know your opinion on which staff members to prioritise in video game infoboxes. I'm currently having a discussion with another user about this. I personally believe that "design/technical/art directors" take precedence over "lead designer/programmer/artist" since many video games generally credit the former ahead of the latter. However, the other user believes the latter take precedence due to Template:Infobox video game mentioning "lead designer/programmer" before "design/technical director" (interestingly "art director" is mentioned before "lead artist"). The discussion is in my talk page. I believe that the documentation while useful is not necessarily to be strictly followed. -- Wrath X (talk) 17:59, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

@Wrath X: Thanks for the message; I've been following this discussion. I think I agree that directors take precedence over leads (if there's only one of each, then we should list both; if there are more than three in total, stick to directors). That being said, I agree with ferret's recommendation to post to the talk page or WT:VG. – Rhain ☔ 23:52, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

@Rhain: Thanks for replying. I've started a section in Template talk:Infobox video game and your involvement/thoughts would be appreciated. -- Wrath X (talk) 03:35, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Hey,

Noticed that you reverted the changes I made to the "L.A. Noire" page. Not sure why though and to be perfectly honest - your added message sounded needlessly passive-aggressive.

I merely changed the sentence structure, I didn't add any additional information that could be seen as "Unsourced and untrue." as you put it. The information on the Wiki-page already states / stated that it's one of the most expensive titles developed.

The text right now (which you reverted back to) states - "would make it one of the most expensive video games to develop". (Poor grammar too.)

Where as I changed it to - "would make it one of the most expensive video games ever developed up to that point".

Again, I merely changed the structure of the sentence, not the inherent message of it so if this is "Unsourced and untrue." then it's the case for the information that is still in the article which I merely re-wrote to fit better.

Would love to know why you reverted this when it didn't change anything other than the cleaned-up sentence structure and grammar.

Sincerely, MeadeIndeed (talk) 05:04, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

@MeadeIndeed: My edit summary was of standard phrasing, no aggression intended. However, I apologise for my use of the term "untrue"; I must have thought that your edit removed the words "one of the", hence my comment at the time. That being said, I stand by my edit otherwise. The current text is concise, and I fail to see the "poor grammar". Words like "ever" (or "all time") are typically unnecessary and mostly just serve to provide the statement more grandeur. "Up to that point" is also unnecessary as this is implied by the sentence—not to mention that it is still one of the most expensive to this day (as is everything else on this list). – Rhain ☔ 12:36, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Teardown is set to come out in two weeks and, since the campaign has been complete for some time, I quickly tried to summarise the key events in roughly chronological order. Plot sections are not my strong suit, so I was hoping that you could look over this one, especially in regard to structure, brevity, and the way we address the player character (who is unnamed; currently, the article repeatedly says "the owner" since the character is the owner of the company at the centre of the plot). Some parts might be cut, others restored. (For example, I cut that the protagonist's mother at one point purchases a new van for the company and reuses the old one for personal stuff. This eventually leads to the antagonist targets the mother's home at the end of the game.) Any help would be appreciated. IceWelder [✉] 14:38, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

@IceWelder: Apologies for the delay; I scanned over the section after your message and couldn't find anything egregious, but wanted to wait until I had more time to read it properly. This game's story sounds insane, so the fact that you've been able to summarise it in a readable way is highly commendable; it's a little difficult to follow, but I suspect that's because of the game, not your writing. I thought referring to the protagonist as "the owner" would get confusing, but it's actually rather straightforward. I can't really find anything major of note. Great work with the article! – Rhain ☔ 00:42, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. The plot has a lot of stuff running in parallel and I tried to strongly condense it, but I did want it to be easy to follow. Maybe I will rewrite it once I find the time. Maybe the Gordon Woo vs. Lawrence Lee plotline is not too important and can be cut, for example. IceWelder [✉] 14:54, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Please discuss the rationale for your reversion of my edits on Uncharted 4; you appear to violate WP:NOX and and WP:RUDE when you disregard my contributions entirely in your comments. I incorporated what you suggested in my revision to prove I'm following WP:OAGF. My edits revolved around tidying sentences and the structure, and information about plot relevancies was replaced with game development. Wikipedia is a place for collaborators to work together. MrloniBoo (talk) 23:51, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

@MrloniBoo: Your edit removes important development information from the lead, and significantly disrupts its structure—not to mention the inaccuracies and unnecessary reversions in Release, Accolades, and the categories. – Rhain ☔ 23:23, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

@Rhain: Important development info was not removed; in fact, important development information was added (i.e., the crunch schedule). Stating generic plot-related goals (i.e., "humanizing" Nathan and Elena) at being at the core of the game's development are not the same thing. The structure was not "disrupted" in that it was mostly simplified; no false (or new) information was added as overwording was removed per WP:SS. Can you please state specific examples you found egregious so we can work together. MrloniBoo (talk) 12:29, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

@MrloniBoo: I'm not sure why you seem so adamant on removing all non-business elements of the game's development from the lead. The lead is meant to summarise the entire article; those particular sentences (about the open world elements, Nate and Elena's relationship, and taking advantage of the hardware) are basically summaries of the three main paragraphs of the Development section, so their removal is unconstructive. Meanwhile, your addition of crunch is actually mentioned nowhere in the article (and only mentioned briefly in the development article). For clarification, the lead paragraphs are roughly structured as follows:

1. Intro, plot, gameplay
2. Development, release
3. Reception, accolades, sales, sequel/remaster etc.

This is essentially meant to mirror the general order of the sections in the article (with minor alterations), and is fairly common. Your edit removes most of the development information, and moves gameplay to the second paragraph. You also rephrased the last sentence of the lead to be inaccurate ("re-released" instead of "remastered") and misleading (Legacy of Thieves is not yet available on Windows), and your changes to the Release section are similar ("in the U.S." implies that it is only available there; changing "United States" to "U.S." is wrong per MOS:US, and "the 2022 film adaptation" implies that it's an adaptation of Uncharted 4). Hope that makes sense. – Rhain ☔ 12:11, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Hey Rhain! I just thought I'd check in about the fan editor questionnaire I sent you a few months back! Thanks.--Gen. Quon_[Talk]^{(I'm studying Wikipedia!)} 13:58, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Warhammer 40,000: Space Marine 2 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. – DarkGlow • 09:49, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Back when I was [much] younger (under a different, long-forgotten account), I did a lot of WP editing. What ultimately made me quit editing WP in any sort of regular manner is the way people would casually revert things you put a lot of work into doing - including sourcing, etc - because it didn't "fit" in some way or other.

Perfection truly is the enemy of the good. - Psi-Locked (talk) 17:44, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

You're welcome. I'm glad I didn't revert anything that took too much work then, at least. – Rhain ☔ 21:11, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Try going through a bunch of old, physical magazines to get references and come back to say that again. - Psi-Locked (talk) 11:01, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

I have, many times. ☔

I saw that my edit for the releases of versions of the game was reverted but I wanted to know why? Other pages for video games do the same if certain versions of a game are released. This is especially true for pages of rpg games. Since the Director's Cut is a separate release with added bonuses and was also released on the same platform as the previous one, PS4, doesn't that mean that it should have a header in the infobox? Unless I accidentally quoted or did a reference wrong I don't think I did something bad. Could I get some help on what I did wrong? Does it need to be discussed in the discussion section first before a change happens? Thanks. Freshpo (talk) 02:30, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

@Freshpo: The Director's Cut for PS4 is the equivalent of a Game of the Year Edition, which we do not list in the infobox. Specific information about the release is discussed in the article, which is enough. – Rhain ☔ 02:55, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

@Rhain: I don't think that's accurate though since it's more than that with added features not present in the original. This is more of a special edition similar to new versions of fighting games or something like Devil May Cry 4: Special Edition. Do you mind if I ask in the game discussion to make sure that it's okay to make the changes? Thanks. – Freshpo talk 03:17, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

@Freshpo: Game of the Year Editions also often have features not present in the original, but sure, that comparison to Devil May Cry 4 is accurate; the difference is that the Special Edition of that game has a separate article, so it's not directly comparable to this one. You're always welcome to start discussions regarding proposed changes. – Rhain ☔ 03:30, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Stray gameplay.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:50, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

[1] I don't see any difference. Neocorelight (Talk) 00:05, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

@Neocorelight: Per the template documentation: "Creates a spaced parenthesis so as to avoid text collisions, especially between italicized content and a closing non-italicized round bracket". There's a visible difference. – Rhain ☔ 00:13, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Actually I did see that. The fact that it looks like there's a stray space before it bothers me. Neocorelight (Talk) 00:18, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

On 22 June 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Music of The Last of Us Part II, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Pearl Jam's manager agreed to include a song in The Last of Us Part II after hearing the story pitch, watching the trailer, and receiving a PlayStation 4 and a copy of the first game? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Music of The Last of Us Part II. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Music of The Last of Us Part II), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 22 June 2022 (UTC)