User talk:Rhain

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)
2024 (Jan–Jun · Jul–Dec)

newsletters

... image: John Robert McPherson

Step by Step (Braxe + Falcon song) is something I've put up at FAC, and I was wondering if you'd check the contents of the article out real quick for any stuff that prospective reviewers may be critical of. Thank you as always for your time in looking at things I've written! And, as it's been generally that time 'round the world, Happy New year. BarntToust 01:32, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year! I'm about halfway through the first day of 2025 already, and it's not half bad so far. I'll have a look at the article shortly, and I look forward to seeing its gold star before long. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 01:39, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Rhain, and a belated happy New Year! It's been a long time coming, but I've finally brought this article to GAN and I would love to have you as a reviewer again. This time around, I'd also be more than happy to return the favor and pick up something of yours that's pending review if you'd like. No pressure on either of those, of course. Let me know what you think, and I hope you're doing well! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 06:03, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@TechnoSquirrel69: Good to hear from you, and happy to see the nomination! It may take me some time to finish a full review, but if you're okay with that, I'd be thrilled to take it on. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 06:17, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I completely understand it's quite a hefty review to be taking on (7303 words as of the last edit?!), so take all the time you need. Very much looking forward to working with you again! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 06:21, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can tell you've been busy! Looking forward to getting started. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 06:23, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

		The GA barnstar
		Yeah, I know I've done this before, but you're no less deserving of this bling the second time around! If anything, you seem to have outdone yourself with a review of even deeper inquiry and even finer attention to detail. Thank you, as always, for raising the bar and continuing to inspire me to do better in my editorial work. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 04:32, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If I have outdone myself, it's only because you have done the same, and the high quality of the work demands a review seeking equal depth. Thank you for your kind words, and for continuing the raise the bar on Wikipedia. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 04:43, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just letting you know that I submitted the accolades for a TFL nomination to hopefully coincide with the season two premiere. Feel free to edit the blurb if needed. -- ZooBlazer 18:16, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rhain! :)

Not sure if you can but can you help with expanding [1]? Also, I think the main Bethesda Softworks article can be considered a B class, not C. What do you think? I've been expanding it for quite some time. Timur9008 (talk) 07:00, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I can't provide much assistance with expansion, sorry. The article is certainly approaching B-class, though some sections (especially the 1990s to 2010s) could use some work to avoid proseline. When you're ready, you can tag the article for reassessment by adding the parameter |reassess=y to the {{WikiProject Video games}} banner as detailed here. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 04:55, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Timur9008 (talk) 05:02, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there Rhain. I have noticed you are major contributor to the L.A. Noire-related articles. I wanted to ask your opinion about the possibility of promoting Characters of L.A. Noire to good article status. What, in your opinion, do you believe would need to be done to achieve this? I thought replacing the primary sources with secondary ones would be a first step, but do such sources exist? Many thanks, Mr Sitcom (talk) 05:46, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Mr Sitcom: Funnily enough, I was thinking about this article recently too. I think it would be relatively easy to get it through a good article review, but I'm not too sure it deserves it. Its mostly written in-universe, and most of the remaining information is duplicative of the main article (and the rest could easily be merged). In all honesty, it's probably due for a merge more than a promotion. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 06:02, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I had another look and made the call—merged all relevant information to the parent article. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 06:56, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, that's rather a shame to lose a B-class article. But I suppose it's for the best (it'll make the main article even better). Thanks for the reply! :) Mr Sitcom (talk) 09:40, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sonic the Hedgehog 3 (film) has been one of those current articles I've sort of shepherded along, and it's a ways out from GA nom-ability given it's not had home media, and there will be accolades to add in. Figured I'd ask you for your thoughts on how it's going so far. Thanks again, Rhain! BarntToust 21:30, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not very familiar with the subject, but I'll try and take a look. At a very quick glance, it appears to be in great shape! – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 23:57, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]