W
Active Editors
Back to Profile

User Talk: 162 etc.

Server-side rendered snapshot of this editor's Wikipedia talk page discussions.

{{User:MiszaBot/config
| algo = old(90d)
| archive = User talk:162 etc./Archive %(counter)d
| counter = 1
| maxarchivesize = 400K
| archiveheader = {{Archive}}
| minthreadstoarchive = 1
| minthreadsleft = 4
}}{{Talk header|search=yes|arpol=no|wp=no|disclaimer=no|bottom=no||}}
<!-- Template:Setup auto archiving -->

Third opinion



Per the discussion at Talk:Metal Gear Solid (1998 video game) ↗, I have lodged a request for a third opinion ↗. LiquidSevens (talk) 00:29, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Electronic engineering -> Electronics engineering



Hi!

In your reply, you kinda missed the point of my question to you. You originally said: “''”Previous talkpage discussion indicates that this is a WP:PTM ↗ and therefore not eligible for WP:RMT ↗. 162 etc. (talk) 17:38, 12 April 2026 (UTC) ↗''”

I asked how '''WP:PTM''' was relevant, because it wasn’t — and still isn’t — clear to me how that had any applicability at all. — You replied citing WP:PCM, which is not the same thing as WP:PTM. So I’m trying to figure out whether you had initially just mistyped the shortcut (in which case an “oops, typo, I actually meant WP:PCM” would have been appropriate), or whether there is some other, bona fide issue on WP:PTM that I actually am not picking up on. Thanks! — tooki (talk ↗) 17:59, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

:Hi, yes WP:PCM ↗ is what I meant. 162 etc. (talk) 18:46, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

Bini Junior removal



Hi, I’d like to discuss the recent removal of the mention of Bini Junior.
Bini Junior is part of the current identity and ongoing media presence of “Bini the Bunny.” The rabbit appeared in Puppy Bowl XXII (2026), an official televised broadcast (Animal Planet / Discovery), which is also available via HBO Max. In the broadcast, the rabbit is presented under the name “Bini the Bunny,” consistent with the established brand.
The recent undo removed a large portion of content, including this update, which makes the article less accurate and up to date. Bini the Bunny now refers to an ongoing media presence that includes both Bini Senior and Bini Junior under the same brand.
Regarding sourcing:
The HBO/Animal Planet broadcast supports the appearance as a primary source.
Official social media posts (including Animal Planet’s and Bini the Bunny’s accounts) also identify and promote the appearance under the “Bini the Bunny” name. I understand these are considered supplementary sources, but they help confirm attribution.
I’m open to improving the wording or adding stronger secondary sources if needed, but I don’t think complete removal is appropriate given the verifiable TV appearance and relevance.
Would it make sense to keep a neutral version while improving sources?
Thanks. Thelewisi (talk) 03:19, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

:Hi, thank you for your contributions.
:Per WP:PROVEIT ↗, ''"All content must be verifiable. (...) '''The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material''', and it is satisfied by providing one inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution."'' Your recent at Bini the Bunny ↗ restoring the improperly cited material were disruptive.
:This material can be included in the article if it is verifiable. Specifically, what reliable secondary sources can be used to verify the notability of Bini Junior? Facebook posts and YouTube videos are not what I'm talking about here. See WP:SOURCES ↗. 162 etc. (talk) 03:40, 23 April 2026 (UTC)
::Hi, thanks for the clarification.
::I understand the requirement for reliable secondary sources per WP and WP, and I agree that Facebook or YouTube alone aren’t sufficient.
::That said, I think there are two slightly different points here:
::Verifiability of the appearance – The Puppy Bowl broadcast (Animal Planet / Discovery, available via HBO Max) serves as a primary source confirming that the rabbit appeared on a nationally televised program under the “Bini the Bunny” name.
::Notability of Bini Junior as a distinct subject – I understand this would require independent secondary coverage, and I’m open to providing that if available.
::My intention isn’t to establish Bini Junior as a separate standalone subject, but rather to keep the article accurate by reflecting the current state of “Bini the Bunny” as an ongoing media presence that now includes a successor rabbit featured in official broadcasts.
::Would it be acceptable to include a more neutral, minimal mention (e.g., noting the 2026 Puppy Bowl appearance) supported by the broadcast citation, while additional secondary sources are identified?
::I’m happy to work with you on wording that aligns with policy.
::Thanks. Thelewisi (talk) 18:35, 23 April 2026 (UTC)
:::Right, I'm not arguing that the appearance of Bini Junior never happened. Clearly, it has. The question here is whether it's <em>notable</em>. If there's no coverage whatsoever in any reliable sources, then it can't be in the encyclopedia. 162 etc. (talk) 19:21, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

":Ottawa Arena ↗" listed at Redirects for discussion ↗


30px ↗
The redirect <span class="plainlinks">[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ottawa_Arena&redirect=no Ottawa Arena]</span> has been listed at redirects for discussion ↗ to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines ↗. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at '''{{section link|1=Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 April 26#Ottawa Arena}}''' until a consensus is reached. <!-- Template:RFDNote --> &#126;2026-25149-07 ↗ (talk) 09:14, 26 April 2026 (UTC)

List of marathon races in South America



Hi, I'm currently updating the list but you deleted some of the races with the reason being blue links only please. But the asian list (List of marathon races in Asia ↗) has many red links, so what's the criteria here? FutsalFan97 (talk) 18:55, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

:Hi, thank you for your contributions.
:Per WP:CSC ↗, ''"Red-linked entries are acceptable if the entry is verifiably a member of the listed group and it is reasonable to expect an article could be forthcoming in the near future."'' I'm not aware of any draft articles for these marathons, so I've removed the entries from the list.
:Red-linked entries at List of marathon races in Asia ↗ could likewise be removed. 162 etc. (talk) 20:29, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

Your move of Perfect Imperfection ↗



Hi 162 etc. I hope you're having a great day. Would you mind having a quick chat about the move of Perfect Imperfection ↗ at RMTR, helping me understand why you went through with it. While the move was not directly listed at RMTR the article about the novel first had to be moved away from PTOPIC so that the disambiguation page even could take its place. Shortly before the TR Perfect Imperfection ↗ was moved away to Perfect Imperfection (novel) ↗ so essentially I was taking it into consideration as well when I took a look at the TR. Since it kind of is a primary topic "ungrab" I moved it to contested requests. While I did not list it in the contestion at the time the move of Perfect Imperfection ↗ -> Perfect Imperfection (novel) ↗ probably already should have gone through a PM given the discussion about the article title 9 years ago. Therefore I think rather that move should have been reverted and the move away from PTOP and our TR move should have been listed at a subsequent RM.

Is there some flaw in my logic or is there something else I did not consider?

Kind Regards ~ Squawk7700 (talk) 19:41, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

:Hi, thank you for your contributions.
:I don't see where this previous discussion took place? If I had seen it, I wouldn't have moved it.
:Feel free to revert and/or start an RM for this. 162 etc. (talk) 21:01, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
::Thanks for the reply there was a ''very'' short convo here {{slink|Talk:Perfect Imperfection (novel)#Ideal Imperfection}} but I'm not sure that qualifies as "[…] past debate about the best title […]" so you might be right. Anyways I don't think discussing this for a week is the best use of volunteer time so I'll leave it since I'm honestly not invested enough. Have a great day :) ~ Squawk7700 (talk) 21:15, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

Major League Volleyball



In response to {{Diff||1353650442|1353615127|your request}} to start another discussion: if I were to present a new large batch of sources to the discussion, would you be open-minded to it, or are you immovable in your view that the PVF and MLV are not contiguous? I hope you can understand that I'm not going to waste my time and energy putting in the research and effort like I have the previous two times, if it's going to be broadly ignored once again. — AFC Vixen 🦊 02:22, 12 May 2026 (UTC)
:Hi, thank you for your contributions. From what I can see on the talkpages, an actual merge discussion has yet to happen. That would likely be the next step. See WP:MERGE ↗. 162 etc. (talk) 16:34, 12 May 2026 (UTC)
::I'm referring to this discussion ↗ on Talk:Pro Volleyball Federation, and this discussion ↗ on Talk:Major League Volleyball (2026)—the latter of which you participated in, and described the league as "{{Tq|a league which has yet to play a single game}}", implying you believed the leagues to be non-contiguous despite the wealth of sources I provided stating otherwise. — AFC Vixen 🦊 02:59, 13 May 2026 (UTC)
:::As long as there are two articles, they should not WP:CFORK ↗ each other. If consensus determines that MLV is indeed a continuation of PVF, then the articles will be merged. 162 etc. (talk) 16:25, 13 May 2026 (UTC)
::::Please answer my question. I'm not asking about others' opinions, I'm asking for yours. — AFC Vixen 🦊 23:33, 13 May 2026 (UTC)
:::::My expertise is in Wikipedia policies and guidelines, not women's volleyball. It's unlikely that I would participate in the merge discussion. 162 etc. (talk) 00:35, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Why rolling back disambiguation?



I see that you rolled back all of my edits attempting to link pages with the YOLO title to the appropriate disambiguation page. These were good faith edits, not vandalism (as you flagged them). If I am out of step with Wikipedia policy somehow, please explain? John_Abbe (talk) 16:28, 17 May 2026 (UTC)
:Hi, thank you for your contributions.
:Per WP:NAMB ↗, ''"It is usually preferable not to have a hatnote when the name of the article is not ambiguous."'' These article titles are fully disambiguated, and there is no realistic scenario where somebody seeking a different meaning will arrive at the wrong article. The hatnotes are therefore unnecessary, and I've removed them. Note also that I made no mention of vandalism when reverting these good faith edits. 162 etc. (talk) 16:33, 17 May 2026 (UTC)
::That makes sense for most of those cases. Will reapply the edits only on pages where confusion is likely. And started adding relevant links to See also sections, mostly a better fit there. John_Abbe (talk) 17:15, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

Grouping types of disambiguation pages



You rolled back my last edit to Yolo ↗ with the comment, 'Links to other disambiguation pages go in "See also".' Disambiguation pages (including this one) regularly group together relevant pages that fall into a category. The page had two links that were both about the aphorism, You Only Live Once, so I grouped them, same as any other category. John_Abbe (talk) 22:07, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

:Hi, the Yolo ↗ dabpage is for topics named "Yolo". "You Only Live Once" is not an exact title match and therefore should not be in the main article body, but the "See also" section. This is all explained at MOS:DAB ↗, which I linked in the edit summary; see specifically MOS:DABSEEALSO ↗. 162 etc. (talk) 22:31, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

Nomination of :White Girl Mob ↗ for deletion


<div class="afd-notice">
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0;">48px|alt=|link= ↗</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article :White Girl Mob ↗ is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines ↗ or whether it should be deleted ↗.

The article is being discussed at '''Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/White Girl Mob ↗''' until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the AfD notice from the article until the discussion is closed.<!-- Template:Afd notice --></div> Arbor to SJ (talk) 04:36, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

Pointe-Noire, Quebec ↗



Greetings. Can you provide me with some insights regarding the effective deletion of the page ↗? What is the rationale behind the decision? Where is the discussion with the community? Webfil (talk) 17:58, 25 May 2026 (UTC)
::Hi, thanks for reaching out. The Pointe-Noire article was a three sentence stub, with no indication of real WP:SIGCOV ↗. The contents can easily be merged into the Sept-Îles ↗ article. See WP:N ↗. 162 etc. (talk) 19:14, 25 May 2026 (UTC)
:::@162 etc. : Notability is based on the existence of suitable sources, not on the state of sourcing in an article ↗. Moreover, it's up to the community to debate whether SIGCOV is sufficient or WP:NPLACE ↗ should prevail. The fact that the article is linked to one interlanguage ↗ (where 9 different sources are cited), an 8 kB wikidata entry ↗ with sources and keys to other databases, a Commons category ↗ populated with 6 different pictures, and that it is viewed 40 times per month (bots and AI excluded) ↗ should be taken into account by an experienced WP contributor as to whether a formal deletion process could be appropriate.
:::Per WP:ATD-R ↗, I will revert the edit; you may launch a AfD ↗ if you oppose. Webfil (talk) 20:17, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

Pop music in Taiwan



Hello, could you please give a valid rationale for constantly reverting my edits for Pop music in Taiwan ↗? You mentioned that it is a WP:CFORK ↗ from Hokkien pop ↗ but it is not the case if you read the article carefully. The article refers to pop music that are specifically produced in Taiwan or associated with Taiwan's music industry, which is not the case for Hokkien Pop or Mandopop ↗ as both contain music from other countries, e.g. Hong Kong, China, Malaysia, Singapore, etc. Therefore, Pop music in Taiwan ↗ should a standalone article that mentions all forms of popular music that originated in Taiwan throughout history, including Mandopop ↗, Campus folk song ↗, Taiwanese hip hop ↗, Taiwanese Indigenous pop music ↗, and Taiwanese rock ↗, as well as any other forms that might emerge in the future.

The pop music-related pages do not necessarily have to be binded by language, as can be seen by pages such as Austropop ↗ – which is mainly sung in German but does not share the same article with German pop music, as well as Hong Kong English, American and British pop music which are all sung in English but have separate pages.

If you have an issue with my edits, you should raise this in the talk page ↗ with a discussion involving the community, taking into consideration other WP users' contributions and opinions instead of blatantly reverting all my edits.

If the main issue you are raising is the non-attribution, I have already paraphrased the entire article. Heeheemalu (talk) 01:11, 26 May 2026 (UTC)
::Hi, thank you for your contributions. I note your bold creation of Pop music in Taiwan ↗, which I've again reverted. WP:CFORK ↗ asks us not to create two articles about the exact same thing; that is indeed what happened here with the article you created. I urge you to use WP:AFC ↗ should you want to pursue this. 162 etc. (talk) 16:18, 26 May 2026 (UTC)
:::WP:CFORK ↗ is defined as "a piece of content (such as an inter-wiki object, a page, or a page section) that has the same scope as another piece of content that predated it, essentially covering the same topic." Pop music in Taiwan ↗ is not the "exact same thing" as any other existing pages. As I already mentioned in my message above, Hokkien pop ↗ and Mandopop ↗ both contain music from other countries, e.g. Hong Kong, China, Malaysia, Singapore, etc. and Pop music in Taiwan ↗ includes all pop music produced in Taiwan. Therefore, the scope is clearly different. Please stop your actions unless you can explain your rationale logically instead of just repeating your statements that have already been refuted. I have already reported your edits as vandalism ↗ and requested you to be blocked. Heeheemalu (talk) 01:15, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
::::Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pop music in Taiwan ↗. 162 etc. (talk) 16:53, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

Recent move of Qurban (Islamic ritual sacrifice) to Qurban



The problem with this move is that ''Qurban'' only in the context of Islam refers to a ritual sacrifice, the term in Christian Arabic usage and English-language usage relating to the Syriac rites etc. is used as the equivalent of prophoron ↗ in the Eastern Orthodox usage and Eucharist ↗ in Western usage. Thus the disambiguation in the title wasn’t really superfluous at all as someone stumbling upon the term in academic or religious texts not related to Islam will now be led to think the article is any way related to the concept… Bari&#39; bin Farangi (talk) 14:02, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

:See Holy Qurobo ↗ and Holy Qurbana ↗ all of these are called ''Qurban'' in Arabic and various texts dealing with these largely Arabic-speaking communities. Bari&#39; bin Farangi (talk) 14:06, 5 June 2026 (UTC)
::Hi, thank you for your contributions.
::Disambiguation tags are used to disambiguate, not to add context. Unless there is one or more topics on Wikipedia known in English as "Qurban", the move to the base title is correct. The usage of "Qurban" in the Arabic language is not a consideration. Do any English-language sources refer to any of the topics you mentioned above as "Qurban"? 162 etc. (talk) 15:49, 5 June 2026 (UTC)
:::Yes, this is part of the standard vocabulary deployed in these contexts especially in everyday usage see:
:::https://archive.org/details/divine-liturgy-of-the-maronite-church-history-commentary-chorbishop/page/26/mode/1up?q=Qurban
:::https://archive.org/details/divine-liturgy-of-the-maronite-church-history-commentary-chorbishop/page/26/mode/1up?q=Qurban
:::Here an example of English-language academic usage (but again this is standard vocabulary and is used in academic texts in various European languages for orientalist/theological work not just English but also German, French etc.):
:::https://www.jstor.org/stable/25212150
:::There should have been a proper disambiguation page disambiguating Jewish usage (ie Korban ↗), Eastern vs Western Syriac usage, and Islamic usage because right now the only disambiguation is done by using different transliteration systems for a term that is fundamentally the same between these languages. The -a suffix in Qurbana is the definite article, the "k" in "korban" is also in truth a Qaf in the Hebrew script, and the difference between u and o isn’t clearly defined in any of the languages, so in truth we have a single term across three languages Hebrew, Aramaic, and Arabic with different meanings depending on which religion the speaker belongs to. Bari&#39; bin Farangi (talk) 16:22, 5 June 2026 (UTC)
::::I'm still pretty confident that the article currently at Qurban ↗ is the primary topic. I encourage you to start a discussion at Talk:Qurban ↗ to discuss this further with other editors. 162 etc. (talk) 19:47, 5 June 2026 (UTC)
:::::I doubt that it is the primary topic (at least without a qualifier). Qurban is not the dominant term in Islamic Arabic today with the purely Arabic أضحية Udh7iyya being much more common in everyday usage (and thus also in derived loans like "Udhiyah" by Arabic-speaking Muslims; with Qurbani etc. existing in communities Islamized by Iranid dynasties or Turkic dynasties Islamized by Iranid dynasties). Udh7iyya remains dominant in contemporary Arabic because the festival is commonly known as Eid al-Adha (and أضحية derives directly from أضحى). In Arabic "Qurban" is qur'anic vocabulary and usually understood much more broadly (compare Quran 46:28). The term is quite prevalent in Persian where it would rather be transliterated Qorban or Ghorban today and Turkish (adopting the vocabulary prevalent Persian like most Turkic languages) were it has been spelled "kurban" since the alphabet change. The reason the term is popular in English-language orientalist scholarship (aside from being the primary vocabulary deployed by the Ottoman state) is that this term is known to any English-speaker familiar with the KJV and the common vocabulary of anglophone Christianity as "Corban" transliterated directly from Greek (in turn transliterating the Aramaic term) occurs in Mark 7:11 and has been decently explained by Sunday sermons since various denominations have required their clergy to learn Hebrew. I‘d argue the onus is on you to propose your change and to undo it until then, because as it stands you seem to have actively ambiguated a helpful title while not knowing the relevant Aramaic term that has even been a somewhat-common English word since the Protestant Reformation… Bari&#39; bin Farangi (talk) 22:34, 6 June 2026 (UTC)
::::::Just to drive home just how dominant "Adha" is for this specific sacrifice here is the ngram. As you can see English corban (related solely to the Jewish and Christian rituals) leads the charge and has essentially always led the charge and in Islamic usage "Qurban" has always been somewhat fringe, with orientalist texts choosing the term most familiar to Christian (and Jewish) readers already not the term actually representative of the common vocabulary of the Muslim world.
::::::https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Qurban%2CQurbani%2CAdha%2CKurban%2CCorban%2CKorban&year_start=1800&year_end=2022&corpus=en&smoothing=3 Bari&#39; bin Farangi (talk) 23:08, 6 June 2026 (UTC)
:::::::Talk:Qurban ↗ is the best place to discuss the article title. 162 etc. (talk) 16:47, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

Mass deletion of sourced content by 162 etc.



User User:162 etc. has removed 28,545 bytes of sourced content from Philippines national baseball team ↗ citing WP:COATRACK ↗, claiming the boxscores belong only in tournament articles. Similar game result content exists on comparable articles such as Japan national baseball team ↗ and South Korea national baseball team ↗, making COATRACK an inconsistent justification.
Diffs of removal:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Philippines_national_baseball_team&diff=1360852597&oldid=1360771570
Current stable version to preserve:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Philippines_national_baseball_team&oldid=1360852597
~2026-36549-39 ↗ (talk) &#126;2026-36549-39 ↗ (talk) 01:14, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

June 2026



link=|25px|alt=Information icon ↗ There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents ↗ regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.&nbsp;The thread is Mass deletion of sourced content by 162 etc. ↗.<!--Template:Discussion notice--><!--Template:ANI-notice--> Thanks. Bobby Cohn&nbsp;🍁 (talk) 01:22, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

25px|alt=Information icon ↗ Thank you for your contributions ↗ to Wikipedia. Regarding your recent edits to :Brookfield Place (Toronto) ↗ when you modified the page, you introduced {{cl|Unknown parameters|unknown parameters}}. Just because you specify {{para|some_param|{{var|some_variable}}}} does not always mean that variable will display. The {{para|some_param}} must be defined in the template. You can look at the documentation for the template you are using but it is also helpful to use the preview ↗ button before you save your edit; this helps you find any errors you have made and ensure that the values you have added are displaying correctly. Below the edit box is a '''Show preview''' button. Pressing this will show you what the page will look like without actually saving it. It is strongly recommended that you use this before saving. Note I have likely fixed the error by now so check the history ↗ of the page to see how it was fixed. If you have any questions, contact the help desk ↗ for assistance.
Thank you.<!-- User:Zackmann08/uw/Unknown-params-warning --> '''<span style="color:#00d5ff !important">Zack</span><span style="color:#007F94 !important">mann</span>''' (<sup>Talk to me ↗</sup>/<sub><span style="color:orange !important">What I been doing</span> ↗</sub>) 04:34, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

Deletion of Hakan Utangac



Why did you delete Hakan Utangaç ↗ article?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hakan_Utanga%C3%A7&curid=2840343&diff=1360771879&oldid=1350546652

And also this https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Metin_T%C3%BCrkcan&curid=52555623&diff=1360779614&oldid=1328313423

unforgvn20 (talk) 01:40, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
:Hi, thank you for your contributions. Per WP:BANDMEMBER ↗, ''"Members of notable bands are redirected to the band's article, not given individual articles, unless they have demonstrated individual notability."'' That is indeed the case with these individuals. 162 etc. (talk) 15:39, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

NHL reverts



I am very well aware of WP:ENGVAR. However, it is a longstanding practice at WP:NHL to use the British spelling for players oustide of the United States. For example, we use "defensman"/"defense" for American players and "defenceman"/"defence" for all other players. Same goes for "center"/"honor" (Americans) and "centre"/"honour" (non-Americans). Therefore, I have restored the correct spelling to those three pages, which is "honour" as neither of those players are American. – sbaio 04:28, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
:Hi, thank you for your contributions. Note that local consensus does not override site policy. See WP:CONLEVEL ↗. I'll also note that WP:HOCKEY/PPF ↗ mentions nothing about spelling or language varieties. 162 etc. (talk) 14:13, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
::{{ping|Sbaio}}

Good Old Boys ↗



Hi, thank you for your contributions. I note your recent revert at this article.

I'm a bit puzzled at your judgment here. Note that a disambiguation page is not an index; the entries should only be for topics named "Good Old Boys". If we look at the entries in question:


Why, specifically, do you believe any or all of the above should be included in the dabpage? 162 etc. (talk) 01:44, 24 April 2026 (UTC)
:Hi, thanks for the note. My apologies, life got busy of late.
:First, in looking over you comments, I think for some, google may have failed you.
:and Wiktionary may help clarify some. our primary goal in dab pages is to support the reader, and assist with navigation. all of these could be valid search targets.
:I did remove the lyric, as you note, and presumably not notable on its own.
:I agree about the cat, the goal was to reduce the see also list. honestly, this page should probably be a member of it.
:Happy to further discuss. - <b>jc37</b> 03:21, 28 June 2026 (UTC)
::Hi, I've reverted the edits, per above. This is the Good Old Boys ↗ dabpage; any topics named "Old Boys" are indeed WP:PTM ↗. The version you restored also violated WP:DABMENTION ↗ and WP:DABBLUE ↗, as I noted previously. Further discussion can happen at Talk:Good Old Boys ↗. Thank you for your continued contributions to the encyclopedia. 162 etc. (talk) 16:46, 28 June 2026 (UTC)

Cascades



I wanna talk to you about the terminus for the Cascades at Pacific Central Station. It should say that the Cascades heads towards Eugene. It doesn't matter if no trains that start at Pacific Central actually go as far as Eugene. Look at the Northeast Regional. No train actually travels every single station possible. For example, at the Burke Centre station, it says heading towards Boston South or Springfield, even though no train that stops at Burke Centre actually goes as far as Springfield, Massachusetts. Also, look at Princeton Junction. There, it says that it can go towards Norfolk, Newport News, or Roanoke heading south, and Boston or Springfield, MA heading north. Even though no Northeast Regional train that actually stops at this stations goes as far as any of those southern termini or to Springfield. Endrias Kassa (talk) 21:22, 29 June 2026 (UTC)
:Hi, discussion concerning this can happen at Talk:Pacific Central Station ↗. 162 etc. (talk) 22:57, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

Nettspend ↗ being listed under Nett (disambiguation) ↗



Just wondering if it makes sense for Nettspend to be there, as it is a common nickname he goes by, even having his signature for the nickname. Cheromaniii (talk) 04:10, 5 July 2026 (UTC)
::Hi, thanks for reaching out. Can you cite reliable secondary sources that refer to him as "Nett"? 162 etc. (talk) 16:34, 5 July 2026 (UTC)