User Talk: DannyRogers800

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

{{Archive box
| archivelist =
| auto = no
| index =
| links =
| search = no
| collapsible = no
| collapsed = no
| box-width = 175
| root = User talk:DannyRogers
| search-width=
| style = background-color:#ebfafa; border-color:#000000;
| title = <big><big>Noise from the Past</big></big>
| image = 150px ↗
| bot =
| age = |
# First Archive: 2024–2025 
}}

Happy New Year, DannyRogers800!

<div style="border: 3px solid #FFD700; background-color: #FFFAF0; padding:0.2em 0.4em; height:auto; min-height:173px; border-radius:1em; box-shadow:.1em .1em .5em rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.75); box-shadow:.1em .1em .5em light-dark(rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.75), rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.75));" class="plainlinks">
left|x173px ↗x173px|right ↗
{{Paragraph break}}
{{Center|{{resize|179%|'''''Happy New Year ↗!'''''}}}}
'''DannyRogers800''', Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year ↗, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
 '''''Volten''''''''001''' ☎ 10:26, 2 January 2026 (UTC) 
</div>
   ''{{resize|88%|Send New Year cheer by adding {{tls|Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.}}''
{{clear}} '''''Volten''''''''001''' ☎ 10:26, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

:Thank you! I wish you a lovely year and pleasant times on Wikipedia. DannyRogers800 (talk) 16:53, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

DYK for The Lion Sleeps Tonight

{{ivmbox
|image = Updated DYK query.svg
|imagesize=40px
|image class=skin-invert
|text = On 8 January 2026 ↗, '''Did you know ↗''' was updated with a fact from the article '''''The Lion Sleeps Tonight ↗''''', which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ''... that the success of one version of "'''The Lion Sleeps Tonight ↗'''" was almost derailed by allegations of communism?'' The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Lion Sleeps Tonight ↗. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, The Lion Sleeps Tonight ↗), and the hook may be added to the statistics page ↗ after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it ↗.
}} Dclemens1971 (talk) 00:03, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of Herostratus ↗ is under review

Your good article nomination ↗ of the article Herostratus ↗ is 20px|alt=|link= ↗ '''under review'''. See '''Talk:Herostratus/GA1{{!}}the review page ↗''' for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have.  Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of A.Cython -- A.Cython (talk) 00:36, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of Herostratus ↗ has failed

Your good article nomination ↗ of the article Herostratus ↗ has 20px|alt=|link= ↗ '''failed'''. See '''Talk:Herostratus/GA1{{!}}the review page ↗''' for more information. If or when the reviewer's feedback has been addressed, you may nominate the article again.  Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of A.Cython -- A.Cython (talk) 04:03, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Featured Article status of The Long and Winding Road ↗ under review

I have nominated The Long and Winding Road ↗ for a featured article review here ↗. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria ↗, or help improve the article. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regard to the article's featured status (see review instructions ↗). George Ho (talk) 04:32, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

FAC

I am sorry that your FAC nomination, The Lion Sleeps Tonight ↗, was archived as unsuccessful. I encourage you to bring the article to WP:PR ↗, and review other articles there to help get feedback. I also suggest reviewing articles at WP:FAC ↗: this helps editors learn the FA criteria ↗, clears the backlog so that your article is more likely to get noticed, and builds goodwill amongst FAC reviewers so they are more likely to review your nominations. Feel free to ping me or post on WT:FAC ↗ if you have any questions. Z1720 (talk) 17:11, 25 April 2026 (UTC)

:Thank you for this thoughtful message, Z1720. It doesn't bother me. School is keeping me very busy right now, so a gold star isn't going to shake me. And I may need some time to patch all the problems on "The Long and Winding Road", so please keep the review open for a bit. Thank you :) DannyRogers800 (talk) 20:02, 25 April 2026 (UTC)

June 2026 GAN Backlog Drive

{| style="border: 5px solid #ABCDEF ; background-color: #FFF; padding:10px 15px 0; color: black"
|style="padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em; font-size:130%" |'''Good article nominations ↗ |''' June 2026 Backlog Drive
|rowspan=3|right|75px ↗
|-
|'''June 2026 Backlog Drive:'''
Do you want to become more experienced in the GA process?

On 1 June, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin.

Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles reviewed.

Mentors are available, and new reviewers (<6 reviews) get bonus points!

Interested in taking part? You can '''sign up here ↗'''.
|-
|colspan=2|'''Other ways to participate:'''

Join the conversations on our talk page ↗.

|-
|colspan=2 style="font-size:85%; padding-top:15px;"|You're receiving this message because you have participated in a good article review this year or participated in the previous backlog drive.
|}

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

Replaceable non-free use File:Godfrey Baldacchino c. 2020.jpg

32px|left ↗
Thanks for uploading ''':File:Godfrey Baldacchino c. 2020.jpg ↗'''. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of non-free use ↗. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion ↗. This criterion states that files used under claims of non-free use may have ''no free equivalent''; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

# Go to the file description page ↗ and add the text {{Tlx|Di-replaceable non-free use disputed|<your reason>}} '''below''' the original replaceable non-free use template, replacing <code><your reason></code> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
# On the file's talk page ↗, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license ↗, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [{{fullurl:Special:Contributions|target=DannyRogers800&namespace=6}} this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy ↗. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page ↗. Thank you.  Gert7 (talk · contribs ↗) 10:13, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

:You make a good point. My friend should manage to take a picture of Baldacchino not too far from today. DannyRogers800 (talk) 13:12, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

Too section ????

Here you deleted ↗ an important section about Internet access rights, guaranteed by the SCOTUS, which is one of the most important rights in modern times. Your description is - "Deleted section: Too section". Can you plz explain what does it even mean ?? You did not give any reasonable explanation to delete a section which was there for years..... ~2026-33365-13 ↗ (talk) 22:13, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

:All rights are important; there's no use in ranking them. That's one thing. Secondly, the article is too long, so some sections have to go. Internet access did not have a strong claim to remain, since the article mentioned just one court case on this particular right. If the article lists all rights that can reasonably qualify as "important", it becomes cumbersome and very much useless since readers expect a summary of the First Amendment, not a volume. Nevertheless, there is an argument to be made that internet rights can return, as long as information on some other right (or rights) is chopped off. That's my explanation. DannyRogers800 (talk) 12:42, 5 June 2026 (UTC)
::That one case is a landmark case, regarding one of the most important rights of our time - Internet access right. The SCOTUS confirmed that the FA of Constitution protects this very important right, even for sex offenders. I think this case info should be there, with or without a distinct section. ~2026-33365-13 ↗ (talk) 20:46, 5 June 2026 (UTC)
:::You may include the information on that case. Ideally, some work is done to trim some other sections... I won't commit to that myself... but the article is already very long anyway. DannyRogers800 (talk) 20:54, 5 June 2026 (UTC)
::::"You may include the information on that case" - the article is protected........ ~2026-33517-90 ↗ (talk) 21:43, 6 June 2026 (UTC)
:::::Okay, I restored the information. See whether you agree with my edit ↗... speak if you find anything else that needs repairing. DannyRogers800 (talk) 10:13, 10 June 2026 (UTC)
:Also, "too section" was a typo. Sounds like something from a surrealist novel. DannyRogers800 (talk) 12:43, 5 June 2026 (UTC)