User talk:Rhain

Hi Rhain! :) Do you know how to fix the errors at List of most expensive television series? (the 2025 iflation ones) Timur9008 (talk) 06:25, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! Easiest way is just to comment out the template for now, and replace it when {{Inflation}} is updated. It's a shame these errors are showing again—there was a period where inputting "2025" still worked—but at least we have a solution. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 07:53, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! :) Timur9008 (talk) 08:09, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reverting it all i wanted to say this link about gta sa is much written at all and you should have added all that understood stuff since january 2024: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=GTA:_San_Andreas&oldid=1331637954 Sapitanoa (talk) 10:44, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think Babysharkboss2 already summarised my thoughts perfectly. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 10:47, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rhain! :) I've been collecting sources on my sandbox for years now. (for companies, Rockstar, Naughty Dog, etc + other stuff)

Might be of some use to you to expand those pages User:Timur9008/sandbox.

These are not used in any articles to my knowledge. Timur9008 (talk) 09:44, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for sharing! The Rockstar source is used on Grand Theft Auto III, per your recommendation, but the others look unused. Nice finds—I'm sure these will prove very useful! – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 22:38, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If I anything else regarding Rockstar/GTA I will be posting it there :) Timur9008 (talk) 11:04, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, do you have any future plans to get the Last of Us Part II to FA? I am in the early stages of working on Horizon Zero Dawn and was looking at the original Last of Us article for some inspiration in some sections. I ended up at the Part II page and realized it was only a GA after thinking it was an FA for some reason. If you ever plan on doing it, I'd be happy to help where I can. -- ZooBlazer 08:02, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, good to hear from you! It's been almost a decade since my last FAC, so it's not something I really think about much anymore; I tend to consider GA a pretty good finish line before moving on. That being said, if I was going to consider nominating an article, The Last of Us Part II is probably one of the most likely candidates. I have plans to (finally) finish its spinoff articles quite soon, so I may consider going for FA around that time, and will certainly let you know if I need help. Good luck with your work on Horizon Zero Dawn! – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 08:31, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, maybe a little random, but if you have time or interest, would you want to do a review for the Horizon FAC? If not, no worries and no rush. I'm just reaching out to editors every once in a while to hopefully prevent the nom from stalling. -- ZooBlazer 19:29, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I may not have enough time for a full review, but I'll try to keep an eye on it; if it's at risk of stalling completely, please give me a ping! – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 22:30, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Rhain,

This is Chris from People Make Games and I just wanted to say how much I appreciated you updating the wiki page for the New York Game Awards last night and then making the extra effort to add the award win to our page as well. That means an awful lot to a small team like us and I just wanted to let you know that your attention to detail is very much appreciated.

Best,

Chris ~2026-40207-6 (talk) 09:59, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Chris! I'm always happy to keep the New York Game Awards article updated, so it made sense to add the accolade to the People Make Games article as well. Congratulations on the achievement, and keep up the great work! – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 00:49, 20 January 2026 (UTC) (P.S. If you ever need help researching obscure information, especially about video games, Wikipedia editors are a great place to start!) (P.P.S. Bring back The Games Press...)[reply]

Your good article nomination of the article The Ark (Doctor Who) is under review. See 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 Olliefant -- Olliefant (talk) 21:06, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Rhain, I hope you are well. This is the first article I have written myself from scratch (on enwiki). And since I based it on your article "When You're Lost in the Darkness", I would appreciate your opinion on whether you think it is ready to be submitted. Any advice or tips would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. Franar8 (talk) 01:33, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Franar8: Good to hear from you! I'm honoured that you used some of my contributions as a guide. I won't read too deeply to avoid spoilers, but at a quick glance it looks great—each section appears to have a solid amount of information, and the references are all reliable and prove notability. It looks ready for mainspace to me; you've done some great work! – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 02:04, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutiva 01:24, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A standard {{Alert}} would have sufficed this time (though I've made several AP edits in the past so I'm certainly well aware regardless), but thank you nonetheless. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 01:38, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Z1720 (talk) 00:02, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your good article nomination of the article Through the Valley (The Last of Us) is under review. See 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 Vestrian24Bio -- Vestrian24Bio (talk) 14:12, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Zackmann08. Thank you for your recent contributions to Template:A Song of Ice and Fire television franchise episodes. When you were adding content to the page, you added duplicate arguments to a template which can cause issues with how the template is rendered. In the future, please use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find these errors as they will display in yellow at the top of the page. Thanks. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 03:18, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The reversion already pings me, so the boilerplate template is a tad unnecessary, but thanks. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 03:30, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

When you break over 100 pages, you don't really get to complain that I am using a template to notify you. I took the time to not only fix your error, but also to notify you, kindly, of the problem. If you have such an aversion to being templated, then don't break things... I don't get this. I've got over 10 times the number of edits as you. If someone took the time to fix my mistake (which absolutely does happen), my response would be "doh, effed that up! Thanks for letting me know!" Why you choose to be hurt that I notified you about your error is bizarre... Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 03:41, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I said thanks. Nobody is complaining or "hurt", and no pages were "broken". Happy editing. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 04:00, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rhain! :)

This was mentioned on one of the old GTA fan websites here. (under Monday - November 18, 2002) [1]

Might be of use if you can find it. I guess that could be the November 2002 issue? Timur9008 (talk) 11:02, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Good find! It's referring to issue 910; the writer also shared it on his website at some point too. Looks like there are a few interesting tidbits that should prove useful. Thanks for sharing! – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 11:11, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your good article nomination of the article Future Days (The Last of Us) has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Plifal -- Plifal (talk) 15:06, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Firstly, regarding the edit on Hot Coffee; I really don’t think it’s necessary to explain both the history of the Grand Theft Auto franchise and include information about the story in this article. The focus of the article is on the minigame and the subsequent controversy. I don’t believe it’s vital context for readers to know the story of the game or the fact that it was released after Vice City and expanded on its gameplay. It just adds unnecessary information that distracts from the main content of the article in my opinion.

Secondly regarding edits on made last month on both Music of Grand Theft Auto V and Soundtracks of Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas; Considering both articles are about music in the same game series. I don’t see a reason not to link them together with each other. I get your point about them already being linked in the templates below the article, but those templates aren’t visible on mobile and it seems like standard practice to link them even if they are linked in a template at the bottom.

Thanks, OrbitalVoid49 (talk) 12:04, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reaching out. I think some brief information about San Andreas's size and scope compared to Vice City is useful, as it establishes context regarding Rockstar's focus on realism—which is relevant to the gameplay mode being developed in the first place. I agree it was a little overly detailed, hence my trimming, but I think the current revision is sound.

I still find the § See also links a little unnecessary, but I get your point and don't feel too strongly about it. Thanks again for reaching out, and please let me know if you'd like any clarification or a third opinion. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 12:40, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hey,, I see that there's a good topic for The Last of Us, and in order to avoid messing that up, I wanna bring this to GA. Yet, I ain't ever played an entry in the series, so I was wondering, could you help tweak the details of the concept and appearances to be more accurate/add any missing content? Cukie Gherkin (talk) 06:24, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the message. The good topic is for the first game, so it shouldn't be impacted by this article, but I'll definitely take a look anyway. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 06:27, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, you're right! Thanks for helping out anyway. Cukie Gherkin (talk) 07:03, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Great work with those changes and improvements. Do you reckon it's GA-ready? Also, do you want to be co-nom? - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 09:31, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Please feel free to adjust my changes as much as you'd like. I think it's in a good shape for GAN; I'd be happy to be co-nom, especially if you want someone more familiar with the story to fall back on. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 13:01, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

By the by, I might look into sources for characters from the Red Dead Redemption, Uncharted, and The Last of Us series; do you have any interest in writing up articles based on such sources? - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 02:13, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm definitely interested if the sources exist! I'm not sure any other characters are notable enough to justify standalone articles, but we can start by expanding their sections on the character lists and then consider splitting from there. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 02:19, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I'll let you know whenever I find anything Cukie Gherkin (talk) 02:26, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Aight, got this set up: User:Cukie Gherkin/The Last of Us, Red Dead, and Uncharted. Not necessarily asking you who's notable, but of the Red Dead cast, aside from Dutch and Sadie, who would you suggest I look into? - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 02:43, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Dutch and Sadie are definitely the top picks. Besides them, maybe Micah, Charles, Hosea, Lenny, and Sean; possibly Bill, Javier, Abigail, and Jack as they appeared in the first game as well. I'm sure there are some interesting and insightful tidbits about most other characters on that list too, but that should be a good place to start. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 03:33, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

All right, thanks, I'll keep those in mind Cukie Gherkin (talk) 04:06, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Found sources for Bill, Nadine Ross, Sadie Adler, and Dutch van der Linde (also, I like the idea of having an audio file to play on your user talk page, great touch) - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 07:17, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the update, and for all your work! I suspected you'd find plenty for Sadie and Dutch in particular. I personally prefer to keep as much contained at the lists as possible, but I'm happy to look into these soon to see if there's enough to split (if not, their list sections will improve anyway, so it's a win-win). Most of Bill's sources seem to be about the TV version (and largely the episode itself) but happy to look into this too. (And thanks! Hope the sounds didn't put you to sleep...) – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 07:29, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The Bill sources definitely skew toward the show, but I think that's not a bad thing; honestly, it really helps out IMO, like this source that discuses how Bill's relationship with Frank was changed for the show Cukie Gherkin (talk) 02:38, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be honest, I think this is definitely something that needs a broader discussion with the project, maybe wikipedia as a whole, but I'm not sure how to go about it. There's something deeply questionable where we're putting a lot of stock into a flag on a video that really any intern can set, especially when the main source lacks it (case in point, the RE4 remake videos, US main and France). I'm just not sure the right way to go about it.

It definitely feels like gaming a system that shouldn't work. It doesn't help that Commons is, frankly, an inconsistent mess; here we can point more cleanly to policy and whatnot often refined to a pinpoint, there it's all over. Kung Fu Man (talk) 01:34, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, after reading several different discussions about this topic, I can understand both arguments: most files were almost certainly tagged by mistake; but it's also not really our place to make those assumptions (any more than we would with an individual user on Flickr, for instance). I guess an argument is whether the subsidiary channels have the legal right to even apply such a license—you're right that the original Japanese trailers don't have it either—but that would take a greater legal mind than my own. This almost certainly needs a larger centralised discussion (probably primarily on Commons) rather than the aforementioned variety of local ones. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 03:25, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on 37th GLAAD Media Awards requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

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. 11WB (talk) 23:51, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

hi!! in the first above-mentioned article you uploaded a short fair-use clip demonstrating a game feature, i would like to do something similar for seven samurai but am not really sure of the mechanics of it. please may you explain it to me? thanks for reading!--Plifal (talk) 14:03, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! For that particular video (not my original upload, I just tidied and reuploaded), I simply trimmed and exported the original video, and then ran it through Ezgif a few times (to crop, resize, optimise, etc.). Let me know if you'd like more specific information, or if I can help more directly. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 21:10, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Rhain, thank you for your help! i added the clip but it seems not to play automatically unless clicked on? i tried resizing the image but it didn't work. when included outside the use of |thumb it seems to work fine. do you have any advice?--Plifal (talk) 09:04, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it might have been related to the size; I got this note on the original file:

Note: Due to technical limitations, thumbnails of high resolution GIF images such as this one will not be animated.

Never seen that before, but it's useful to know! I've reduced the resolution and reuploaded, which appears to have fixed the problem. Let me know if you have any other issues, or questions about anything else! – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 10:11, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

thank you so much, that's very kind of you! let me know if i can help you at all in the future!!--Plifal (talk) 14:12, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there... I was in WikiJail yesterday, but I'm now out on parole whenever you want to do the rest of the GAs. No rush, though! I just didn't want you to think the GAs were abandoned since there was a strike through my name yesterday. Bgsu98 (Talk) 16:22, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the update! Glad you've been freed. No worries, I'd planned to continue the reviews regardless—I'll try to leave some comments soon. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 21:21, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your good article nomination of the article The Path (The Last of Us) is under review. See 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 Vestrian24Bio -- Vestrian24Bio (talk) 07:36, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your good article nomination of the article The Massacre (Doctor Who) is under review. See 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 Adamstom.97 -- Adamstom.97 (talk) 09:34, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your good article nomination of the article The Massacre (Doctor Who) has been placed on hold, as the article needs some changes. See the review page for more information. If these are addressed within 7 days, the nomination will pass; otherwise, it may fail. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Adamstom.97 -- Adamstom.97 (talk) 12:04, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your good article nomination of the article The Massacre (Doctor Who) has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Please also consider reviewing somebody else's nomination to help keep the backlog down. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Adamstom.97 -- Adamstom.97 (talk) 13:35, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

		The Feathered Quill Barnstar
		For your tireless efforts on getting The Massacre and The Ark to Good Article Status, while also writing extensively for the next 2 serials and getting them to a Good Article Nomination phase. Yes I am a nerd -XCBRO172 (How could you tell?) 00:10, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I've been thoroughly enjoying the work, especially considering my extended break after the last one. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 00:30, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Likewise congratulations! It's always a joy seeing these pop up since they're always so well-researched and high quality. Wishing you the best of luck for your future editing endeavors! Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 00:09, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Heya Rhain. There's been a goal listed at the goals page for Doctor Who season 5 which I'm aiming to chip away at right now (Finished The Tomb of the Cybermen recently and aim to hit up The Ice Warriors at some point in the future). While I'm likely not going to be able to get to the season article for some time, do you have any suggestions for writing these, especially compared to the show's revival? I'm a little less versed in Classic Who stuff so I'd appreciate any general notes or suggestions based on what you usually do for the season articles like your work on the first two Hartnell seasons. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 00:08, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats on all your great work so far! My primary suggestion would be to continue what you've already been doing: working on the individual articles. A lot of my work on the first two season articles consisted of taking anything important or interesting from the serials and trying to make it flow together neatly (one exception is the § Promotion sections, which are mostly original).

Admittedly, it has been some time since I last wrote a Doctor Who season article, and my writing and research style has evolved quite a bit since then; I intend to work on another one soon, so I'll let you know if I have any notes or suggestions based on that. Please let me know if I can help more specifically or if you'd ever like me to read over anything! – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 11:56, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Once I hit up The Ice Warriors I'll start drafting up the season article with the other GAs that are finished and try to follow your format and suggestions. If you'd be willing to take a look over it when that comes, I'll let you know when it eventually gets to a decent stage. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 20:57, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

	The Bronze Figure Skating Barnstar
	Thank you much for all of your help in ushering six skating articles from the 2022 Winter Olympics to Good Article status! Bgsu98 (Talk) 04:49, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm honoured to make the podium! We may want to wait until after my test results before we start handing out medals, though...

All I really did was read over others' great work and leave a few nitpicky comments—the true winners, of course, are the editors like you who have worked so tirelessly on this series. They've been lots of fun to review, and I'm looking forward to seeing the last article get its own bronze soon! – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 11:40, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you already have the list situated for season 3? The credits haven't even populated yet. Moscriptcallum (talk) 23:36, 3 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

As I explained, Ramsey isn't listed first in season 2 because they are not credited first. The season 3 article starts with Dever, based on the reliable sources confirming she will lead the series, while the rest of the list is based on the previous credits order (Ramsey to Wright) followed by new characters (DuVall). It will be adjusted and split into subsections once we have more information. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 23:44, 3 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

what information are you basing this off from? bella lead the second season. in several episodes, pedro isn't even in the credits Moscriptcallum (talk) 23:55, 3 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It's based on the second-season premiere, in which, like the first season, Pascal received top billing. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 00:10, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

you know the season is more than just the premiere, right?

season 3 didn't even have a premiere yet and you already have the cast ranked Moscriptcallum (talk) 00:35, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Cast lists are ordered based on earliest appearances—in the case of season 2, that would be the premiere. I explained the season 3 ordering above. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 00:48, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

bella's number 1 on the call sheet according to this article

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv-features/bella-ramsey-the-last-of-us-interview-ellie-season-2-1236195178/ Moscriptcallum (talk) 01:15, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but only from season 2's third episode onwards. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 01:16, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

she was the lead for the 1st and second episodes, too. she didn't just disappear Moscriptcallum (talk) 03:11, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ramsey was a lead, not the lead; Pascal still got top billing. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 03:20, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

top billing according to who? Moscriptcallum (talk) 06:43, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) You're going around in circles. Rhain has already explained the billing is from the first episode in which Bella was second and Pedro was first. -- ZooBlazer 06:53, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Even the article you linked confirms it: becoming the show's top-billed star took Ramsey to another level. Pascal had top billing; Ramsey took it after he left. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 06:59, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]