Archives |
---|
Contents
- 1 Peer review of 1877 Wimbledon Championship
- 2 Wikipedia:Today's featured article/April 28, 2015
- 3 Halifax Explosion
- 4 Template: NHL teams
- 5 Invitation to comment on VP proposal: Establish WT:MoS as the official site for style Q&A on Wikipedia
- 6 Re: Jim Rutherford
- 7 Failed notification
- 8 Mail
- 9 Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 1, 2015
- 10 RfC: Religion in infoboxes of nations
- 11 LMAO
- 12 THE LIE IS BACK
- 13 Deftly
- 14 Not sure why I bother, but here are the facts
- 15 Arbitration motion regarding Arbitration enforcement
- 16 Arbitration enforcement arbitration case opened
- 17 1919 Stanley Cup
- 18 Change from announced time table for the Arbitration enforcement arbitration case
- 19 Your GA nomination of The Hockey Sweater
- 20 Motion passed in AE arbitration case granting amnesty and rescinding previous temporary injunction
- 21 Dave Gallaher FAC
- 22 The Wikipedia Library needs you!
- 23 Your GA nomination of The Hockey Sweater
- 24 Montreal Expos
- 25 Request for comment
- 26 Sorry
- 27 Notable condo buildings?
- 28 MOS:IDENTITY is being revisited: How should Wikipedia refer to transgender individuals before and after their transition?
- 29 Home city location for the New York Islanders
- 30 Oops!
- 31 MOS discussion
- 32 Vested contributors arbitration case opened
- 33 Vested contributors retitled Arbitration enforcement 2
- 34 Patients
- 35 Reference errors on 16 December
- 36 The Signpost: 16 December 2015
- 37 WikiCup 2016 is just around the corner...
- 38 Arbitration enforcement 2 case closed
- 39 Wishing you all the best . . .
- 40 The Signpost: 30 December 2015
- 41 The Signpost: 06 January 2016
- 42 WikiCup 2016: Game On!
- 43 WikiCup 2016: Game On!
- 44 Arbcase
- 45 The Signpost: 13 January 2016
- 46 RfC announce: Religion in infoboxes
- 47 DYK suggestions
- 48 The Signpost: 20 January 2016
- 49 The Signpost: 27 January 2016
- 50 The Signpost: 03 February 2016
- 51 WikiCup 2015 March newsletter
- 52 WikiCup 2016 March newsletter (update)
- 53 Wikipedia:WikiProject Wales/Awaken the Dragon
- 54 Gamaliel and others arbitration case opened
- 55 WikiCup 2016 May newsletter
Peer review of 1877 Wimbledon Championship
Hi Resolute, as an editor of articles on sport can I interest you in a peer review of the article on the inaugural 1877 Wimbledon Championship? Besides being the first edition of the Wimbledon Championships it was also the first official tennis tournament and as such has historical significance. It is my first peer review request and so far it has not received any review comments. The article has GA status since mid 2013 and I am the major contributor, although it was not created by me. Hopefully it can be turned into an FA, which would make it the very first FA article of the WikiProject Tennis. If you have an interest and some time I would certainly welcome your comments. Cheers,--Wolbo (talk) 01:12, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
- Hi Wolbo. I would be happy to give a review, but I won't have time until late next week. I will try to remember, but if I don't give a review by next Thursday, please ping me again. Thanks, and good luck with the article! Resolute 01:28, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for willing to spend some time on this. User Brianboulton will also have a look at it after the weekend so maybe the review will still be running by late next week. Cheers, --Wolbo (talk) 23:42, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Today's featured article/April 28, 2015
You know the drill. A summary of a Featured Article you nominated at WP:FAC will appear on the Main Page soon. Was there anything I left out you'd like to see put back in? (If we fit the full team names for each team in, we'd have to cut a lot out, but maybe we could use just the city names or leave the city names out, if you want to mention them all?) I'd appreciate it if you could check the article one more time before its day on the Main Page. - Dank (push to talk) 05:12, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
- Okay, nevermind, I was able to fit all the team names in. Please check the links, though ... I see in at least one case (the Jets) you preferred a more specific link. - Dank (push to talk) 16:46, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
- Hi Dank, thanks! And yes, the Winnipeg Jets franchise from this article's time period is separate from the modern franchise, so the link you currently have is proper. The blurb looks okay on a first pass, but I might try to come up with an alternate to avoid having it pretty much just become a listing of teams that came and went. Assuming I have both time and inclination. Cheers! Resolute
- I have the same reservation, but OTOH, I'm thinking of Main Page day and what's likely to happen at WP:ERRORS, if we list some of the teams but omit someone's favorite team from that era. - Dank (push to talk) 17:43, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
- Hi Dank, thanks! And yes, the Winnipeg Jets franchise from this article's time period is separate from the modern franchise, so the link you currently have is proper. The blurb looks okay on a first pass, but I might try to come up with an alternate to avoid having it pretty much just become a listing of teams that came and went. Assuming I have both time and inclination. Cheers! Resolute
Halifax Explosion
Thoughts on coverage and organization of this article? Does anything need to be added? Nikkimaria (talk) 05:54, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
- @Nikkimaria: - Oh wow. I got halfway through re-writing this article, got sidetracked and never got back to it. It was on my 'must finish' list but I just never made the time. (I still have my layout thoughts sandboxed.) Happy to see you picked it up! I see a lot of the things that bugged me about the old format (such as stub sections for individual survivors) have been removed, but the layout looks good to me! Off-hand, I would say the blob of text that is the legacy section could probably use a subsection. Much as I hate them in general, the popular media paragraphs might be the most logical split. I'll have to go through the article again for more concrete suggestions. Were you thinking of making a GA/FA run on it? Resolute 13:50, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
- I'm actually considering cutting a bit more of that pop-cult stuff - Barometer Rising is an obvious inclusion, but there have been so many depictions that we could probably justify a Halifax Explosion in popular culture to contain the mass of it. I think I'll also steal the Ladd bit from your sandbox :) Yeah, I was thinking of doing the whole GA-A-FA run - I don't think it's too far off GA now, once I get the remaining references in. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:00, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
- Awesome! I'll definitely help you with the chase for the bronze star. Hopefully I can make some time this weekend to do a read through and get my own bearings re-set. And agreed on being close to GA. A little bit of additional clean-up should get it there. Off-hand though, I'd like to replace at least one of those memorial images in legacy wtih a picture of the Christmas tree. Not sure how easy would be to find such an image though. Resolute 14:12, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
- Pretty easy though it would be nice to have the original. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:46, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
- Awesome! I'll definitely help you with the chase for the bronze star. Hopefully I can make some time this weekend to do a read through and get my own bearings re-set. And agreed on being close to GA. A little bit of additional clean-up should get it there. Off-hand though, I'd like to replace at least one of those memorial images in legacy wtih a picture of the Christmas tree. Not sure how easy would be to find such an image though. Resolute 14:12, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
- I'm actually considering cutting a bit more of that pop-cult stuff - Barometer Rising is an obvious inclusion, but there have been so many depictions that we could probably justify a Halifax Explosion in popular culture to contain the mass of it. I think I'll also steal the Ladd bit from your sandbox :) Yeah, I was thinking of doing the whole GA-A-FA run - I don't think it's too far off GA now, once I get the remaining references in. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:00, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
I'm about ready to send this to FAC - would you like to be a co-nom? Nikkimaria (talk) 20:04, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
- Sure. Is there anything you want or need me to do before you launch the nomination? Resolute 20:12, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
- Not that I can think of, unless there are some more improvements you want to make. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:43, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
- I think it's alright. I'll give it another look over, but a nomination shouldn't have to wait on that. Resolute 22:22, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
- Not that I can think of, unless there are some more improvements you want to make. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:43, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Template: NHL teams
Well, ya may aswell revert all the non-playoff team templates. We both know, I won't put up an argument. GoodDay (talk) 16:05, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
- No, you will just passive-aggressively complain about it after wasting everyone's time. And yes, I intend to revert all the changes. That the playing season is over is no reason to hamper the ability of readers to easily find the articles. The links to 2014-15 are fine until this season ends and the 2015-16 articles start to get created. Resolute 16:07, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Invitation to comment on VP proposal: Establish WT:MoS as the official site for style Q&A on Wikipedia
You are being contacted because of your participation in the proposal to create a style noticeboard. An alternate solution, the full or partial endorsement of the style Q&A currently performed at WT:MoS, is now under discussion at the Village Pump. Darkfrog24 (talk) 21:23, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Re: Jim Rutherford
Firstly, please elaborate the POV comments. All comments are sourced, including the critics of the trade.
Please recommend which parts to cull before removing them entirely.
Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MacFanJohn (talk • contribs) 23:58, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
- @MacFanJohn:. Honestly, I would cull nearly all of it. Even if you add more to the article - and I certainly encourage that - a 4000 character entry on a single trade is seriously excessive for someone with a history as long as Rutherford. This is always something many editors struggle with - trying to find the right balance when adding info. If you do re-add, please adhere to neutral point of view policies. Specifically, avoid puffery like "a talented young defenseman" and "an older defenseman already at peak potential". Also, please note that web forums like HFBoards and Reddit are not reliable sources.
- I would say that, before re-adding, that you compile a list of moves you think should be mentioned. Both good and bad. Perhaps use the article talk page to formulate it. I suspect that once you get that written down, you will realize that no individual move warrants more than a sentence or two when faced with having to describe the overall body of work. Thanks, and feel free to ask any of us at WP:HOCKEY for advice and thoughts! Resolute 00:07, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
(New Response) I am really more familiar with Rutherford as a GM to the Penguins, not so much to the Carolina days. I'd be comfortable adding a heading for his positive (based on critical and fan opinion) and a seperate heading for negative trades - the only one of which would qualify being the Despres one, possibly the Winnik for 2 (!!) draft picks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MacFanJohn (talk • contribs)
- It would be better to do this chronologically, actually. If you want to focus on his time in Pittsburgh, that's okay, but the same limitations will still apply. And it would be good to at least try to put some effort into filling in some of his Carolina history. Keep in mind that he was GM of the Whalers/Hurricanes for 20 years - and won a Cup there - but GM of the Penguins for only 1. By necessity, his Pittsburgh history will have to be a very small percentage of the whole article. His bio on the Penguins website and in the Pens media guide could help you a little with identifying things to consider adding for his whole history. Cheers! Resolute 00:21, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
- Also, if you wish to focus on the Penguins trades in greater detail, consider the single-season articles like 2014–15 Pittsburgh Penguins season. Right now, that article is in need of a great deal of expansion. For comparison, consider how I have written 2014–15 Calgary Flames season. Resolute 00:26, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
(New response) The fan opposition is clearly noted as such, with fan discussion forums as sources. If I am citing "fan reaction" why are fan pages like HFforums not good indicators?
(New response) Only two sentences may indeed be subject to debate. The "some attribute the loss in playoffs to Scuderi, some attribute the loss to Lovejoy". These sentences can be removed, or amended to read that it is based on opinion pieces.— Preceding unsigned comment added by MacFanJohn (talk • contribs)
- Hi MacFanJohn, It would help if you kept posts in chronological order. Also, please sign your posts using four tildes (~), that adds a signature, helping people identify your posts! As to the question of forum discussions as sources, the reason why those are not acceptable goes back to Wikipedia's reliable source policies. Wikipedia's purpose is to basically aggregate what reliable secondary sources say, and fan forums don't meet that threshold. This project ultimately does not aim to cover everything, so we tend to draw the line around what the project has determined to be good sources. Also, forum posts are easily manipulated. A person could, for example, write a few posts about how they love the trade, and then cite that. We have a rather large alphabet soup of policy and guideline pages that generally explain why we don't accept these sources. WP:OR (original research), WP:SPS (self-published sources), WP:POV (point of view), etc. Most blogs are likewise problematic. In this case, I would stick to major media outlets for the basis of any additions. Cheers! Resolute 03:39, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
Failed notification
Hi, re this edit "ping works better if I get your name right" - that one failed too, because you need to get it right first time. Going back and amending it won't re-trigger a notification, see WP:Echo. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:34, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
--Super Bazooka (talk) 16:47, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 1, 2015
Hi Resolute, Brianboulton has scheduled your article for July 1, when a summary of a Featured Article you nominated at WP:FAC will appear. Was there anything I left out you'd like to see put back in? - Dank (push to talk) 19:00, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
- Nope, I think that's just about perfect. Thanks! Resolute 21:57, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
RfC: Religion in infoboxes of nations
There is an RfC that you may be interested in at Template talk:Infobox country#RfC: Religion in infoboxes of nations. Please join us and help us to determine consensus on this issue. --Guy Macon (talk) 13:53, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
LMAO
If I had the power to edit the LA Galaxy lie, I WOULD'VE DONE IT MYSELF, but the page is locked/semilocked/whatever-the-ffff, and not letting me make any changes. THERE YOU HAVE IT. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MatiGOL85 (talk • contribs) 20:38, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
THE LIE IS BACK
Some moron changed it back to the lie. Care to handle this again since others apparently can't do it themselves? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MatiGOL85 (talk • contribs) 17:55, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Deftly
Can you do everyone a favour and stop insinuating motives that are not there or, at least, totally without evidence? In your recent comment at the open arbcom request you say that Corbett's "supporters" have "deftly buried" that the incident is his fifth transgression. They haven't "deftly" done anything, nor are the so-called "supporters" (I'm guessing this means the ones who do not agree with you) all approaching the issue from the same perspective. Methinks you should go write for a tabloid, if you do not already. - Sitush (talk) 17:00, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
- Shakespeare coined a phrase for just this type of situation. Resolute 17:26, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
Not sure why I bother, but here are the facts
I don't know why I bother, but Sitush is correct that I'm on fairly frosty terms with Eric Corbett. I admire his work but have always avoided conversing with him. The last time I posted on his userpage was in March of this year.[1] You can see me telling Eric to fuck off here, a couple of months ago. (Apparently he had never heard such language.[2]) He answered me with an edit summary that made me so tired I've avoided him completely since, as indicated here.[3] You know nothing of my relations with Eric, yet you pigeonholed me as being his "friend/ally" and as therefore making a proposal in bad faith . I don't know why, or what you meant by your comment (which now again holds its head high on WP:AN). I'm not aware of you and me having had any communication. (I may have forgotten something.) But I suppose it's possible a person can conceive a deep-rooted dislike for me just from seeing me around. Bishonen | talk 14:02, 28 June 2015 (UTC).
Arbitration motion regarding Arbitration enforcement
You are receiving this message because you have commented about this matter on the AN page, the AE page or the Case Requests page and are therefore restricted as specified in (2). For the Arbitration Committee, L235 (t / c / ping in reply) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:30, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
Arbitration enforcement arbitration case opened
You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has, per the above, accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement/Evidence. Please add your evidence by July 13, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. Apologies for the potential duplicate message. For the Arbitration Committee, L235 (t / c / ping in reply) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:43, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
1919 Stanley Cup
Hi Resolute. What's up with 1919 Stanley Cup Finals? I have a book and first: match 5 was held on March 29, not March 30 . Second: match 6 was cancelled due to the influenza on April 1, 1919 five hours before the game starts. THERE is no winner this year, Seattle has not won the Stanley Cup, would you correct that please. Thanks. Friendly. --Danielvis08 (talk) 20:14, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
- Looks like an IP vandalized the article about a week ago. I've corrected it. Thanks for the heads up! Resolute 20:56, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
Change from announced time table for the Arbitration enforcement arbitration case
You are receiving this message either because you are a party to the Arbitration enforcement arbitration case, because you have commented in the case request, or the AN or AE discussions leading to this arbitration case, or because you have specifically opted in to receiving these messages. Unless you are a party to this arbitration case, you may opt out of receiving further messages at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement/Notification list. The drafters of the Arbitration enforcement arbitration case have published a revised timetable for the case, which changes what you may have been told when the case was opened. The dates have been revised as follows: the Evidence phase will close 5 July 2015, one week earlier than originally scheduled; the Workshop phase will close 26 July 2015, one week later than originally scheduled; the Proposed decision is scheduled to be posted 9 August 2015, two weeks later than originally scheduled. Thank you. On behalf of the arbitration clerks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:58, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of The Hockey Sweater
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Hockey Sweater 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 Harrias -- Harrias (talk) 14:00, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Motion passed in AE arbitration case granting amnesty and rescinding previous temporary injunction
This message is sent at 12:53, 5 July 2015 (UTC) by Arbitration Clerk User:Penwhale via MassMessage on behalf of the Arbitration Committee. You are receiving this message because your name appears on this list and have not elected to opt-out of being notified of development in the arbitration case.
On 5 July, 2015, the following motion was passed and enacted:
Dave Gallaher FAC
Hey Resolute. I nominated the article Dave Gallaher at WP:FAC about ten days ago but haven't yet had a single comment (other than an image review). You did comment at the peer review (archived here), so I was hoping that if you had any time you'd mind commenting at the FAC nomination page (Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Dave Gallaher/archive1). You're feedback is always appreciated so I'd be very grateful. Thanks. -- Shudde talk 08:42, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library needs you!
[[
File:Wikipedia Library owl.svg|110px|right|link=WP:The Wikipedia Library]]
We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!
With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:
- Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
- Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
- Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
- Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
- Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
- Research coordinators: run reference services
Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of The Hockey Sweater
The article The Hockey Sweater you nominated as a good article has passed [[
Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]]
- see Talk:The Hockey Sweater for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Harrias -- Harrias (talk) 17
- 41, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
Montreal Expos
Though my ego laments that my extensive contributions to this article have now been scattered to the winds, I appreciate your rewriting the article, something that I was unlikely to do, given my tendency towards trying to keep other contributors happy by building on their work as much as possible. I've only given it a quick look so far; I'll probably do some copy editing in the days to come. Thanks for your work! isaacl (talk) 05:47, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
- Oh, I was totally counting on your copyediting. ;) And don't let your ego worry too much. The previous version was my template. It's all re-written, but still built on that. Cheers! Resolute 13:00, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
I think the current article may be a little overdependent on a couple of sources. I haven't read Gallagher's latest book, but the previous Remember the Montreal Expos was very fannish, though filled with lots of interesting tidbits. And although I have the utmost respect for Keri, he is a huge fan too, and so I think some care is needed when including any personal analysis. Unfortunately I haven't read the two definitive volumes on the Expos published in French (not sure if English translations have been released yet). On a separate note, I think a little more info on the players and events of the day may be good: I will be trying to work in some mentions of Tim Wallach and Vladimir Guerrero, for example. isaacl (talk) 15:30, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keri's book is pretty much the definitive English language history of the Expos though, which is why I used it as much as I did. Gallagher and Young definitely came across as fannish at points, so I tended to avoid that book for any statement not simply regurgitating a fact. They were the best I could do though, as my local library is thin as hell on the Expos. And let me tell you how annoying it is to source e-books. And yes, please do add more on some of the players. My first pass was more to organize the overall franchise history. Thanks, Resolute 15:57, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- There may be some other books in French I'm forgetting; the one other notable English book I'm aware of is The Expos Inside Out, by Dan Turner, which covered the 1982 season and the history before that. Brodie Snyder had a couple of in-season diaries covering 1979 and 1981, The year the Expos almost won the pennant! and The year the Expos finally won something! which are great reading for fans, though at a lower level of detail than is needed for sourcing the Wikipedia team article. isaacl (talk) 17:14, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Don't think I have access to those, unfortunately. Resolute 17:25, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- There may be some other books in French I'm forgetting; the one other notable English book I'm aware of is The Expos Inside Out, by Dan Turner, which covered the 1982 season and the history before that. Brodie Snyder had a couple of in-season diaries covering 1979 and 1981, The year the Expos almost won the pennant! and The year the Expos finally won something! which are great reading for fans, though at a lower level of detail than is needed for sourcing the Wikipedia team article. isaacl (talk) 17:14, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Request for comment
An editor has asked for a discussion on the deprecation of Template:English variant notice. Since you've had some involvement with the English variant notice template, you might want to participate in the discussion if you have not already done so.—Godsy(TALKCONT) 07:09, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
Sorry
Pardon our smoke. Sca (talk) 14:28, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
- Ahaha, thanks! We're used to getting smoke from fires up north, but this is rather ridiculous! Hopefully you guys can get these fires under control soon! Resolute 14:45, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
- Alas, fires are pretty common this time of year due to sparse rainfall in eastern WA & OR and most of ID. Lots of dry 'fuel' in the forests. (Not nearly as common where I grew up in Minn. – whence we used to trek up to N. Ont. for great fishing.) My son works for the Forest Service, & he says some of those fires could keep on burning for weeks. Sorry!
- Hope we get a real winter this year. Sca (talk) 15:00, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
- Don't bet on it. El Nino says dry, warmer winter is likely. Resolute 15:25, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
- Sigh. Well, in case you're not familiar with the U.S. term real winter, here's what it means. Sca (talk) 15:50, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
- Oh, we like to call that "spring" up here. ;) Canadian winter. Or hell, Canadian SUMMER, for that matter. Resolute 16:14, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
- Impressive, but you're not really so far north. If we'd won the Oregon boundary dispute you wudda been in Montana ... I think.
- I used to know someone who had lived in Edmonton for several years. Now that sounded cold!
- Where I grew up, real winter generally blew in from the Prairie Provinces, across N.D. (where my mom was from) and down to us. Here's a pic from Mom's hometown. Sca (talk) 21:26, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
- Oh, we like to call that "spring" up here. ;) Canadian winter. Or hell, Canadian SUMMER, for that matter. Resolute 16:14, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
- Sigh. Well, in case you're not familiar with the U.S. term real winter, here's what it means. Sca (talk) 15:50, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
- Don't bet on it. El Nino says dry, warmer winter is likely. Resolute 15:25, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
And more smoke. Sca (talk) 14:07, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Notable condo buildings?
Hi Resolute,
In regards to your vote Can you help me out by telling me which condo building in Canada is notable enough to have its own article here. Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk)
- @Ottawahitech:; Honestly, I can't think of any off the top of my head. Condos, like most buildings, simply exist. The closest example I can think of, in Calgary, was the Erlton Condo fire in 2002 that sparked (heh) a 2009 lawsuit. However, even though it was one of the biggest fires in Calagry's history, I still wouldn't write a Wikipedia article on it. It was still just local news. And even if it did merit an article, the article would be about the fire rather than the dwellings. Resolute 12:27, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for being honest (and for pinging me). I hope you are not saying that things that "simply exist" such as buildings and structures are by their nature not notable? Surely there can be some condo buildings in Canada (millions of Canadians live ine one) which are notable, no? Ottawahitech (talk) 12:09, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- IMO, yes, most things simply exist and therefore are not notable. Could there be a notable condo building? Perhaps - there is always exceptions - but the only "default" criteria I can think of would relate to Wikipedia's fetish for articles on the largest high rises in major cities. Generally though, if you think such a facility is notable, you are going to have to do some work into writing an article about it. The Las Brisas article, for instance, is just two sentences. One that says what it is, and the other being trivia. If you want to improve the odds of any such article being kept, flesh them out more than that, and keep in mind that you will generally want more than just local news coverage, if possible. Resolute 12:40, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for being honest (and for pinging me). I hope you are not saying that things that "simply exist" such as buildings and structures are by their nature not notable? Surely there can be some condo buildings in Canada (millions of Canadians live ine one) which are notable, no? Ottawahitech (talk) 12:09, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
-
-
-
- You are obviously in the minority believing that things such as building “which only exist” are not notable. There are thousands of such articles at Wikipedia. But talking of fetishes for articles on the largest high rises in major cities, this is exactly my point in when I say Las Brisas condominium should not be deleted— it is a moderately small building with only some 200 hundred odd owners, but the story about how owners discovered they each owed up to $66,000 for repairs is compelling, and the ramifications are not limited to the individual owners, to Ottawa, or to Canada. It could have happened anywhere to any of the tens of millions of people who own a condominium. It is obviously a story that development companies do not want to get very wide circulation, but I thought Wikipedia was above this? Ottawahitech (talk) 02:02, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
- There are thousands of articles on buildings. Out of millions of buildings in the world. Only a small percentage is notable. As to the rest, Wikipedia does not exist to right great wrongs. Resolute 02:53, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
- You are obviously in the minority believing that things such as building “which only exist” are not notable. There are thousands of such articles at Wikipedia. But talking of fetishes for articles on the largest high rises in major cities, this is exactly my point in when I say Las Brisas condominium should not be deleted— it is a moderately small building with only some 200 hundred odd owners, but the story about how owners discovered they each owed up to $66,000 for repairs is compelling, and the ramifications are not limited to the individual owners, to Ottawa, or to Canada. It could have happened anywhere to any of the tens of millions of people who own a condominium. It is obviously a story that development companies do not want to get very wide circulation, but I thought Wikipedia was above this? Ottawahitech (talk) 02:02, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- As far as your comments on the ANI thread from yesterday go, I wouldn't worry about it too much. In that case, the issue isn't so much that the user has had a lot of pages deleted, but why. They have routinely ignored everything from good advice to well formed consensuses and have deliberately created articles on non-notable subjects against that advice and consensus to try and game new article creation records. They have also demonstrated a five-year unwillingness to modify their attitude without the use of community sanctions. What finally prompted my report was an increasingly cavalier attitude about plagiarism. Too many problems in too many areas there. Resolute 12:43, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
-
MOS:IDENTITY is being revisited: How should Wikipedia refer to transgender individuals before and after their transition?
You are being contacted because you contributed to a recent discussion of MOS:IDENTITY that closed with the recommendation that Wikipedia's policy on transgender individuals be revisited.
Two threads have been opened at the Village Pump:Policy. The first addresses how the Manual of Style should instruct editors to refer to transgender people in articles about themselves (which name, which pronoun, etc.). The second addresses how to instruct editors to refer to transgender people when they are mentioned in passing in other articles. Your participation is welcome. Darkfrog24 (talk) 02:04, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Home city location for the New York Islanders
I was curious as to how to reach consensus with other editors regarding the home city location for the New York Islanders (as per Talk:National Hockey League#Home city for the Islanders)? The Islanders' Contact Us page lists the address for the Barclays Center as: 620 Atlantic Ave., Brooklyn, NY 11217 (the page is seen here). IMO, I believe that Wikipedia should list the home city location for all sports teams based on that team's home arena address. How do you propose I reach consensus with other editors? Charlesaaronthompson (talk) 19:42, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
- Several people already watch the article, so some should chime in naturally. If you like, post a message to WT:HOCKEY to invite more discussion. Resolute 19:44, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
Oops!
Sorry for the mistake with Jim vs Gary Roberts. Glad you corrected so quickly. I feel like an idiot since I do remember Jim Roberts from his playing days! Thanks!
MOS discussion
FYI, I would like to completely disassociate myself from the other editor's meltdown regarding ISO footnote dates, and I really don't want anyone to think that I somehow support that kind of behavior. I value your good opinion too much not to seek agreement when we can, and to disagree agreeably when we can't. Cheers. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 21:22, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
- @Dirtlawyer1: Yeah, Walter's attitude is... strange. I get your argument though. Using anything but ISO dates for citations drives me batty, but when an article already has a style for its citations, it is incumbent on myself to conform to what is already there. It seems a lot of these issues are created using semi-automated tools, which indicates that we should perhaps be asking whomever operates them for ways to improve the tool itself - since both Walter (on one side) and the people you refer to on the other are consistent in one thing - their refusal to check the article for a pre-existing preferred format before converting. Resolute 23:38, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
Vested contributors arbitration case opened
You may opt-out of future notifications related to this case at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Vested contributors/Notification list. You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Vested contributors. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Vested contributors/Evidence. Please add your evidence by November 5, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Vested contributors/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 01:19, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
Vested contributors retitled Arbitration enforcement 2
You may opt-out of future notifications related to this case at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement 2/Notification list. You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement 2. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement 2/Evidence. Please add your evidence by November 5, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. For this case, there will be no Workshop phase. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Liz Read! Talk! 13:17, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
Patients
All I ask, is grant me patients, Resolute. BTW, Have you heard anything in the news lately, about the Queen of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, or the Queen of Saint Kitts and Nevis? Just wondering. GoodDay (talk) 05:00, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
PS: How should I handle this & this? They seem to favour sources for one office, over the other. GoodDay (talk) 09:35, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
- I think Miesianacal is correct there. In general, we should say what we mean, so "Governor General" is far more useful in context than "representative of the Canadian monarch". He is also right that, in general, we don't need to cite statements in the lead when they exist and are cited in the body. Resolute 14:24, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
When you told me to "pick my spots...", I should've listened. It's so bleeping frustrating, sometimes :( GoodDay (talk) 06:09, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
- All battles are frustrating. That's why it helps to only choose the ones that are worth fighting. Resolute 22:14, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
The republican accusation by an editor there, was a stinker. Not to mention 2 editors conversing in the french language, evern after I made it clear I only understood english. But you're quite correct, my recent post would likely be brought up against me in RFA. GoodDay (talk) 00:49, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
Reference errors on 16 December
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
- On the 2015–16 Calgary Flames season page, your edit caused a URL error (help). ( | )
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can . Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:25, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 16 December 2015
- In the media: Wales in China; #Edit2015
- Arbitration report: GMO case decided
- WikiProject report: Women in Red—using teamwork and partnerships to elevate online and offline collaborations
- Traffic report: A feast of Spam
- Featured content: An unusually slow week
- Read this Signpost in full
- Single-page
- Unsubscribe
- MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:56, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
WikiCup 2016 is just around the corner...
Hello everyone, and we would like to wish you all a happy holiday season. As you will probably already know, the 2016 WikiCup begins in the new year; there is still time to sign up. There are some changes we'd like to announce before the competition begins.
After two years of serving as WikiCup judge, User:Miyagawa has stepped down as judge. He deserves great thanks and recognition for his dedication and hard work, and for providing necessary transition for a new group of judges in last year's Cup. Joining Christine (User:Figureskatingfan) and Jason (User:Sturmvogel 66) is Andrew (User:Godot13), a very successful WikiCup competitor and expert in Featured Pictures; he won the two previous competitions. This is a strong judging team, and we anticipate lots of enjoyment and good work coming from our 2016 competitors.
We would also like to announce one change in how this year's WikiCup will be run. In the spirit of sportsmanship, Godot13 and Cwmhiraeth have chosen to limit their participation. See here for the announcement and a complete explanation of why. They and the judges feel that it will make for a more exciting, enjoyable, and productive competition.
The discussions/polls concerning the next competition's rules will be closed soon, and rules changes will be made clear on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring and talk pages. The judges are committed to not repeating the confusion that occurred last year and to ensuring that the new rules are both fair and in the best interests of the competition, which is, first and foremost, about improving Wikipedia.
If you have any questions or concerns, the judges can be reached on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, on their talk pages, or by email. We hope you will all join us in trying to make the 2015 WikiCup the most productive and enjoyable yet. You are receiving this message because you are listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Figureskatingfan (talk), and Godot13 (talk).--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:47, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
Arbitration enforcement 2 case closed
You are receiving this message because you are a party or offered a preliminary statement and/or evidence in the Arbitration enforcement 2 case. This is a one-time message.
The Arbitration enforcement 2 arbitration case (t) (ev / t) (w / t) (pd / t) has been closed, and the following remedies have been enacted:
1.1) The Arbitration Committee confirms the sanctions imposed on Eric Corbett as a result of the Interactions at GGTF case, but mandates that all enforcement requests relating to them be filed at arbitration enforcement and be kept open for at least 24 hours.
3) For his breaches of the standards of conduct expected of editors and administrators, Black Kite is admonished.
6) The community is reminded that discretionary sanctions have been authorised for any page relating to or any edit about: (i) the Gender Gap Task Force; (ii) the gender disparity among Wikipedians; and (iii) any process or discussion relating to these topics, all broadly construed.
For the Arbitration Committee, Kharkiv07 (T) 02:41, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
- Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Arbitration enforcement 2 case closed
Wishing you all the best . . .
Merry Christmas, Resolute, and may your holidays be merry and bright . . . . Cheers. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 04:17, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 30 December 2015
- News and notes: WMF Board dismisses community-elected trustee
- Year in review: The top ten Wikipedia stories of 2015
- Arbitration report: Second Arbitration Enforcement case concludes as another case is suspended
- In the media: Wikipedia plagued by a "Basket of Deception"
- Traffic report: The Force we expected
- Featured content: The post-Christmas edition
- Gallery: It's that time of year again
- Read this Signpost in full
- Single-page
- Unsubscribe
- MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:35, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 06 January 2016
- News and notes: The WMF's age of discontent
- In the media: Impenetrable science; Jimmy Wales back in the UAE
- Arbitration report: Catflap08 and Hijiri88 case been decided
- Featured content: Featured menagerie
- WikiProject report: Try-ing to become informed - WikiProject Rugby League
- Technology report: Tech news in brief
- Read this Signpost in full
- Single-page
- Unsubscribe
- MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:46, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
WikiCup 2016: Game On!
We are about to enter the second week of the 2016 WikiCup. The most recent player to sign up brings the current total to 101 contestants. Signups close on 5 February. If you’re interested, you can join this year's WikiCup here.
We are aware that in some areas the scoring bot’s numbers are a little bit off (i.e., overly generous) and are working to have that corrected as soon as possible.--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:03, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
WikiCup 2016: Game On!
We are about to enter the second week of the 2016 WikiCup. The most recent player to sign up brings the current total to 101 contestants. Signups close on 5 February. If you’re interested, you can join this year's WikiCup here.
We are aware that in some areas the scoring bot’s numbers are a little bit off (i.e., overly generous) and are working to have that corrected as soon as possible.--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:07, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
Arbcase
Hey Resolute, just wanted to clarify a thing or two. The block was clearly involved, the issue was about him and he instigated the block, any other admin could have done that upon his request. I received no information at all to enable me to assess what was happening, i.e. if he had left me a message on my talk page telling me that it was a banned editor and named him, it would have helped. He simply warned me via bad faith edit summary, accusing me of being a proxy for a sockpuppet. I'm more than happy to have my behaviour looked into by Arbcom as you suggest, but I felt it was important that before it goes too far, you actually see the bigger picture. As regards In the end, and unsurprisingly, TRM was all harassment and no action in this regard, yes I didn't launch this Arbcom request, I simply don't have the time to focus so hard on the correct deployment of such a drama festival. As I'm already witnessing, the whole thing is transforming, and becoming about technicalities, and not about the over-riding issue. Anyway, all the best to you. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:27, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
The Signpost: 13 January 2016
- News and notes: Community objections to new Board trustee
- In focus: The Crisis at New Montgomery Street
- Editorial: We need a culture of verification
- Community view: Battle for the soul of the WMF
- Traffic report: Pattern recognition: Third annual Traffic Report
- Special report: Wikipedia community celebrates Public Domain Day 2016
- Featured content: This Week's Featured Content
- Arbitration report: Interview: outgoing and incumbent arbitrators 2016
- Technology report: Tech news in brief
- Read this Signpost in full
- Single-page
- Unsubscribe
- MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:16, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
RfC announce: Religion in infoboxes
There is an RfC at Template talk:Infobox#RfC: Religion in infoboxes concerning what What should be allowed in the religion entry in infoboxes. Please join the discussion and help us to arrive at a consensus on this issue. --Guy Macon (talk) 21:19, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
DYK suggestions
Hi Resolute,
I wrote two Calgary-related articles that were recently approved via WP:AFC - Stampede Wrestling 50th Anniversary Show and Stu Hart 50th Anniversary Show. Would Wikipedia:WikiProject Alberta be interested in nominating either of them to Wikipedia:Did you know? Both articles have some interesting facts. Ralph Klein, for example, appeared at both events to honor the Hart family. 72.74.200.46 (talk) 05:48, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
- The Stampede Wrestling 50th article is pretty thin, and may have been in mainspace too long to qualify. But the Stu Hart one is a rather solid article. I think I can work a DYK nomination for that one on your behalf. I'll see about that later this afternoon. Nicely done! Resolute 14:45, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
- Hmm. Looking more closely, I'm not sure I could get a DYK nom passed. Not because of your writing, but because I don't see how the Angelfire link and the "Coreys Wrestling Video Archives" link would qualify as reliable sources as Wikipedia defines them. Wrestlenewz looks more legit, but I don't have enough of a background on Wrestling to argue in its favour myself. Given the article is heavily dependent on these links, I don't think I could successfully complete a nomination to place it on the main page. Resolute 21:30, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
I was actually citing the original VHS release rather than the CoreysTapes.com website. I can remove the links in question if they're a problem. I mostly used Wikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestling's good and featured articles as a guide for finding references. Online World of Wrestling is used on Bobby Eaton (FA) and CM Punk (FA), TheHistoryofWWE.com is used on Survivor Series (1992) (GA) and Survivor Series (1994) (GA), and Wrestlenewz.com is used on Mark Henry (GA).
Would any of these meet WP:RS?
- Ralph Klein visit (source: Canadian Online Explorer (2015))
- It was held to celebrate Stu Hart’s 80th birthday (source: Canadian Online Explorer (2000) / Canadian Online Explorer (2003) / Canadian Online Explorer (2015) / Online World of Wrestling / Saskatoon Sun / Titan Sinking, p. 211)
- The show was co-promoted by the World Wrestling Federation (Canadian Online Explorer (2000) / Saskatoon Sun / Titan Sinking, p. 211)
- The show featured the first "WCW vs. WWF" match during the Monday Night Wars (source: Canadian Online Explorer (2003) / Canadian Online Explorer (2015) / Titan Sinking, p. 212)
- It was last time Bret Hart would defend the WWF World Heavyweight Championship in his hometown (source: Canadian Online Explorer (2015))
- This was Dan Kroffat's first in-ring appearance since his retirement in 1985 (Calgary Herald)
Thanks. 72.74.200.46 (talk) 01:26, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
- Hi, sorry for taking so long to reply. I usually disappear on weekends. But yes, all of those are RSes. CANOE is the old online archive for Sun Media papers. All of those are acceptable. Thanks! Resolute 14:29, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
The Signpost: 20 January 2016
- News and notes: Vote of no confidence; WMF trustee speaks out
- In the media: 15th anniversary news round-up
- Traffic report: Danse Macabre
- Featured content: This week's featured content
- Read this Signpost in full
- Single-page
- Unsubscribe
- MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:21, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
The Signpost: 27 January 2016
- Traffic report: Death and taxes
- News and notes: Geshuri steps down from the Board
- In the media: Media coverage of the Arnnon Geshuri no-confidence vote
- Recent research: Bursty edits; how politics beat religion but then lost to sports; notability as a glass ceiling
- Featured content: This week's featured content
- Read this Signpost in full
- Single-page
- Unsubscribe
- MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:24, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
The Signpost: 03 February 2016
- From the editors: Help wanted
- Special report: Board chair and new trustee speak with the Signpost
- Traffic report: Bowled
- Featured content: This week's featured content
- Arbitration report: Catching up on arbitration
- Read this Signpost in full
- Single-page
- Unsubscribe
- MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:29, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
WikiCup 2015 March newsletter
That's it, the first round is done, sign-ups are closed and we're into round 2. Forty-seven competitors move into this round (a bit shy of the expected 64), and we are roughly broken into eight groups of six. The top two of each group will go through to round 3, and then the top scoring 16 "wildcards" across all groups.
Twenty-two Good Articles were submitted, including three by Cyclonebiskit (submissions), and two each by MPJ-DK (submissions), Hurricanehink (submissions), 12george1 (submissions), and Cas Liber (submissions). Twenty-one Featured Pictures were claimed, including 17 by Adam Cuerden (submissions) (the Round 1 high scorer). Thirty-one contestants saw their DYKs appear on the main page, with a commanding lead (28) by Cwmhiraeth (submissions). Twenty-nine participants conducted GA reviews with J Milburn (submissions) completing nine.
If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Thanks to everyone for participating, and good luck to those moving into round 2. Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), and Godot13 (talk · contribs · email) --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:38, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
WikiCup 2016 March newsletter (update)
Along with getting the year wrong in the newsletter that went out earlier this week, we did not mention (as the bot did not report) that Cas Liber (submissions) claimed the first Featured Article Persoonia terminalis of the 2016 Wikicup. Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), and Godot13 (talk · contribs · email).--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:05, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Wales/Awaken the Dragon
Hi, can I interest you and page stalkers in participating in April? Up to £200 in Amazon vouchers and books up for grabs.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:13, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
Gamaliel and others arbitration case opened
You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel and others. The scope of this case is Gamaliel's recent actions (both administrative and otherwise), especially related to the Signpost April Fools Joke. The case will also examine the conduct of other editors who are directly involved in disputes with Gamaliel. The case is strictly intended to examine user conduct and alleged policy violations and will not examine broader topic areas. The clerks have been instructed to remove evidence which does not meet these requirements. The drafters will add additional parties as required during the case. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel and others/Evidence.
Please add your evidence by May 2, 2016, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel and others/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. This notification is being sent to those listed on the case notification list. If you do not wish to recieve further notifications, you are welcome to opt-out on that page. For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:39, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
WikiCup 2016 May newsletter
Round 2 is over and 35 competitors have moved on to Round 3.
Round 2 saw three FAs (two by Cas Liber (submissions) and one by Montanabw (submissions)), four Featured Lists (with three by Calvin999 (submissions)), and 53 Good Articles (six by Worm That Turned (submissions) and five each by Hurricanehink (submissions), Cwmhiraeth (submissions), and MPJ-DK (submissions)). Eleven Featured Pictures were promoted (six by Adam Cuerden (submissions) and five by Godot13 (submissions)). One Featured Portal, Featured Topic and Good Topic were also promoted. The DYK base point total was 1,135. Cwmhiraeth (submissions) scored 265 base points, while The C of E (submissions) and MPJ-DK (submissions) each scored 150 base points. Eleven ITN were promoted and 131 Good Article Reviews were conducted with MPJ-DK (submissions) completing a staggering 61 reviews. Two contestants, Cwmhiraeth (submissions) and Cas Liber (submissions), broke the 700 point mark for Round 2.
If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Thanks to everyone for participating, and good luck to those moving into round 2. Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), and Godot13 (talk · contribs · email) -- MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:59, 5 May 2016 (UTC)