Archives |
---|
|
Contents
- 1 A barnstar for you!
- 2 Woman climbing
- 3 Falcon's Fury
- 4 Videos as citation sources
- 5 Fanny Bullock Workman
- 6 Just a little thank-you note...
- 7 Wikicup points
- 8 WikiCup 2015 May newsletter
- 9 Hello from the team at Featured article review!
- 10 Another one
- 11 Sesame Street response
- 12 Wikipedia:Today's featured article/June 18, 2015
- 13 TFL notification
- 14 Season 46 of Sesame Street
- 15 Your Op-Ed
- 16 Maybe we need to add more
- 17 Re: Signpost
- 18 GA Cup
- 19 Greetings
- 20 GA Cup Reminder
- 21 Tyrone Garland FAN
- 22 Just an FYI
- 23 WikiCup 2015 September newsletter
- 24 Barnstar
- 25 Would this RfC ...
- 26 WikiCup 2015: The results
- 27 ArbCom elections are now open!
- 28 Season 46 of Sesame Street #2
- 29 Season's Greetings!
- 30 WikiCup 2016 is just around the corner...
- 31 Season's greetings!
- 32 Season's Greetings
- 33 Orphaned non-free image File:Caged bird2.jpg
- 34 Talk:Track and field/GA2 review for WikiCup needs to be addressed
- 35 Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 17, 2016
- 36 WikiCup 2016: Game On!
- 37 Sesame Street Muppet Performers-related
- 38 TFAR
- 39 Spirit Animal
- 40 Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Misty Copeland/archive1
- 41 Disambiguation link notification for February 26
- 42 Possibly interesting...
- 43 WikiCup 2015 March newsletter
- 44 WikiCup 2016 March newsletter (update)
- 45 Maya Angelou
- 46 Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
- 47 Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Emily Ratajkowski/archive3
- 48 Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
- 49 Guild of Copy Editors April 2016 Newsletter
- 50 Lawrence Lessing
- 51 "Women are everywhere"
- 52 GA Cup
- 53 DRN help needed and volunteer roll call
- 54 Books & Bytes - Issue 16
- 55 Disambiguation link notification for April 18
- 56 Editor of the Week : nominations needed!
- 57 Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Emily Ratajkowski/archive4
- 58 Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
- 59 Of note
- 60 WikiCup 2016 May newsletter
- 61 Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 20, 2016
A barnstar for you!
![]() |
The Brilliant Idea Barnstar |
You technically deserve 5,125,839 more barnstars but that would take way to long on my end! :P
If it wasn't for you the GA Cup would of never have happened and the backlog would probably be 600+ right now! Dom497 (talk) 00:58, 2 March 2015 (UTC) |
Woman climbing
I nominated "yours" for TFA: Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/Fanny Bullock Workman, in women's history month, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:34, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
- But @Gerda Arendt: it's not "mine"; it's User:Wadewitz's. Very nice thought, since she deserves that one of her articles is TFA during March. Thanks. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 00:06, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
- It may have been better to nominate earlier on, though, as Brian's already scheduled much of March. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:50, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
-
- I notified her, in memory, and there are several days open. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:10, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
Falcon's Fury
Hey,
Do you review FAC's? If so, would you mind reviewing Falcon's Fury for me please? If not, no worries! It's on its fourth nomination (the other three were closed because not enough people responded) so even if you know someone else who might be interested, it would help a lot! :) --Dom497 (talk) 19:28, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
- Hey to you! Yah, I review FACs and am happy to assist. I can't tell you how many times I've gone through the exact thing. I've resorted to building a posse of folks who I know that I can count on to review my FACs. That's not canvassing; it's just ensuring that articles are reviewed and no one wastes their time. I have some time tomorrow, so I'll go take a look then. I have an FLC currently, but they're better at reviewing lists over there and they're making me do some sorely needed stuff to improve it. BTW, I have next week off, and starting a discussion about the next GA Cup is on my to-do list! I also want to go through the feedback. Cheers, mate! ;) Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 03:12, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks so much! Regarding the GA Cup, I'm on vacation from the 14th to 22nd so I won't be able to be part of any discussions until after next week.--Dom497 (talk) 21:01, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
- Good to know. No worries, there's no hurry. I was thinking we'd start up again late summer (Aug?), so I'm good with postponing discussion. Have a great time, whatever you're doing! Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 21:28, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
- I'm ready to start when you are! :) --Dom497 (talk) 00:26, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
- @Dom497: now it's my turn to be busy! I'll try and look at the feedback tomorrow and contact you through email in the next couple of days. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 15:06, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
- I know I've been pretty inactive lately but I'm ready to get started (given that it might take a while with how many other things I have on my plate for the next 2 months).--Dom497 (talk) 02:22, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
- I've been pretty busy as well, but am looking at my time of summer unemployment, so I'll have more time to devote to our next round as well. I'm spending some time this afternoon, and plan on more tomorrow. I'm working on an email to send out to you guys by the end of tomorrow afternoon, so expect that from me. Thanks for the nudge. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 22:42, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
- I know I've been pretty inactive lately but I'm ready to get started (given that it might take a while with how many other things I have on my plate for the next 2 months).--Dom497 (talk) 02:22, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
- @Dom497: now it's my turn to be busy! I'll try and look at the feedback tomorrow and contact you through email in the next couple of days. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 15:06, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
- I'm ready to start when you are! :) --Dom497 (talk) 00:26, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
- Good to know. No worries, there's no hurry. I was thinking we'd start up again late summer (Aug?), so I'm good with postponing discussion. Have a great time, whatever you're doing! Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 21:28, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks so much! Regarding the GA Cup, I'm on vacation from the 14th to 22nd so I won't be able to be part of any discussions until after next week.--Dom497 (talk) 21:01, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
Videos as citation sources
I have a question regarding the use of videos as sources. In the performers section of 84th Academy Awards list, some users (including 'Atomic Meltdown) want to put the songs (or actually singing about the Best Picture nominees in tune with popular songs) that host Billy Crystal performed in his opening monologue. Atomic Meltdown uses this article from The Hollywood Reporter as a source. The article contains a video of Billy Crystal performing the songs, but the article itself does not say or indicate word for word in the text what he is actually singing (i.e. singing about Midnight in Paris to the tune of "The Last Time I Saw Paris"). I know what Crystal sang is true, but for the sake of Wikipedia standards, is this acceptable?
- --Birdienest81 (talk) 06:26, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
- @Birdienest81: I looked at the nature of the controversy, and I fall on your side. When you cite a source, it has to support the statements you make in the article. If the Hollywood Reporter article doesn't report on what Crystal sang (or did), you can't use it to support content about the song. It's my understanding that we can't use a YouTube clip as a source. You can, however, use the broadcast itself as a source. I suggest that you include the information as a note, and support it with the broadcast. I warn you, though, that it might not fly at FAC, but it won't hurt to try. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 03:31, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
Fanny Bullock Workman
Hello Figureskatingfan,
Very well done. I imagine that Wadewitz would be proud. If you have any interest in improving other articles about women mountaineers, let me know. I have worked on a few. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:04, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
- Ah thanks, you're so nice, but it wasn't just me. User:Adam Cuerden also helped. But I'm honored to have a small part in the promotion of Workman's article, and agree that Adrienne would have been pleased. Please let me know how I can assist with your women mountaineer articles. I want to help promote some of Adrienne's other articles, but things have been way busy this spring. I hope to get to it this summer, so I'll ask for you help if and/or when I need it. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 02:16, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
- It was almost all you. Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:42, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
- What?!! Humility in Wikipedia?! I'm not sure I recognize what it looks like, having never seen it before! ;) Oh, you guys! Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 02:54, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
- It was almost all you. Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:42, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
- Thank you for "raising it up in her memory", precious again, see? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:56, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
- When you have time, take a look at Miriam O'Brien Underhill and Arlene Blum. The second one has some issues with promotionalism. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:46, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
Just a little thank-you note...
![]() |
The Barnstar of Good Humor | |
For your recent kindness, and more generally your unfailing ability to combine good sense with good fun... a rare and deeply appreciated trait, not only on Wiki but the Internet at large. Shoebox2 talk 03:49, 11 April 2015 (UTC) |
@Shoebox2: what a good egg you are. I appreciate the kind words. I'm glad that my sillynes has inspired you to contribute to our project more. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 04:48, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Wikicup points
Forgot to record my wikicup submission of Bazy Tankersley for FAC until today; it passed about a week ago. Montanabw(talk) 01:37, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- @Montanabw: the bot hasn't come by yet; I'm sure that it will soon, unless it's programmed to stop after the end of this round. If so, I'll add it by hand, since I checked and you indeed worked on the FA during the round. Make sure that you're more expeditious the next round, please. ;) Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 03:22, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
-
-
- Just checked, and ya made it, pal! Whoot! ;) Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 21:39, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
-
WikiCup 2015 May newsletter
![](https://web.archive.org/web/20160511092809im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/55/C2014_Q2.jpg/220px-C2014_Q2.jpg)
![India](https://web.archive.org/web/20160511092809im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/4/41/Flag_of_India.svg/23px-Flag_of_India.svg.png)
The second round one has all wrapped up, and round three has now begun! Congratulations to the 34 contestants who have made it through, but well done and thank you to all contestants who took part in our second round. Leading the way overall was Cas Liber (submissions) in Group B with a total of 777 points for a variety of contributions including Good Articles on Corona Borealis and Microscopium - both of which received the maximum bonus.
Special credit must be given to a number of high importance articles improved during the second round.
Coemgenus (submissions) was one of several users who worked on improving Ulysses S. Grant. Remember, you do not need to work on an article on your own - as long as each person has completed significant work on the article during 2015, multiple competitors can claim the same article.
Cwmhiraeth (submissions) took Dragonfly to Good Article for a 3x bonus - and if that wasn't enough, they also took Damselfly there as well for a 2x bonus.
LeftAire (submissions) worked up Alexander Hamilton to Good Article for the maximum bonus. Hamilton was one of the founding fathers of the United States and is a level 4 vital article.
The points varied across groups, with the lowest score required to gain automatic qualification was 68 in Group A - meanwhile the second place score in Group H was 404, which would have been high enough to win all but one of the other Groups! As well as the top two of each group automatically going through to the third round, a minimum score of 55 was required for a wildcard competitor to go through. We had a three-way tie at 55 points and all three have qualified for the next round, in the spirit of fairness. The third round ends on June 28, with the top two in each group progressing automatically while the remaining 16 highest scorers across all four groups go through as wildcards. Good luck to all competitors for the third round! Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), Miyagawa (talk · contribs · email) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) 16:32, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello from the team at Featured article review!
We are preparing to take a closer look at Featured articles promoted in 2004–2010 that may need a review. We started with a script-compiled list of older FAs that have not had a recent formal review. The next step is to prune the list by removing articles that are still actively maintained, up-to-date, and believed to meet current standards. We know that many of you personally maintain articles that you nominated, so we'd appreciate your help in winnowing the list where appropriate.
Please take a look at the sandbox list, check over the FAs listed by your name, and indicate on the sandbox talk page your assessment of their current status. Likewise, if you have taken on the maintenance of any listed FAs that were originally nominated by a departed editor, please indicate their status. BLPs should be given especially careful consideration.
Thanks for your help! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:55, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Please respond at Wikipedia talk:Unreviewed featured articles/sandbox#Pinging next round; thanks! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:55, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Another one
Hi again, Another GA question and this one I sincerely think is in a real gray area so if you want me to post at the wikicup scoring talk page, I can, but figured hitting you up directly would be quicker. Talk:Jackalope/GA1 just passed. I did work on it prior to this year, babysat it from (tons of) vandals over the year and helped some with the GA push, but I think Finetooth did a lot more of the heavy lifting. see history. I am not sure if I can claim wikicup points for my efforts (18 edits since January 1 to the article plus participation in the GAN). It's important to me that I not "game the system" so thought I'd ask. (If you say no, I can live with that, my wikicup goal this year is to make it to round four, one more round than last year, LOL!). Montanabw(talk) 22:24, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
- Just jumping in here as you haven't had a response - I've taken a look and I don't think that it's even close to qualifying. Typically to gain the points you'd expect to see a large chunk of expansion to an article but in this case I've taken a look at your edits in 2015 and they appear to be either rearrangements or copyedits/tweaks. Sorry! Miyagawa (talk) 18:44, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
- Yah, sorry I spaced the question. My answer was gonna be, "I dunno, I'll go ask Miyagawa." His answer sounds reasonable to me, and how I suspected it'd go. I'm such a girl, I was afraid of disappointing you, Montanabw, so I avoided answering. ;) Actually, no I really spaced finding out the answer, so I appreciate M stepping in and answering it for me. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 18:50, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Sesame Street response
This time for the Sesame Street part, all I did was sort the roles of the Two-Headed Monster by who did each head, mentioned about Alan being Japanese with his actor Alan Muraoka's Facebook account mentioning about Jennifer Barnhart performing Zoe by next season as well as an Instagram photo of her performing Zoe, correcting the link to Goldilocks and the Three Bears following a redirect from The Story of the Three Bears, and mentioning how Abby Cadabby has pink fur. Was there anything else that I left out? --Rtkat3 (talk) 21:43, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
- @Rtkat3: you're missing my point, something I've tried to convey to you over and over again. The redirect is fine, which is why it remains. Your other additions, however, don't have reliable sources. Instagram and Twitter are not reliable and don't belong as sources in an encyclopedia, and I will continue to revert them unless you find reliable sources. Yes Abby has pink fur (which you misspelled, btw), but that information is not contained in the source used. Every assertion in this list (and every Wikipedia article, actually) needs to be supported by a reliable source. This is especially true for this list because it's so prone to editors (hmm, like you) adding bits of trivia and info they remember from watching The Show as children. This list is also a FL, and additions like the ones you tend to make will cause it to be delisted. So I ask you again, although I suspect you'll continue to not listen, to please refrain from making them. If your changes aren't supported by reliable sources, I will continue to revert you. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 22:43, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Today's featured article/June 18, 2015
Hi Christine. A summary of a Featured Article you nominated at WP:FAC will appear on the Main Page soon. I had to squeeze the summary down to around 1200 characters; was there anything I left out you'd like to see put back in? Also ... I wasn't sure if there were more than 9 Emmy nominations from the text, can you check on that? - Dank (push to talk) 19:39, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
- It would be nice to have an image run with the TFA column ... File:Steve Burns of Blue's Clues.jpg is one possibility, though he's quite a bit older there. Is there an image you prefer? - Dank (push to talk) 21:05, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
- @Dank: Wow, how cool is that; Blue's Clues as TFA. Thanks! The summary looks fine. The Emmy awards count is as correct as it could be, since the source cited is the only one I could find that supports any number. The picture is also okay, but just. One of the challenges with this article (as it seems to be for most children's TV programs) is finding good and free images. Burns' picture isn't great and it shows him at a later time than when he was on BC, but it's the only one that's at least somewhat usable. The other option is to use the logo in the userbox, if that's possible. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 23:24, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
- Dank - I considered the Burns image, but a) it's too small to be cropped properly and b) it strikes me as too dark to show up well on the MP. Sadly, Christine, we can't use the logo, as non-free images aren't allowed on the MP. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:26, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
-
- In that case, the best choice, alas, is no image. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 23:30, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
- Good to know, Chris ... small as in not enough pixels? Christine, yeah, I'm happy to see Blue's Clues at TFA too. Judging from IMDB (which we can't use), the Emmy count isn't very helpful, so I'm going to pull it (from TFA, not from the article). If you find a source that covers through 2005, I can put it back in. - Dank (push to talk) 00:27, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
- Right. It's 148px wide, so to have a 100px wide image, we'd still have some extra black space. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:44, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
-
- How about File:Steve Burns.jpg? Neelix (talk) 13:28, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
- Wow, I didn't even know about it. @Dank: what do you think? Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 22:11, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
- Chris? - Dank (push to talk) 22:56, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
- Good to know, Chris ... small as in not enough pixels? Christine, yeah, I'm happy to see Blue's Clues at TFA too. Judging from IMDB (which we can't use), the Emmy count isn't very helpful, so I'm going to pull it (from TFA, not from the article). If you find a source that covers through 2005, I can put it back in. - Dank (push to talk) 00:27, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
- In that case, the best choice, alas, is no image. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 23:30, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
- @Dank: Wow, how cool is that; Blue's Clues as TFA. Thanks! The summary looks fine. The Emmy awards count is as correct as it could be, since the source cited is the only one I could find that supports any number. The picture is also okay, but just. One of the challenges with this article (as it seems to be for most children's TV programs) is finding good and free images. Burns' picture isn't great and it shows him at a later time than when he was on BC, but it's the only one that's at least somewhat usable. The other option is to use the logo in the userbox, if that's possible. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 23:24, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for giving us the clues to your "son's favorite thing in the universe"! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:40, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
- You're welcome, Gerda, and thank you! In some ways, George has inspired all that I do on Wikipedia. I always say, "You wanna change the world? Edit for WP!" That kid, despite his significant limitations, has done so. Such an inspiration, that kid! Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 21:27, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
TFL notification
Hi, Christine. I'm just posting to let you know that List of Sesame Street Muppets – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list for June 29. The TFL blurb can be seen here. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008 (Talk) 21:20, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
Season 46 of Sesame Street
Figureskatingfan, I was wondering if you are looking forward to Season 46 of Sesame Street. Upon the photos that Sesame Street's Facebook page unleashed, the set has been redesigned where Big Bird's nest is nestled near a tree, Elmo's apartment has been transferred to 123 Sesame Street, Cookie Monster is now living in an apartment above the redesigned Hooper's Store, and there is a community center. Now that would be a big update for the page about this show's location once Season 46 debuts. --Rtkat3 (talk) 01:34, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
- @Rtkat3: that's very cool, but could you provide some sources? Because remember that we can't add anything to any article without a reliable source. Also remember that press releases aren't enough. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 00:27, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
Your Op-Ed
I am sorry that your op-ed did not run this week. It is 100% my fault, and again, I apologize for the delay. It is cued up and will definitely run this coming week. Thank you again for the submission. Go Phightins! 19:01, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
Maybe we need to add more
@Figureskatingfan: So after reading the discussion that was brought up on the GA talk page, I'm thinking that we may/should add some info about how the verification process will work (since almost everyone associates competition with cheating). Adding this info would be more just to earn the trust of potential participants and prove the legitimacy of the competition.--Dom497 (talk) 02:42, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
- @Dom497: Yah, I think that would be okay to add to the rules or to the general info page. I guess I didn't realize that it was needed, since I'd think that it'd be self-evident that judges check all entries. The WikiCup doesn't even bother with it. But it won't hurt, so go ahead. BTW, did you mean to ask this here? If not, I'll move it over to my talk page. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 03:41, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
- @Figureskatingfan: I meant it to be here but I guess it would have been more easy to put it on your talk page. I'll add some stuff tomorrow and ping you to take a look at it. :) --Dom497 (talk) 00:17, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
- @Dom497: I went ahead and moved this here, if only because I wouldn't have seen your response if you hadn't pinged me. I pinged you because I'm not sure if you have my talk page watchlisted like I have yours. Looking forward to seeing what you come up with. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 03:29, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
- I just realized that it is already mentioned that all reviewers are looked over! (epic fail)--Dom497 (talk) 15:00, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
- Ha ha, that's what we both get for trusting in your conscientiousness. You'll do well in university; you even make sure you do what you've already done! ;) Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:46, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
- I just realized that it is already mentioned that all reviewers are looked over! (epic fail)--Dom497 (talk) 15:00, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
- @Dom497: I went ahead and moved this here, if only because I wouldn't have seen your response if you hadn't pinged me. I pinged you because I'm not sure if you have my talk page watchlisted like I have yours. Looking forward to seeing what you come up with. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 03:29, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
- @Figureskatingfan: I meant it to be here but I guess it would have been more easy to put it on your talk page. I'll add some stuff tomorrow and ping you to take a look at it. :) --Dom497 (talk) 00:17, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
Re: Signpost
Great writeup in The Signpost this week! Thank you for all that you do. ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:05, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
- Ah, you're welcome, AB! Right back at ya! Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 02:53, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
You can at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
GA Cup
Wrote up a quick draft for a newsletter to go out a few days before the competition starts. It's pretty much the same as the one we sent out last year.--Dom497 (talk) 00:16, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
- Duh, I forgot that we need to do that. Thanks for thinking of it, and for writing something. It looks good; I have no criticisms. Perhaps you could publish it by tomorrow morning? Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 15:51, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
Greetings
![Mail-message-new.svg](https://web.archive.org/web/20160511092809im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/49/Mail-message-new.svg/40px-Mail-message-new.svg.png)
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.
Vanamonde93 (talk) 04:32, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
GA Cup Reminder
Remember to provide your user signature when you review a submission. :) --Dom497 (talk) 16:16, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
- Just one more thing. What are we doing in the case of this. Obviously under 1000 characters but does mention things that need to be fixed.--Dom497 (talk) 23:44, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
-
- I'm of two minds about this. The rules state that no review under 1000 characters will be allowed; however, they also state that exceptions should be made at the discretion of the judge. I'm thinking that perhaps we should be strict about the 1000 characters, especially in the early rounds. OTOH, I think that it's clear that the reviewer submitted the entry on good faith. The other review he's submitted thus far is way over the character limit, and the review in question seems to be complete in that the article fulfills the GA criteria. Of course, what complicates things is that Jonas was the article's nominator, and if we allow it, he can accuse us with favoritism. However, it proves our point that there's a difference between short and complete reviews and Jonas' attempts to game the system. I may need to sleep on this, but what's your opinion? Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 03:04, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Tyrone Garland FAN
Hello. I have nominated the Tyrone Garland article for featured article review. It may not be long enough, but I am ready to make whatever changes you say are necessary. If you are interested in reviewing it, please initiate the review. TempleM (talk) 15:46, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
Just an FYI
Hi, FSF! Just an FYI. Given your work on Sesame Street-related articles, I thought I would bring Word Party to your attention. Also, I redirect Henson Digital Puppetry Studio to The Jim Henson Company, but I am not sure whether or not the studio is notable enough for its own article. ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:31, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
- Very cool, will definitely check it out with the kiddos. I think that re-direct was a good idea. What I'm really excited about, though, is the new Muppet series. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 16:36, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
WikiCup 2015 September newsletter
The finals for the 2015 Wikicup has now begun! Congrats to the 8 contestants who have survived to the finals, and well done and thanks to everyone who took part in rounds 3 and 4.
In round 3, we had a three-way tie for qualification among the wildcard contestants, so we had 34 competitors. The leader was by far Casliber (submissions) in Group B, who earned 1496 points. Although 913 of these points were bonus points, he submitted 15 articles in the DYK category. Second place overall was
Coemgenus (submissions) at 864 points, who although submitted just 2 FAs for 400 points, earned double that amount for those articles in bonus points. Everyone who moved forward to Round 4 earned at least 100 points.
The scores required to move onto the semifinals were impressive; the lowest scorer to move onto the finals was 407, making this year's Wikicup as competitive as it's always been. Our finalists, ordered by round 4 score, are:
Cas Liber (submissions), who is competing in his sixth consecutive Wikicup final, again finished the round in first place, with an impressive 1666 points in Pool B. Casliber writes about the natural sciences, including ornithology, botany and astronomy. A large bulk of his points this round were bonus points.
Godot13 (submissions) (FP bonus points), second place both in Pool B and overall, earned the bulk of his points with FPs, mostly depicting currency.
Cwmhiraeth (submissions), first in Pool A, came in third. His specialty is natural science articles; in Round 4, he mostly submitted articles about insects and botany. Five out of the six of the GAs he submitted were level-4 vital articles.
Harrias (submissions), second in Pool A, took fourth overall. He tends to focus on articles about cricket and military history, specifically the 1640s First English Civil War.
West Virginian (submissions), from Pool A, was our highest-scoring wildcard. West Virginia tends to focus on articles about the history of (what for it!) the U.S. state of West Virginia.
Rodw (submissions), from Pool A, likes to work on articles about British geography and places. Most of his points this round were earned from two impressive accomplishments: a GT about Scheduled monuments in Somerset and a FT about English Heritage properties in Somerset.
Rationalobserver (submissions), from Pool B, came in seventh overall. RO earned the majority of her points from GARs and PRs, many of which were earned in the final hours of the round.
Calvin999 (submissions), also from Pool B, who was competing with RO for the final two spots in the final hours, takes the race for most GARs and PRs—48.
The intense competition between RO and Calvin999 will continue into the finals. They're both eligible for the Newcomers Trophy, given for the first time in the Wikicup; whoever makes the most points will win it.
Good luck to the finalists; the judges are sure that the competition will be fierce!
Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs), Miyagawa (talk · contribs) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs) 11:48, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
Barnstar
|
All-Around Amazing Barnstar | |
For all you've done over the years. :) Sorry I had to ditch the GA Cup half way through. --Dom497 (talk) 00:59, 2 November 2015 (UTC) |
Ah, thanks pal. You're the best. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:17, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
Would this RfC ...
... be up your alley? —ATinySliver/ATalkPage 🖖 20:49, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
WikiCup 2015: The results
WikiCup 2015 is now in the books! Congrats to our finalists and winners, and to everyone who took part in this year's competition.
This year's results were an exact replica of last year's competition. For the second year in a row, the 2015 WikiCup champion is Godot13 (submissions) (FP bonus points). All of his points were earned for an impressive 253 featured pictures and their associated bonus points (5060 and 1695, respectively). His entries constituted scans of currency from all over the world and scans of medallions awarded to participants of the U.S. Space program.
Cwmhiraeth (submissions) came in second place; she earned by far the most bonus points (4082), for 4 featured articles, 15 good articles, and 147 DYKs, mostly about in her field of expertise, natural science.
Cas Liber (submissions), a finalist every year since 2010, came in third, with 2379 points.
Our newcomer award, presented to the best-performing new competitor in the WikiCup, goes to Rationalobserver (submissions). Everyone should be very proud of the work they accomplished. We will announce our other award winners soon.
A full list of our award winners are:
Godot13 (submissions) (FP bonus points) wins the prize for first place and the FP prize for 330 featured pictures in the final round.
Cwmhiraeth (submissions) wins the prize for second place and the DYK prize for 160 did you knows in the final round (310 in all rounds).
Cas Liber (submissions) wins the prize for third place and the FA prize for 26 featured articles in all rounds.
West Virginian (submissions) wins the prize for fourth place
Calvin999 (submissions) wins a final 8 prize.
Rationalobserver (submissions) wins a final 8 prize.
Harrias (submissions) wins a final 8 prize and the FL prize for 11 featured lists.
Rodw (submissions) wins the most prizes: a final 8 prize, the GA prize for 41 good articles, and the topic prize for a 13-article good topic and an 8-article featured topic, both in round 3.
ThaddeusB (submissions) wins the news prize for the most news articles in round 3.
We warmly invite all of you to sign up for next year's competition. Discussions and polls concerning potential rules changes are also open, and all are welcome to participate. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2016 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.
Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · logs), Miyagawa (talk · contribs · logs) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · logs) 18:39, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Season 46 of Sesame Street #2
Christine, I was wondering if you heard the news that Season 46 of Sesame Street will air in January of 2016. --Rtkat3 (talk) 16:40, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- Not sure, but it's something that can be easily looked up, even with a reliable source. The article is currently up-to-date, with info about the move to HBO. Is there a problem? Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:16, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
Season's Greetings!
-
Use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message
@Northamerica1000: thanks so much! Merry Christmas to you, too. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 19:20, 21 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) 06:46, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
Season's greetings!
-
Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message
Season's Greetings
Wishing you a Charlie Russell Christmas! 🎄 |
|
Best wishes for your Christmas Is all you get from me 'Cause I ain't no Santa Claus Don't own no Christmas tree. But if wishes was health and money I'd fill your buck-skin poke Your doctor would go hungry An' you never would be broke." —C.M. Russell, Christmas greeting 1914. Montanabw(talk) |
User:Montanabw: Thanks, pal! Same to you and more of it! ;) Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 20:38, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Caged bird2.jpg
![⚠ ⚠](https://web.archive.org/web/20160511092809im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/34/Ambox_warning_blue.svg/35px-Ambox_warning_blue.svg.png)
Thanks for uploading File:Caged bird2.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:30, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
Talk:Track and field/GA2 review for WikiCup needs to be addressed
Figureskatingfan, it's always a bit of a crapshoot when inexperienced people review Good Article nominations, as you know from the GA Cup, and it's important to make sure that those who don't do an adequate job are informed of the issues. As it turns out, 333-blue passed this article with only minimal comments, and without reference to the specific GA criteria. I see that 333-blue has done one previous GA review, back in October, which was similarly brief and also without apparent reference to the criteria.
It seems a shame that the oldest unreviewed GA nomination should get caught up in this situation. Ideally, the review should be reversed; it certainly doesn't meet WikiCup guidelines, and doesn't meet GA review guidelines. In any event, it is clearly ineligible for WikiCup credit. I hope you and the other judges will be keeping a close eye on early WikiCup GA reviews to ensure proper quality. Thank you for your consideration, and I hope to see action on this matter soon. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:14, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
- I took a harder look at the article, found issues that no GA should be listed with. This is serious enough that I reverted the results of the review (and closed it, putting the nomination back in the pool with its seniority intact). The so-called review isn't, and the (clearly inexperienced) reviewer should not be allowed to continue on such a long, complex article, so I added a closing comment to the review page. (You might want to note that this edit added a brief section to the review 19 minutes after I posted the above to your page, even though the article had already been added to the GA list, as if to make the review more robust. If the reviewer is to continue submitting GA reviews for the WikiCup, I'd like to request that a mentor be required to sign off on the review before it is finalized, so we don't have to reverse further GAs: it's not fair to the nominator to have to hear that the article isn't a GA after all, or to have to be dragged through the GA reassessment process. At this point, I should probably ping Sturmvogel 66 and Godot13, your fellow WikiCup judges, so they're aware of this issue. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:04, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
- Bluemoonset, thanks for spotting this. I've deleted his submission and posted to his talkpage my reasoning for doing so with a link to the GAN instructions on how to review. Thankfully you caught this before he'd closed the review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:15, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
- Sturmvogel 66, I didn't catch it before he closed the review—I undid the close on the article talk page and removed the listing from the GA page. (No icon had been added to the article itself.) We've done that at GAN on occasion when reviews have been done by someone who clearly didn't understand the process or apply the criteria, so I was bold and did so again this time. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:23, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
- Ah, I didn't check the history to see if it had closed. Anyways, I concur with your bold action to undo the close.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:35, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
-
- Everyone obviously has done the right thing in this situation. Thanks for bringing it to our attention, so that it was dealt with quickly. As you may or may not know, I'm also a judge (and co-creator) in the GA Cup. In both competitions we've had thus far, we had a problematic editor that tried to game the system and reviews GACs with minimum feedback and issues the nominator had to address. He was almost disqualified the first time, and he quit before getting too far the second. And all because he wanted to win the GA Cup. I'm not saying that 333-blue is doing the same here, but it's something to look out for, since there's precedence. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 22:55, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for responding, Christine. I did know you were a GA Cup judge as well, which is why I originally referred to that competition and chose your talk page. I am a bit dismayed that despite suggestions by Sturmvogel 66 and me about GA reviewing on the editor's talk page yesterday, 333-blue has started a new GA review in much the format as last time, found a couple of issues (possible paragraph move and does the article stay on topic, though the latter is more a question) and missed some prose/grammar issues I found in a quick skim-through. Again, the article looks like an appropriate candidate for GA, but it will need some work (perhaps not much) to get there. And again, the new review has already been claimed for WikiCup credit, this time without having concluded. Oddly, there have been a couple of comments added to an ongoing review, Talk:Grodziskie/GA1, which is winding down and scheduled to be closed within the day due to lack of nominator response. I'm not quite sure what to make of them. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:33, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
- He does seem to be a bit obtuse on the concept on how to review. I've deleted his submission and let him know again on his talk page. I'm wondering how much of this is the result of the language barrier as he's either Chinese or Taiwanese, IIRC.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:47, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
- I tend to be a little paranoid about folks trying to game the system, mostly due to past experience in the GA Cup, but looking at things, it seems he's genuinely confused about GA criteria. I think that the way to handle it is the way we'd handle any submission: check if they fulfill the criteria, and if they don't, remove them. Also as judges, it's not our responsibility to mentor him and ensure that he understands how to review articles, although if anyone has the time, they can certainly try. I have some extra time early this week, so if I can, I will. So far, we're doing everything right. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 05:13, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
- It has always struck me as a weakness in the GA and DYK review space that people who are not proficient in English nevertheless are welcome, if not urged or required, to review. How can someone who cannot write good prose or has problems with punctuation and grammar be expected to identify such problems in the articles they're checking? Anyone with a language barrier is going to produce reviews that miss not only prose and grammar issues, but will likely also miss more significant issues, such as close paraphrasing or even copyvios. In this case, we have someone who is not only confused by criteria, but who I don't think has the language skills to be an effective and accurate reviewer. I don't have the time to be a mentor myself, but I will keep an eye out to make sure no more premature review closures are done. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:33, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
- I tend to be a little paranoid about folks trying to game the system, mostly due to past experience in the GA Cup, but looking at things, it seems he's genuinely confused about GA criteria. I think that the way to handle it is the way we'd handle any submission: check if they fulfill the criteria, and if they don't, remove them. Also as judges, it's not our responsibility to mentor him and ensure that he understands how to review articles, although if anyone has the time, they can certainly try. I have some extra time early this week, so if I can, I will. So far, we're doing everything right. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 05:13, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
- He does seem to be a bit obtuse on the concept on how to review. I've deleted his submission and let him know again on his talk page. I'm wondering how much of this is the result of the language barrier as he's either Chinese or Taiwanese, IIRC.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:47, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for responding, Christine. I did know you were a GA Cup judge as well, which is why I originally referred to that competition and chose your talk page. I am a bit dismayed that despite suggestions by Sturmvogel 66 and me about GA reviewing on the editor's talk page yesterday, 333-blue has started a new GA review in much the format as last time, found a couple of issues (possible paragraph move and does the article stay on topic, though the latter is more a question) and missed some prose/grammar issues I found in a quick skim-through. Again, the article looks like an appropriate candidate for GA, but it will need some work (perhaps not much) to get there. And again, the new review has already been claimed for WikiCup credit, this time without having concluded. Oddly, there have been a couple of comments added to an ongoing review, Talk:Grodziskie/GA1, which is winding down and scheduled to be closed within the day due to lack of nominator response. I'm not quite sure what to make of them. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:33, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
- Everyone obviously has done the right thing in this situation. Thanks for bringing it to our attention, so that it was dealt with quickly. As you may or may not know, I'm also a judge (and co-creator) in the GA Cup. In both competitions we've had thus far, we had a problematic editor that tried to game the system and reviews GACs with minimum feedback and issues the nominator had to address. He was almost disqualified the first time, and he quit before getting too far the second. And all because he wanted to win the GA Cup. I'm not saying that 333-blue is doing the same here, but it's something to look out for, since there's precedence. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 22:55, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
-
- Ah, I didn't check the history to see if it had closed. Anyways, I concur with your bold action to undo the close.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:35, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
- Sturmvogel 66, I didn't catch it before he closed the review—I undid the close on the article talk page and removed the listing from the GA page. (No icon had been added to the article itself.) We've done that at GAN on occasion when reviews have been done by someone who clearly didn't understand the process or apply the criteria, so I was bold and did so again this time. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:23, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
- Bluemoonset, thanks for spotting this. I've deleted his submission and posted to his talkpage my reasoning for doing so with a link to the GAN instructions on how to review. Thankfully you caught this before he'd closed the review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:15, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
I just looked over 333-Blue's review of O Street Market and it appears pretty cursory. Happily, the article is actually in very good shape and would only need a few changes in the prose before I'd pass it. Weakness in English competency could be a real problem if we had more reviewers, but I don't know that we actually can solve it other than by monitoring all of the reviews, like you've been doing, Blue.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:09, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
- Not only was it cursory, Sturmvogel 66, but 333-blue passed the nomination earlier today, and has no inclination to reverse himself or herself although acknowledging that problems remained with the article. The nominator had asked for help or a new reviewer at WT:DYK, and 333-blue was not really responsive. (I've noticed how questions and suggestions are frequently ignored; there's been no response to the mentor suggestion, or that someone do a confirmation check before a nomination is passed.) So my question is this: the review was open much longer this time, even if little business was done on the review page itself. Has it gone far enough that a reversal is not feasible? If so, I'll be opening a GAR, since the article isn't GA quality yet: there's that phrase I'd pointed out on 333-blue's talk page, but other issues as well, such as a Design section that's pretty impenetrable, too much detail (not summary style) in places, and at least one place where the cited source does not support the preceding sentence. I'll be pressed to find the time for a GAR, but I don't see how it can be avoided if the approval stands. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:35, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
- Just a note, Sturmvogel 66, since you've been most active in this thread: unless I hear otherwise here in the next few hours, I will be opening a Good Article Reassessment for O Street Market. And I've started adding a significant number of comments to the Talk:Hyōgo-ku, Kobe/GA1 review since the initial set was inadequately sparse and mostly incorrect, but 333-blue seems hellbent on closing it in the next 24 hours. I trust that, if that happens, no WikiCup credit will be forthcoming. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:28, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
- And it looks like there's a new WikiCup reviewer who is quickfailing nominations with a two-line explanation: three so far. Christine, Sturmvogel 66, and Godot13—one of you might want to break the news on acceptable reviews to this participant before more damage is done. One of the nominators has already put the nomination back in the reviewing pool (with no loss of seniority); I'll let you check and do any necessary unwinding if the other two warrant similar treatment. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:24, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
-
- There are really two issues here. The first is regarding the WikiCup and something the judges need to handle. These reviews shouldn't (and won't) be counted for points in the competition, for the simple reason that they don't fulfill the rules, which clearly state that GA reviews must be longer than 1000 bytes [1]. (Cursory to that, we judges need to ascertain whether or not these competitors are using GA reviews to game the system, which doesn't seem to be case thus far because we don't have evidence for it yet.) The second issue has to do with the integrity of GA reviews, something that everyone who cares about high-quality articles in WP should value. That's why we're discussing mentoring these competitors, and why we've come up with the solution of reversing the reviews and placing the articles back into the GAN queue without the nominators losing seniority. It's also why it's a good idea for this discussion to occur on a talk page, and since I know that the other WikiCup judges are watching this discussion, we've been able to agree and deal with the problem, as it relates to the competition. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 03:13, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
-
- And it looks like there's a new WikiCup reviewer who is quickfailing nominations with a two-line explanation: three so far. Christine, Sturmvogel 66, and Godot13—one of you might want to break the news on acceptable reviews to this participant before more damage is done. One of the nominators has already put the nomination back in the reviewing pool (with no loss of seniority); I'll let you check and do any necessary unwinding if the other two warrant similar treatment. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:24, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
- Just a note, Sturmvogel 66, since you've been most active in this thread: unless I hear otherwise here in the next few hours, I will be opening a Good Article Reassessment for O Street Market. And I've started adding a significant number of comments to the Talk:Hyōgo-ku, Kobe/GA1 review since the initial set was inadequately sparse and mostly incorrect, but 333-blue seems hellbent on closing it in the next 24 hours. I trust that, if that happens, no WikiCup credit will be forthcoming. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:28, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 17, 2016
Christine, I'm almost done with this one, how does it look so far? - Dank (push to talk) 16:15, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
- @Dank:, looks good. I added an image, the standard Angelou image for almost all of her articles. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 05:17, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Precious again, your Gather Together in My Name!
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:53, 17 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) 18:04, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi, I was wondering if you had time to see the latest episodes of Sesame Street on HBO. I have seen the credits and Steve Whitmire (who is currently working on The Muppets) is no longer on the cast and Billy Barkhurst (who was credited in the last season) is now doing Ernie according to Sesame Workshop's official website just like how it is mentioning that Stephanie D'Abruzzo is the current performer of Prairie Dawn and Jennifer Barnhart (who was uncredited) is the current performer of Zoe. If you don't believe me, go to the official website of Sesame Workshop and look at the puppeteer bios under behind the scenes. Just making a suggestion. --Rtkat3 (talk) 18:57, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
TFAR
Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/The Heart of a Woman --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:46, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
Spirit Animal
Sure. I understand. Please tell me what to improve as soon as possible. Horsegeek(talk) 04:21, 14 February 2016 (UTC)horsegeek
Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Misty Copeland/archive1
Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Misty Copeland/archive1 could use some attentive eyes. I haven't called on you in a while, but when I have in the past, you have generally been a very important discussant. I am hoping that you might be interested this nomination.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 12:49, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for February 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Simon Pryce, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rugby (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:10, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
Possibly interesting...
Tangentially related to the image at the top of your user page, possibly interesting (not knowing if you have a connection to the place)...--Godot13 (talk) 23:30, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
- @Godot13: very cool. Wonder what he bought with that money... ;) Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 22:03, 1 March 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) 02:39, 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)
Maya Angelou
It was a heartbreaking discovery all round, I think. No-one wanted to delete the image, but my attempts to get a featured picture of her backfired spectacularly, I think you'll agree, when I actually found evidence our best picture of her was in copyright. I have sent a FoI to the Clinton Library (no response); perhaps it'd be less likely to hit the circular file coming from an American resident. Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:27, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
- @Adam Cuerden: Thanks for the sympathy. Could you answer my question, though, about the images at the National Archives? Are they usable? I'll make a request of the Clinton library myself. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 20:16, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
- I'm a little hesitant after the last issue; I think - so long as it's from a different angle - it's safe to presume it's PD-USGov, but if it's exactly the same angle as the other image, I would presume it's a second photo by the same photographer a few moments later. Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:27, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
Views/Day | Quality | Title | Content | Headings | Images | Links | Sources | Tagged with… |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1.0 ![]() |
Sesame Street Emmy awards and nominations (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Add sources | |
1.0 ![]() |
Oscar the Grouch (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Add sources | |
3.0 ![]() |
Martin Luther King, Jr. (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | Add sources | |
3.0 ![]() |
Sydney (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | Add sources | |
2.0 ![]() |
Now That's What I Call Music! (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Add sources | |
2.0 ![]() |
Muppet Babies (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Add sources | |
3.0 ![]() |
Women in science (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | Cleanup | |
1.0 ![]() |
Hardy/Webber family (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Cleanup | |
2.0 ![]() |
Smith College (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | Cleanup | |
2.0 ![]() |
Sesame Street Spaghetti Space Chase (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Expand | |
1.0 ![]() |
Antonio Salviati (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Expand | |
3.0 ![]() |
Hillary Clinton (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | Expand | |
2.0 ![]() |
Peyton Manning (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | Unencyclopaedic | |
3.0 ![]() |
Dale Earnhardt, Jr. (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | Unencyclopaedic | |
1.0 ![]() |
Stanford University School of Earth, Energy & Environmental Sciences (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Unencyclopaedic | |
2.0 ![]() |
News Corp Australia (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Merge | |
3.0 ![]() |
The Casual Vacancy (miniseries) (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Merge | |
1.0 ![]() |
Scaffolding (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Merge | |
1.0 ![]() |
Pong Pagong (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Wikify | |
2.0 ![]() |
Wolfgang Kubin (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Wikify | |
2.0 ![]() |
Rent (musical) (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | Wikify | |
1.0 ![]() |
Artesunate Plus Sulfadoxine-Pyrimethamine (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Orphan | |
1.0 ![]() |
Anton Kurbatov (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Orphan | |
1.0 ![]() |
Ahmed Aboki Abdullahi (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Orphan | |
1.0 ![]() |
Alpha Beam with Ernie (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Stub | |
1.0 ![]() |
Crossing to Safety (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Stub | |
1.0 ![]() |
123 Sesame Street (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Stub | |
1.0 ![]() |
Zhima Jie (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Stub | |
1.0 ![]() |
Sesame Street Unpaved (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Stub | |
1.0 ![]() |
Joey Mazzarino (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Stub |
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:37, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Emily Ratajkowski/archive3
Maybe Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Emily Ratajkowski/archive3 interests you. I could use some comments.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:13, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
Views/Day | Quality | Title | Content | Headings | Images | Links | Sources | Tagged with… |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1.0 ![]() |
Claudia Tate (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Add sources | |
2.0 ![]() |
Goldfish (snack) (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Add sources | |
2.0 ![]() |
Blood (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | Add sources | |
2.0 ![]() |
The Jim Henson Company (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Add sources | |
1.0 ![]() |
Choice magazine (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Add sources | |
3.0 ![]() |
Lazer Team (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 2.0 | Add sources | |
3.0 ![]() |
History of General Hospital (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 2.0 | Cleanup | |
1.0 ![]() |
Simile (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Cleanup | |
2.0 ![]() |
Doonesbury (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | Cleanup | |
1.0 ![]() |
Ifrit (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Expand | |
1.0 ![]() |
The Wiggles Movie (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Expand | |
2.0 ![]() |
William Ernest Henley (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Expand | |
2.0 ![]() |
Black matriarchy (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Unencyclopaedic | |
2.0 ![]() |
The Muppet Show (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Unencyclopaedic | |
1.0 ![]() |
Anne (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Unencyclopaedic | |
1.0 ![]() |
Bert and Ernie (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Merge | |
3.0 ![]() |
Lindsay Lohan (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | Merge | |
1.0 ![]() |
Honkers (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Merge | |
1.0 ![]() |
The Hitchhiker (TV series) (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Wikify | |
3.0 ![]() |
Academic degree (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | Wikify | |
2.0 ![]() |
Involuntary commitment (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Wikify | |
1.0 ![]() |
Aashray Adhikar Abhiyan (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Orphan | |
1.0 ![]() |
Anqing Stadium (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Orphan | |
1.0 ![]() |
Al Wahda Street (Sharjah) (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Orphan | |
1.0 ![]() |
Weed, Arkansas (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Stub | |
1.0 ![]() |
Kidz Bop 30 (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Stub | |
1.0 ![]() |
Vusumzi Make (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Stub | |
1.0 ![]() |
A Brave and Startling Truth (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Stub | |
1.0 ![]() |
KaBoom! Entertainment Inc. (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Stub | |
1.0 ![]() |
Silent Generation (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Stub |
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:23, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
Guild of Copy Editors April 2016 Newsletter
Guild of Copy Editors April 2016 Newsletter
March drive: Thanks to everyone who participated in last month's backlog-reduction drive. Of the 28 people who signed up, 21 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. April blitz: The one-week April blitz, again targeting our long requests list, will run from April 17–23. Awards will be given to everyone who copyedits at least one article from the requests page. Sign up here! May drive: The month-long May backlog-reduction drive, with extra credit for articles tagged in March, April, and May 2015, and all request articles, begins May 1. Sign up now! Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Miniapolis, and Baffle gab1978. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
|
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:48, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
Lawrence Lessing
This article was in the pink box on the GAN page when I started the review. I generally pick reviews out of that box, or for WikiCup participants. It should be 20 points, not 12. Thanks. MPJ-US 16:55, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks for catching my error, and sorry for it. I've already made the corrections. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:19, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello, sorry me again, Michael Laucke was also in the pink box when I started the review. It's only 2 points but with the group I am in that may be the difference make. MPJ-US 19:20, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
- No problem. I didn't see it in the pink box when I looked, but I'll AGF, give you the benefit of the doubt, and award you the two points. I get it; you're in a very competitive pool. Wow, you earned a lot of points with that one! ;) And good luck going forward. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 20:42, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
"Women are everywhere"
Hi Figureskatingfan. I'm an editor (not very active till now) of the Italian Wikipedia, where the gender gap is a real issue. I'm trying to participate to an IEG with the project "Women are everywhere". You will find the draft at this link https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/Women_are_everywhere It would be great if you could have a look at it. I need any kind of suggestion or advice to improve it. Support or endorsement would be fantastic. Many thanks, --Kenzia (talk) 16:56, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
GA Cup
Hey, so first off, thanks for adding my points to the GA Cup. Secondly, (I may be wrong), but I don't think I received the points for two of my three reviews. Again, I could be wrong, but I believe Testaroli is 13,768 characters according to the website mentioned in the DYK tool (including the removal of templates, infoboxes, and images), and You'll See is easily over 25,000 characters using the tool. Please let me know if you could take a look at this; thank you very much! Cheers, Carbrera (talk) 04:34, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
- Another use looked at my concerns and fixed them appropriately. Thank you anyway! Carbrera (talk) 02:49, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
- Glad it got taken care of. Sorry I wasn't able to; it's been a busy weekend. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 14:13, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
DRN help needed and volunteer roll call
You are receiving this message because you have listed yourself on the list of volunteers at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard/Volunteering#List of the DRN volunteers.
First, assistance is needed at DRN. We have recently closed a number of cases without any services being provided for lack of a volunteer willing to take the case. There are at least three cases awaiting a volunteer at this moment. Please consider taking one.
Second, this is a volunteer roll call. If you remain interested in helping at DRN and are willing to actively do so by taking at least one case (and seeing it through) or helping with administrative matters at least once per calendar month, please add your name to this roll call list. Individuals currently on the principal volunteer list who do not add their name on the roll call list will be removed from the principal volunteer list after June 30, 2016 unless the DRN Coordinator chooses to retain their name for the best interest of DRN or the encyclopedia. Individuals whose names are removed after June 30, 2016, should feel free to re-add their names to the principal volunteer list, but are respectfully requested not to do so unless they are willing to take part at DRN at least one time per month as noted above. No one is going to be monitoring to see if you live up to that commitment, but we respectfully ask that you either live up to it or remove your name from the principal volunteer list.
Best regards, TransporterMan (talk · contribs) (Current DRN coordinator) (Not watching this page) Sent via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:05, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
Books & Bytes - Issue 16
Books & Bytes
Issue 16, February-March 2016
by The Interior (talk · contribs), UY Scuti (talk · contribs)
- New donations - science, humanities, and video resources
- Using hashtags in edit summaries - a great way to track a project
- A new cite archive template, a new coordinator, plus conference and Visiting Scholar updates
- Metrics for the Wikipedia Library's last three months
The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:17, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for April 18
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Stanford Memorial Church, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page All Souls Church (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:04, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Editor of the Week : nominations needed!
The Editor of the Week initiative has been recognizing editors since 2013 for their hard work and dedication. Editing Wikipedia can be disheartening and tedious at times; the weekly Editor of the Week award lets its recipients know that their positive behaviour and collaborative spirit is appreciated. The response from the honorees has been enthusiastic and thankful.
The list of nominees is running short, and so new nominations are needed for consideration. Have you come across someone in your editing circle who deserves a pat on the back for improving article prose regularly, making it easier to understand? Or perhaps someone has stepped in to mediate a contentious dispute, and did an excellent job. Do you know someone who hasn't received many accolades and is deserving of greater renown? Is there an editor who does lots of little tasks well, such as cleaning up citations?
Please help us thank editors who display sustained patterns of excellence, working tirelessly in the background out of the spotlight, by submitting your nomination for Editor of the Week today!
Sent on behalf of Buster Seven Talk for the Editor of the Week initiative by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:18, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Emily Ratajkowski/archive4
You were involved in one of the prior WP:FAC or WP:PR discussions about Emily Ratajkowski. The current discussion at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Emily Ratajkowski/archive4 needs more discussants. In my prior successful FACs, success has been largely based on guidance at FAC in reshaping the content that I have nominated. I would appreciate discussants interested in giving guidance such guidance.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:56, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
Views/Day | Quality | Title | Content | Headings | Images | Links | Sources | Tagged with… |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
3.0 ![]() |
Badlands (Halsey album) (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Add sources | |
1.0 ![]() |
Norman Stiles (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Add sources | |
1.0 ![]() |
Still Me (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Add sources | |
3.0 ![]() |
Internet troll (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | Add sources | |
2.0 ![]() |
Kermit the Frog (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Add sources | |
1.0 ![]() |
Sid the Science Kid (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Add sources | |
2.0 ![]() |
Soap opera (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | Cleanup | |
1.0 ![]() |
Bridget Malcolm (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Cleanup | |
2.0 ![]() |
Nickelodeon Kids' Choice Awards (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Cleanup | |
2.0 ![]() |
Nickelodeon (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Expand | |
3.0 ![]() |
Superman in film (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | Expand | |
2.0 ![]() |
One Life to Live characters (2010s) (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Expand | |
1.0 ![]() |
Can You Tell Me How to Get to Sesame Street? (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Unencyclopaedic | |
1.0 ![]() |
Formative assessment (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | Unencyclopaedic | |
1.0 ![]() |
Pearl Primus (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Unencyclopaedic | |
3.0 ![]() |
Machinima (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | Merge | |
3.0 ![]() |
George Washington (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | Merge | |
2.0 ![]() |
Spin Master (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Merge | |
1.0 ![]() |
Telling Stories with Tomie dePaola (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Wikify | |
1.0 ![]() |
World Club Series records (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Wikify | |
1.0 ![]() |
Who Scent You? (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Wikify | |
1.0 ![]() |
Jonathan Hsu (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Orphan | |
1.0 ![]() |
Sesame Street (comic strip) (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Orphan | |
1.0 ![]() |
Andreas Kleinheinz (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Orphan | |
1.0 ![]() |
Greg Page (album) (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Stub | |
1.0 ![]() |
Traci Paige Johnson (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Stub | |
1.0 ![]() |
California Labor School (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Stub | |
1.0 ![]() |
Great Food, All Day Long (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Stub | |
1.0 ![]() |
Wiggly Waffle (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Stub | |
1.0 ![]() |
Judy Freudberg (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Stub |
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:04, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
Of note
Given your knowledge of children's television, this AfD may be of interest to you: Jessica Smith (actress). Montanabw(talk) 21:54, 4 May 2016 (UTC) and Kallan Holley and Anna Carlsson. Your input on all of these would be helpful. Montanabw(talk) 21:59, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
- @Montanabw: I'm not sure they shouldn't be deleted. At the very least, these articles should be expanded. Sorry, I just don't have the time these days to help. I wish I could do more, but perhaps we should just allow the deletions if they actually go through. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 23:33, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
- My concern is that those who raise WP:GNG are confusing quality for notability. If you can take even a moment of your time for a cursory glance and can !vote at the AfD in either direction, it would help. If you see no notability, then it's apt to not be worth further discussion and that will close the case. If you do see something but the article is generally of poor quality, I agree, it is the responsibility of someone else who cares to dig up sources and improve the articles. My concern is getting an assessment of "yeah, nothing there worth notability" or "there might be something here, suggest people dig up material." The Teletubbies one is the one that strikes me -- if Lawnchair Larry gets an article, surely the giggling baby that was on TV for decades (in reruns at least) tops that! LOL! Montanabw(talk) 17:56, 5 May 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) 03:00, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 20, 2016
Hi Christine, I'll start work on this one today. You nominated the article at WP:FAC. - Dank (push to talk) 23:55, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
- Hi @Dank:, no I didn't nominate it, but thanks to whomever did, and thanks for letting me know. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 22:35, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
- Sure. I'm looking at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Sesame Workshop/archive1. - Dank (push to talk) 22:38, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
- Hah, I thought you meant that I had nominated it for TFA. My bad, thanks again. ;) Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 22:41, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
- Sure. I'm looking at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Sesame Workshop/archive1. - Dank (push to talk) 22:38, 8 May 2016 (UTC)