User talk:Wizardman/Archive40
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
WikiCup 2011 October newsletter
The 2011 WikiCup is now over, and our new champion is 
Hurricanehink (submissions), who joins the exclusive club of the previous winners: Dreamafter (2007), jj137 (2008), Durova (2009) and Sturmvogel_66 (2010). The final standings were as follows:
Hurricanehink (submissions)
Sp33dyphil (submissions)
Yellow Evan (submissions)
Miyagawa (submissions)
Wizardman (submissions)
Casliber (submissions)
Resolute (submissions)
PresN (submissions)
Prizes for first, second, third and fourth will be awarded, as will prizes for all those who reached the final eight. Every participant who scored in the competition will receive a ribbon of participation. In addition to the prizes based on placement, the following special prizes will be awarded based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, the prize is awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round.
- The Featured Article Award: Casliber (submissions), for his performance in round 2. Hurricanehink (submissions) matched the score, but Casliber won the tiebreaker.
- The Good Article Award: Yellow Evan (submissions), for his performance in round 4.
- The Featured List Award: Miyagawa (submissions), for his performance in round 4. PresN (submissions) matched the score, but Miyagawa won the tiebreaker.
- The Recognised Topic Award (for good and featured topics): PresN (submissions), for his performance in round 3.
- The Did You Know Award:
The Bushranger (submissions), for his performance in round 1. - The In the News Award:
Candlewicke (submissions), for his performance in round 1. - The Reviewer Award (for good article reviews): Wizardman (submissions), for his performance in round 3.
No prize was awarded for featured pictures, sounds or portals, as none were claimed throughout the competition. The awards will be handed out over the next few days. Congratulations to all our participants, and especially our winners; we've all had fun, and Wikipedia has benefitted massively from our content work.
Preparation for next year's WikiCup is ongoing. Interested parties are invited to sign up and participate in our straw polls. It's been a pleasure to work with you all this year, and, whoever's taking part in and running the competition in 2012, we hope to see you all in January! J Milburn and The ed17 00:53, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
The Signpost: 31 October 2011
- Opinion essay: The monster under the rug
- Recent research: WikiSym; predicting editor survival; drug information found lacking; RfAs and trust; Wikipedia's search engine ranking justified
- News and notes: German Wikipedia continues image filter protest
- Discussion report: Proposal to return this section from hiatus is successful
- WikiProject report: 'In touch' with WikiProject Rugby union
- Featured content: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: Abortion case stalls, request for clarification on Δ, discretionary sanctions streamlined
- Technology report: Wikipedia Zero announced; New Orleans successfully hacked
The Wikipedia is done?
I found this comment recently... "DYK outlived its usefullness a couple years back. When it began, major articles were still being added to the encyclopedia"
Really? I find that the Wiki is still missing or underepresents the vast majority of topics I'm interested in. Sure, bombsight technology is a, hmmm, "limited?" field... But that;'s just it, the Wikipedia is the best place for piquane material like this, and generally it's all still missing.
So I'm curious what sort of topics you write on and what the "major" part is? We're definitely done with pop stars and video game characters, but it seems major swaths of history, say 20th century UK politics in the interbellum, is vastly underrepresented.
Maury Markowitz (talk) 16:04, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
- Oh, not in my experience! Aircraft are fairly well covered, but the vast majority of milhist, and hist in general, is nowhere near complete. Maybe 5% in my guess. Pokemon characters, on the other hand... Maury Markowitz (talk) 19:35, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
WikiCup 2011 final 8
WikiCup 2011 Reviewer Award
Awarded to Wizardman for the high number of good article reviews performed in the 2011 WikiCup. Congratulations! J Milburn and The ed17. 21:17, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
Joseph Liebgott
You can read more about Liebgott's personal life here:
- Brotherton, Marcus (2010). A Company of Heroes: Personal Memories about the Real Band of Brothers and the Legacy They Left Us. Berkley Caliber. ISBN 9780425234204.
It is at Google Book, but to read all of the text you have to trick it with two browsers. Carry on. Best O Fortuna (talk) 08:30, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
Deletion of magnetic tower of Hanoi
Hello,
Recently the above article which I created and edited was deleted.
I would appreciate your help in understanding the reasons for the deletion, and also if possible in providing me with the source of the deleted article.
As far as I can understand from the deletion discussion, there were 3 main reasons for the deletion:
- SPA - It is true that magnetic tower of Hanoi represents my first efforts in Wikipedia, but I do not think that I come under this category. I am a physicist who regularly uses Wikipedia in my professional and private life, and have long considered contributing. Recently I came across the Magnetic Tower of Hanoi (MTOH) puzzle, and after much study thought it sufficiently interesting for Wikipedia. I thought also that this would be a good opportunity to begin contributing to the site. I have no vested interest in the MTOH or the general subject matter, and beyond this specific article, I do not intend to devote further attention to the subject. Any other activity I hope to undertake in Wikipedia will probably be related to physics in general.
- COI - I certainly do not have COI. It is true that the main subject matter of the article was based on the work of Uri Levy, but this was due to my being a physicist, and the fact that the approach taken by Uri Levy to the puzzle was based on an analogy to a physical phenomena (magnetisim). References were provided to other works dealing with the MToH puzzles, and I believe that were the article to remain, it could have been extended in the future to cover these works also. I would also like to note that the editing performed by Uri Levy was minor except for the inclusion of three pictures which Dr. Levy claims are relevant to the origins section of the article. I do not agree with Dr. Levy on this, and believe the figure are not appropriate for the article. If I am able to re-edit the article, I would like to remove these figures. Having said this, I do not believe that the addition of these figures by Dr. Levy constitutes a COI
- The MToH is a non-notable variant of the ToH - clearly this is a question of opinion. Personally, I think that the MToH merits an article for three reasons: (a) - the physical analogy to magnetism (b) - the fact that the article deals with an entire self contained family of puzzles, and not a single variant, and (c) the fact that a comprehensive and systematic solution is discussed for the entire system.
I would appreciate any comments you have on the above.
Also, please could you restore the source of the article to my talk page so that I can re-edit it and submit it for further discussion.
Thanks, David. Davidm0508 (talk) 21:31, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
The Signpost: 7 November2011
- Special report: A post-mortem on the Indian Education Program pilot
- Discussion report: Special report on the ArbCom Elections steering RfC
- WikiProject report: Booting up with WikiProject Computer Science
- Featured content: Slow week for Featured content
- Arbitration report: Δ saga returns to arbitration, while the Abortion case stalls for another week
Please comment on Talk:Ugg boots
Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ugg boots. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.
You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 08:16, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
WWE Divas Championship
Just wondering when you're going to fix the bare urls that were stated in the FTC. I want to close the review soon but don't want to close it due to dead and bare links. GamerPro64 16:13, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
- Closed the nomination to not promote. Also, can you delete this redirect? I failed to notice that I was making an October log instead of a November log and now its just there. GamerPro64 15:42, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
A kitten for you!
Your voter guide is interesting and insightful. Good work. :)
Reverting a bot
When a bot archives a conversation on a notice board, is it ever permissible for the bot to be reverted? If permissible, is this common practice? I ask not out of idle curiosity, but because a comment I made on WP:BLPN was archived by a bot without ever having received a response. I am troubled by the lack of response, and the archiving means none will ever be forthcoming. Should I simple repost the message, in the hope that someone will address my concerns? ---RepublicanJacobiteTheFortyFive 16:40, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low 
to High 
.
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
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. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 21:37, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
The Signpost: 14 November 2011
- News and notes: ArbCom nominations open, participation grants finalized, survey results on perceptions on Wikipedia released
- WikiProject report: Having a Conference with WikiProject India
- Arbitration report: Abortion and Betacommand 3 in evidence phase, three case requests outstanding
Featured Topic questions
Two questions:
First, I was wondering what the closing schedule is, specifically when the FT nomination for the Song Dynasty might be closed.
Second, I was wondering if you needed any additional help there. I've previously been a coordinator at the ill fated Featured Sounds process, so I know how to close things, and having gone through one FT (and watched the page from afar for a while, as I see it as a good barometer of what's being tackled at the highest levels on the project) I feel that I'm starting to have a good grasp of the process.
Thanks, Sven Manguard Wha? 08:18, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
Baseball
Thankyou for pointing that out, I was using AWB and hadn't checked the spelling I had put in, changed this now. Waacstats (talk) 20:45, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I know it's been some weeks since you've deleted the article, but: You realise that deleting the article only half a day after the AfD discussion had been relisted leaves your decision pretty vulnerable towards, say, a deletion review? No additional reasons had been added since the relisting, and you had given no explanation. The way this whole discussion had gone just leaves a bit of a sour taste. I failed to provide any basic information about the person, and thus I agree with the result; nevertheless, I'd still consider this person to be in accordance with the guidelines concerning sportspeople, and I'd at least expected you to give a statement about wether the deletion was due to generally missing notability or because of the missing coverage, a question I had addressed in the AfD discussion. Imo, the article was only deleted because the subject competes in a sport covered rather poorly in the 'net, with pool being one of the worse covered sports in the 'pedia. --Axolotl Nr.733 (talk) 19:33, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
The Signpost: 21 November 2011
- Discussion report: Much ado about censorship
- WikiProject report: Working on a term paper with WikiProject Academic Journals
- Featured content: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: End in sight for Abortion case, nominations in 2011 elections
- Technology report: Mumbai and Brighton hacked; horizontal lists have got class
Please send wikilove to incompetent female editor
Copied from you, can't find the mistake. I'm sure it's the gender gap. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:47, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
- I did this too User:SandyGeorgia/ACE2011/row. Ditz. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:59, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
- Because of the way your guide is titled, you needed to do that at User:SandyGeorgia/ArbVotes2011/row (which I have done for you). Also, loved the gender gap comment and edit summary :) NW (Talk) 22:22, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
- D'oh :) Thank you! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:27, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
- Because of the way your guide is titled, you needed to do that at User:SandyGeorgia/ArbVotes2011/row (which I have done for you). Also, loved the gender gap comment and edit summary :) NW (Talk) 22:22, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
Please watch, correct and update as needed: User:SandyGeorgia/ArbVotes2011/Guides. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:44, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
AWB usage suspended for Waacstats
I mentioned your name in Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#AWB usage suspended for Waacstats -- PBS (talk) 11:19, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
" ... the combination of being very deletionist everywhere except BLPs is a stance I can't accept. ..."
I think you misunderstand my stance. I'm a favor of strict sourcing everywhere, be it the playlist of an album or the sexual preference of a politician. In the case of fictional characters, TV episodes, weapons from video game series, and the like, it makes me favor deletion, because there typically aren't any independent sources for those articles. Most of our BLPs do have independent sourcing, and all of them should. I'd delete all of them that didn't tomorrow, given the opportunity and consensus. The articles themselves should follow what every article should follow: they should consist of material derived from independent reliable sources, weighted roughly in the same way that reliable sources weight them, with material from primary sources being included only when necessary to glue the material from independent sources together. The only reason that I seem to come across as an inclusionist in the BLP arena is that there is a trend to remove notable material on the basis of it being unsavory in BLPs, and I oppose that. Facts are facts, and "unsavory" shouldn't be one of our weighting criteria.—Kww(talk) 17:30, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sierra McCormick
Hi there, a few months ago you deleted Sierra McCormick following Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sierra McCormick. It is back at Sierra Nicole McCormick, as repeated recreations of Sierra McCormick got that page salted. Now whilst I'm not a big fan of every kid actor getting pages here, she is one of the lead actors, not just a guest star or bit part, in a internationally shown Disney Channel show. Given that A.N.T. Farm was on only mentioned a couple of times in the AfD (it had only just started to screen at that time) I think that things have changed since then and the page should be unsalted and moved to the correct location. Regards, The-Pope (talk) 16:01, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Pat Burrell GA review
I did note on my talk page that I would do the review for Pat Burrell but life has caught up with me. I haven't had a chance to start the review yet, but I did still intend to do the review. Considering the "5" in my username is a tribute to Burrell, I thought it would be fitting if I did the GA review. So if you wouldn't mind restoring the pages, I'll get at it ASAP. — KV5 • Talk • 00:12, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
FTRC
I'm just reminding you about the topics at Wikipedia:Featured topic removal candidates that need to be closed. Since the moth's almost over, might as well get the backlog done before it needs. GamerPro64 02:06, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
The Signpost: 28 November 2011
- News and notes: Arb's resignation sparks lightning RfC, Fundraiser 2011 off to a strong start, GLAM in Qatar
- In the news: The closed, unfriendly world of Wikipedia, fundraiser fun and games, and chemists vs pornstars
- Recent research: Quantifying quality collaboration patterns, systemic bias, POV pushing, the impact of news events, and editors' reputation
- WikiProject report: The Signpost scoops The Bugle
- Featured content: The best of the week
- Read this Signpost in full
- Single-page
- Unsubscribe
- EdwardsBot (talk) 07:56, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Copyeditor's Barnstar |
| Thanks for your suggestions with Trevor Hoffman and helping to promote it to GA status. —Bagumba (talk) 17:14, 1 December 2011 (UTC) |
Is there a good reason for deleting Talk:Shellsort/GA1? Subject-matter experts are hard to find. Perhaps it takes another few month before one has time to review the article. I fail to see the benefit of deleting the current review. —Ruud 18:52, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
- But why does the comment by Vaughan Pratt (an author of one of the references used in the article) have to be deleted? I fail to see the benefit of that. Can't the review simply be marked as inactive? Also, where does this "review drive" get its qualified reviewers from? Or is this going to be a "I don't understand the topic, but the picture looks nice" kind of review? —Ruud 19:04, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
Ssejsantokotha
The article was deleted.Its original was "Smritokotha".Now it is included in three discourses of wikipedia and other resources .Can we create another page named "Smritokotha" with full version of the discourse.117.194.207.96 (talk) 16:41, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
Re: Mei-Ann Chen
Thanks for offering to conduct a GA review (and for participating in the GA nomination drive). I will try to address your concerns as soon as possible, once posted. --Another Believer (Talk) 22:40, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
Good Article Nominee for Texas State University–San Marcos
I've never really participated in a GA nominee page. I feel I've been a significant contributor to the Texas State University–San Marcos page and am willing to do what I can to resolve any issues a GA reviewer has with the page. However, I'm confused about the current status of the page and was hoping you could offer some assistance since you recently edited the talk page. I see Njavallil (talk · contribs) provided a somewhat non-substantial review with your comments following. It also looks like there is a new GA review page setup (by you). Do you believe there is anything I should do in response to the current review or should I wait for a more substantial review and comments of the article? Thanks for your information and advice. (PS: I've got your talk page watched so no worries responding directly here.) --TreyGeek (talk) 05:28, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
- Basically all you need to do is wait for a reviewer to actually go and note any concerns there are with the article in full. There's a GA drive going on now so I would be surprised if it took longer than a couple days to get a real review. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 05:40, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
extend Heath Bell protection
Thanks for helping with the protection of Heath Bell. Can you extend the protection of from the current Dec 3? An announcement is not likely to occur until December 5. Per MLB.com, "The team, however, is not commenting on the matter, although it is believed that the signing will become official perhaps Monday at the Winter Meetings in Dallas."—Bagumba (talk) 18:18, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
RFA thanks
Thank you for your support at my recent successful RFA. Being now the new fellow in the fraternity of administrators, I will do my best to live up to the confidence shown in me by others, will move slowly and carefully when using the mop, will seek input from others before any action of which I might be unsure, and will try not to break anything beyond repair. Best, Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 21:59, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
A concern
Hi, Wizardman. How are you? Do you have some authority about GAs? I was very shocked that this [1] was passed as a GA. I started trying to doing some clean-up to try to salvage it, and then realized it was beyond the scope of an easy clean-up. It's rampant with grammar, formatting, and punctuation mistakes. I'm very concerned that the reviewer who passed this did, but if I can help it, I'd really rather not approach that reviewer directly. I could instigate a GAR on that particular article, but I'm concerned the reviewer will still be reviewing other articles. I guess if I had to I could approach the reviewer directly, though. Is there a precedent for this kind of situation? What kinds of measures have been taken in the past? Thank you, Moisejp (talk) 00:39, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
What to do about this? I have left a note at User talk:Jerem43#Talk:PepsiCo/GA1. I see he reverted your closure. He just doesn't seem to get it. Jezhotwells (talk) 04:05, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
Deletion of Disciples Football Page
On November 19th, the Disciples Football page was deleted under the grounds of being a G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement violator.
This article cited its sources, utilized paraphrase, NOT direct quotation, and provided valuable information. If using other websites as sources and paraphrasing is a G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement violation, than nearly every page on Wikipedia should be deleted to conform to its policies. \
Although the Disciples page did at one point contain some copyright infringement content, this content was afterwards properly cited, paraphrased, or entirely removed. Yet the page was still deleted.
I hope this error will be corrected as soon as possible.
Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.75.71.160 (talk) 23:02, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
Request
Hello, Please request possible.
Is it possible to develop an article Singer of the High School Musical, Corbin Bleu and become a good article See the article Arabic Wikipedia good article, can you? .
Look at this version will help you to become a good article. I do not see any adjustment well in this article, can you make a good article as an article Biographies.
Success in your life. Goodbye. --2.91.153.114 (talk) 19:19, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
The Signpost: 05 December 2011
- News and notes: Amsterdam gets the GLAM treatment, fundraising marches on, and a flourish of new admins
- In the news: A Wikistream of real time edits, a call for COI reform, and cracks in the ivory tower of knowledge
- Discussion report: Trial proposed for tool apprenticeship
- WikiProject report: This article is about WikiProject Disambiguation. For other uses...
- Featured content: This week's Signpost is for the birds!
- Read this Signpost in full
- Single-page
- Unsubscribe
- EdwardsBot (talk) 19:51, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
GA and FA Thanks
On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, I would like to thank you for contributing to the promotion of Thurman Tucker to WP:GA status and Rogers Hornsby to WP:FA status.
 | This user helped promote Thurman Tucker to good article status. |
 | This user helped promote Rogers Hornsby to featured article status. |
--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:14, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
Question about the Article history template
I noticed you have made a few edits to {{Article history}} in the past and thought I would run an idea past you for your wisdom. I have been trying to think of ways to make the US Article Collaboration of the Month process better both in terms of ease of use and efficiency of scale. One of the ideas I thought about was to gradually get people away from using individual project templates for these collaborations. Most of which have gone defunct or are inactive with some never being used at all. In order to do this though I would like to modify the Article history template to include the tracking of the individual (mostly WikiProject led) Collaborations and peer reviews (starting with United States). Then the article history template would hold the information in one place along with the other applicable events showing a more accurate "Article history".
Since there were or are a couple of bots that automate some tasks with the template and there is already a template structure in place I thought this might be the best approach. Before I drop this on the Village pump or something though I wanted to ask some eidtors who have used it or edited it for there opinions. of course we wouldn't be forcing any project to use it if they preferred to use their own but I believe we could eliminate a lot of the templates located here. Many of which have never been used and could be outright eliminated. --Kumioko (talk) 17:27, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
Talk:Kit Mueller/GA1
I left a message at Talk:Kit Mueller/GA1.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 23:07, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
- I have responded to your concerns.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 06:11, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Domestic violence
Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Domestic violence. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.
You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 09:15, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
request for an interview
great, if you emailed me at nagaraj AT mit DOT edu, i'll get back to you with a set of questions. I dont see an email for you anywhere here. Thanks!
Dalek2point3 (talk) 04:07, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
---
I'm a researcher at MIT studying the impact of Google Books digitization of the Baseball Digest on Wikipedia baseball editing. I would like to briefly interview you on the phone to ask you a few questions about how baseball editing is organized on Wikipedia, about prominent bots and your personal experiences with the digital copies of the Baseball Digest.
Let me know, I can call most times.
my webpage is http://abhishek.mit.edu
Dalek2point3 (talk) 00:08, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
Talk:Junior Hemingway/GA1
I have replied to your concerns at Talk:Junior Hemingway/GA1.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 02:56, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
December 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States
The December 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High .
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
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. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 04:02, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
The Signpost: 12 December 2011
- Opinion essay: Wikipedia in Academe – and vice versa
- News and notes: Research project banner ads run afoul of community
- In the news: Bell Pottinger investigation, Gardner on gender gap, and another plagiarist caught red-handed
- WikiProject report: Spanning Nine Time Zones with WikiProject Russia
- Featured content: Wehwalt gives his fifty cents; spies, ambushes, sieges, and Entombment
- Read this Signpost in full
- Single-page
- Unsubscribe
- EdwardsBot (talk) 19:01, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi Wizardman. I am contacting you since at the previous nomination you made some comments which may not have been fully addressed at the time. The previous nomination was rejected due to lack of support. The list has been re-nominated and this time the publisher field was filled up for all the 500+ citations, as you suggested. The list was also split due to a technical issue and the inclusion criteria was made clearer. I would appreciate it if you could comment on the list. Best regards.--Muhandes (talk) 15:56, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
I made you something: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Skip James (baseball). If you move it to article space I'll beef it up some during the next exam. Merry Christmas, 207.157.121.52 (talk) 16:24, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
- Wizardman, I found User:Cwagner13/Baldwin High School, but there still is User:Cwagner13/Baldwin High School, the source for the article in the main space (cut and paste move). Thanks, 207.157.121.52 (talk) 17:19, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi Wizardman. You participated in Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive228#Richard Arthur Norton copyright violations, in which a one-month topic ban on creating new articles and making page moves was imposed on Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk · contribs). The closing admin has asked for community input about whether to remove the topic ban or make it indefinite at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Richard Arthur Norton: Revisiting topic ban; Should it be removed or made indefinite?. Cunard (talk) 08:51, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
Deletion review for Disciples Football
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Disciples Football. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Republic of Unclaimed Land (talk) 14:07, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
Re: GA class reviews
Grades are due this Sunday, and most students have the finals week, so they may not do much work till Sunday. That's why my course is structured to get their work out there in mid-November, with the intent that by mid-December things will be winding down... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 19:42, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the ping, I'll be doing final grading soon, so that's great timing. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 00:12, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
Broadway
If you remember deleting Broadway (band) several months ago for like the millionth time out of all its deletions, I'd like to confirm that it was recreated at Broadway (post-hardcore band) and should technically be speedily deleted as a means of being recreated just with a slightly different title. I'm not entirely against the page being deleted since I do kind of like the band, but in the terms of this website (and instance on notability) I felt as if it's good to go to you (the last deleter of such an article) instead of writing an AfD report. • GunMetal Angel 20:21, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
Final Resolution
All issues have been taken care of with Final Resolution (January 2008).--WillC 07:11, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
Deletion review for Sierra McCormick
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Sierra McCormick. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. The-Pope (talk) 16:23, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
The Signpost: 19 December 2011
- News and notes: Anti-piracy act has Wikimedians on the defensive, WMF annual report released, and Indic language dynamics
- In the news: To save the wiki: strike first, then makeover?
- Discussion report: Polls, templates, and other December discussions
- WikiProject report: A dalliance with the dismal scientists of WikiProject Economics
- Featured content: Panoramas with Farwestern and a good week for featured content
- Arbitration report: The community elects eight arbitrators
- Read this Signpost in full
- Single-page
- Unsubscribe
- EdwardsBot (talk) 05:07, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
Category overboard?
Wizard, I was looking at your contributions and you made some categories for topics that haven't been made yet. Granted, some of them will be promoted today and maybe tomorrow but some haven't been supported or opposed. What's up with that? GamerPro64 19:07, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
- Oh, o.k. Just wondering. Thanks for that. GamerPro64 19:18, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
C&A GA nom
Why? I was adding it back to the bottom like the rest of the new nominees. RAP (talk) 5:36 24 December 2011 (UTC)
Merry Christmas
Hey, Wizardman. We haven't spoke for quite some time but I wanted to wish you a Merry Christmas and I hope you'll enjoy the holiday. Regards, --Lecen (talk) 14:06, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
MercyMe GA reviews
Thanks for taking those over - I believe I have made the adjustments you requested. Are the articles good to go for GA status? Toa Nidhiki05 21:45, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
GA review of Soeprapto (prosecutor)
Hi Wizardman, I've made the edits to Soeprapto (prosecutor) that you suggested at the GA nomination. Merry Christmas and have a happy new year! Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:50, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
RE: Techno Cumbia
Hey there, I fixed all the concerns you pointed out. Happy holidays, Jonayo! Selena 4 ever 15:52, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
Beautiful GA Review
I believe I have fixed the issues you raised. Toa Nidhiki05 17:19, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
All of Creation GA Review
I fixed the issues, I believe. Toa Nidhiki05 03:00, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
The Signpost: 26 December 2011
- Recent research: Psychiatrists: Wikipedia better than Britannica; spell-checking Wikipedia; Wikipedians smart but fun; structured biological data
- News and notes: Fundraiser passes 2010 watermark, brief news
- WikiProject report: The Tree of Life
- Arbitration report: Three open cases, one set for acceptance, arbitrators formally appointed by Jimmy Wales
- Technology report: Wikimedia in Go Daddy boycott, and why you should 'Join the Swarm'
- Read this Signpost in full
- Single-page
- Unsubscribe
- EdwardsBot (talk) 04:37, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Special Barnstar |
| For clearing out those abandoned GA reviews. Thanks a bunch! Toa Nidhiki05 18:39, 28 December 2011 (UTC) |
Talk:Glen Rice, Jr./GA1
Please re-evaluate Talk:Glen Rice, Jr./GA1. I believe, I have responded to all of your concerns.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 23:39, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
The Satanic Bible GA review
Hi Wizardman, just thought you should know: [2] and [3]. I understand your reason for deleting the review page, but a little heads-up would have been nice. While I may have put the article on my back back burner, I had left a preliminary review re: the article's missing content, which is now regrettably lost. Just something to keep in mind for the future, if you run across an "abandoned" review. Deleting without checking its status just seems hasty to me. Take care, María (yllosubmarine) 02:58, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
2012 WikiCup
Hi! As you've previously expressed interest in the competition, I'm just letting you know that the 2012 WikiCup is due to start in less than 24 hours. Signups are open, and will remain so for a few weeks after the beginning of the competition. The competition itself will follow basically the same format as last year, with a few small tweaks to point costs to reflect the opinions of the community. If you're interested in taking part, you're more than welcome, and if you know anyone who might be, please let them know too- the more the merrier! To join, simply add your name to Wikipedia:WikiCup/2012 signups, and we will be in touch. Please feel free to direct any questions to me, or leave a note on the WikiCup talk page. Thanks! You are receiving this note as you are listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Please feel free to add or remove yourself. EdwardsBot (talk) 01:30, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
I found this source describing a bribe, in 1881, dealing with John Clapp. Could you add that bit in? I don't know how to word it, and I don't fully understand what happened. Albacore (talk) 23:41, 31 December 2011 (UTC)