Archive 5Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12Archive 15

Tom Deitz

Google searches like this show the rest is certainly copyrighted, but I can't find the whereabouts of the sources (possibly a pdf? I don't know). It's fairly obvious that it isn't just the first third that is the problem, but short of identifying where the passages are nicked from I'm not quite sure what to do. Ironholds (talk) 05:44, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

That's why I suggested listing it at Wikipedia:Copyright problems. They deal with these things all the time. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 06:18, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Are you the Admin Protecting the Youtube Poop topic

If you are, I am requesting the unprotection of the topic Youtube Poop because I would like to create a serious topic on it. The deletion log of it shows that you were the last one to delete it. I have no indent on using it for nonsensical reason. I can develop it and show you ahead of time if I must. YTP lover (talk) 20:09, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

  Not done If you believe you can write an article on the subject that is encyclopedic and meets our requirements for an article, please create a draft in your userspace and later request that it be moved to the article space. Given the history of this article, I will not unprotect it on the simple assertion that a good article will be created. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 04:42, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Iowa 2

What do you think of helping get it to a GA? I have some thoughts at User:Ctjf83/Iowa. If you wanna post on there some thoughts on my thoughts, or new thoughts (ugh, I need a synonym) that'd be great! :) CTJF83Talk 04:17, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

I'll take a look. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 15:13, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
I've added some comments there. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 09:35, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
Ok, thank you. So, you wanna help me get it to GA? I'm on vacation till Monday, but I really wanna get it to GA status soon! :) CTJF83Talk 03:40, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
I'm not going to be available Tuesday and (possibly) Wednesday, but I'll help. Perhaps you should add a link to your subpage to Talk:Iowa and WT:IOWA so others interested can help? Oh, and dibs on fixing the <ref> tags, btw. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 03:45, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
Good idea! And what <ref> tag did I fix? CTJF83Talk 03:47, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
I don't know whether you fixed any of them. I was just dibsing them. :P --Philosopher Let us reason together. 03:51, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
LOL, ok! Any help you provide will be greatly appreciated. I think I just need to motivate myself, and other users to actually get the ball rolling. CTJF83Talk 03:54, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Davenport

Do you think I should add any more pictures to Davenport, Iowa before I resubmit it for FA? I still need to do a little work on it. Maybe something like, File:LVLKYHILO.gif? I'd also like to add a map of major streets and such, but not sure how to find a free map to add, since it would be a lot of work to create one myself. CTJF83Talk 04:03, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Have you addressed Karanacs' issues from the last nomination? As for the rest, I'll think about it, but considering my amazingly large number of FAs nominated (look at the wikilink ;), my comments will be of limited utility. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 04:28, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
LOL, Zero, you should work on that! :) Do you think there should be more photos though, even if you have no FA experience. I haven't addressed all Karancas' concerns, but working on that. CTJF83Talk 05:58, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
Also, I am working on that. See #Iowa 2, supra.   --Philosopher Let us reason together. 01:34, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Personally, I think it has an appropriate number of photos the way it is, but if you really want to add a picture, how about a photo of the Davenport Citibus and/or its headquarters? --Philosopher Let us reason together. 05:06, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
Also consider transwiki'ing the free use photos to Commons and categorizing them into Commons:Category:Davenport, Iowa. I've added {{commonscat}} to the article. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 05:11, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
Ok! Sounds good. CTJF83Talk 18:31, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
If you have a lot of free time, would you mind reading over Davenport, Iowa and doing copy edit before I nominate it for FA? Thanks, CTJF83Talk 19:46, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, I don't exactly have free time atm. Perhaps remind me in a week or so? --Philosopher Let us reason together. 19:55, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
Sure! I'm in no real rush anyways CTJF83Talk 19:56, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
I forgot to remind you 2 weeks ago, so I'm doing it now :) CTJF83 chat 20:13, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

more info for your page "St. Mary's Catholic Church in Dubuque"...

The TH (local Dubuque Paper) indicated today that St. Mary's might close its doors.

http://www.thonline.com/article.cfm?id=249711

I did not want to modify your excellent article.... thus this note :)

Cheers!

(I hope this time this posting is OK... I'm new to this!!!!... feel free to delete this after reading it :) )

173.27.47.66 (talk) 17:40, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

It is not in any way "my" article - in fact, if you think it should be changed or have information added, feel free to do so yourself! Be WP:BOLD! And welcome to Wikipedia! --Philosopher Let us reason together. 18:01, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Kosovo

the kosovo flag and coat of arms is deleted and page is protected how to bing flag of Republic of kosovo back herre it is old page with flag http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kosovo&oldid=303912016 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lontech (talkcontribs) 01:38, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Replied at Talk:Kosovo#KOSOVO Flag and Coat Of Arms. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 18:43, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Philosopher/Archive 10,

I'm asking Wikipedians who are interested in United States legal articles to take a look at WP:Hornbook, the new "JD curriculum task force".

Our mission is to assimilate into Wikipedia all the insights of an American law school education, by reducing hornbooks to footnotes.

  • Over the course of a semester, each subpage will shift its focus to track the unfolding curriculum(s) for classes using that casebook around the country.
  • It will also feature an extensive, hyperlinked "index" or "outline" to that casebook, pointing to pages, headers, or {{anchors}} in Wikipedia (example).
  • Individual law schools can freely adapt our casebook outlines to the idiosyncratic curriculum devised by each individual professor.
  • I'm encouraging law students around the country to create local chapters of the club I'm starting at my own law school, "Student WP:Hornbook Editors". Using WP:Hornbook as our headquarters, we're hoping to create a study group so inclusive that nobody will dare not join.

What you can do now:

1. Add WP:Hornbook to your watchlist, {{User Hornbook}} to your userpage, and ~~~~ to Wikipedia:Hornbook/participants.
2. If you're a law student,
(You don't have to start the club, or even be involved in it; just help direct me to someone who might.)
3. Introduce yourself to me. Law editors on Wikipedia are a scarce commodity. Do knock on my talk page if there's an article you'd like help on.

Regards, Andrew Gradman talk/WP:Hornbook 02:32, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Chuck Gipp

According to Iowa House of Representatives elections, 2008, he didn't contest the 2008 election - the Republican candidate was one Randy Schissel - so he certainly can't have been defeated! I've modified it to reflect this. Shimgray | talk | 16:07, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Come to think of it, hrm. If the incumbent technically remains in office until the beginning of the year after the election, then should the box at the bottom note 1991-2003, and 2003 to 2009? It seems a bit odd to treat one set of dates one way and one set the other? Shimgray | talk | 16:10, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Whoops! Looks like I misread the graph. The language you're using now looks good. You're also right about the succession boxes - finding the exact (dd/mm/yyyy) date and fixing the infoboxes and succession boxes has been on my to do list for a while - keeping in mind that several legislators were elected in special elections, so won't have the "normal" inauguration date (or even year) so each legislator's history has to be checked separately. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 18:36, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Iowa

Hi Phil, Sorry for undoing your Iowa edit, but it just came out odd, with a list of refs just below the lede. Try it again. Bill Whittaker (talk) 19:58, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

You're right, that was odd. Good catch. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 20:53, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Your assistance please...

You were the administrator who concluded a {{prod}} on Ibrahim Mohammed Khalil.

I asked you to userify the article.

I added some references, and reformatted it, and I would like your opinion as to whether it should be restored to article space.

Thanks Geo Swan (talk) 17:10, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry it took me so long to reply. The article looks like it can be restored - to my knowledge it meets the concern raised in the prod now, though there is always the possibility that someone could take it to WP:AfD if they have further concerns about Khalil's notability. I haven't moved it back to article space myself because it looks like you may still be working on it (the last sentence ends with a semicolon, not a period), but feel free to do so when you are ready. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 04:20, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply. I have restored "Ibrahim Mohammed Khalil" to article space. If the article is then nominated for deletion, because it lacks routine biographical details, like age, education and birthplace, I'll cite the counter-arguments in a couple of essays I wrote: The earliest sockpuppet to be unmasked..., "False Geber" and what a biography should contain.
Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 16:50, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

request

Your help has been requested by User talk:Blastingoff, apparently he can't ask you personally. You should be aware that these guys and this guy are probably the same person as blasting.--Jac16888Talk 11:59, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't see any reason he couldn't - he doesn't appear to be blocked and my page isn't protected. Weird. Heading over to his page. If I may ask, though, why do you suspect that he is another sock of those guys? --Philosopher Let us reason together. 14:20, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
On Chzz's talk page he says that he is Yadontmind, who was blocked as a sock of who ever the sockmaster is from the checkuser case. I suspect he thinks it will mean he can't be blocked since hes only (well mostly) editing his talk page. Its a weird case and I'm not entirely sure why he chose you, can't say I'd blame you if you choose to ignore it or not get involved--Jac16888Talk 14:24, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
I know, should be more civil with him, it just really pisses me off when people are so arrogant like that, the guy has a massive superiority complex, I mean "Jac, go get some remedial education, ok?", just really really made me angry.--Jac16888Talk 17:43, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
Philosopher, I just figured out that you didn't look at my talk page lately. alright, how can we solve this? Blastingoff (talk) 07:38, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
Be patient, please! I'm posting a reply now. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 09:51, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Rollback request

On my talk page this morning I noticed someone mentioning I should apply for the rollback option, to help speed up the reversing of vandalism. [1] It says on the Wikipage for rollback to ask an administrator on their list, so here I am. I promise to only use it for clear cases of vandalism. I have reverted a lot of vandalism, most notable on the crayfish page, which surprisingly has received more than a dozen foul mouthed kids messing with it in the past months I've worked on it. But I've reverted on many pages, and it would be far easier sometimes with the rollback option, instead of having to revert multiple edits one at a time. Please give it to me. Dream Focus 14:55, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

  Done, further message at your talk page. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 15:34, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Template:Prod-nn/doc

Hello Philosopher, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Template:Prod-nn/doc has been removed. It was removed by Closedmouth with the following edit summary '(removing the example, seems to be nominating this page for deletion for some reason)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with Closedmouth before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 20:52, 2 September 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Email

Hi there. I just sent you an email. Amsaim (talk) 17:48, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Replied via e-mail. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 04:09, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
thanks for the reply. I sent you another email just now. Amsaim (talk) 11:03, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
Replied via e-mail again. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 17:17, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:Non-free_content#Proposed_clarification

FYI. This RFC is based on, Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Jack Merridew/Blood and Roses which you participated in. If you already have commented at the RFC, my apologies for contacting you. Ikip (talk) 00:20, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 20:02, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Unsourced additions / vandalism

Hi there. Would you pls take a look at this article? There's a user who first edited via IP, and then after his edit had been reverted by a wikipedian, the IP edits vandalised the page, added unsourced material. Few hours later a new user appeared, & continued vandalising the page adding unsourced material. This seems to be a case of a member of a nigerian minority group laying claim on a city which fell into the property of the Federal Nigerian troops during the Biafra-Nigeria war. Your admin attendion is needed here pls. Thanks. Amsaim (talk) 00:25, 25 September 2009 (UTC)


Template

Hi Phil. Would you have time to please assist me in creating a new template for the African Movie Academy Awards (AMAA)? I'm rather reluctant to use the already existing Academy Awards template, since that template is reserved for the American Academy Awards. The new articles I want to create are similar to this one, and will be about the various past AMAA ceremonies from 2005-2009. Any tip, help or advice on how to create the template for the African Movie Academy Award will be highly appreciated. Thank you. Amsaim (talk) 17:52, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Template:S-par

Hi, I notice you have responded to a request for a template on this page. I wonder if you have any idea why my requests might have been ignored? Thanks. Mooretwin (talk) 14:54, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

It shouldn't have been ignored this long... I'll take a look at it sometime over the weekend. Do you have suggestions for the parameter names? Also, are the bodies here actually legislatures? At the very least the Constitutional Convention doesn't seem to be one – I don't know enough about Northern Irish history to judge, but at first glance, the others don't either, especially as they are all listed as "interim bodies" in {{Politics of Northern Ireland}}. For these, it may be better to use {{s-other}}, which is customizable. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 21:26, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi, and thanks for your response. Of the four bodies, only the first one was an actual legislature. The other three, however, were elected bodies, and (in my view) are better suited to S-par than to S-other, since S-other deals with offices and not membership of elected bodies. Forgive my ignorance of the technical side of things, but what do you mean by "parameter names"? If you explain, I am sure that I can offer suggestions. Thanks again for looking at this. Mooretwin (talk) 09:53, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
I'll propose a change over at Template talk:S-par. If you (or anyone else) objects to or wishes to modify the suggestion, please feel free to do so. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 21:04, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
Appreciate it. Mooretwin (talk) 23:15, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
Wow, I didn't realize someone was so active in the {{s-par}}succession template. Generally speaking, I have no problem with people adding parameters to these templates. If the addition/correction is to make a param more appropriate, it is even better. I'm not entirely sure what you are trying to change as I couldn't find the specific thread you want to discuss in the discussion page, so if you could provide me with a topic link to it, that would help me help you. Originally the members of WP:SBS wanted to redirect all discussion topics for succession boxes to a general discussion page there to make the entire community aware of suggestions and problems, but obviously that hasn't been the case here. Either way, I am happy to assist, I just need to know what the discussion is about first. Thanks!
Darius von Whaleyland, Great Khan of the Barbarian Horde 00:27, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Sorry I didn't give you a section-link. I'm referring to Template talk:S-par#Request for new creations. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 17:03, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Dave Heaton

I had to make a major change on your article Dave heaton-there is another David Heaton (North Carolina politician) so I change your article to David Heaton (Iowa politician). I hope there is no problems-Many thaks-RFD (talk) 16:25, 5 November 2009 (UTC)PS-My kid sister&brother in law live in Bettendorf so I am very familiar with your state-RFD (talk) 16:25, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Is there some reason the {{otherpeople3|PERSON1|PERSON2|PAGE2}} hatnote wouldn't work? With only two articles at similar names, I don't see a need for either of them to have a parenthetical at this time. (Alternatively, if they did need to be moved for clarity, a disambiguation page would be needed). --Philosopher Let us reason together. 17:22, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

I did not know about the hatnote; there were two different David Heatons both in politics but in different states-my apologies for any problems I just want to clarify that there were two different individuals with the same name-Thanks-RFD (talk) 17:49, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

I thought that may be the case - some of our templates are fairly obscure. In that case, if you don't object, I'll implement this (and move the pages appropriately). --Philosopher Let us reason together. 18:27, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
No problems-Thanks-RFD (talk) 18:41, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
  Done. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 21:30, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Your warning to Þadius

I've responded to it on his/her talk page. Steve Smith (talk) 11:39, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in SecurePoll feedback and workshop

As you participated in the recent Audit Subcommittee election, or in one of two requests for comment that relate to the use of SecurePoll for elections on this project, you are invited to participate in the SecurePoll feedback and workshop. Your comments, suggestions and observations are welcome.

For the Arbitration Committee,
Risker (talk) 08:31, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

21:00, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

WikiCup 2020 March newsletter

And so ends the first round of the competition. Everyone with a positive score moves on to Round 2, with 57 contestants qualifying. We have abolished the groups this year, so to qualify for Round 3 you will need to finish Round 2 among the top thirty-two contestants.

Our top scorers in Round 1 were:

  •   Epicgenius, a WikiCup newcomer, led the field with a featured article, five good articles and an assortment of other submissions, specialising on buildings and locations in New York, for a total of 895 points.
  •   Gog the Mild came next with 464 points, from a featured article, two good articles and a number of reviews, the main theme being naval warfare.
  •   Raymie was in third place with 419 points, garnered from one good article and an impressive 34 DYKs on radio and TV stations in the United States.
  •   Harrias came next at 414, with a featured article and three good articles, an English civil war battle specialist.
  •   CaptainEek was in fifth place with 405 points, mostly garnered from bringing Cactus wren to featured article status.
  • The top ten contestants at the end of Round 1 all scored over 200 points; they also included   L293D,   Kingsif,   Enwebb,   Lee Vilenski and   CAPTAIN MEDUSA. Seven of the top ten contestants in Round 1 are new to the WikiCup.

These contestants, like all the others, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. In Round 1 there were four featured articles, one featured list and two featured pictures, as well as around two hundred DYKs and twenty-seven ITNs. Between them, contestants completed 127 good article reviews, nearly a hundred more than the 43 good articles they claimed for, thus making a substantial dent in the review backlog. Contestants also claimed for 40 featured article / featured list reviews, and most even remembered to mention their WikiCup participation in their reviews (a requirement).

Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Some contestants made claims before the new submissions pages were set up, and they will need to resubmit them. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews.

If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:47, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 March 2020

WikiCup newsletter correction

There was an error in the WikiCup 2020 March newsletter;   L293D should not have been included in the list of top ten scorers in Round 1 (they led the list last year), instead,   Dunkleosteus77 should have been included, having garnered 334 points from five good articles on animals, living or extinct, and various reviews. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:30, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2020).

  Guideline and policy news

  • Following an RfC, the blocking policy was changed to state that sysops must not undo or alter CheckUser or Oversight blocks, rather than should not.
  • A request for comment confirmed that sandboxes of established but inactive editors may not be blanked due solely to inactivity.

  Technical news

  • Following a discussion, Twinkle's default CSD behavior will soon change, most likely this week. After the change, Twinkle will default to "tagging mode" if there is no CSD tag present, and default to "deletion mode" if there is a CSD tag present. You will be able to always default to "deletion mode" (the current behavior) using your Twinkle preferences.

  Miscellaneous



00:36, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

17:15, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

21:16, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

17:08, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 March 2020

17:25, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2020).

  Guideline and policy news

  • There is an ongoing request for comment to streamline the source deprecation and blacklisting process.

  Technical news

  Arbitration

  Miscellaneous

  • The WMF has begun a pilot report of the pages most visited through various social media platforms to help with anti-vandalism and anti-disinformation efforts. The report is updated daily and will be available through the end of May.

19:02, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

15:30, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

18:45, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 April 2020

WikiCup 2022 May newsletter

The second round of the 2022 WikiCup has now finished. It was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 115 points to advance to round 3. There were some very impressive efforts in round 2, with the top seven contestants all scoring more than 500 points. A large number of the points came from the 11 featured articles and the 79 good articles achieved in total by contestants.

Our top scorers in round 2 were:

  1.   Epicgenius, with 1264 points from 2 featured article, 4 good articles and 18 DYKs. Epicgenius was a finalist last year but has now withdrawn from the contest as he pursues a new career path.
  2.   AryKun, with 1172 points from two featured articles, one good article and a substantial number of featured article and good article reviews.
  3.   Bloom6132, with 605 points from 44 in the news items and 4 DYKs.
  4.   Sammi Brie, with 573 points from 8 GAs and 21 DYKs.
  5.   Ealdgyth, with 567 points from 11 GAs and 34 good and featured article reviews.
  6.   Panini!, with 549 points from 1 FA, 4 GAs and several other sources.
  7.   Lee Vilenski, with 545 points from 1 FA, 4 GAs and a number of reviews.

The rules for featured and good article reviews require the review to be of sufficient length; brief quick fails and very short reviews will generally not be awarded points. Remember also that DYKs cannot be claimed until they have appeared on the main page. As we enter the third round, any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed now, and anything you forgot to claim in round 2 cannot! Remember too, that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:39, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

WikiCup 2020 May newsletter

The second round of the 2020 WikiCup has now finished. It was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 75 points to advance to round 3. There were some very impressive efforts in round 2, with the top ten contestants all scoring more than 500 points. A large number of the points came from the 12 featured articles and the 186 good articles achieved in total by contestants, and the 355 good article reviews they performed; the GAN backlog drive and the stay-at-home imperative during the COVID-19 pandemic may have been partially responsible for these impressive figures.

Our top scorers in round 2 were:

  •   Epicgenius, with 2333 points from one featured article, forty-five good articles, fourteen DYKs and plenty of bonus points
  •   Gog the Mild, with 1784 points from three featured articles, eight good articles, a substantial number of featured article and good article reviews and lots of bonus points
  •   The Rambling Man, with 1262 points from two featured articles, eight good articles and a hundred good article reviews
  •   Harrias, with 1141 points from two featured articles, three featured lists, ten good articles, nine DYKs and a substantial number of featured article and good article reviews
  •   Lee Vilenski with 869 points,   Hog Farm with 801,   Kingsif with 719,   SounderBruce with 710,   Dunkleosteus77 with 608 and   MX with 515.

The rules for featured article reviews have been adjusted; reviews may cover three aspects of the article, content, images and sources, and contestants may receive points for each of these three types of review. Please also remember the requirement to mention the WikiCup when undertaking an FAR for which you intend to claim points. Remember also that DYKs cannot be claimed until they have appeared on the main page. As we enter the third round, any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed now, and anything you forgot to claim in round 2 cannot! Remember too, that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth. - MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:44, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2020).

 

  Administrator changes

  GnangarraKaisershatnerMalcolmxl5

  CheckUser changes

  Callanecc

  Oversight changes

  HJ Mitchell

  Guideline and policy news

  Technical news

  Miscellaneous


16:59, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Iowa (government) articles

 

A tag has been placed on Category:Iowa (government) articles requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz Read! Talk! 16:13, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

20:41, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

17:19, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

14:18, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 May 2020

Administrators' newsletter – June 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2020).

 

  Administrator changes

  CaptainEekCreffettCwmhiraeth
  Anna FrodesiakBuckshot06RonhjonesSQL

  CheckUser changes

  SQL

  Guideline and policy news

  Arbitration

  • A motion was passed to enact a 500/30 restriction on articles related to the history of Jews and antisemitism in Poland during World War II (1933–45), including the Holocaust in Poland. Article talk pages where disruption occurs may also be managed with the stated restriction.

22:31, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

21:12, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

21:38, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. Sent at 08:20, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. Sent at 08:45, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

18:49, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 June 2020

16:31, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2020).

  Guideline and policy news

  Technical news

  Arbitration


WikiCup 2020 July newsletter

The third round of the 2020 WikiCup has now come to an end. The 16 users who made it into the fourth round each had at least 353 points (compared to 68 in 2019). It was a highly competitive round, and a number of contestants were eliminated who would have moved on in earlier years. Our top scorers in round 3 were:

  •   Epicgenius, with one featured article, 28 good articles and 17 DYKs, amassing 1836 points
  •   The Rambling Man , with 1672 points gained from four featured articles and seventeen good articles, plus reviews of a large number of FACs and GAs
  •   Gog the Mild, a first time contestant, with 1540 points, a tally built largely on 4 featured articles and related bonus points.

Between them, contestants managed 14 featured articles, 9 featured lists, 3 featured pictures, 152 good articles, 136 DYK entries, 55 ITN entries, 65 featured article candidate reviews and 221 good article reviews. Additionally,   MPJ-DK added 3 items to featured topics and 44 to good topics. Over the course of the competition, contestants have completed 710 good article reviews, in comparison to 387 good articles submitted for review and promoted. These large numbers are probably linked to a GAN backlog drive in April and May, and the changed patterns of editing during the COVID-19 pandemic. As we enter the fourth round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met. Please also remember that all submissions must meet core Wikipedia policies, regardless of the review process.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk), Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:34, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

 

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Boris Malagurski on a request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:31, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia technical issues and templates request for comment

 

Your feedback is requested at Template talk:Infobox executive government on a request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 11:31, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

20:18, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

 

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Propaganda on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:30, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

16:30, 13 July 2020 (UTC)