Ballot spoiling

edit

This has a venerable history, but I wonder why you would do it in this instance? Is it about this specific RfA, RfA in general, or something else? (I ask partly because I'm sure the candidate wonders, too, and because RfA is a blend of vote and discussion, rather than a situation where the ballot response is the only opportunity to make one's opinions heard. Yngvadottir (talk) 22:01, 6 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hey, thanks for asking! I've explained this elsewhere off-wiki, but will expand a bit here. I've looked at various RfAs in the past since joining (but not all of them) - and this is the first one I've actually commented on. In this instance, I wanted a way to acknowledge that I had read the RfA and questions/answers/some of the discussions below, but not vote in it.
Some parts of the discussion process in RfAs still feel to me to have a "student union politics" kind of feel - with arguing and people taking others' answers to the extreme - and I just don't have the desire to get involved with that. Although, I have seen some good chances being implemented with the discussion period before voting opens.
But to me, spoiling the ballot in this instance made the most sense in acknowledging that I had read the RfA but did not wish to participate. Let me know if that makes sense! Pretzelles (talk) 18:08, 10 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Concern regarding Draft:Charles Hamilton Owens

edit

  Hello, Pretzelles. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Charles Hamilton Owens, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 06:08, 7 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

WikiCup 2024 July newsletter

edit

The third round of the 2024 WikiCup ended on 28 June. As with Round 2, this round was competitive: each of the 16 contestants who advanced to Round 4 scored at least 256 points.

The following editors all scored more than 400 points in Round 3:

The full scores for round 3 can be seen here. So far this year, competitors have gotten 28 featured articles, 38 featured lists, 240 good articles, 92 in the news credits, and at least 285 did you know credits. They have conducted 279 featured article reviews, as well as 492 good article reviews and peer reviews, and have added 22 articles to featured topics and good topics.

Remember that any content promoted after 28 June but before the start of Round 4 can be claimed during Round 4, which starts on 1 July at 00:00 (UTC). 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 for a good article, featured content, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed.

If you would like to learn more about rules and scoring for the 2024 WikiCup, please see this page. Further questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges (Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), Epicgenius (talk · contribs), and Frostly (talk · contribs)) are reachable on their talk pages. 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. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:30, 29 June 2024 (UTC)Reply