User:RenamedUser jaskldjslak901/Archive43

Twitter issue
As you had participated in the previous AfD, your views would be welcome here Talk:Use_of_Twitter_by_celebrities_and_politicians. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 16:32, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Jim Umbricht
Hey. Just letting you know I reviewed the article here, waiting for responses. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 14:49, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

RFA
Hmmm... how about we give it a shot over the weekend? It certainly would be nice to have the tools in time for the free agent madness. I still don't think I'm psychologically ready for this, but I don't know if I'll ever be. Meh. Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

It must have been cool to have been at the game. I do wish the Bulls were there instead. :) Zagal e jo^^^ 05:58, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah, thanks. Some interesting stuff you found. I haven't thought about most of those discussions for a while. :) I should be getting to bed right now, so I'm planning to kick things off early tomorrow evening. Zagal e jo^^^ 06:24, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, this evening, I mean. Probably sometime after 7:00 PM (central time). :) I've made a few minor edits to the nomination statement to correct some typos. I hope that's OK. Zagal e jo^^^ 06:37, 25 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Yea I most of the ad through an ipad so I knew I would have typed some typos Secret account 00:33, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Cool. Thanks for cleaning up my page. Zagal e jo^^^ 01:28, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, that went better than I expected! Thanks so much for setting things into motion. Zagal e jo^^^ 02:23, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Don Kindt GA
On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, I would like to thank you for editorial efforts that helped Don Kindt become a WP:GA.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:41, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 June newsletter
Apologies for the lateness of this letter; our usual bot wasn't working. We are now entering round 4, our semi-finals, and have our final 16. A score of 243 was required to reach this round; significantly more than 2011's 76 points, and only a little behind 2010's 250 points. By comparison, last year, 150 points in round 4 secured a place in the final; in 2010, 430 were needed. Commiserations to Pool A's, who scored 242 points, missing out on a place in the round by a whisker. However, congratulations to Pool B's, whose television articles have brought him another round victory. Pool A's came second overall, with an impressive list of biological did you knows, good articles and featured articles. Third overall was Pool D's, with a long list of contibutions, mostly relating to baseball. Of course, with the points resetting every round, the playing field has been levelled. The most successful Pool was Pool D, which saw seven into the final round. Pool B saw four, C saw three and Pool A saw only the two round leaders.

A quick note about other competitions taking place on Wikipedia which may be of interest. There are 13 days remaining in the June-July GAN backlog elimination drive, but it is not too late to take part. August will also see the return of The Core Contest- a one month long competition first run in 2007. While the WikiCup awards points for audited content on any subject, The Core Contest about is raw article improvement, focussing heavily on the most important articles on Wikipedia. As ever, 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 WikiCup/Reviews. 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 WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 11:08, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

LeBron James
Secret,

Do you still volunteer to review articles? I've been trying to improve the LeBron James one for the better part of the past two weeks. I think it's looking a lot better, except we still need to fix dead links. Would you be willing to give some feedback on it? --Ktmartell (talk) 18:19, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Retain new editors
Hi Secret! created some teams for WikiProject Editor Retention. He currently placed you on the "Retain new editors" team. Are you interested in being a part of it? is the team leader, but he will be out for the rest of the month so we'll need to start with some organization. I created Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Editor Retention/Retain new editors so we can centralize discussion. The page may be moved around later on. In any case, I hope you would be happy to join the team. Otherwise, you can always check out WikiProject Editor Retention for some other teams that might interest you. Ryan Vesey Review me!  21:21, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Sonar Vs Muslimgauze
Hi. I've declined your PROD on Sonar Vs Muslimgauze because it was recreated after a previous PROD deletion. If you'd still like to pursue deletion, you'll need to take it to WP:AfD. Cheers, Whouk (talk) 12:54, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion converted to PROD: Thedatabank
Hello Secret, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed on Thedatabank to a proposed deletion tag. The speedy deletion criteria are extremely narrow to protect the encyclopedia, and do not fit the page in question. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Electric Catfish 10:59, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
 * The CSD criteria for G11 are very small and the article does not meet them. However, the guidelines for WP: CORP are that to establish notability, the article must have reliable 3rd party sources. Therefore, I converted it into a PROD. Electric Catfish 11:01, 25 July 2012 (UTC)


 * "thedatabank’s mission is to create positive social change through technology. They do this by providing high performance, easy to use, affordable software solutions to nonprofit organizations engaged in making the world a better place; and by providing a workplace that respects diversity, encourages innovation, and creates sustainable employment for our community". That's a random sentence from the article, not to mention the clear WP:COI of the author. C'mon "our community" that's a textbook example of G11, so I don't understand why the tag got declined. I guess it is just the citations to the company own website that confused some editors. The tagging is correct but I won't bother as I'm hardly active right now, and it wasn't like it's fully declined, just moved to prod. Secret account 09:10, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 July newsletter
We're approaching the beginning of 2012's final round. Pool A sees as the leader, with 300 points being awarded for the featured article Bivalvia, and Pool B sees  in the lead, with 10 good articles, and over 35 articles eligible for good topic points. Pool A sees in second place with a number of articles relating to baseball, while Pool B's  follows Grapple X, with a variety of contributions including the high-scoring, high-importance featured article on the 2010 film Pride & Prejudice. Ruby2010, like Grapple X, also claimed a number of good topic points; despite this, not a single point has been claimed for featured topics in the contest so far. The same is true for featured portals.

Currently, the eighth-place competitor (and so the lowest scorer who would reach the final round right now) has scored 332, more than double the 150 needed to reach the final round last year. In 2010, however, 430 was the lowest qualifying score. In this competition, we have generally seen scores closer to those in 2010 than those in 2011. Let's see what kind of benchmark we can set for future competitions! As ever, 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 WikiCup/Reviews. 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 WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 22:32, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Marvin Hamlisch
Hi. At here and here, you removed a significant amount of stuff from Marvin Hamlisch that you didn't feel belonged in the article (some of which I don't necessarily agree with). What I'm concerned about is that the "minor" flag was set on those changes. Was that intentional? —&#91; Alan M 1  (talk) &#93;— 13:17, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

I mostly removed a duplication paragraph, some way too overdetail borderline copyvio for some composition he did that didn't made a lasting impact and a trivial mention of him in a movie. And I added citations. It's really just cleanup (the article was in poor shape), and wasn't a major edit in my opinion. The minor edit policy is a very tricky one. What one may consider as minor may not be to another person. Secret account 19:42, 9 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I try to stick to WP:MINOR –&#32;using it for only minor cosmetic/formatting, punctuation, spelling, clearly incorrect grammar, etc. –&#32;basically anything that can't be reasonably argued about. I think removing or adding full sentences or more would generally be arguable. —&#91; Alan M 1  (talk) &#93;— 15:59, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

New Pages newsletter
Hey all :)

A couple of new things.

First, you'll note that all the project titles have now changed to the Page Curation prefix, rather than having the New Pages Feed prefix. This is because the overarching project name has changed to Page Curation; the feed is still known as New Pages Feed, and the Curation Toolbar is still the Curation Toolbar. Hopefully this will be the last namechange ;p.

On the subject of the Curation Toolbar (nice segue, Oliver!) - it's now deployed on Wikipedia. Just open up any article in the New Pages Feed and it should appear on the right. It's still a beta version - bugs are expected - and we've got a lot more work to do. But if you see something going wrong, or a feature missing, drop me a note or post on the project talkpage and I'll be happy to help :). We'll be holding two office hours sessions to discuss the tool and improvements to it; the first is at 19:00 UTC on 14 August, and the second at 23:00 on the 15th. Both will be in #wikimedia-office as always. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 15:28, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks. It's funny enough you'd bring up that; I hiatused because the effort to delete bilateral relations of countries was pretty successful, and I couldn't be motivated to work on content in a context where everything was at significant risk of deletion. It didn't help that I'd just written a featured article, which was a fuck-ton of work; why build a sandcastle if people are just going to come and knock it over? Wily D 05:53, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the plaudits
I'm working on making some of these NFL articles a bit better...always good to get some encouragement.--Batard0 (talk) 08:40, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

My RfA
Thank you for participating in my RfA. I appreciate your sentiments and I hope I can continue to retain your trust in the months to come.

Take care. =) Kurtis (talk) 17:06, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Your Credo Reference account is approved
Good news! You are approved for access to 350 high quality reference resources through Credo Reference. Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi 17:22, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Fill out the survey with your username and an email address where your sign-up information can be sent.
 * If you need assistance, ask User:Ocaasi.
 * A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a Credo article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free Credo pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:Credo accounts/Citations.
 * Credo would love to hear feedback at WP:Credo accounts/Experiences
 * Show off your Credo access by placing on your userpage
 * If you decide you no longer can or want to make use of your account, donate it back by adding your name here

List of Major League Baseball records considered unbreakable
I'm guessing you are wary of the article in the same way I am of the list of floppers in Flop (basketball). They are both based on someone's subjective opinion from reliable sources. However, OR will be a hard-sell as there are multiple sources. Have you looked at Talk:List_of_Major_League_Baseball_records_considered_unbreakable? There is an effort to make this more than any ol' record that has been called unbreakable by someone. Theoretically, its possible; practically, it's a lot of work to maintain and make sure cruft references arent added or that people dont add original research with a bunch of random stats from a stats site.

I think if you want to see this deleted, it will take something like an essay to explain the nuances of the issues, as they go beyond most people's perception of OR. I dont mind working with you on this if you have further ideas.—Bagumba (talk) 18:28, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for your support in my RfA despite any differences we've had in a few AfDs. I look forward to maintaining your trust in me.—Bagumba (talk) 00:22, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip
I didn't know these were in the public domain. I saw something in the guidelines saying football/baseball cards weren't suitable, but I suppose that must refer to more recent ones. I'll replace images with the Bowman cards and public domain claims where they can be found.--Batard0 (talk) 06:08, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I swapped 'em out for Frank Gatski, Dante Lavelli, Mac Speedie, Lou Groza and a couple others where they could be found. I think I slapped the right PD notice on them, but I'm not 100% on that. Thanks again for the help. --Batard0 (talk) 15:57, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 August newsletter
The final is upon us! We are down to our final 8. A massive 573 was our lowest qualifying score; this is higher than the 150 points needed last year and the 430 needed in 2010. Even in 2009, when points were acquired for mainspace edit count in addition to audited content, 417 points secured a place. That leaves this year's WikiCup, by one measure at least, our most competitive ever. Our finalists, ordered by round 4 score, are:
 * 1) once again finishes the round in first place, leading Pool B. Grapple X writes articles about television, and especially The X-Files and Millenium, with good articles making up the bulk of the score.
 * 2) led Pool A this round. Fourth-place finalist last year, Miyagawa writes on a variety of topics, and has reached the final primarily off the back of his massive number of did you knows.
 * 3) was second in Pool B. Ruby2010 writes primarily on television and film, and scores primarily from good articles.
 * 4) finished third in Pool B. Casliber is something of a WikiCup veteran, having finished sixth in 2011 and fourth in 2010. Casliber writes on the natural sciences, including ornithology, botany and astronomy. Over half of Casliber's points this round were bonus points from the high-importance articles he has worked on.
 * 5) came second in Pool A. Also writing on biology, especially marine biology, Cwmhiraeth received 390 points for one featured article (Bivalvia) and one good article (pelican), topping up with a large number of did you knows.
 * 6) was third in Pool A. Muboshgu writes primarily on baseball, and this round saw Muboshgu's first featured article, Derek Jeter, promoted on its fourth attempt at FAC.
 * 7) was fourth in Pool A. She writes on a variety of topics, including horses, but this round also saw the high-importance lettuce reach featured article status.
 * 8) is another WikiCup veteran, having been a finalist in 2009 and 2010. He writes mostly on mycology.

However, we must also say goodbye to the eight who did not make the final, having fallen at the last hurdle:, , , , , , and. We hope to see you all next year.

On the subject of next year, a discussion has been opened here. Come and have your say about the competition, and how you'd like it to run in the future. This brainstorming will go on for some time before more focused discussions/polls are opened. As ever, 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 WikiCup/Reviews. 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 WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 00:22, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Doubleday myth
What a great topic for an article. I had never even thought about making a page on this, but I imagine there are quite a lot of sources that can be found for it. I am interested in a collaboration and have a couple of books that have details on how the myth started; John Thorn's 2011 book in particular goes into great detail on it. The issue for me is time. I'm a full-time student, and am barely keeping up with my present work on Wikipedia. It might be a week or two before I can devote any significant time to creating such an article due to my workloads, and I don't know if you plan on waiting that long. However, as I said I am interested in this topic and can get something started in my sandbox, when time permits. Giants2008 ( Talk ) 11:31, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Wrote a few sentences at User:Giants2008/Sandbox, but I need to crack open my books to really get anything done. Feel free to add stuff there at your convenience. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 15:26, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Wanted to let you know that I put what I worked on in the mainspace at Doubleday myth. It's ready for any work you feel like doing on it. I nominated the article for DYK; if credits from that process interest you, I'm sure I can modify the nom to include you as a co-nominator if you improve the article. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 21:30, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
I saw your userpage update and just wanted to drop you an anti-stress kitten to combat the thyroid drama. I once had a similar issue with mine and spent a week in the hospital getting it straightened out, so I know how annoying those little glands can be! At any rate, feel better, and I hope you've got the sucker beaten into submission now :)

A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 15:01, 13 September 2012 (UTC) 

Your Credo account access has been sent to your email!
All editors who were approved for a Credo account and filled out the survey giving their username and email address were emailed Credo account access information. Please check your email. If you have any other questions, feel free to contact me. I hope you enjoy your account! User:Ocaasi 15:38, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
 * If you didn't receive an email, or didn't fill out the survey, please email me at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com
 * If you tried out Credo and no longer want access, email me at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com

RE: Welcome
Boy, am I glad to see a familiar face around here! Thanks for the welcome! I'd love a crash course whenever you have a chance actually! I'm afraid to do anything outside my userspace without rereading 7 years worth of revised policies! - Acetic Acid 04:36, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Percy Fender
You opened a GA review of Percy Fender a week ago. I'm just checking that you haven't forgotten! Sarastro1 (talk) 16:48, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't mean to nag, but this review has been open for a month now. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:51, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Your free 1-year Questia online library account is approved ready
Good news! You are approved for access to 77,000 full-text books and 4 million journal, magazine, newspaper articles, and encyclopedia entries. Check your Wikipedia email! If you need help, please first ask Ocaasi at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com and, second, email QuestiaHelp@cengage.com along with your Offer ID and Promotional Code (subject: Wikipedia). Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi EdwardsBot (talk) 05:13, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Go to https://www.questia.com/specialoffer
 * 2) Input your unique Offer ID and Promotional code.  Click Continue. (Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive).
 * 3) Create your account by entering the requested information.  (This is private and no one from Wikipedia will see it).
 * 4) You'll then see the welcome page with your Login ID.  (The account is now active for 1 year).
 * A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a Questia article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free Questia pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:Questia/Citations.
 * Questia would love to hear feedback at WP:Questia/Experiences
 * Show off your Questia access by placing on your userpage
 * When the 1-year period is up, check the applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Tyler Thigpen deadlinks
Took me a while, but I did it. I'm not 100% sure that all of the links tagged as |deadurl=yes are actually dead, but they all have archive url's now! Hopefully this helped. LegoKontribsTalkM 07:30, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Thurman Munson
I disagree with your reverting of the edits I did on Thurman Munson. If you looked at what I took out, it was all redundant information that was repeated in the article. I was just streamlining it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnny Spasm (talk • contribs)

See WP:LEAD Secret account 02:38, 24 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm familiar with WP:LEAD. I made it a more concise overview. I removed information about when he was drafted that should (and does) appear later in the article.

Page Curation newsletter
Hey. I'm dropping you a note because you used to (or still do!) patrol new pages. This is just to let you know that we've deployed and developed Page Curation, which augments and supersedes Special:NewPages - there are a lot of interesting new features :). There's some help documentation here if you want to familiarise yourself with the system and start using it. If you find any bugs or have requests for new features, let us know here. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 12:52, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

New Page Patrolling
Hi. Thank you for patrolling new pages. Please note that per long standing  precedent (WP:OUTCOMES), we   do  not  PROD or AfD non  notable mainstream  primary/elementary or middle schools. The usual practice is to  blank and redirect them  to  the article about  their school  district (USA)  of the education  section  of the the article about the school's locality. When redirecting, please remember to include the  template. Thanks, and happy patrolling! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:54, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Dock Ellis GAN
Hi, can you revisit Talk:Dock Ellis/GA1 when you can? I think I've addressed your concerns, and I have been able to use some pages of Ellis' book from what's available in the preview on Google Books to add some detail. I'll need to get the whole book before taking it to FAC. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:36, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 September newsletter


We're over half way through the final, and so it is less than a month until we know for certain our 2012 WikiCup champion. currently leads, followed by, and. However, we have no one resembling a breakaway leader, and so the competition is a long way from over. Next month's newsletter will feature a list of our winners (who are not necessarily only the finalists) and keep your eyes open for an article on the WikiCup in a future edition of The Signpost. The leaders are already on a par with last year's winners, but a long way from the huge scores seen in 2010. That said, a repeat of the competition from 2010 seems unlikely.

It is good to see that three-quarters of our finalists have already scored bonus points this round. This shows that, contrary to criticism that the WikiCup has received in the past, the competition does not merely incentivise the writing of trivial articles; instead, our top competitors are still spending their time contributing to high-importance articles, and bringing them to a high standard. This does a great service to the encyclopedia and its readers. Thank you, and good work!

The planning for next year's WikiCup is ongoing. Some straw polls have been opened concerning the scoring, and you can now sign up for next year's competition. As ever, 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 WikiCup/Reviews. 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 WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) J Milburn (talk) 20:02, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Mount Hermon Cemetery
If you restore Mount Hermon Cemetery I will add more material and references.

Mount Hermon Cemetery
If you restore Mount Hermon Cemetery I will add more material and references. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 15:17, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm no longer an administrator, and it was a speedy deletion A1 little content, you can recreate the article without asking as long as it meets our guidelines. Secret account 22:12, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

What's up?
Long time no speak, are you still interested in working together on Selena? I haven't edited the article for a year now since we agreed to work together. Hope you are feeling better  Jona  talk to me  14:10, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm semi-retired, don't have the time anymore to contribute much to the project anymore. I'll try to help you out but I can't guarantee anything sorry, if anything email me. Secret account 22:11, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 October newsletter
The 2012 WikiCup has come to a close; congratulations to, our 2012 champion! Cwmhiraeth joins our exclusive club of previous winners: (2007),  (2008),  (2009),  (2010) and  (2011). Our final standings were as follows:



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 goes to, for four featured articles in the final round.
 * The good article award also goes to, for 19 good articles in the second round.
 * The list award goes to, for three featured lists in the final round.
 * The topic award goes to, for three good topics (with around 40 articles) in round 4.
 * The did you know award goes to, for well over 100 DYKs in the final round.
 * The news award goes to, for 10 in the news items in round 3.
 * The picture award goes to, for two featured pictures in round 2.
 * The reviewer award goes to both (14 reviews in round 1) and  (14 reviews in round 3).
 * Finally, for achieving an incredible bonus point total in the final round, and for bringing the top-importance article frog to featured status, a biostar has been awarded to.

Awards will be handed out in the coming days; please bear with us! This year's competition also saw fantastic contributions in all rounds, from newer Wikipedians contributing their first good or featured articles, right up to highly experienced Wikipedians chasing high scores and contributing to topics outside of their usual comfort zones. It would be impossible to name all of the participants who have achieved things to be proud of, but well done to all of you, and thanks! Wikipedia has certainly benefited from the work of this year's WikiCup participants.

Next year's WikiCup will begin in January. Currently, discussions and polls are open, and all contributions are welcome. You can also sign up for next year's competition. There will be no further newsletters this year, although brief notes may be sent out in December to remind everyone about the upcoming competition. It's been a pleasure to work with you all, and we hope to see you all in January! J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 00:42, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Jim Umbricht/GA2
Hi - Just wanted to let you know I've started a GA review of the Jim Umbricht article at Talk:Jim Umbricht/GA2. It looks to be in fine shape, with only some nitpicks to address re: the prose. --Batard0 (talk) 05:38, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

JSTOR
Hi there. You're one of the first 100 people to sign up for a free JSTOR account via the requests page. We're ready to start handing out accounts, if you'd still like one.

JSTOR will provide you access via an email invitation, so to get your account, please email me (swalling@undefinedwikimedia.org) with...


 * the subject line "JSTOR"
 * your English Wikipedia username
 * your preferred email address for a JSTOR account

The above information will be given to JSTOR to provide you with your account, but will otherwise remain private. Please do so by November 30th or drop me a message to say you don't want/need an account any longer. If you don't meet that deadline, we will assume you have lost interest, and will provide an account to the next person in the rather long waitlist.

Thank you! Steven Walling (WMF) &bull; talk   20:57, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

A new sport peer review
Here. Tnx. ;-) --Kasper2006 (talk) 05:52, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Unhidden
Just so you know, I unhid this feedback submission, since I could understand what the user was asking, and it didn't meet any other criteria for hiding. Did I miss something? Thanks. — Francophonie&#38;Androphilie (Je vous invite à me parler ) 17:58, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Notice of change
Hello. You are receiving this message because of a [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Administrators&oldid=526254016#Restoration_of_the_tools_.28proposal.29 recent change] to the administrator policy that alters what you were told at the time of your desysopping. The effect of the change is that if you are inactive for a continuous three year period, you will be unable to request return of the administrative user right. This includes inactive time prior to your desysopping if you were desysopped for inactivity and inactive time prior to the change in policy. Inactivity is defined as the absence of edits or logged actions. Until such time as you have been inactive for three years, you may request return of the tools at the bureaucrats' noticeboard. After you have been inactive for three years, you may seek return of the tools only through WP:RFA. Thank you.  MBisanz  talk 00:20, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Bobby V
That change came to by by the request of his management. Is there someone we should email regarding this.

Deswms (talk) 17:41, 7 December 2012 (UTC)deswms

WP:OTRS, or email me though email this user link below for further assistance. Thanks Secret account 00:01, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas


Automatic Strikeout ( T  •  C) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas5}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

OTRS confirmation
Confirming this is me applying for OTRS. Secret account 01:46, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas (2)
  "And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold,   I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.  For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord."  Luke 2:10-11 (King James Version)  Moe Epsilon is wishing you a  Merry Christmas. This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove.

Spread the cheer by adding to their talk page with a friendly message.

Merry Christmas
Hi, Secret! Thank you, and Merry Christmas to you as well! Delaywaves &bull;&#32; talk  16:27, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 starting soon
Hi there; you're receiving this message because you have previously shown interest in the WikiCup. This is just to remind you that the 2013 WikiCup will be starting on 1 January, and that signups will remain open throughout January. Old and new Wikipedians and WikiCup participants are warmly invited to take part in this year's competition. (Though, as a note to the more experienced participants, there have been a few small rules changes in the last few months.) If you have already signed up, let this be a reminder; you will receive a message with your submissions' page soon. Please direct any questions to the WikiCup talk page. Thanks! J Milburn 19:44, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

RfA/Ocaasi
Hi. When you have a moment, could you go back to Ocaasi's RfA page and read your support comment over again? I think you left a verb out of the first sentence, and while the intent is clear, it would be good if you filled it in. Thanks very much, Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:45, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2013 WikiCup!
Hello Secret, and welcome to the 2013 WikiCup! Your submissions' page is here. The competition begins at midnight UTC. The first round will last until the end of February, at which point the top 64 scorers will advance to the second round. We will be in touch at the end of every month, and signups are going to remain open until the end of January; if you know of anyone else who may like to take part, please let them know! A few reminders: *The rules can be found here. There have been a few changes from last year, which are listed on that page. *Anything you submit must have been nominated and promoted in 2013, and you need to have completed significant work upon it in 2013. (The articles you review at good article reviews does not need to have been nominated in 2013, but you do need to have started the review in 2013.) We will be checking. *If you feel that another competitor is breaking the rules or abusing the competition in some way, please let a judge know. Please do not remove entries from the submissions' pages of others yourself. *Don't worry about calculating precisely how many points everything is worth. The bot will do that. The bot may occasionally get something wrong- let a judge know, or post on the WikiCup talk page if that happens. *Please try to be prompt in updating submissions' pages so that they can be double-checked. Overall, however, don't worry, and have fun. It doesn't matter if you make the odd mistake; these things happen. Questions can be asked on the WikiCup talk page. Good luck! J Milburn and The ed17 18:16, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2013 WikiCup
Hello, Secret, and welcome to the 2013 WikiCup! Your submissions' page is here. The first round will last until the end of February, at which point the top 64 scorers will advance to the second round. We will be in touch at the end of every month, and signups are going to remain open until the end of January; if you know of anyone else who may like to take part, please let them know! A few reminders:
 * The rules can be found here. There have been a few changes from last year, which are listed on that page.
 * Anything you submit must have been nominated and promoted in 2013, and you need to have completed significant work upon it in 2013. (The articles you review at good article reviews does not need to have been nominated in 2013, but you do need to have started and completed the review in 2013.) We will be checking.
 * If you feel that another competitor is breaking the rules or abusing the competition in some way, please let a judge know. Please do not remove entries from the submissions' pages of others yourself.
 * Don't worry about calculating precisely how many points everything is worth. The bot will do that. The bot may occasionally get something wrong- let a judge know, or post on the WikiCup talk page if that happens.
 * Please try to be prompt in updating submissions' pages so that they can be double-checked.

Overall, however, don't worry, and have fun. It doesn't matter if you make the odd mistake; these things happen. Questions can be asked on the WikiCup talk page. Good luck! J Milburn and The ed17 13:01, 1 January 2013 (UTC)