User talk:Alexcoldcasefan

WikiCup 2013 July newsletter
We're halfway through this year's penultimate round, and the competition is moving along well. Pool A's currently leads overall, while Pool B's  is second. Both leaders are WikiCup veterans, and both have already scored over 600 points this month. If the round were to end today,, with 274 points, would be the lowest-scoring participant to make it through. This indicates that participants will need a score comparable to last year's (573, the highest ever) to qualify for the final. The high scores this year are a testament both to the quality of participants and to the increased focus on significant content (eligible for bonus points) in this year's competition. So far this round, both Sasata and have made up over half of their score through bonus points, with, for example, high importance FA koala earning Sasata a total of 440 points (from a multiplier of 4.4) and high-importance GA sea earning Cwmhiraeth a total of 216 points (from a multiplier of 7.2). Other articles on important topics submitted this round include a featured article on the Norman conquest of England by, and good articles on Nobel laureate in literature Henryk Sienkiewicz, Nobel laureate in physics Hans Bethe, and the noted Japanese aircraft carrier Hiryū. These articles are by, and Sturmvogel_66 respectively.

Other than that, there is not much to report! 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. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce 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 WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 23:10, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 August newsletter
This year's final is upon us. Our final eight, in order of last round's score, are:
 * , a WikiCup newcomer who has contributed on topics of military history and physics, including a number of high-importance topics. Good articles have made up the bulk of his points, but he has also scored a great deal of bonus points. He has the second highest score overall so far, with more than 3000 points accumulated.
 * , another WikiCup veteran who reached the finals in 2012, 2011 and 2010. He writes on a variety of topics including botany, mycology and astronomy, and has claimed the highest or joint highest number of featured articles every round so far this year. He has the third highest score overall, with just under 3000 points accumulated.
 * , 2012 WikiCup champion, who writes mostly on marine biology. She has also contributed to high-importance topics, seeing huge numbers of bonus points for high-importance featured and good articles. Previous rounds have seen her scoring the most bonus points, with scoring spread across did you knows, good articles and featured articles.
 * , a WikiCup veteran who finished in second place in 2012, and competed as early as 2009. He writes articles on biology, especially mycology, and has scored highly for a number of collaborations at featured article candidates.
 * , the winner of the 2010 competition. His contributions mostly concern Naval history, and he has scored a very large number of points for good articles and good article reviews in every round. He is the highest scorer overall this year, with over 3500 points in total.
 * , who is competing in the WikiCup for the second time, though this will be her first time in the final. A regular at FAC, she is mostly interested in British medieval history, and has scored very highly for some top-importance featured articles on the topic.
 * , a finalist in 2012 and 2011. He writes on a broad variety of topics, with many of this year's points coming from good articles about Star Trek. Good articles make up the bulk of his points, and he had the most good articles back in round 2; he was also the highest scorer for DYK in rounds 1 and 2.
 * 1) has previously been involved with the WikiCup, but hasn't participated for a number of years. He scores mostly from restoration work leading to featured picture credits, but has also done some article writing and reviewing.

We say goodbye to eight great participants who did not qualify for the final:, , , , , , ,. Having made it to this stage is still an excellent achievement, and you can leave with your heads held high. We hope to see you all again next year. Signups are now open for the 2014 WikiCup, which will begin on 1 January. All Wikipedians, whatever their interest or level of experience, are warmly invited to participate in next year's competition.

This last month has seen some incredible contributions; for instance, Cwmhiraeth's Starfish and Ealdgyth's Battle of Hastings—two highly important, highly viewed pages—made it to featured article status. It would be all too easy to focus solely on these stunning achievements at the expense of those participants working in lower-scoring areas, when in fact all WikiCup participants are doing excellent work. A mention of everything done is impossible, but here are a few: Last round saw the completion of several good topics (on the 1958, 1959 and 1962 Atlantic hurricane seasons) to which 12george1 had contributed. Calvin999 saw "S&M" (song), on which he has been working for several years, through to featured article status on its tenth try. Figureskatingfan continued towards her goal of a broad featured/good topic on Maya Angelou, with two featured and four good articles. ThaddeusB contributed significantly to over 20 articles which appeared on the main page's "in the news" section. Adam Cuerden continued to restore a large number of historical images, resulting in over a dozen FP credits this round alone. The WikiCup is not just about top-importance featured articles, and the work of all of these users is worthy of commendation.

Finally, the usual notices: 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. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce 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 WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 05:10, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Francis Folger Franklin
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Francis Folger Franklin you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cdtew -- 21:22, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Francis Folger Franklin
The article Francis Folger Franklin you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Francis Folger Franklin for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cdtew -- 15:22, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 24
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Edward of Angoulême, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Plague (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:36, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Edward of Angoulême
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Edward of Angoulême you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- 19:22, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 1
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Edmund Ætheling, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Orthodox (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:59, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 September newsletter
In 30 days, we will know the identity of our 2013 WikiCup champion. currently leads; if that lead is held, she will become the first person to have won the WikiCup twice. , —who has never participated in the competition before—and follow. The majority of points in this round have come from a mix of good articles and bonus points. This final round is seeing contributions to a number of highly important topics; recent submissions include Phoenix (constellation) (FA by Casliber), Ernest Lawrence (GA by Hawkeye7), Pinniped, and red fox (both GAs by Sasata).

The did you know (DYK) eligibility criteria have recently changed, meaning that newly passed good articles are accepted as "new" for did you know purposes. However, in the interests of not changing the WikiCup rules mid-competition, please note that only articles eligible for DYK under the old system (that is, newly created articles or 5x expansions) will be eligible for points in this year's WikiCup. We do, however, have time to discuss how this new system will work for next year's competition; a discussion will be opened in due course. On that note, thoughts are welcome on changes you'd like to see for next year. What worked? What didn't work? What would you like to see more of? What would you like to see less of? All Wikipedians, new or old, are also warmly invited to sign up for the 2014 WikiCup.

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. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce 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 WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 22:35, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Edward of Angoulême
The article Edward of Angoulême you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Edward of Angoulême for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- 18:42, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Pedro, Prince Imperial of Brazil
Hi, Alex. How did you have access to the "Anuário do Museu Imperial"? --Lecen (talk) 17:59, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, I haven't actually read the article, I found a reference to Pedro's baptism on the Portuguese Wikipedia and translated it. --  Alex  (talk) 19:43, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
 * There are a few mistakes in the article. He died of yellow fever. He had two godparents, not three. Do you mind if I correct them? --Lecen (talk) 12:36, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Absolutely not, if you can provide citations for your changes. Longo says that it was typhoid fever that killer Pedro and, as for the godparents, that I am not absolutely sure of. So, feel free to edit out any mistakes. --  Alex  (talk) 16:58, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Alex: Hi, and thank you for the hard work on Pedro, Prince Imperial of Brazil. You will see that I have made a contribution to the Featured Article debate on this article; I felt it better to oppose the promotion of the article to FA status at this time, for reasons that I explain on the FA nominations page. I hope you will understand that this is not a reflection on the quality of the article, but arises from my concerns about the procedural issues involved. I am confident that in the future this article will have a good chance of becoming a Featured Article; we just need to wait until we are sure that the text and formatting are stable. This will probably take a few months, but I hope you'll agree that the delay will be worth it. Please feel free to get in touch if you'd like to discuss this further. And once again, congratulations on improving the existing article so much! RomanSpa (talk) 21:38, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I have no opinion on the FA, but would you be interested in nominating the article for WP:DYK? It's been expanded enough to be eligible. Chris857 (talk) 22:34, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I hadn't though about it, but I have just posted the nomination. --  Alex  (talk) 23:00, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Pedro, Prince Imperial of Brazil
Gatoclass (talk) 00:52, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 11
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Arthur, Prince of Wales (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Job, Chelsea, John Alcock and The Telegraph

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:17, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Two many FACs
Hi, according to WP:FAC, an editor "is allowed to be the sole nominator of only one article at a time"; with your nomination of Arthur, Prince of Wales, you have two FACs undergoing review at the same time. --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 04:51, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I honestly looked for that for two hours, I thought there should be a restriction. What should I do now? --  Alex  (talk) 16:27, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I think you need to withdraw the latest nomination, instead of simply deleting the page, since J Milburn has commented on the FAC. Or, you could ask another major contributor to be co-nom to the second FAC. --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 07:33, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Ian Rose, Ucucha, GrahamColm: Just wanting to alert the delegates and keeping the discussion here on the nom's talk page. --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 10:28, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm willing to withdraw the nomination, and I'll re-nominate it when I'm done with my other FAC. That'll also give me some time to work out any issues with the article. --  Alex  (talk) 17:55, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Noted. I'm sure you have honestly looked for the restriction, but your enthusiasm I presume must have clouded your judgment. With your Pedro FAC going so well, I think you would be able to renominate your second article for FA class in no time. --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 06:52, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Ian Rose has said that he is inclined to give you "a reasonable exception" in this case. --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 12:00, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I think it's just awful the way Alexcc keeps creating all this high-quality content e.g., thereby overloading the FA process. He should aim lower and crank out humdrum half-baked articles instead. EEng (talk) 17:11, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Edmund Ætheling
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Edmund Ætheling you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of LT910001 -- 02:03, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Prince John of the United Kingdom
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Prince John of the United Kingdom you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of EEng -- 18:20, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I have a hard time resisting tinkering with others' prose -- feel free to revert or open a thread (either on the GA page or, if the discussion can wait until after the GA, on the regular Talk). EEng (talk) 02:37, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Edmund Ætheling
The article Edmund Ætheling you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Edmund Ætheling for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of LT910001 -- 07:42, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 22
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Prince John of the United Kingdom, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Halifax (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:18, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

October 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=578577705 your edit] to Prince John of the United Kingdom may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:01, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
 * of Wales, who had died in 1871 one day after birth, and who was also buried at St Mary Magdalene .|group=note}}

Regarding Arthur
Greetings. I just wanted to say, I think the article is in pretty good shape. It seems well sourced and reasonably complete. If you take care of the prose issues and minor MoS issues that people have brought up at the FAC, it will certainly be at GA status and would be a strong new FAC. All the best, – Quadell (talk) 18:25, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
 * So, in your opinion, should I maintain the FAN, or should I just withdraw it and nominate it for GA? Cheers,  Alex  (talk) 18:33, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Hmm, that's a though call. Since you already offered to withdraw it, it might be troublesome to un-withdraw it. (Some reviewers might be hesitant to go through the trouble of reviewing, if they think you might withdraw the nomination.) So I think if it were me, I would withdraw it, address all the issues listed, and nominate it for GAN. Once it passes GAN (and I'm sure it will), the added feedback will help it become even stronger, and you can renominate it for a second FAC. When you do, let me know; assuming you've addressed all my previous concerns by then, I'll be very likely to support. All the best, – Quadell (talk) 18:48, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Very well, I'll let you know when I decide to re-nominate it. Cheers,  Alex  (talk) 19:08, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Dermide Leclerc
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Dermide Leclerc you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- 01:32, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Dermide Leclerc
The article Dermide Leclerc you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Dermide Leclerc for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- 02:02, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Prince John of the United Kingdom
The article Prince John of the United Kingdom you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Prince John of the United Kingdom for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of EEng -- 17:22, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you!  Alex  (talk) 17:53, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I saw your plan for royal biographies on your userpage. I'm actually planning a few royalty projects of my own (During 2014, I would like to bring George III's remaining children to GA, starting with Princess Amelia of the United Kingdom). I'd be open to a collaboration if you're interested.  Ruby  2010/  2013  18:17, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I'd be willing to help with some, I'll see for sure when you want to start.  Alex  (talk) 18:21, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

I actually owe you one of these, too:

I really appreciate all you're doing in this area. -- Khazar2 (talk) 18:55, 29 October 2013 (UTC
 * Thanks!  Alex  (talk) 20:05, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 October newsletter
The WikiCup is over for another year! Our champion, for the second year running, is. Our final nine were as follows:

All those who reached the final win prizes, and prizes will also be going to the following participants:


 * wins the FA prize, for four featured articles in round 4, worth 400 points.
 * wins the GA prize, for 20 good articles in round 3, worth 600 points.
 * wins the FL prize, for four featured lists in round 2, worth 180 points.
 * wins the FP prize, for 23 featured pictures in round 5, worth 805 point.
 * wins the FPo prize, for 2 featured portals in round 3, worth 70 points.
 * wins the topic prize, for a 23-article featured topic in round 5, worth 230 points.
 * wins the DYK prize, for 79 did you know articles in round 5, worth 570 points.
 * wins the ITN prize, for 23 in the news articles in round 4, worth 270 points.
 * wins the GAR prize, for 24 good article reviews in round 1, worth 96 points.
 * The judges are awarding the Oddball Barnstar to, for some curious contributions in earlier rounds.
 * Finally, the judges are awarding the Geography Barnstar for her work on sea, now a featured article. This top-importance article was the highest-scoring this year; when it was promoted to FA status, Cwmhiraeth could claim 720 points.

Prizes will be handed out in the coming weeks. Please be patient!

Congratulations to everyone who has been successful in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and a particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have achieved this year. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition. While it has been an excellent year, errors have opened up the judges' eyes to the need for a third judge, and it is with pleasure that we announce that experienced WikiCup participant Miyagawa will be acting as a judge from now on. We hope you will all join us in welcoming him to the team.

Next year's competition begins on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; it is open to all Wikipedians, new and old. Brainstorming and discussion remains open for how next year's competition will work, and straw polls will be opened by the judges soon. Those interested in friendly competition may also like to keep an eye on the stub contest, being organised by Casliber. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2014 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 00:10, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014
Hi, you should consider signing up for WikiCup 2014. Cheers, --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 00:42, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Pedro FAC
Hi Alex, I suggest you, as the FA nominator of Pedro, weigh into the discussion that has been taken place over at that page. Unless you want to see the FAC fail, you should respond to the comments of Lecen and hamiltonstone's and address the opposes. Otherwise you could simply withdraw the nomination to let the dust settle. Regards, --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 06:50, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Great minds, Phil, you've posted just as I was about to, although my angle is slightly different... What I was going to say, Alex, is that given the changes to the article, I was considering a restart to the review rather than archiving it. The argument for a restart is that although Lecen changed the article a good deal, it's been essentially stable since then, and if you regard it as having improved (regardless of the way that was done, which I understand may have annoyed you) then a restart makes sense. If on the other hand you dispute the form of the article as Lecen has left it and need to discuss it with him and perhaps re-edit it yet again, then archiving is indeed preferable. Pls let me know here ASAP; I have this page watchlisted. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:43, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
 * You sure you're not me? ;) --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 12:25, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I have another article I'm editing at the moment which I really want to get past FAC, so I suppose I can withdraw it and nominate it for GA, or perhaps you could nominate it for FA again.  Alex  (talk) 17:28, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I'm not sure what you mean by "perhaps you could nominate it for FA again". Essentially, anyone nominating (or continuing with the nomination of) an article must have their heart in it and endorse what's in the article. If you endorse the article as it is now, after Lecen's changes, then restarting the nomination would be in order (remembering there's no guarantee of promotion after the restart, that ultimately lies in the hands of the reviewers, as always). If you don't endorse his changes, or you need time to consider/discuss/rework them, then withdrawing/archiving is the better option at this stage. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:30, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
 * In that case, I suppose I'll withdraw it.  Alex  (talk) 18:09, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Arthur, Prince of Wales
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Arthur, Prince of Wales you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of J Milburn -- 19:41, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Grand Duke Michael Alexandrovich of Russia
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Grand Duke Michael Alexandrovich of Russia you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- 01:10, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Grand Duke Michael Alexandrovich of Russia
The article Grand Duke Michael Alexandrovich of Russia you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Grand Duke Michael Alexandrovich of Russia for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- 02:30, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Grand Duke Michael Alexandrovich of Russia
The article Grand Duke Michael Alexandrovich of Russia you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Grand Duke Michael Alexandrovich of Russia for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- 13:52, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Arthur, Prince of Wales
The article Arthur, Prince of Wales you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Arthur, Prince of Wales for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of J Milburn -- 14:12, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Wow, a two-GA day! (Nice work) 2 . -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:15, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Congrats from me too. I hope to see the article back at FAC soon. All the best, – Quadell (talk) 14:48, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much! I'm currently working on another article, and I have been for almost a month, hoping to get it to FA status soon. Cheers,  Alex  (talk) 15:50, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Terrific--good luck with it. And by the way, I don't know if your work on Michael has gotten you interested in his brother, but it looks like Nicholas II of Russia would bag you the top tier of the Million Award. Khazar2 (talk) 17:27, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 17
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Marie of Romania, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Gala and Le Matin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:10, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Streets?
First, thank you for your excellent work on the article, which was much needed. (All our articles on Romanian royalty could use some improvement.) Second, what would you say to adding something like this?

"Two high schools are named for Marie, in Constanța and Dorohoi. A boulevard and a square in Bucharest bear Marie's name, as well as a square in Timișoara and streets in Alba Iulia, Bechet, Berceni, Caransebeș, Dej and Râmnicu Vâlcea. In the interwar period, what is now Eroilor Avenue in Cluj-Napoca was named after her, as were streets in Cernăuți and Deva."

On the one hand, it does seem useful. On the other hand, I don't think a source is strictly necessary, but it would be quite difficult to cite for each one if that were the case; I mainly gleaned the information from Google Maps, and this and this. Anyway, it's up to you. - Biruitorul Talk 22:30, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 January newsletter
The 2014 WikiCup is off to a flying start, with, at time of writing, 138 participants. The is the largest number of participants we have seen since 2010. If you are yet to join the competition, don't worry- the judges have agreed to keep the signups open for a few more days. By a wide margin, our current leader is newcomer, whose set of 14 featured pictures, the first FPs of the competition, was worth 490 points. Here are some more noteworthy scorers:


 * and were the first people to score, for the good article Tropical Storm Bret (1981) and its good article review respectively. 12george1 was also the first person to score in 2012 and 2013.
 * scored the first ITN points for 2014 North American polar vortex.
 * scored points for an early good topic, finishing off Featured topics/She Wolf.
 * scored the first bonus points of the competition, for his work on Typhoon Vera.
 * has scored the highest number of bonus points for a single article, for the high-importance Jurassic Park (film).

Featured articles, featured lists, featured topics and featured portals are yet to play a part in the competition. The judges have removed a number of submissions which were deemed ineligible. Typically, we aim to see work on a project, followed by a nomination, followed by promotion, this year. We apologise for any disappointment caused by our strict enforcement this year; we're aiming to keep the competition as fair as possible.

Wikipedians interested in friendly competition may be interested to take part in The Core Contest; unlike the WikiCup, The Core Contest is not about audited content, but, like the WikiCup, it is about article improvement; specifically, The Core Contest is about contribution to some of Wikipedia's most important article. Of course, any work done for The Core Contest, if it leads to a DYK, GA or FA, can earn WikiCup 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 WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help 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 WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email), The ed17 (talk • email) and Miyagawa (talk • email) 19:54, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 February newsletter
And so ends the most competitive first round we have ever seen, with 38 points required to qualify for round 2. Last year, 19 points secured a place; before that, 11 (2012) or 8 (2011) were enough. This is both a blessing and a curse. While it shows the vigourous good health of the competition, it also means that we have already lost many worthy competitors. Our top three scorers were:


 * , a WikiCup newcomer whose high-quality scans of rare banknotes represent an unusual, interesting and valuable contribution to Wikipedia. Most of Godot's points this round have come from a large set of pictures used in Treasury Note (1890–91).
 * , a WikiCup veteran and a finalist last year, Adam is also a featured picture specialist, focusing on the restoration of historical images. This month's promotions have included a carefully restored set of artist William Russell Flint's work.
 * , another WikiCup newcomer. WikiRedactor has claimed points for good article reviews and good articles relating to pop music, many of which were awarded bonus points. Articles include Sky Ferreira, Hannah Montana 2: Meet Miley Cyrus and "Wrecking Ball" (Miley Cyrus song).

Other competitors of note include:


 * , who helped take Thirty Flights of Loving through good article candidates and featured article candidates, claiming the first first featured article of the competition.
 * , who claimed the first featured list of the competition with Natalia Kills discography.
 * , who takes the title of the contributor awarded the highest bonus point multiplier (resulting in the highest scoring article) of the competition so far. Her high-importance salamander, now a good article, scored 108 points.

After such a competitive first round, expect the second round to also be fiercely fought. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 1 but before the start of round 2 can be claimed in round 2, but please do not update your submission page until March (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 equally.

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. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help 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 WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email), The ed17 (talk • email) and Miyagawa (talk • email) 00:01, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

FA congratulations
Just a quick note to congratulate you on the promotion of Pedro Afonso, Prince Imperial of Brazil to FA status recently. If you would like to see this (or any other FA) appear as "Today's featured article" soon, please nominate it at the requests page; if you'd like to see an FA on a particular date in the next year or so, please add it to the "pending" list. In the absence of a request, the article may end up being picked at any time (although with 1,323 articles in Category:Featured articles that have not appeared on the main page at present, there's no telling how long – or short! – the wait might be). If you'd got any TFA-related questions or problems, please let me know. BencherliteTalk 22:32, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Marie of Romania
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Marie of Romania you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Royroydeb -- 09:20, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 March newsletter
A quick update as we are half way through round two of this year's competition. WikiCup newcomer (Pool E) leads, having produced a massive set of featured pictures for Silver certificate (United States), an article also brought to featured list status. Former finalist (Pool G) is in second, which he owes mostly to his work with historical images, including a number of images from Urania's Mirror, an article also brought to good status. 2010 champion (Pool C) is third overall, thanks to contributions relating to naval history, including the newly featured Japanese battleship Nagato. , who currently leads Pool A and is sixth overall, takes the title for the highest scoring individual article of the competition so far, with the top importance featured article Ian Smith.

With 26 people having already scored over 100 points, it is likely that well over 100 points will be needed to secure a place in round 3. Recent years have required 123 (2013), 65 (2012), 41 (2011) and 100 (2010). Remember that only 64 will progress to round 3 at the end of April. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page; if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally. 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. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help 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 WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email), The ed17 (talk • email) and Miyagawa (talk • email) 22:55, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Marie of Romania/GA1
On request I took over the review of Marie of Romania. I have finished the review, and while I like the article I have some concerns over the amount of images and the length of the text, so the review is on hold until those concerns are addressed.  SilkTork  ✔Tea time  14:57, 3 May 2014 (UTC)




 * A decent article. As part of ongoing development, especially if considering going for FA, I suggest trimming the article down to a more digestible size.  SilkTork  ✔Tea time  10:06, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 April newsletter
Round 3 of the 2014 WikiCup has just begun; 32 competitors remain. Pool G's was Round 2's highest scorer, with a large number of featured picture credits. In March/April, he restored star charts from Urania's Mirror, lithographs of various warships (such as SMS Gefion) and assorted other historical media. Second overall was Pool E's, whose featured list Silver certificate (United States) contains dozens of scans of banknotes recently promoted to featured picture status. Third was Pool G's who has produced a large number of good articles, many, including Falkner Island, on Connecticut-related topics. Other successful participants included, who saw three articles (including the top-importance Ian Smith) through featured article candidacies, and , who saw three lists (including the beautifully-illustrated list of plantations in West Virginia) through featured list candidacies. High-importance good articles promoted this round include narwhal from, tiger from and The Lion King from. We also saw our first featured topic points of the competition, awarded to and  for their work on the Sega Genesis topic. No points have been claimed so far for good topics or featured portals.

192 was our lowest qualifying score, again showing that this WikiCup is the most competitive ever. In previous years, 123 (2013), 65 (2012), 41 (2011) or 100 (2010) secured a place in Round 3. Pool H was the strongest performer, with all but one of its members advancing, while only the two highest scorers in Pools G and F advanced. At the end of June, 16 users will advance into the semi-finals. 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. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help 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 WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email), The ed17 (talk • email) and Miyagawa (talk • email) 17:56, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Katherine McKinley


A tag has been placed on Katherine McKinley requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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 "Click here to 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 removed 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 06:16, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 June newsletter
After an extremely close race, Round 3 is over. 244 points secured a place in Round 4, which is comparable to previous years- 321 was required in 2013, while 243 points were needed in 2012. Pool C's was the round's highest scorer, mostly due to a 32 featured pictures, including both scans and photographs. Also from Pool C, finished second overall, claiming three featured articles, including the high-importance Grus (constellation). Third place was Pool B's, whose contributions included featured articles Russian battleship Poltava (1894) and Russian battleship Peresvet. Pool C saw the highest number of participants advance, with six out of eight making it to the next round.

The round saw this year's first featured portal, with taking Portal:Literature to featured status. The round also saw the first good topic points, thanks to and the 2013 Atlantic hurricane season. This means that all content types have been claimed this year. Other contributions of note this round include a featured topic on Maya Angelou's autobiographies from, a good article on the noted Czech footballer Tomáš Rosický from and a now-featured video game screenshot, freely released due to the efforts of.

The judges would like to remind participants to update submission pages promptly. This means that content can be checked, and allows those following the competition (including those participating) to keep track of scores effectively. This round has seen discussion about various aspects of the WikiCup's rules and procedures. Those interested in the competition can be assured that formal discussions about how next year's competition will work will be opened shortly, and all are welcome to voice their views then. 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 help 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 WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. and 18:48, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 August newsletter
The final of the 2014 WikiCup begins in a few short minutes! Our eight finalists are listed below, along with their placement in Round 4:


 * , a WikiCup newcomer, finished top of Pool A and was the round's highest scorer. Godot is a featured picture specialist, claiming large numbers of points due to high-quality scans of historical documents, especially banknotes.
 * 1) is a WikiCup veteran, having been a finalist every year since 2010. In the semi-final, he was Pool B's highest scorer. Cas's points primarily come from articles on the natural sciences.
 * 2) was Pool A's runner-up. Czar's points come mostly from content related to independent video games, including both articles and topics.
 * 3) was Pool B's runner-up. Another featured picture specialist, many of Adam's points come from the restoration of historical media. He has been a WikiCup finalist twice before.
 * 4) won the WikiCup in 2012 and 2013, and enters this final as the first wildcard. She focuses on biology-related articles, and has worked on several high-importance articles.
 * 5) is the second wildcard. George's points come primarily from meteorology-related articles. This year and last year, George was the first person in the competition to score.
 * , the third wildcard, was the 2010 champion and a finalist last year. His writes mostly on military history, especially naval history.
 * , the fourth and final wildcard, has participated in previous WikiCups, but not reached any finals. Bloom's points are mostly thanks to did you knows, featured lists and good articles related to sport and national symbols.

We say goodbye to this year's semi-finalists. ,, , , , and  have all performed well to reach this stage of the competition, and we hope they will all be joining us again next year.

There are two upcoming competitions unrelated to the WikiCup which may be of interest to those who receive this newsletter. The Stub Contest will run through September, and revolves around expanding stub articles, especially high-importance or old stubs. In addition, a proposal has been made for a new competition, the GA Cup, which the organisers plan to run next year. This competition is based on the WikiCup and aims to reduce the good article review backlog.

There is now a thread for brainstorming on how next year's WikiCup competition should work. Please come along and share your thoughts- What works? What doesn't work? What needs changing? Signups for next year's competition will be open soon; we will be in touch. If, at this stage of the competition, you are keen to help the with the WikiCup, please do what you can to participate in review processes. Our finalists will find things much easier if the backlogs at good article candidates, featured article candidates, featured picture candidates and the rest are kept at a minimum. As ever, 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. and 22:09, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 September newsletter
In one month's time, we will know our WikiCup 2014 champion. Newcomer has taken a strong lead with a featured list (historical coats of arms of the U.S. states from 1876) and a raft of featured pictures. Reigning champion is in second place with a number of high-importance biology articles, including new FA Isopoda and new GA least weasel. , who is in his fifth WikiCup final, is in third, with featured articles Pictor and Epacris impressa.

Signups for the 2015 WikiCup are open. All Wikipedians, new and experienced, are warmly invited to sign up for the competition. Wikipedians interested in friendly competition may also like to sign up for the GA Cup, a new WikiCup-inspired competition which revolves around completing good article reviews. As ever, 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. and 22:11, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014: The results
The 2014 WikiCup champion is, who flew the flag of the Smithsonian Institution. This was Godot13's first WikiCup competition and, over the 10 months of the competition, he has produced (among other contributions) two featured lists and an incredible 292 featured pictures, including architectural photographs and scans of historical documents. , 2012 and 2013 WikiCup champion, came in second, having written a large number of biology-related articles. , WikiCup finalist every year since 2010, finished in third.

A full list of our prize-winners follows:


 * wins the prize for first place and the FP prize for 181 featured pictures in the final round.
 * wins the prize for second place and the DYK prize for 65 did you knows in the final round.
 * wins the prize for third place and the FA prize for four featured articles in the final round.
 * wins the prize for fourth place
 * wins a final 8 prize.
 * wins a final 8 prize.
 * wins a final 8 prize.
 * wins the GA prize for 27 good articles in round 2 and the review prize for 28 good article reviews in round 1.
 * wins the FL prize for three featured lists in round 2.
 * wins the FPo prize his work on featured portals.
 * wins the topic prize for a nine-article featured topic in round 3.
 * wins the news prize for 28 in the news articles in round 3.

Congratulations to everyone who has been successful in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and a particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have participated this year. We warmly invite all of you to sign up for next year's competition. Discussions and polls concerning potential rules changes are also open, and all are welcome to participate. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2014 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. and 22:51, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015 is just around the corner...
Hello everyone, and may we wish you all a happy holiday season. As you will probably already know, the 2015 WikiCup begins in the new year; there is still time to sign up. We have a few important announcements concerning the future of the WikiCup.


 * We would like to announce that Josh (J Milburn) and Ed (The ed17), who have been WikiCup judges since 2009 and 2010 respectively, are stepping down. This decision has been made for a number of reasons, but the main one is time. Both Josh and Ed have found that, over the previous year, they have been unable to devote the time necessary to the WikiCup, and it is not likely that they will be able to do this in the near future. Furthermore, new people at the helm can only help to invigorate the WikiCup and keep it dynamic. Josh and Ed will still be around, and will likely be participating in the Cup this following year as competitors, which is where both started out.
 * In a similar vein, we hope you will all join us in welcoming Jason (Sturmvogel 66) and Christine (Figureskatingfan), who are joining Brian (Miyagawa) to form the 2015 WikiCup judging team. Jason is a WikiCup veteran, having won in 2010 and finishing in fifth this year. Christine has participated in two WikiCups, reaching the semi-finals in both, and is responsible for the GA Cup, which she now co-runs.
 * The discussions/polls concerning the next competition's rules will be closed soon, and rules changes will be made clear on WikiCup/Scoring and talk pages. While it may be impossible to please everyone, the judges will make every effort to ensure that the new rules are both fair and in the best interests of the competition, which is, first and foremost, about improving Wikipedia.

If you have any questions or concerns, the judges can be reached on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, on their talk pages, or by email. We hope you will all join us in trying to make the 2015 WikiCup the most productive and enjoyable yet. You are receiving this message because you are listed on WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk), The ed17 (talk), Miyagawa (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Figureskatingfan (talk) 18:53, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Precious
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:27, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Three years ago, you were recipient no. 1437 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:20, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Jolean Wejbe


A tag has been placed on Jolean Wejbe, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate,. Under the specified criteria, where a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

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 removed 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. KAP03Talk &bull;&#32;Contributions 22:49, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Aynsley Lemon


The article Aynsley Lemon has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern:
 * Does not meet criteria for WP:NACTOR, four minor roles without any continued notability

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. &#9790;Loriendrew&#9789;  &#9743;(ring-ring)  00:17, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Disappearance of Anna Christian Waters for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Disappearance of Anna Christian Waters is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Disappearance of Anna Christian Waters until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Sitush (talk) 21:06, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

File:Barabara Bush with her two children, 1950.jpg
Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 21:34, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

File:George H. W. Bush holding Robin.png
Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 21:40, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

John of Denmark (1518–1532)
Please see Talk:John of Denmark (1518–1532) -- PBS (talk) 14:05, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Pauline Robinson Bush
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Pauline Robinson Bush you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of DannyS712 -- DannyS712 (talk) 09:41, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Talkback
DannyS712 (talk) 00:19, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Pauline Robinson Bush
The article Pauline Robinson Bush you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Pauline Robinson Bush for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of DannyS712 -- DannyS712 (talk) 00:02, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Pauline Robinson Bush
The article Pauline Robinson Bush you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Pauline Robinson Bush for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of DannyS712 -- DannyS712 (talk) 05:21, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:SophiaHanover 2.jpg


The file File:SophiaHanover 2.jpg has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "unused, low-res, no obvious use"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Elisabethhesse.jpg


The file File:Elisabethhesse.jpg has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "unused, low-res, no obvious use"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Margaret1523.jpg


The file File:Margaret1523.jpg has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "unused, low-res, no obvious use"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Louise1515.jpg


The file File:Louise1515.jpg has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "unused, low-res, no obvious use"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Precious anniversary 4
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:19, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 24
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Nicolas Henri, Duke of Orléans, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Plague. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:09, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Frances Talbot, Countess of Tyrconnell
Dear Alexcoldcasefan. Thank you for your edits on the article "Frances Talbot, Countess of Tyrconnell". I see you are an experienced wikipedian with an impressive track record of GAs and FAs that I do not have. You improved, among others, the lifespan information of her siblings. But, should you not have also added the corresponding citations? She now seems to have two brothers called Richard. Is this an error? Please help. With many thanks and best regards, Johannes Schade (talk) 08:21, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi! No, it's not an error, I just read the same book that is already referenced for her siblings. The first reference used in the sibling table has a link to the first in a series of about 3-4 pages that contain details on all of the siblings (including the two consecutive Richards) and mention years, dates and the like. I could've referenced each sibling, but felt it unnecessary since the page was already there, but feel free to, if you find the page could use it!  Alex  (talk) 20:24, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Dear Alexcoldcasefan. You were quite evidently right. I should have looked better at the lifespans. I found the details mentioned by you in Sergeant on page 7 and added corresponding citations. I hope you agree. With many thanks for your help and best regards, Johannes Schade (talk) 21:27, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Elizabeth of York
Hello, I noticed the changes you made for Elizabeth's naming. I like that just as much as my revision (which I coincidently did the same time as you did, though you published it just before mines, despite having the similar intentions), but I did that originally as a bit of a compromise; looking into the talk page for Edward IV, I noticed that there are some editors who don't like using "Elizabeth, Queen of England", thinking that people will idiotically mistake that for Elizabeth I. Just a precaution if someone does change it back to "Elizabeth, Queen Consort", or even worse in my opinion, bring back the "of York" naming conventions to the list of Edward's issue, which led to the jumbled up list we both encountered and wanted to fix. Thanks. Yourlocallordandsavior (talk) 20:48, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Using the Interlanguage link template instead of a piped link to an article in another language
Hi, Alexcoldcasefan! I would strongly suggest that you use ill, a commonly used redirect to Interlanguage link. This has three advantages & a disadvantage. Please have a look at my ill substitutions for your piped links to itwiki at Gian Galeazzo Visconti & Bianca Maria Visconti. Peaceray (talk) 18:43, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Advantage: It adheres to the principle of least astonishment (WP:SURPRISE) from the Writing better articles explanatory supplement to the Manual of Style guideline. See the principle of least astonishment (POLA) article for a fuller explanation of the concept. Basically, if you link to another language & use a piped label, the user will have no idea that they are going to a foreign language article. I believe that, more often than not, this would lead to a WTF?!? reaction.}}
 * Advantage: ill provides a red link followed by one or more language codes that link to corresponding articles in other languages. This alerts the reader that there is an opportunity to create/translate an article.
 * Advantage: ill allows one to link to articles in more than one language. This is useful when they each contain useful content that the other does not.
 * Disadvantage: One cannot create a piped link with it.

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:31, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:CardinalInfante.JPG


The file File:CardinalInfante.JPG has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Superseded by c:File:Diego Velázquez 045.jpg."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --Minorax &laquo;&brvbar;talk&brvbar;&raquo; 13:39, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Charles II de Valois, Duke of Orléans (ca 1543).jpg


The file File:Charles II de Valois, Duke of Orléans (ca 1543).jpg has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Unused. Superseded by File:Charles II, duc d'Orléans (1522-1545).jpg and File:Corneille de Lyon - Charles d'Angoulême (huile sur bois, 1536).jpg."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. mattbr 11:52, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Robin Bush portrait, 1953.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Robin Bush portrait, 1953.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

''' This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. ''' Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:InfanteFelipe.JPG


The file File:InfanteFelipe.JPG has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Unused, replaced with c:File:Pieter Paul Rubens - Portrait of King Philip IV (Hermitage).jpg."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --Minorax &laquo;&brvbar;talk&brvbar;&raquo; 03:48, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:JosephFranzofAustria.jpg


The file File:JosephFranzofAustria.jpg has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Redundant to c:Josef Kreuzinger Erzherzog Joseph Franz Leopold.jpg."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --Minorax &laquo;&brvbar;talk&brvbar;&raquo; 03:09, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Questions about expressions in Edmund Ætheling
Dear Alexcoldcasefan

Hello. My name is Ansokuko-San, a Japanese Wikipedian. I have some questions about some expressions in this article. If you can specify them, please tell me. ( I am now nominating this article of Japanese version for the Good Article, but some veterans are asking me to make some points more specific. I need your help……) Four points below are now being asked by veterans.

Q1

・ < Edmund and Edward were recorded as being "somewhat grown, and had passed twelve years" when they arrived in Yaroslav's capital, Gardorika [27] > → the veteran is asking me about the name of literatures that prove those sentences above.

Q2&Q3

・< A mid thirteenth-century letopis (chronicle) records nothing of Edmund and Edward's stay at the Kievan court, although later Russian chronicles do mention their refuge.[29]> →the veteran is asking me about the specific name of letopis that prove those sentences.

→the veteran is asking me about later. When were those later Russian Chronicles made? He is saying there are too many Russian chronicles to find the right ones mentioned here.

Q4

・<The Æthelings' presence at the Kievan court presented itself as "a very useful negotiating counter" for Yaroslav's Western-orientated foreign policy.[32] →What is the Western-oriented foreign policy? and How Kiev used Æthelings as a very usuful negotiating counter?

These four points are all about I want to ask. I hope they are resolved and these resolutions make this article better! Sorry for bad English.If you need more explanation, don’t hesitate to ask! —安息香酸 (talk) 04:27, 16 February 2024 (UTC) regards

Good article reassessment for Edmund Ætheling
Edmund Ætheling has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Dudley Miles (talk) 15:46, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Barabara Bush with her two children, 1950.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Barabara Bush with her two children, 1950.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:07, 29 February 2024 (UTC)