User talk:BigDom/Archive 10

Disambiguation link notification for September 1
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Wayne Harrison (footballer), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Coleman (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) 14:19, 1 September 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) 23:15, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Malkin Tower
Thinking about Malkin Tower again, it seems to me that it might be an interesting edge case. Sure, it's short, but as far as I'm aware it contains just about everything that's known about the place. And being short is no impediment at FAC anyway; at a readable prose size of 6387 B (1087 words) it's significantly longer than Nico Ditch for instance, which is 4747 B (776 words). So I say let's go for it, but hopefully it won't be your swan song. Eric  Corbett  16:54, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Did you manage to get to the library last week? I've had anoher search myself, and I can't find anything we've missed, so unless you have I suggest we go for it. Eric  Corbett  13:22, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I ended up being run off my feet all last week and have been away for the weekend, so I haven't had chance to go yet. I'm off to York tonight as well for the football, but I should be free tomorrow so will try and go then. It's doubtful that I'll find anything substantial enough that it would cause any problems at FAC, so I wouldn't be against going for it now if you want to. BigDom (talk) 15:07, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
 * We'll go for it now then. I can't believe there's anything substantial we've missed, but if you find anything at the library tomorrow we can easily add it. I'll put the nomination up later this afternoon. Eric   Corbett  15:16, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, like I say I won't be able to help this evening but after that there should be no problem with me helping out responding to comments etc. BigDom (talk) 15:28, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
 * No worries, these things tend to start off pretty slowly. Eric   Corbett  15:41, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Strangely I’ve been thinking that there is fair amount more to add. But the more I think about it, my discoveries are all pointing in one direction, we’ll probably never know where it stood. Is any of the following useful? (Most of it can be referenced) Wiktionary suggests that firehouse could just mean a building with a hearth in it. Alkincoats (which separates Malkin tower farm from Colne town) was a separate vill from Colne. Property in that area is described in the court rolls as in Alkincoats. This suggests to me that somewhere described as in the north end of Colne is unlikely to be near the forest boundary. The claim about old masonry found in a field wall at Malkin tower is surprisingly old. It appears in a footnote on the (1848) Chetham society version of Potts. Also the field boundary pattern surrounding the farm probably signifies something. On the subject of Potts – approximately 20 people attended the supposed coven at Malkin, seems a bit much for a small cottage? James Device stole a sheep from Barley to feed them. It’s quite a long walk back to Blacko from there. He’s also very specific about the location of the initial meeting with John Law. Colne-field was east of the old town, around today’s graveyard and cricket club. Do we know whether the Sadler’s farm claim relates to a malkin field or just a kiln field? It occurs to me that Lime kilns would have been fairly common around here, but probably not that habitable. --Trappedinburnley (talk) 23:02, 6 August 2013 (UTC)


 * So what do you want to do? Eric   Corbett  23:15, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Some of that looks like stuff we could add to the article, the fact that there were allegedly 20 people at the coven would point to a larger building than a small cottage, which is interesting. Wiktionary's definition of a "firehouse" is taken almost verbatim from the Oxford English Dictionary so it does seem to mean that it could just have been any building with a hearth, which doesn't really narrow it down much. Anyway, I'll see what you two think about what we should do next. BigDom (talk) 10:20, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The reason I posted it here rather than trying to incorporate it straight into the article, is that I'm concerned that it would actually be detrimental. Is turning it into a discussion of various people's theories on the subject going to improve it? Also on the Chetham society bit, I'm not sure what discription to use when citing the source? If you two aprove, I'll try and do some stuff over the next couple or three days. Feel free to copyedit as required, I've never been much of an author. --Trappedinburnley (talk) 13:45, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Add whatever you think is useful/relevant if you can source it. Eric   Corbett  14:16, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I've added another line about Blacko being a possible location, but that was the only thing I could find at the library that was a bit different to what we already have. BigDom (talk) 13:56, 8 August 2013 (UTC)


 * It sounds to me that Lumby is talking about the same place. The footnote in potts reads "...It stood in a field a little elevated, on a brow above the building at present called Malking-Tower. The site of the house or cottage is still distinctly traceable, and fragments of the plaster are yet to be found imbedded in the boundary wall of the field. The old road to Gisburne ran almost close to it".
 * Also I've butchered my way through a commons upload to create this image of the old pub sign. I feel it shows Stansfield Tower in the background. I want to change the line about the pub but don't have that source. Is there any leeway?--Trappedinburnley (talk) 19:48, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Not unless we want to have new arseholes installed when we go to FAC. You could perhaps couch it rather vaguely, such as "what may be Stansfield Tower in the background", and see what the reaction is. Eric   Corbett  19:55, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Not too surprising that it's pretty similar to what's in Potts, it did say in Lumby's book that he had used Potts as a source. I can't remember exactly what the source for the inn sign said, but from what I recall it didn't really go into much detail. IMO the sign is probably meant to depict Malkin Tower but they've just used the folly as an idea of what it might have looked like. BigDom (talk) 20:03, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm going away for the weekend on a last minute thing, so further contributions from me will have to wait for a little while. Feel free to use anything I haven't added yet. Do either of you have access to Walter Bennett's book? It seems he might favour the Newchurch site and I think it needs some expansion. Why Sadler's Farm over anywhere else in that area? --Trappedinburnley (talk) 08:25, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I've got a copy of Bennett's book, which I'll have a look through later. Eric   Corbett  13:14, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Here's what Bennett says on page 6:
 * "Demdike lived with her daughter and grandchildren in a house or converted building called "Malkin Tower" which was situated in Malkin Field, part of Sadler's Farm, Newchurch. Some five hundred yards away from Malkin Tower and less than 30 minutes walk for a blind old woman was Bull Hole Farm where Demdike made an unsuccessful attempt to cure a sick cow ...""


 * No explanation of why he believes that to be the location, and as only Demdike and her grandaughter lived in Malkin Tower, not her daughter and grandchildren, I think we ought to be cautious in putting too much credence into what Bennett says. Eric   Corbett  21:33, 15 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Not really anything we can use then. I really don't think that there's much more to be added. BigDom (talk) 21:45, 15 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Neither do I, so I think we might as well go for it now. Eric   Corbett  22:06, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Would you like to do the honours? BigDom (talk) 06:57, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll do it later today. Eric   Corbett  11:57, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * While I don't agree that there isn't much more that could be added, I expect the rest would only be more conjecture. I certainly don't think we've made any howlers. Clayton has a little site where he attributes the Sadler's claim to a Dr. Laycock, who I think features in the 1st ref in Jonas Moore (to which someone recently added an interesting but unreferenced claim). While some volumes of Transactions of the Burnley Literary and Scientific Club are available at archive.org I've not been able to find anything relevant. I might try to get a look at Clayton's 2012 book as he claims to have new research, but it can always be added later. --Trappedinburnley (talk) 19:58, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I've read Clayton's book; there's nothing in it that we've missed. Eric   Corbett  20:49, 16 August 2013 (UTC)


 * FAC is now go. Eric   Corbett  20:49, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Cheers for sorting that out. Got it on my watchlist, and I should be around most of the time to help out. Now we play the waiting game. BigDom (talk) 20:51, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I sometimes wonder whether FAC is worth the hassle and isn't just a demonstration of the law of diminishing returns, which is what I'm thinking right now. Eric   Corbett  19:07, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Seems that our nomination has stalled. I had expected that by now it would have been about to drop off the end of the queue and be archived, so I was surprised to see that there are still quite a few below it. Pity about that oppose; I don't think there's anything actionable in it, but there you go. Means we need to get another couple of supports to stand any chance though. Eric  Corbett  19:49, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I thought it would have finished by now as well. Shame we haven't had a few more reviewers but I guess that's often the case with obscure topics like this. The oppose is just daft IMO, hopefully it might get overlooked. BigDom (talk) 22:50, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Even if it was, we'd still need another support. Eric   Corbett  23:27, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

We did it, well done to us! Eric  Corbett  21:57, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Brilliant news, took a while but it was worth it in the end. If you're ever round Pendle way I think a drink would be in order. BigDom (talk) 21:36, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Jocelyn Ducloux for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jocelyn Ducloux 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/Jocelyn Ducloux 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. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 15:18, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

FA congrats
Just a quick note to congratulate you on the promotion of Malkin Tower to FA status recently. If you would like to see (or any other FA you may have helped to write) appear as "Today's featured article" soon, please nominate  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 1,327 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 questions TFA-related or problems, please let me know. BencherliteTalk 17:45, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Just saw this on the main page and wanted to add my own congratulations; a fine piece of writing, and a fine choice for Halloween... -- Khazar2 (talk) 16:59, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps you now get some flavour of why I hate TFA so much. You find yourself fighting on so many fronts at once. Eric  Corbett  23:26, 31 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) 00:56, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

GAN December 2013 Backlog Drive
{| |}

Nomination of Joe Wilkinson (footballer) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Joe Wilkinson (footballer) 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/Joe Wilkinson (footballer) 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. Laun chba  ller  22:55, 25 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)

March 2014 GAN Backlog Drive
It's that time again! Starting on March 1, there will be another GAN Backlog Drive! There will be several changes compared to previous drives:


 * This drive will introduce a new component to it; a point system. In a nutshell, older nominations are worth more points than newer nominations. The top 3 participants who have the points will be awarded the Golden, Silver, or Bronze Wikipedia Puzzle Piece Trophy, respectively.
 * Unlike the December 2013 Backlog Drive, earning an additional barnstar if you reached your goal has been removed.
 * The allowance to have insufficient reviews has been lowered to 2 before being disqualified.
 * An exception to the rule that all reviews must be completed before the deadline has been created.

Also, something that I thought I would share with all of you is that we raised $20.88 (USD) for the WMF in the December 2013 drive. It may not sound like a lot but considering that that was raised just because we reviewed articles, I would say that's pretty good! With that success, pledges can be made for the upcoming drive if you wish.

More info regarding the drive and full descriptions regarding the changes to this drive can be found on the the drive page. If you have any questions, feel free to leave a message on the drive talk page.

I look forward to your participation and hope that because of it, some day the backlog will be gone!

--Dom497

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:58, 22 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)

GAN March 2014 Backlog Drive
The March 2014 GAN Backlog Drive has begun and will end on April 1, 2014! Sent by Dom497 on behalf of MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:00, 1 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)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Minnesota Thunder squad
Template:Minnesota Thunder squad has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Mikemor92 (talk) 03:30, 17 April 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)

Request for comment
Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:46, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Just temporary?
We can't afford to lose editors from the northwest; who'd be left to call a spade a fucking shovel? Eric  Corbett  22:29, 27 June 2014 (UTC)


 * I also hope that you’ll be back! Working with you both on Malkin Tower was definitely one of the better experiences I’ve had here. I’d certainly be happy to work together again in the future. Actually I was talking to Eric a little while ago about doing an article on the 1633 witch trail with at idea in mind.--Trappedinburnley (talk) 09:12, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks to both of you. I don't know how long it'll be for, perhaps forever or maybe just temporary. I honestly really enjoyed working with both of you on Malkin Tower, it was definitely one of my best experiences here too. Let me know if either of you do start any more witchy projects in the future and I'd probably be happy to do some research if not much writing. BigDom (talk) 09:35, 29 June 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)

Nomination for deletion of Template:CCC
Template:CCC has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.
 * Hi, I wanted to reach out about potentially renaming the County Cricket Club template. Perhaps "CCEW" (Cricket Championship England and Wales), hopefully a series of letters that won't conflict in the future.  Now that that I know the template is still of use, I have tentatively withdrawn my nomination. --Zfish118 (talk) 17:33, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Stefan Bliem


The article Stefan Bliem has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Article has no references

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. AlanS (talk) 13:00, 6 August 2014 (UTC)