User talk:Casliber/Archive 63

Please friend, close it
Hello dear friend, could you please close DYK nomination for George Beauchamp (sailor)? I couldn't find more sources. I am more successful with other DYK nomination and Featured Pictures candidates but not this one LOL. Please if you can. Kind regards & Best wishes. --LLcentury (talk) 10:53, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot, hope to not have contributed for the worse. Kind regards --LLcentury (talk) 12:30, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Rockwarbler
Hi Cas; I hope you're well. We have a wonderful image of an endemic Australian bird at FPC, but, sadly, the article is only a few sentences long. I wonder if the topic is one of interest? If so, I'm sure an expanded article would draw a few readers if/when the image makes the main page. Josh Milburn (talk) 06:06, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
 * on it. yes, this is about to be moved from a monotypic genus too so there is some cool genetic stuff to add. I have also nominated a cool bird at GAN....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 07:31, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Fantastic! I may be able to pick that review up this weekend, but no promises. Josh Milburn (talk) 19:09, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Heh cool, we'lll see how we go :) Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:21, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Rockwarbler
Hi. Its my first DYK review so excuse me if this doesn't seem right. I personally would like to know why it was called the hanging dick which I could find from a simple google search. Otherwise it seems eligible, I find the second hook to be more interesting. Thanks! --E.3 (talk) 23:46, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Rockwarbler
Hello! Your submission of Rockwarbler at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! E.3 (talk) 23:46, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Masked booby
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Masked booby 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 Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 08:20, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Renaming an article
Hi Cas Liber, how are you? I know that you're an administrator, and I was wondering whether you could help me with renaming an article. As you may know, Columbia Records releases a lot of Bob Dylan's old, unreleased recordings as part of what is called the Bootleg Series, the last one being The Bootleg Series Vol. 14: More Blood, More Tracks. Very recently Columbia released a box set of 1975 live recordings, and I absentmindedly assumed it was the next in the series, and created The Bootleg Series Vol. 15: The Rolling Thunder Revue: The 1975 Live Recordings. It was pointed out to me that for whatever reason it was not released as part of the series; according to Dylan's official website [], the album's title should be Bob Dylan – The Rolling Thunder Revue: The 1975 Live Recordings. Would you possibly be able to either change the title directly of the the article I created, or else delete the article, in which case I could create a new one with the proper name. Thank you. Moisejp (talk) 05:53, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
 * done. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 06:25, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much! :-) Moisejp (talk) 06:30, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi again, is it possible to make the title italicized? I know how to put italics in the text of an article, of course, but I just realized I maybe don't know how to make a newly created article name italicized. (Or maybe I do know and am just foggy-headed today.) Thanks so much. Moisejp (talk) 06:38, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
 * done Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 06:46, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Notice of arbitration
You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Antisemitism in Poland. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Antisemitism in Poland/Evidence. Please add your evidence by June 23, 2019, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Arbitration/Requests/Case/Antisemitism in Poland/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, – bradv 🍁  15:07, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Masked booby
The article Masked booby you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Masked booby for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 08:21, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Membership renewal


You have been a member of Wiki Project Med Foundation (WPMEDF) in the past. Your membership, however, appears to have expired. As such this is a friendly reminder encouraging you to officially rejoin WPMEDF. There are no associated costs. Membership gives you the right to vote in elections for the board. The current membership round ends in 2020.

Thanks again :-) The team at Wiki Project Med Foundation---Avicenno (talk) 05:34, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

weebill
Hello, i dont know why there is a picture of a goat. im new to wikipedia.

i am contributing content to the weebill page for a university assignment. i needed to contribute information to an existing 'stub'. I will be marked on the information (as is it currently presented) provided on the weebill wiki page.

Thanks for your feedback and help. Stephanie StephanieMartin272 (talk) 05:44, 12 June 2019 (UTC): 
 * okay, how complete does it have to be? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:19, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

WikiCup 2019 Reminder
Hi. I'm DannyS712 (talk), and I just wanted to remind you that you are a current participant in round 3 of this year's WikiCup! There are just over 2 weeks until the third round ends – if you haven't made you first submission for this round yet, there is still time to start; if you have already started, keep up the good work. See your submissions page: here. Good luck!

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 19:11, 12 June 2019 (UTC) on behalf of DannyS712 (talk)

Yellow-tailed Black Cockatoo scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the Yellow-tailed Black Cockatoo article has been scheduled as today's featured article for July 6, 2019. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Today's featured article/July 6, 2019, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.

We also suggest that you watchlist Main Page/Errors up to the day of this TFA. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me?  06:54, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the "sombre bird"! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:56, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Acuro Organics Limited
Hi There, i would like to know the concerned part of the proposed page for the speedy deletion, because of which you had objected its existence on Wikipedia. I am committed to do all rectifications or improvement to clarify the issue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shubhh97 (talk • contribs) 06:39, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
 * okay then I have undeleted it and tagged it. It needs at least two detailed mentions in independent sources. You have one, but someone might contest that one anyway as merely a listing. In any case I recommend you find the sources fairly quickly as otherwise it might get renominated for deletion pretty soon. Good luck Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:24, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Cas Liber. I have a question about your decision to undelete this article. WP:CSDRFU specifies that A7s are not typically restored at requests for undeletion. This makes me a little confused—if you think my A7 tag was accurate, why did you restore the article to mainspace rather than draftspace? Would draftifying have been a more appropriate action to begin with, or was my A7 tag justified? – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 22:46, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Good question and thanks for asking. Your tagging was fine actually. I pondered this and in the spirit of Ignore all rules I decided to leave in mainspace and tag, which gives the writer a time limit/sense of urgency to get cracking and source it. If it is still tagged and not referenced appropriately, I would recommend going through the processes to review its suitability at that point. If I had userfied it, it might languish in userspace for months or even years. This way it gets sorted one way or the other more quickly. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:27, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for explaining your thought process, and sorry for not replying to you earlier. I'm still new to the realm of speedy deletion, and I second-guess whether I'm applying the criteria correctly :) Seeing as how the article creator hasn't turned up any more sources, I went ahead and started Articles for deletion/Acuro Organics Limited if you wish to comment. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 23:10, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
 * you've done absolutely the right thing. Eleven days is plenty of time to find material and they haven't done so. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:21, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Banksia lemanniana scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the Banksia lemanniana article has been scheduled as today's featured article for July 19, 2019. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Today's featured article/July 19, 2019, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.

We also suggest that you watchlist Main Page/Errors up to the day of this TFA. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me?  10:39, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun! Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:23, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

TFA
Thank you today for Crater (constellation)! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:19, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

... and today for Banksia lemanniana --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:12, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Letter-winged kite
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Letter-winged kite 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 Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 20:01, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Letter-winged kite
The article Letter-winged kite you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Letter-winged kite for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 19:42, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

WikiCup 2019 July newsletter
The third round of the 2019 WikiCup has now come to an end. The 16 users who made it to the fourth round needed to score at least 68 points, which is substantially lower than last year's 227 points. Our top scorers in round 3 were:


 * 🇳🇫 Cas Liber, our winner in 2016, with 500 points derived mainly from a featured article and two GAs on natural history topics
 * Adam Cuerden, with 480 points, a tally built on 16 featured pictures, the result of meticulous restoration work
 * SounderBruce, a finalist in the last two years, with 306 points from a variety of submissions, mostly related to sport or the State of Washington
 * 🇺🇸 Usernameunique, with 305 points derived from a featured article and two GAs on archaeology and related topics

Contestants managed 4 (5) featured articles, 4 featured lists, 18 featured pictures, 29 good articles, 50 DYK entries, 9 ITN entries, and 39 good article reviews. As we enter the fourth round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them, and it is imperative to claim them in the correct round; one FA claim had to be rejected because it was incorrectly submitted (claimed in Round 3 when it qualified for Round 2), so be warned! When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:12, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Avoiding threaded discussion on case page
I thought it best to have a case request by the community with a chance for everyone to comment. This ritual calms the wider conflict, pulls it to this page, and eventually makes the result more legitimate. When ArbCom has acted spontaneously in the past there have often been bad results. Maybe I’m wrong, but that’s my logic. I agree with you they should get on with it in whatever form they like. Thank you for all you have done for Wikipedia. Jehochman Talk 14:36, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Errr...ok. Though they are not acting on their own as they are being sent (presumably) the evidence by T & S. But anyway, we are all watching. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:14, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

emboldened
You say, "Don't use bold in body of text", but is that just your preference or a an established guideline? cygnis insignis 09:46, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
 * A guideline is just that. It can be ignored at the editor's choosing. It's not a rule of thumb that is set in stone. I suggest learn the difference.   Cassianto Talk  10:52, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Excuse my new fan Cas. cygnis insignis 11:08, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
 * [the user stalked me here and has nothing to with this matter]. cygnis insignis 14:15, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I've known Casliber for years and I have his page on my watchlist. Not that I have to justify myself to you.  Cassianto Talk  14:22, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
 * ici Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:51, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Please elaborate. cygnis insignis 14:15, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
 * (a) yes I have known for years. (b) have a look at bold stuff on that page. easter egg link. voila. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:42, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Another one watching this page: due to the guideline, I practically yuse bold font on articles only for the the subject in the lead, and it's most important redirects, - nothing else. As a beginner, I wanted to highlight things by bolding, but learned that it's more neutral not to do that. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:08, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Met him 12 hours ago when he was insulting people.
 * b) Not an answer to someone who is not new here, is it? I think you enforce something I oppose, but avoid discussing that because it is an in-house deviation from sources that somehow avoids conflict. In my view, this 'rule' was imposed by people with little interest in organisms, other than to enforce a lot of distasteful notions (mostly rooted in reactionary know-nothingism). You prefer the status quo, as I guess at your motives for strongly suggesting that others adhere. I think that it muddies things to the point where information is excluded so as not to contradict the idea that common name is "better" than any other (but just one). The scope of wikipedia includes all biota, not a reduction to a paper document whose editors select words from a list of early vocabulary. cygnis insignis 15:20, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
 * He wasn't insulting people he was asking Admin from having a gloating session on Corbetts page, you decided to come in and decide what you thought was ok and not and removed a perfectly fine edit. I reverted you and he agreed because your action was stupid and did nothing but pour gasoline over that situation. O....just in case you wonder I have every page I edit automatically on my watchlist so before you get your shirt in a twist it's been on my watchlist for years too from some arbitration if I remember correctly. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 15:33, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

UTC)
 * Cas, could you separate these threads please. cygnis insignis 15:38, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Another diff of uncivil, bad faith accusations of "insulting" behaviour. If you feel that strongly about it,, maybe you should report me? In fact, I'm asking you to report me.  Go ahead.   Cassianto Talk  15:40, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Yep, enough is enough, I've reported to my mum. cygnis insignis 15:44, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Delirium or bipolar disorder collaboration
Hi Casliber saw on your talk page you'd consider collaborating for these articles. I'd be happy to collaborate with either, prefer delirium! Thanks -- [E.3]  [chat2]  [me]   02:26, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
 * delirium it is then Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:09, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Great, it looks pretty good already TBH, how should we start do you think? See you on the talk page. -- [E.3]  [chats]  [c]   17:05, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Edit war
Looks like User:Dmvradioguy has been engaged in a long-term edit war with another editor. Noah Talk 03:44, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Talk:Moringa oleifera discussion on “superfood” fad status, medicinal properties and nutrient density
Hi Casliber,

There is an ongoing discussion on the biochemical properties and *tentative* medicinal value of ‘’Moringa oleifera’’, which have been extensively researched and documented; however, most such studies fall outside of the standard pharmaceutical design.

Its high and well-rounded nutritional (and purportedly medicinal) qualities, alongside its ease of growth, resistant to drought and poor soil and multipurpose uses, is discussed as the basis of its “superfood” status in the lay-press, albeit an unofficial and unscientific one. While no definitive medical claims are being made, my question is if this phenomenon can be explained within a proper, well-sourced NPOV context.

This might be a little bit out of your editing jurisdiction, but you’re the most qualified botany editor I could think of. Many thanks in advance for any input!

Auree ★ ★  15:29, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Also, if you know of any articles on medicinal plants that have passed FA review, I would much enjoy looking over those as a learning basis for my further edits to botany articles. Auree ★ ★  15:32, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Okay, so is a tricky area as we have medical article referencing vs others WRT primary sources etc. Need to be taken on a case by case basis and depends on how much is research vs cmmon use vs historical use etc. Of course, absolutely critical that the article reflects waht the source says. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:18, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your input and contributions thus far. This is one of the best-studied and most highly commercialized plants out there, with a rich history of use across many different cultures and traditions. That definitely makes it hornet's nest to take on. My intention is to bolster the content and take it through GAN one day, although it falls outside my usual interest in meteorology, so any help is appreciated! Auree ★ ★  05:00, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Collab
Hi Cas, thanks for expanding the Taxonomy section! This is a very important plant throughout the world for many reasons. My intentions with the article are to get it up to GA (and maybe take it to FAC one day). This will be the first time I'm dabbling outside my meteorology comfort zone, so any help from experts as yourself is welcome. Would you want to do a collab here (if there is time and interest)? I'm looking to mostly focus on the sections beyond "Taxonomy/phylogeny" and "Description"; further help with expanding just those two (or any tips on how/where to research additional sources) would be a great start. Auree</b> <sup style="color: #12ceb2;">★ ★  13:57, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Okay will do. Late here (midnight) and will look again tomorrow Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:58, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Much appreciated :) <b style="font-family: charter BT; color: black">Auree</b> <sup style="color: #12ceb2;">★ ★  18:41, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * So I've perused the available literature, and it's a terrifyingly staggering amount. Since I'm new to working on plant articles, I'm looking to start with a smaller project. Most interesting to me is M. oleifera's African sister species, Moringa stenopetala, which is very similar in its cultivation and cultural uses, with edible leaves, pods and seeds—the latter also being used in water purification. Also want to get Moringa drouhardii, Moringa ovalifolia and Moringa hildebrandtii to at least GA one day. Let me know if any of these particular trees interest you; they should be less daunting to work on, but an extra eye and expert help with taxonomy/description is welcome. <b style="font-family: charter BT; color: black">Auree</b> <sup style="color: #12ceb2;">★ ★  16:24, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'll take a look at those too and let you know Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:24, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Rockwarbler
— Maile (talk) 00:01, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Deleting Zheng Shengtian's Page
Hi! So sorry for the new page, I had accidentally published it thinking I was simply saving it. It was just a draft and it wasn't ready for submission yet. How do I approach it now that it's deleted? (Sorry I am still relatively new in Wikipedia) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dianehywong (talk • contribs) 18:08, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Referencing bot
Do you know if there's a bot that arranges cites so that they all have the author's name first than year, etc? LittleJerry (talk)
 * yes there is. I need to remember what it was called and how it works. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:22, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Found it - it is User:Citation bot. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:44, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I tried it on wolf but it didn't seem to do what I wanted. Did i do something wrong? LittleJerry (talk) 03:33, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Am a bit busy at present but I can't see any bare urls or dois left...? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:52, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I meant in regards to consistency in the order in which the parts of the citation are arranged. Some of them list the doi first and others the author first in the editing box. Does that matter for FA? LittleJerry (talk) 04:31, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't think so - as long as they display the same way. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:21, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Vote indented
Hi, I should probably just have waited for a bureaucrat to deal with this, but I was somehow unable to resist attempting to fix the issue myself. You may like to finish my attempt at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Johnuniq&action=history ~ ToBeFree (talk) 03:29, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
 * (facepalm) my bad. Anyway, has been removed now (right thing to do). I somehow missed the fact that I had voted...oops. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 08:04, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

FAC
I know you like to do single species, but would you like to join me for turtle? LittleJerry (talk) 19:38, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I think it is a good one. I am feeling a bit unenthusiastic about anything much at the moment. I need to get a spark of interest. I'll take a look and see how I go. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:05, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Australian spelling question
An anonymous IP,, has been editing articles about Australian spiders, most of which are marked as in Australian English. Most changes are ok (although some are pointless, such as capitalizing the first letter in a piped wikilink, and some are against the MOS (like putting "#" before the issue number in a citation). However, they also change spellings in "-our" to "-or", e.g. "colour" to "color". I'm aware that this is perhaps not clear in Australian English, but as a Brit, I've relied on this for example. What's your view? Peter coxhead (talk) 08:20, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
 * It's not a view - Australian english utilises our not or, simple as that. That's why we have engvar au - but there as some taggers who claim it is a problem - but finding Australian items changed from our to or - is wrong. period. It is very clear in usage. JarrahTree 09:00, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Ok, that's what I thought (although I do see "labor" in Australian English). Unfortunately it means that all of 's edits need to be reviewed. Sigh... Peter coxhead (talk) 13:11, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
 * The spelling of Labor is a political curiosity, the new party wanted to appeal to the working class yet distance themselves from the British movement (or was it more complicated, don't remember). cygnis insignis 13:19, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Thankfully we werent alive then cygnis - it was deep in the past Australian Labor Party JarrahTree 13:25, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi!
Hello! I've noticed your username in the list of FAC mentors. I'm currently writing an article draft about Indonesian homegardens, and I'm aiming a featured-article criteria for it. However, I'm afraid that the writing might be inadequate in its flow or readability, and I'm also afraid that I might accidentally came into indications of original research. If you have time, any revision or any form of constructive criticism will be appreciated. Thank you in advance! Dhio-270599 15:31, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for the revisions! (especially the correction on collective nouns and species names) Dhio-270599 02:01, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

Draft
Cas can you take a look at my draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Hotel_Hollywood pretty please?--Carrolquadrio (talk) 05:58, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Actually I might make two articles, one about Doris and the other about the Hotel-what do you think? --Carrolquadrio (talk) 07:21, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
 * two articles might be possible. Doris is fine, tthe Hollywood Hotel might be fine as well but might be safer with another source or two discussing it...Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:36, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Friendly question
Hello Cas, I'm just dropping by to ask if you'd be willing to evaluate the two pending WP:FOUR article candidates, which have been there for seven days. (One is nominated by myself; the other is by another user). Thanks!  Ergo Sum  01:46, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Sure, no problem! Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:47, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

GA
Thanks for reviewing slender glass lizard. I really appreciate it and your edits. SL93 (talk) 21:53, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I try to give it as big a shove towards FAC as possible. If you want to proceed that way, I'll take another look and see what else needs buffing. Alternatively try and do a few more biology GAs first (or whatever) Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:35, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Weebill
— Maile (talk) 00:01, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Moors murders
Hey Cas. I think running an RfC was a good idea, but my sense is that things have gone beyond an RfC and without a lot of people willing to do some heavy lifting, checking diffs and sources within a structured review setting, the bickering will continue. So I've been bold and suggested it be taken to FAR. I realize Eric was blocked, and had been blocked when the rewrite began, but he should be able to participate when his block expires. As you know, stewardship is poorly understood and it's hard - especially for editors whose activity levels have decreased. My concern is setting precedent for rewriting without going through the process, which was set up specifically for these types of situations if I'm correct? Anyway, sorry, brevity isn't my forte, but wanted to let you know what I was thinking. Best, Victoria (tk) 02:10, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I think FAR is the next logical step Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:01, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I'm wimp and don't want to get too involved in that talk page discussion. Can you, as coordinator submit to FAR, or tell to? I'm willing to try to trawl through diffs once it gets there, but my time is limited and I don't want to commit to something I can't see through. Victoria (tk) 03:39, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
 * This is the annoying thing about being a coordinator - I can't really nominate it but anyone on that page can. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:43, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that's what I thought. Big sigh. It's late here and I'm about to turn in. I'll nominate it if I can get to it tomorrow, but whether I can be around is always a big if these days. Regardless, I'll keep an eye on it. Victoria (tk) 03:51, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
 * If you nominate it and state succinctly what the issues are, there is no need to get or remain heavily involved. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:54, 14 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Um, for the record, EC was not blocked when I started; he was blocked the next day, and I didn't know about it until someone mentioned it ten days later. Can someone enlighten me about this mysterious "FAR" and why its name is always invoked in such hushed tones? The article is clearly no longer an FA (and never was, now that all the sourcing problems are apparent) -- it will take a lot of work to get it even to GA level. So shouldn't the star just come off now talk of FA again be way down the road? <b style="color: red;">E</b><b style="color: blue;">Eng</b> 09:14, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Excuse me Cas, but I find I am not able to post on EEng's talk (page size and scripts)., the object of FAR might be seen as retaining the star, you and several others have identified areas for improvement (I agree the sociological and media reactions might be included, for example), so outline that at the review. I am sort of across the bones of the discussion, and see suggestions that FAR is the path forward, is it more complicated than that? ~ cygnis insignis 09:42, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
 * OK, I am absolutely, positively going to make an effort to cut that page down. I can't have people feeling they can't post. Give me a day or two. <b style="color: red;">E</b><b style="color: blue;">Eng</b> 14:59, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
 * - WP:FAR is the process by which a Featured Article is reviewed. They don't automatically lose their status but are reviewed, like GAs are etc. Cas Liber (talk · contribs)

Cas, I see that initiated the nom,, which is good. Can the coords take over the notifications (relevant Wikiprojects per the talk page banners, Eric, PoD, top 10 contributors, etc)? Or Schro, or EEng, since he's challenging the text? I'm not capable of editing today, so can't help. Victoria (tk) 14:43, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the ping . I think Eric is probably aware of it, and I’ve had emails from one or two others about it too. I didn’t want it to go down this route, and was trying to sort one section on the talk page without the section being tag-bombed and near-unreadable for anyone wanting to read it. That didn’t seem to please EEng, who’s reverted it out and carried on tag bombing the rest. I’m not sure this is the best approach to improving what was there, but it’s clear my efforts weren’t wanted, so I’m stepping away from it. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 15:08, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree that it's not ideal but it's process we've followed for more than a decade and at this point seems to be the only option. I've posted at the talk page; EEng should make the notifications since he's challenging. Thanks Cas for hosting this discussion here. Victoria (tk) 16:27, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not challenging anything, -- not formally, anyway, my comment above was just an observation. I'm just taking stock of the article's problems and preparing to address them. <b style="color: red;">E</b><b style="color: blue;">Eng</b> 16:56, 14 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi Cas, I'm out of the review (and the MM article entirely) - I've taken them off watchlist and walked away; it's just too difficult to try and help when there is so much hostility and aggression going on. Feel free to cap the first part of the review (to just above your please for neutral comments), as I'm sure it'll only fester as badly as the talk page is. Good luck being ringmaster with that, but hopefully with the number of admins there, the aggressive battlefield approach may calm down a little. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 08:15, 15 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi Cas. Given the way that the discussion at this page has evolved, I'm wondering if it might not be better to close your RfC as a "no consensus" (which is my reading of it at the moment) and to allow the FAR to proceed unhindered. Even if consensus should develop, it might be severely constraining to have either of of the versions become set in stone; and it's been 8 days, so it isn't too early. Best, Vanamonde (Talk) 15:17, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, it can be clearly closed as "no consensus/moved to FAR". Best closed by another admin and I'd support that Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:28, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm still uninvolved: I'm happy to close it. I'll go ahead and do that. Vanamonde (Talk) 21:08, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

, : The trouble is, no consensus for what? As far as I'm concerned, no consensus means no consensus to revert the article to two months ago i.e. no consensus to let this stand edit, which sent the article back to June 26 by unilaterally tossing out 200+ edits by ten editors. The edit summary for that edit cited "BRD", but if that made sense then you could arbitrarily send any article back any amount of time by claiming that everything in between "lacks consensus", no matter how long it's been there, how many editors participated, and how friendly the editing involved, just so long as there wasn't an explicity pow-wow somewhere putting an explicit imprimatur on everyone's edits. Therefore, I submit, the edit I just linked was the bold edit, its proponents bore the burden of justifying it, and no consensus means they failed to do that. And that's before you consider that their primary not-really-an-argument argument ("The June 26 version is a high-quality FA version") has now been exposed as complete nonsense.Certainly the closing logic cannot passively be that there's no consensus so therefore the article stays in the WRONGVERSION it accidentally happened to be in when protection was applied.Though if truth be told it was no accident. When protection was first applied, the article was in the current version all editors had been working on up to that very day. Then three editors swooped in at the protecting admin's talk page and pressured him into reverting the article -- still under the protection that admin had imposed -- to June 26; the admin's comment was "I relent". And that's why it "just so happened" to be in the June 26 version when the RfC started. Truly an extraordinary sequence of events.Combine all this with the fact that the three major proponents of reverting to June 26 have all declared that they no longer care, have unwatched, don't give a shit, won't participate, and so on and the conclusion as to how to close the RfC becomes inescapable. <b style="color: red;">E</b><b style="color: blue;">Eng</b> 21:10, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
 * In this case, "no consensus" as I see it means "the discussion needs to continue until some of you persuade some of the others". In general, a version of an article that has been through multiple prose reviews (such as at FAC) can be said to have consensus for the prose; so yes, in that case it would be the version that existed before you began editing it. However, that applies only to prose; a version that has flagrant breaches of WP:V cannot be said to have consensus, and BRD cannot be used to prevent those issues from being addressed, or failing that, tagged. Vanamonde (Talk) 21:16, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
 * you'd agree that its mere existence now (given it's at FAR) is muddying the waters going forward and we should try and keep focus in one place? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:18, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
 * (Sorry, I've kind of made a mess by trying to copy this over to T:Moors murders -- hope I didn't munge up anyone's post there...) Oh, I want the RfC over, but at the moment the article's unprotected it's got to be in some version. From Vanamonde's argument above (about WP:V and so on) that has to be the version current when protection was first imposed (and before the admin was pressured into into changing it to July 26). I'm sorry you're both having to spend your time one this; I'm sorry everyone's having to spend their time on this. <b style="color: red;">E</b><b style="color: blue;">Eng</b> 21:25, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
 * (You did conflict with my closure, but don't worry about it): Yes, it's got to be in some version; and per convention, in this case BRD, it will sit in the version you don't like. But, the RFC was "no consensus defaulting to the old version", not "consensus for the old version"; meaning discussion needs to continue, and the old version isn't endorsed. I think you can live with that version while you discuss things. Vanamonde (Talk) 21:32, 15 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Well, OK, but why does the article have to "sit"? Why doesn't normal editing resume? I'm not trying to be difficult but this world of FAs seems completely topsy-turvy. <b style="color: red;">E</b><b style="color: blue;">Eng</b> 21:42, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I recommend asking one of the admins who full-protected the page. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:43, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
 * OK thanks. I must say it's a good thing Wikipedia's not a bureaucracy, because if it were just IMAGINE how complicated this would get. <b style="color: red;">E</b><b style="color: blue;">Eng</b> 21:47, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Rock parrot
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Rock parrot 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 The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 20:41, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Rock parrot
The article Rock parrot 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:Rock parrot for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 08:41, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Rock parrot
The article Rock parrot you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Rock parrot for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 13:41, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

GAs
I have two GA reviews that I worked on for Talk:Warcraft (film)/GA1 (close to being failed) and Talk:Thuy Trang/GA1 (passed). I just have two questions - How do I transclude the GA reviews to the talk pages and where can I find the template that you used for slender glass lizard? SL93 (talk) 04:00, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
 * If you look are reviews, you'll see many different templates/formats etc. I just cut-and-pasted one I'd used before as comprehensive yet simple. Just look around or cut and paste mine, I am not fussed. As far as transclusion, that's odd as I thought theywere transcluded automatically. I am not aware of any for or against discussion on this and recommend asking it at WT:GA or something. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 07:14, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Western yellow robin
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Western yellow robin 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 -- J Milburn (talk) 15:21, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Suillus bovinus scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for September 19, 2019. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Today's featured article/September 19, 2019. Thanks!—Wehwalt (talk) 07:59, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Holy Cow batman! That's cool!Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 08:14, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Hepatitis E
Cas Liber I would like to thank you for reviewing Hepatitis E, it was a pleasure working with you, to better the article, thank you again--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 14:59, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Pekarangan peer review
Hello! First of all, thank you for the corrections you have pointed out in the review page. If you have time, can you re-review the page and reply to some points I've made in the review? I'd be happy to know whether the article is assuredly adequate in its quality. Thank you! Dhio-270599 10:00, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Rock parrot
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 12:02, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Heh thanks! what would really make my day is more folks commenting keep/remove at Featured_article_review (where y'all can hear the tumbleweeds a-blowing...) Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:59, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/C.G. Jung House Museum
Cas Liber, there has been a response to your DYK review here, including the suggestion of an ALT hook. Please stop by at your earliest convenience to resume your review. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:02, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
 * done Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:10, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Western yellow robin
The article Western yellow robin you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Western yellow robin for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 11:02, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

WikiCup 2019 September newsletter
The fourth round of the competition has finished in a flurry of last minute activity, with 454 points being required to qualify for the final round. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants with over 400 points being eliminated, and all but two of the finalists having achieved an FA during the round. Casliber, our 2016 winner, was the highest point-scorer, followed by Enwebb and Lee Vilenski, who are both new to the competition. In fourth place was SounderBruce, a finalist last year. But all those points are swept away as we start afresh for the final round.

Round 4 saw the achievement of 11 featured articles. In addition, Adam Cuerden scored with 18 FPs, Lee Vilenski led the GA score with 8 GAs while Kosack performed 15 GA reviews. There were around 40 DYKs, 40 GARs and 31 GAs overall during round 4. Even though contestants performed more GARs than they achieved GAs, there was still some frustration at the length of time taken to get articles reviewed.

As we start round 5, we say goodbye to the eight competitors who didn't quite make it; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia, and we hope you will join us again next year. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them (some people have fallen foul of this rule and the points have been removed).

If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). 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. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66, Vanamonde and Cwmhiraeth MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:44, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Please help
We are now less than 3k - how can you help? when you create a new article - please try to complete the biota assessment, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Unknown-importance_Australian_biota_articles when you deal with an older article - it is well worth going to the talk page and tweaking for biota.. Thanks for your work in biota articles !! cheers JarrahTree 00:25, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Ok will take a look Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:28, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
 * but... no sweat, if you have missed the odd xxx talk pages or so, darren and I do find them in the end, well most... JarrahTree 00:33, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Jew with a coin DYK
The page doesn't say that buyers of the picture apply the instruction, it's an OR.Xx236 (talk) 06:54, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I suggest discussing that with when he is unblocked. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 07:50, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Four Award

 * Just had to say nice work on the 13 year gap from article creation to FA-class! « Gonzo fan2007  <small style="color:#2A2722">(talk)  @ 15:17, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Blocked user
Just to let you know - you thankfully blocked User:Infrontofthedoor but he/she is still vandalising. Regards Denisarona (talk) 13:00, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
 * (sigh) ....have to do RL chores soon. Need some revdeleting? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:33, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Don't forget to always disable talk page access to this nazi LTA. El_C 15:04, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Ah ok. good point Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:54, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

FA nom Digital media use and mental health
Hi Casliber how are you? Thanks again for all your help with this article. I was hoping you might consider reviewing this again per FA criteria. Thanks :) -- [E.3]  [chat2]  [me]   06:42, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I'll take a look Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 08:11, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Banksia caleyi
Coming soon to a TFA near you! "red lantern banksia" gets 600 ghits (verbatim); "Caley's banksia" gets 1400. I can only use one in a TFA blurb. Do you have a preference? - Dank (push to talk) 16:42, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I prefer "red lantern banksia" but hard to argue with "Caley's banksia" given the ghits I mean most of us just use the latin name anyway.... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:17, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Happy to go with your preference (here and generally). Keep 'em coming. - Dank (push to talk) 20:23, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Yellow-faced honeyeater scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the Yellow-faced honeyeater article has been scheduled as today's featured article for October 8, 2019. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Today's featured article/October 8, 2019, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.

We also suggest that you watchlist Main Page/Errors up to the day of this TFA. Thanks! <b style="font-family:Lucida;color:red">Jimfbleak</b> - talk to me?  06:24, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the bird with a sweet name! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:20, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail!

 * Thanks Cas for making the time to come up with something useful. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 21:06, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
 * (shrugs) it ain't useful yet - you could do it for WP:FL methinks. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:18, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
 * We already have a background page for FL, Featured list candidates/Instructions has been there for years. But in any case, FL never claims to be "vital lists" or claim some kind of provenance.  It knows its place.  The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 21:29, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Aha, never noticed that! Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:37, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Also, I've made some edits to the background page...fleshed it out. p b  p  21:25, 9 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Would you like me to reach out to what's left of the Core Bios project? Should a regular post be enough, or an RfC?  It should be relatively uncontroversial  p  b  p  00:27, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Sure. the more eyes (and hands) the merrier. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:17, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅ here p  b  p  23:48, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
 * On the Polish Wikipedia (pl:Wikipedia:Wikiwyzwanie, maybe the only this type of challenge on Wikipedia because of this has no wikidata for now) there is project which revolve around Q:Q6545408. The list is more often actualised there because of users care it based on raports from . I tell about it because of I belive that correcting difficult and important articles on English Wikipedia just like Human behaviour can be very hard task and not courae other editors for activity (I tell it also based on fact English Wikipedia has much larger requirment to FA than many others) but maybe Wikicup for creating new articles from Articles in many other languages but not on English Wikipedia could be another step to imporove in some sense collaboration with Vital article project. On the VA project there were often situation when topic with red link has been suggested to addition. On the levels 1/2 we had contigents that article The arts is our wrongarticle which could be rediect to another article (you can found that) on the level 3 there were contigents about not existing articles which are currently redirects (see: ). On the level 4 we had more often situations when red link was suggested. For eample I suggested just last year suggested addition of witch. Dawid2009 (talk) 18:05, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I think you have a bad link, Dawid; did you mean: Common interwiki links? One of the things I've oft wondered is if we needed some sort of minimum number of interwiki links for various VA levels.  It's generally a red flag when I find an article with fewer than 10, especially fewer than 5  p  b  p  20:00, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Yup. I think about engaging/couraging people to creating new articles on English Wikipedia with the largest number of Interwiki in similar way what Core Challenge or Wikiwyzwanie on PLwiki. However only to find way to proved more active editors on VA (increasing number of active members), not to introducing interwiki requirement Dawid2009 (talk) 21:04, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Wow, that Articles in many other languages but not on English Wikipedia page - I'd never seen that before. There is something wrong as the wikidata items are muddled I think. have you seen that page? Needs a cleanup.  I find that people like making new pages, it's the consolidation of stubs that is the issue. Also many core pages were expanded over ten years ago and have had little proper cleanup. This was my thinking behind the Core Contest re-runs that I did. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:59, 16 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Heh, I'd help on Pl wiki but I speak no Polish. I have family in Podkowa Leśna..Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:03, 16 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Not sure which page you are referring to - but 99of9 is always the best person for understanding wikidata issues... JarrahTree 01:14, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
 * This one --> Articles in many other languages but not on English Wikipedia - it looks like wikidata items are mismatched...or something? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:17, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
 * You have my attention. I have visited that page, and tried some of the links. They seem to work, and the "link to Wikipedia" column seems to correctly describe the situation. So, for example, many languages have a page for  and another page for . For example Spanish has es:Bruja and es:Brujería, and neither are redirects. Whereas English only has Witchcraft, and the other is a redirect. So, the English Wikipedia could consider writing a new article about Witch. But maybe I've misunderstood your concern.  Can you explain the issue again? --99of9 (talk) 02:19, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I have your explanation and cas's reference to the page and that is all I need at this stage - thanks... however Cas might have something further. JarrahTree 02:29, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Interesting. One day will have a look on a page by page basis and see if anything is a redirect that (maybe) shouldn't be....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 05:40, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I belive this page is not well clean up because of recently it was edited two years ago and well builed (many times by bot) list should look in a way when number of missed articles is increasing proportionally when number of wikidata is fall down (for example should be plenty articles missed what have less than 8 links but not so much/not comparable with number larger than 35). If we take look on pagewievs for this group of wikidata we can find that these lists currently are the most cared on JAwiki and PLwiki (on PLwiki due to that Wikiwyzwanie). On the list is many redirects probably due to fact these ones on ENwiki are well discussed on redirects for discussion and maybe also due to fact that the raport is made in a way where English Wikipedia is centre of the Wikipedia (AFAIR bot search article what exists on English Wikipedia but not e g on PL and has many wikidata... but not in a way where bot search article which even does not exist on ENwiki for smaller Wikipedia) however I agreee that many articles on ENwiki were created years ago. Anyway I belive this list also could revolve around Core Challenge and I belive as long as articles like human behaviour are short, projects like VA can be useful. On the talk page someone asked how it work and suggested to add put this list into other Wikipedia. While this page has less than 30 pagewatchers I belive many people would be interested in that page if it would be more often edited even though it might be not so much useful for ENwiki. Dawid2009 (talk) 19:25, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Banksia caleyi scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the Banksia caleyi article has been scheduled as today's featured article for October 13, 2019. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Today's featured article/October 13, 2019, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.

For Featured Articles promoted on or after October 1, 2018, there will be an existing blurb linked from the FAC talk page, which is likely to be transferred to the TFA page by a coordinator at some point.

We suggest that you watchlist Main Page/Errors up to the day of this TFA. Thanks! <b style="font-family:Lucida;color:red">Jimfbleak</b> - talk to me?  13:13, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the article, part of your Banksia mission! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:02, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of King brown snake
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article King brown snake 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 Dunkleosteus77 -- Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 19:20, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Hydnellum scabrosum
valereee (talk) 12:02, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Ursula K. Le Guin
Cas, could you please look at my comment at User talk:Vanamonde93? Any chance that yu could perhaps fix the issue in the FAC yourself to speed things up. I'd really like to run this at TFA on her 90th, but as you will see, times getting short. Cheers, <b style="font-family:Lucida;color:red">Jimfbleak</b> - talk to me?  06:18, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Grants for contests?
Hi Cas, related to your above, can you elucidate more on how you apply for WMF grants for contest prizes? This is something I was unaware of. While it's probably too late to do for an upcoming contest, it would be good to know for the future. Enwebb (talk) 14:23, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I asked at WMUK - see . The pages have been moved around. For an old discussion see here. I'd get a grant of 250 pounds/euro/dollars and divide accordingly. See the contest pages for how I did it. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:32, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of King brown snake
The article King brown snake you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:King brown snake for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dunkleosteus77 -- Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 15:21, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

ARBCOM
Would you consider running for ARBCOM again, Cas? I cannot help but think that a couple of decisions that I, personally, have disagreed with would have gone differently if there had been more people on it with a longer history of content work. Conversely, some other decisions may possibly have been received less poorly if the committee's composition had been different...or maybe that's wishful thinking on my part. Regardless, I would like very much to see you on it again. Vanamonde (Talk) 22:17, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
 * You read my mind. I had not considered running again, but after observing developments since June this year am worried there is a not insignificant risk of things really going pear-shaped and feel that some longitudinal experience might be a Good Thing. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:12, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I for one would be grateful. Experience is a good thing. — Ched (talk) 02:46, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
 * support, all of it, + thank you for yesterday's mushroom - travelling ... --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:14, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
 * You would certainly have my support. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:02, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

there was mail
but gnashing of teeth, rending of garments, and reaching for whatever, might be appropriate with the item... JarrahTree 03:42, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Deadly trees
As a specialist in antipodean trees, you might be interested in this discussion. Andrew D. (talk) 16:38, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

DYK preps full; only one queue stocked
Cas Liber, if you get a chance today, it would be great if you could promote a prep or two to queue. Right now, all six preps are full, so none can be loaded, and only one queue is filled. Thanks for anything you can do. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:43, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Sorry been occupied until now. Taking a look....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 19:48, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

About doing article pretty good
I love how you made Black Mamba article looks so good, it is very helpful for education purposes, I was hoping that you would make King cobra as a good article also, since it is a popular one like black mamba. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 153.183.67.46 (talk) 08:50, 9 October 2019 (UTC)


 * I hadn't thought of that one. Sounds like a good idea. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:48, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Good Article Backlog Drive Barnstar

 * Thanks, I wish it could have been more but I had my hands full....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 19:45, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I always want to do more than I end up doing but know - as I hope you do - that every bit counts, helps, and matters. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 19:55, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

rollback request
Can you please grant me rollback rights. I have requested it here. I am engaged in anti-vandal work. &#8212;&#x202F; Vaibhavafro &#x202F;&#128172; 08:22, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

D&D monsters
I put a start into rebuilding at Monsters in Dungeons & Dragons based on the existence of independent reliable sources, and will add more as I find them. BOZ (talk) 16:01, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Bat TFA
Hello, do you think I could nominate bat for TFA on October 31? There is plenty of room for Michael Collins in November. Or perhaps move him to October 22 and have Megabat in November. LittleJerry (talk) 20:38, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I think that is a great idea. Need to ask a TFA coordinator though Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:41, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Jimfbleak in October, I believe. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:17, 17 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Cas, Gerda Arendt, I've declined the request, reasons here <b style="font-family:Lucida;color:red">Jimfbleak</b> - talk to me?  05:38, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Black-faced monarch
Hi Cas (and any talk page stalkers who might be interested!); there's a pretty Australian bird at FPC with an article that would benefit from a little attention if it is of any interest. Josh Milburn (talk) 18:57, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Sure. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 19:44, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

FAC Mentor
Howdy hello! I've been working on Cactus wren for many months now, having already brought it to GA status. I've had it peer reviewed and copy edited, and now I'm finally looking down the barrel of FAC. FAC advises that first time nominators seek a mentor, and thus I'm seeking you! You are often around bird articles, and I hope you'll be interested. Smooth sailing, Captain Eek  Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 18:59, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Am happy to be involved. it looks in good shape. How you wanna do this? I am happy if you just want to nominate and I can just hover around or can co-nominate if you prefer. Either way is absolutely fine by me. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:47, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
 * , Just having someone to hover around, and to help out during the review frenzy, would be most appreciated. If you could give the article a once over, I'd appreciate it. I'll be nominating it soon, although not sure the exact date. I'm just cleaning up the last technical stuff on the article rn, and will nominate once I think the next week IRL will be pretty free. Captain Eek  Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 22:31, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Happy to help. Will have a look and hang around during FAC process.. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:58, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Ahoy! As a heads up, I plan to nominate cactus wren sometime this week, as I finally have some free time to shepherd it through. I will ping you in the nom when I put it up. Thanks for your help! Captain Eek  Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 03:05, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Letter-winged kite scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that Letter-winged kite has been scheduled as WP:TFA for 8 November 2019. Please check that the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Today's featured article/November 8, 2019. Thanks! Ealdgyth - Talk 21:37, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for another birdie, "an elusive nocturnal raptor that generally lives in areas far from human activity....and thus is little studied"! - Please stand for arbcom, as he can't. (ignore if you already nominated) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:45, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Caligari question
Hey Casliber. I saw on the FAC for Caligari that you had struck some of your outstanding questions and expressed Support for the FAC. But then I also saw that those edits by you were removed by another user (which I'm certain was accidental on their part) and that your Support message was removed from the page. I was tempted to add it back because I think the other user mistakenly removed it, but I didn't want to try to speak for you. Did you mean for this to be removed? And/or did you want to put it back in? — <b style="color:#C0C0C0">Hun</b><b style="color:#C0C0C0">ter</b> <b style="color:#595454">Ka</b><b style="color:#595454">hn</b> 02:28, 27 October 2019 (UTC)


 * I am sure it was a misclick. Fixed now. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:06, 27 October 2019 (UTC)