User talk:Chris857/Archive 4

NRHPPROGRESS script
Thanks for running the script to update WP:NRHPPROGRESS earlier today. I was actually running it at the same time haha, so my edit finished about 30 minutes after yours. It appears as if the script worked fine, but if I may ask, how was the experience? I am usually the one running it, so I don't get any feedback haha. Did you encounter any errors or see any room for improvement? How long did the script take to run? Thanks again!--Dudemanfellabra (talk) 21:03, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
 * This was actually the first time I've gotten the script to run all the way through without failing. Did it at work (because my home machine doesn't have enough RAM at 1 GB), and it took about two hours. Used Firefox on Fedora. Chris857 (talk) 22:22, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Yea I run into errors kind of often too, but I can't really see a way to fix them. The script is querying ~50K pages in the span of ~2 hours, so it's bound to run into some kind of error. I want to be able to handle them better, though.. maybe like skipping problem counties rather than aborting all together. I still haven't figured out a graceful way to do that yet, though. What were the errors you ran into? I usually get the request failed error because my internet is sometimes choppy.
 * Also, RAM shouldn't really be an issue with the script, as I made it explicitly conserve RAM by only loading one page at a time rather than sending out multiple requests. One of the earlier versions of the code was set up to load everything at once and increased RAM exponentially, so at the expense of speed I limited it to one request at a time. If anything would be the limiting factor (besides internet speed), it would be your processor, which is what I run into a lot, maxing mine out. Do you see heavy RAM usage? I use Firefox on OS X (Leopard.. my computer is quite old haha), and I don't use any more RAM than usual during execution.--Dudemanfellabra (talk) 17:37, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I tried again on my home machine last night (Chrome, on XP). I wasn't exceeding my CPU, and I had RAM to spare, but it would never seem to get past the Fetching wikitext... stage. At work, the fetching is like 5 seconds long. Chris857 (talk) 12:50, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Calcariidae
The nomination is in limbo waiting for you to return to finish your review and assign the appropriate icon. Do you think you can do this soon? There's been quite a bit posted there in the interim, including a few ALT hooks, but nothing for the past week. If you do not plan to complete the review, please post there accordingly. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:19, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

thank you re ND NRHP pics
Thank you for uploading and/or linking pics for many ND NRHPs. E.g., I really appreciate your providing pics for First State Bank of Buxton, for which an erroneous pic of the modern, non-NRHP once graced the NRHP Traill Cty list article. It's really gratifying to see stuff get developed, and well, where i had contributed a very small article a while back. I hope you enjoyed having the (fairly minimal) articles created already. Thanks for the nice pics! -- do ncr  am  01:05, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, it's not all me. Andrew Filer of everydot.com is one of those photographers who has indirectly provided a lot of NRHP photos. But combing the lists in nearly every state, and looking for free images on flickr and Commons is quite a slog. But I think I've found pictures for at least 50 sites so far, and I'm not done yet. Chris857 (talk) 02:16, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

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

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

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

Finally, the usual notices: If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 05:49, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Start? uh no
Someone wants this to be a start..No, I am not kiddingCoal town guy (talk) 17:23, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

24.111.1.182
Thanks for reverting edits by 24.111.1.182. Have you looked at his history? He's been a vandal since 2008. Can we block him? Robotics1 (talk) 20:52, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Re: Talk:Appthority, Inc.
Yes, that is what I meant to do... Thanks for catching my mistake!  Sophus Bie  (talk) 02:50, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Durango High School (Colorado)
Hello! Your submission of Durango High School (Colorado) 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! SagaciousPhil  -  Chat  12:16, 29 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) 23:09, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Tom Wade (cricketer)
Hi. Is it standard practice to add a project "banner" to a new article's talk page? You have added WPBIO so should I add one for the cricket project? Sorry if this doesn't display correctly. Thanks. --Bill (talk) 19:46, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, the majority of articles tend to have WikiProject banners, and I have a habit of adding them to pages I come across without one, as it helps with tracking broad article quality on Wikipedia. One point in particular, is that the banner for people has a parameter (listas) that ensures that the article sort by lastname, firstname in things like categories. Also, for living people (though not in this case) there is a parameter to display a warning about the WP:BLP policy. Go ahead and add one for Cricket and England if you wish. Chris857 (talk) 19:55, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Chris. I'll have a go. --Bill (talk) 20:08, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Benzie County Courthouse
Hello! Your submission of Benzie County Courthouse 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! Mackensen (talk) 01:31, 30 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) 00:50, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 1
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Benzie County Courthouse, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Clapboard (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) 19:57, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Question
About place, Wikipedia:Media copyright questions might be better, but this isn't necessarily a bad spot. All images (*should*) have licensing information on their page, for example File:Brooklyn Bridge Postdlf.jpg states it is dual-licensed GFDL 1.2/ CC-BY-SA-3.0 (in this case, in the "Permission" spot, but the tags could appear anywhere on the page). All text on Wikipedia (unless someone has released something under a more permissive license) is CC-BY-SA-3.0. For excerpts of articles, adding a link to the particular page, or at least mentioning it title, is preferred to just saying "from Wikipedia" or some such thing, because that for sure satisfies the BY (attribution) requirement of the license. That also means, if you attribute it, you could repeat the whole article. You didn't ask, but I believe all code on Wikipedia (scripts and stuff) is GFDL.

You wrote, "For excerpts of articles, adding a link to the particular page, or at least mentioning it title, is preferred to just saying "from Wikipedia" or some such thing, because that for sure satisfies the BY (attribution) requirement of the license."

Generally speaking, I write "Wikipedia", then (the Wikipedia search topic).

All images (*should*) have licensing information on their page, for example File:Brooklyn Bridge Postdlf.jpg states it is dual-licensed GFDL 1.2/ CC-BY-SA-3.0 (in this case, in the "Permission" spot, but the tags could appear anywhere on the page).



I Googled Brooklyn Bridge (images), found one, went to its page, then clicked on "terms of use". Here they are:

1. The text, images, and data on the Wired New York Web site (the “Site”) are protected by copyright and may be covered by other restrictions as well. The Wired New York retains all rights, including copyright, in data, images, software, documentation, text, and other information contained in these files (collectively, the “Materials”). Copyright and other proprietary rights may be held by individuals or entities other than, or in addition to, the Wired New York.

2. The Materials are made available for limited non-commercial, educational, and personal use only, or for fair use as defined in the United States copyright laws. ''Users may download these files for their own use, subject to any additional terms or restrictions which may be applicable to the individual file or program. Users must, however, cite the author and source of the Materials as they would material from any printed work, and the citations should include the URL “wirednewyork.com”.''



So it looks like this particular image ... not a Wikipedia image ... must be cited with an URL.



Then, this:

Postdlf at the English language Wikipedia, the copyright holder of this work, hereby publishes it under the following license:

GNU head Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. A copy of the license is included in the section entitled GNU Free Documentation License.

w:en:Creative Commons attribution share alike

This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license. Attribution: Postdlf at the English language Wikipedia You are free: to share – to copy, distribute and transmit the work to remix – to adapt the work Under the following conditions: attribution – ''You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work). share alike – If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under the same or similar license to this one.''



I see no attribution of the work (image) specified by the author or licensor. Or maybe it's "postdif". If so, is postdif the image originator?

My intent is not to publish for now, rather to put forward some compelling evidence to an authority. I suppose that constitutes fair use. In that case. if I cited the authority directly, not through Wikipedia, would that be fair use, as well?

Thanks, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dubina 6 (talk • contribs) 02:01, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Dog
Just because we are editing an encyclopaedia, do we all have to be dull? Sometimes I feel I need to sit in a black robe and sing hymns. Can't we have a litle fun sometimes? And the picture depicts a japanese dog in japanese enviroment, not bad that. Hafspajen (talk) 15:35, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

POTD notification


Hi Chris,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Eureka Tower, Melbourne - Nov 2008.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on December 17, 2013. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2013-12-17. Thank you for all of your contributions! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:51, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Featured article candidates/The Carpet from Bagdad/archive1
There's been quite a bit of work done on The Carpet from Bagdad over the last week. I hope that it has resolved your concerns, as well as made the article generally better. If you have time at some point, I'd invite you to come take a look at provide your thoughts on its current status. Thanks for reviewing! Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 15:56, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of 19th Street Bridge
Hello! Your submission of 19th Street Bridge 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! Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:55, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

rut-roh
Your deletion tagging notification tagger may be broken. Chees Dloh cierekim  21:22, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Fossil ant DYK
Hey there, since I havent seen anything from you, i did some digging and found the De Andrade paper here as a pdf link.-- Kev min  § 22:31, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Nice work on Black Squirrel Creek Bridge ...
... but just as an FYI for future DYKs, it's not all that unusual for properties to get demolished subsequent to being listed ... we have whole lists of them for each state. For that to be a good hook, IMO, it has to be unusual enough within that context, like the Dr. Hun Houses article I wrote a few months back where the hook was that they were demolished three months later and subsequently delisted. Daniel Case (talk) 15:03, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Brick Squad
Good idea - salted.  Ron h jones  (Talk) 01:55, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Polyhalite Wiki Page
I have some information on the Polyhalite article on wikipedia and would like assistance in uploading

let me know if this interests you

Benhogarth (talk) 10:39, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK Anochetus dubius
Did you forget you were coming back to Template:Did you know nominations/Anochetus dubius? — Maile (talk) 21:26, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

dude
that there is what we'uns call an attack page. Dloh cierekim  23:51, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't remember the text at this point, but it didn't seem to be an attack. Maybe it was in there somewhere, but I've come across more blatant ones before. Chris857 (talk) 23:53, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Revolutionary poets brigade
why have you tagged the revolutionary poets brigade page for deletion? They are an organization that hardly has any sources online but has very notable members, but more importantly are very active in san francisco. users need to have something to reference online to find out what this group is and what they are doing. from your user profile it seems you don't have much of an interest in poetry, particularly the SF scene, so not sure why you decided to edit the page. i don't edit or create many articles, so your rationale or help on the matter is appreciated. Mishkoti (talk) 01:55, 29 December 2013 (UTC)mishkoti
 * With Revolutionary Poets Brigade, the problems are: the only sources given are by the group themselves, and the only notability expressed by the article, "dedicated to bringing positive change...", is only so much puffery. Given the groups youth, you yourself highlighted a major issue "has any sources online". Offline sources are perfectly fine (if they are independent of the group), but I don't think many (if any) exist. Chris857 (talk) 03:02, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2014 WikiCup!
Hello Chris857, and welcome to the 2014 WikiCup! Your submission page can be found here. The competition will begin at midnight tonight (UTC). There have been a few small changes from last year; the rules can be read in full at WikiCup/Scoring, and the page also includes a summary of changes. One important rule to remember is that only content on which you have completed significant work, and nominated, in 2014 is eligible for points in the competition- the judges will be checking! As ever, this year's competition includes some younger editors. If you are a younger editor, you are certainly welcome, but we have written an advice page at WikiCup/Advice for younger editors for you. Please do take a look. Any questions should be directed to one of the judges, or left on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will make it to round 2. Good luck! , and  17:32, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Tyop Contest!
Hi there! This is just a friendly reminder that the first ever Tyop Contest starts tomorrow at 0:00 UTC! The contest will be run from February 1 to March 1, 2014. Please note that there have been some changes to the scoring process to allow a system that involves almost no effort on your part submitting your typo corrections. This allows for moar time spent fixing typos, less time submitting your fixes! Your judges, Jeffrd10 and Newyorkadam

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)

Listing Typos
Hi there, you don't need to list typos :) I have a semi-automatic way to do that!! -Newyorkadam (talk) 19:19, 2 February 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam

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)

Tyop Contest Conclusion!
The Tyop Contest is over! Great job, everyone! Of the fourteen entrants, twelve fixed typos! The judges are very behind with the judging, but it will get done! Another note similar to this one will be sent out when the judging is complete to announce the winners. Check back again next January for the (hopeful) second running of the Tyop Contest, as this one went swell Your judges, Jeffrd10 and Newyorkadam

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)

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) 17:57, 4 May 2014 (UTC)