User talk:Cromium/Archive 1

Welcome!
Hello, Green Giant, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! --Khoikhoi 03:26, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style


 * Much appreciate the welcome message :) Green Giant 16:40, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

City symbols
The list of city officials should remain. I put the CoA specifically because the city template has no provision for that.

Pizzadeliveryboy 00:23, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Have added on yr idea
Hi:

I have modified the infobox as per yr points. Any ideas on formatting are welcome.

Pizzadeliveryboy 00:56, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Done with formatting the seal
I used a diffent template or else I was messing with Kolkata/Bangalore pages too!!! Any ideas on formatting???

Pizzadeliveryboy 01:23, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Paris Page
Green Giant,

Ho ho ho. Thanks for your Paris page edit - and sorry that this "baptism" was reverted - this is a recurring problem there. I set that straight this morning; your edits are back in place.

Although "Paris" should normally be a much-frequented subject, its Wiki page has very few editors - only one in particular for the time being, and it is this lack of consensus that is responsible for the page's stagnation. Are you knowledgable on the subject? Even engaging in lively discussion about eventual improvements on its talk page would be much welcome and could be enough to get things going there. Anyhow, beinvenue : )  T HE P ROMENADER  10:33, 22 January 2006 (UTC)


 * My apologies for the Paris-page bedlam - the author who reverted your work is a bit of a stickler about protecting his opinions. Don't let this get you down though - things will be fine if we (wikipedians) keep pulling in the direction of reason and readablility. In any case that's what I'm pulling for there. Cheers!  T HE P ROMENADER  21:04, 22 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Actually you are a godsend - I have been waiting since months for someone who a) knows enough about Paris to know what the *$%&*$ I'm going on about on the talk page and b) has the b*lls to stick around long enough to change anything. I've been commended for my 'trials' there but this is neither help, reason nor consensus - I can't tell you how much time and research I've wasted on proving the fact of my misgivings, and trying to spell them out in plain language! Thank you for finally arriving!


 * Today was important as a certain contributor's behaviour has been increasingly bold and bad - today's wholesale reverts flew in the face of both reason and consensus. There is little anyone can do against this sort of behaviour on Wiki, especially in subjects as particular to English readers as Paris is, and I am quite certain the person in question knows it. Thank you also for helping to overcome this.


 * Although I'm glad to finally have some help in the fight towards reason, I must stress that I always place reason first. If together we can determine a) what could be improved and b) prove the veracity of the information that would replace it, I think we can finally begin getting around to finally making some improvements to the article. What's more, this 'no consensus possible' deadlock broken and 'threat of revert' removed, perhaps contributors new and old (and the page's original creators) will return once again. So thanks on all counts. Now let's get to work!


 * T HE P ROMENADER 03:09, 23 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Paris should be a showcase article.


 * Hallelujiah! Now I must get to bed : )  T HE P ROMENADER  03:38, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Green Giant,

I just saw your Talk:Paris page addition this morning - you certainly do have your sources! If you have tried sorting out anything in the rest of the talk page you may have noticed that I also have been attempting to dissemble and disprove the "Paris is its 'aire urbaine' (which is a 'metropolitan area')" theory dominating the article as fact - but I haven't been able to in any few words. Could you give the 'Contested Content; POV' section a read-through when you have the time, and perhaps add notes on any sense/nonsense you see in it? I intended to make changes even today, but it would be nice to build some honest consensus first. This would also leave my 'pause time' free for other more less tedious chores : )

Thanks in advance, cheers,

T HE P ROMENADER 09:29, 23 January 2006 (UTC)


 * This is odd - did you forget to log in again? The user 81.64.90.173 just reverted the Paris page back to its "fifth or sixth, depending on the sources" economy phrasing - and placed Paris fifth in the ranking of the "world's largest Metropolitan area economies" in the "Paris economy" article. Perhaps you are not aware that this battle in ambiguity has been going on for the better part of a year now, and these reverts are exactly those Hardouin always makes - but always under his own name. What's odder is that the same user also made edits to other articles as well - If it was indeed you, don't forget to hit the "remember me" button next time you log in : )  T HE P ROMENADER  14:27, 23 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Forget the last message - Hardouin seems to have become a HalfMoonBay sock puppet.  T HE P ROMENADER  15:03, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

I have to say yesterday's events and this morning's message ended by making me quite angry, so I'm happy for a break - I've got some photos to take in Wissous. Sources, Roman aqueducts, 'fun stuff' for me.

Please continue to correct and comment any and everything in the Paris Page - one cannot be bogged down by designs in distraction. I have a few maps to complete for the "Streets of Paris" Wikiproject, then I will be able to get around to making the improvements noted on the talk page. In the meantime If you see anything there that could use some refining or rephrasing, please do - thanks in advance.

Take care,

T HE P ROMENADER 07:14, 24 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Yesterday I broke my own cardinal rule - keeping my sights on the central issue - and it is more than likely because of this that the Paris talk page is overflowing with new bush-beating banter. This won't be the case today.


 * It would be simpler if discussion would stick to existing reference works - Do you have a working e-mail registered at Wiki? I could forward you the complete Paris articles from the Encyclopedia Britannica 2006 and Encyclopedie Universalis. If you would like webpage references I would stick to "official" references such as the concerned Mairies, departments and région Île-de-France. (do a search for "metropolitan area" or "aire urbaine" somewhere in these - here or here- to see what priority this statistic has at present).


 * I have nothing against the word 'metroplitan area' or the 'aire urbaine' concept it represents - my proposed edits make this clear -, but if it is to be used it must be explained and used context, and as a reference to nothing outside the population, place of work and trade information collected within it. Anything outside this is non-factual. Damn, I think I just said it simply : )


 * T HE P ROMENADER 09:43, 25 January 2006 (UTC)


 * PS: Feel free to archive any or all of the above!


 * Green Giant,


 * I'm just about done with the Paris page corrections - shall we get about making a 'showcase article' anytime soon?


 * all the best,


 * T HE P ROMENADER 18:10, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Please check - there are some really unreadable sections in Mumbai now!!!
Pizzadeliveryboy 01:41, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Hello
I've been editing in Wikipedia for quite sometime now and am currently working on improving the Kargil War having added content backed with good references and in NPOV IMO. Since you've been editing some subcontinent content with a third party perspective I thought I'd request you in inputting anything in Peer review/Kargil War/archive1. I've incorporated most of the suggestions from other editors. Plz take a look. Idleguy 10:33, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Changes vetted
I have vetted the changes - reverted some - modified some - kept some. Most of your changes resulted in moving from a passive to an active voice construction, which is good. But in some places they seemed out of place, so either modified them or reverted for lack of a better version.

Pizzadeliveryboy 16:11, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Re: Pakistan
Not a problem, I was just doing vandal patrol and just try to pick the most recent version that doesn't appear vandalized. I trust your knowledge of the subject. (ESkog)(Talk) 04:01, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Paris Consensus
I like the changes you made to your User page. I saw your detailed contribution to Talk:Paris - I'm not sure how much research you had to do, but thanks for that. Knowing something isn't right is one thing, but going through all the work to prove it is another - it is most likely for this that the Paris page remained unchanged for so long.

I've concluded the 'comparison of areas' section, and, in light of your message, added a very short 'apellation consensus' other. Please feel free to add to it.

Take care,

T HE P ROMENADER 07:52, 26 January 2006 (UTC)


 * PS: Cancel the 'apellation consensus' bit above - I've removed it to give your contribution time to breathe. I did find one 'eek' within though: - because only the Ile-de-France region is the metropolitan area - I see your meaning, and this is in favour of the Paris article becoming about something more 'Paris', but as this concerns mainly the Île-de-France I'll explain here. If you don't mind.


 * "Metropolitan area" is the best translation possible for "aire urbaine" - they are both statistical commuter belts. The Île-de-France is a 'région' with a very strong administrative boundries and a very imposing political makeup. They are two completely different things.


 * I wouldn't give too much weight to that 'metropolis' association - ony the name has anything in common with "metropolitan area", and the association has existed since before the idea of "aire urbaine" ever existed. If anything the website shows to what point Paris' neighbouring départements impose themselves as independant political entities: Any Paris project extending even just a little past its borders imparitively requires the involvment of the representative of the concerned departement. It is for this that the mayor of Paris had to take (as baggage, some would say), the representatives from Paris' closest departements and a representative for the Île-de-France region. The 'metropolis' project most likely involves Paris to the limits of its agglomeration - which extends into most all of the Île-de-France's eight departements, albeit only a smidgen into the four outer ones. It is for this that you don't see "aire urbiane" or "metropolitan area" in any official website - the term and even concept is unused and even ignored by politicians. The 'aire urbaine' (metoropolitan area) is simply not an aknowledged entity of any sort here. I hope I made this clear.


 * My misgivings with the Paris' article's use of "metropolitan area" in that it is used as an excuse to claim everything past Paris' agglomeration - even the entire Île-de-France region - as Paris itself. The logic used is this: If Paris' 'aire urbaine' limits are 'almost the same' as those of the Île-de-France, then there is no reason why we cannot speak of everything within the Île-de-France as belonging to the 'aire urbaine'. If everything within the 'aire urbaine' belongs to Pairs, then so does everything within the Île-de-France.


 * When you are reading about the "Paris metropolitan area" in the Paris article, three times out of four you are reading info on the Île-de-France. This will give you a good idea what the article will look like once we do give evrything its correct appellation. Have a look at the stagnated state of the Île-de-France (région) article to see where much of it should go. And please have a look at the Paris article (and its talk page) to see how they treat the 'aire urbaine' : )


 * All this is horribly complicated to sort out, isn't it? I hope we do soon. I'm looking forward to having more time for contributing.


 * Cheers.  T HE P ROMENADER  09:21, 26 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the message. But LOL - I see that you're still mixing the Île-de-France and "aire urbaine" concepts. The "metropolitan area" template is actually correct in its content - it contains all the communes englobed in the latest (1999) INSEE definition of the 'aire urbaine'. One can question the template's presence in the Paris page - I have, and Thbz as well - as it makes much more 'noise' than its informative value.


 * Remember: to the template's authour, the 'aire urbaine' and 'metropolitan area' are one and the same. The template should actually be called "communes in the aire urbaine" and be linked to the aire urbaine article, but as a compromise we had to make do with the "metropolitan area" title linked to the 'aire urbaine' article. Perhaps you should put this back as it was? I do find amusing though that the introduction to the metropolitan area article you linked it to explains very clearly the extreme caution with which this title should be used, and the lack of seriousness of any comparisons between any two regions from different countries using this title. You could also have a look at Largest_European_metropolitan_areas for more lucidity on the matter.


 * I have perhaps forgotten to mention the Paris article's 'Paris is its metropolitan area' theme's most glaring illogic: there is a New York City and New York metropolitan area article; there is a London article and a Greater London article; but there is no Paris and Paris metropolitan area article. Why?  T HE P ROMENADER

Paris Photo/Infobox
Could you perhaps take care of this? Your changes before were nice but there was a big white space above the photo - perhaps changing "clear:both" to "clear:right" in the spacer div will set things straight. I must fly and won't be back till late this afternoon so if you don't get to it first I can see to it then. Cheers! T HE P ROMENADER 10:30, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I just did it myself - acutally it was a bit more complicated than I thought as it was actually the template's code messing things up. All set now.  T HE P ROMENADER  20:34, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Paris Population Density, etc
GG, Could you have a look to the population/density section of the Paris page? You seem to be knowledgable in such matters, and I am not completely sure about the veracity/validity/utility of the comparisons there. Thanks if you can find the time.

T HE P ROMENADER 22:38, 30 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Can I ask for some input on the Paris page? Corrections were going fine but lately I've had less time - In my absence I noticed that "metropolitan area" has begun to sneak its way into the article once again. Corrections to this were met with reverts of course. I've also tried to shorten the infobox of its needless "metropolitan area" and use the space to add other more relevent and useful information - these are being reverted outright. I think, once again, truth and consensus are going to have to be made clear.  T HE P ROMENADER  08:03, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Changed infobox
There's no point having an infobox if only one article uses it - each province plus Islamabad had their own infobox. So I've replaced the obsolete Template:Sind_infobox with a generic one for all provinces and territories. Green Giant 01:06, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I have made the Template:Sind infobox few months ago. Well, its good to have unique infobox for all provinces. I appreacite your efforts on desinging Template:Pakistan infobox.
 * User:M.Imran 11:45, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

The infoboxes for French cities
The reason why there is not a single template for French cities so far is because at first I didn't envision to make such a large scale work, and I thought I was gonna work only on one or two cities. Now of course there are many large French cities who have these templates, and so I have been thinking of creating a single template for all large French cities, template that could be re-usable in several articles. Unfortunately, so far I haven't done it due to the constant hostility and reversions from ThePromenader, who irks at the very mention of the word metropolitan area.

To be very honest, so far I have only seen you supporting him without ever calling him into question, so I don't know if you can be a neutral voice on this. However, if you have a look at Lille or Strasbourg articles for instance, and you look at the infoboxes there with a neutral and non-prejudiced mind, you can only admit that we need to distinguish neatly between city information and metropolitan area information, to avoid mixing otherwise extremely confusing figures and data.

At first I had made infoboxes like the one for New York City, dealing only with city information, and with only a mention of the metro area population, but then it became rapidly clear that due to the very complex situation in most French large cities, with distinct city and metro area structures, it was better to spell out things clearly, even if it meant making the infoboxes longer. In a place like Lille for example, the mayor is not the same person as the president of the urban community, and the former has less power than the latter. City and metro area administrations in Lille are intertwinned, and population, land area, density figures are different. This is not a unique case.

So if ThePromenader stops his uncompromising attitude (maybe he'll listen to you... he never listens to me), then I'll make a single unified template for large French cities, instead of having a different template for each city.

By the way, I see you are interested in South Asian things. There is a big error at the Mumbai infobox. This message is already long enough, but I will explain it to you later if you are interested. Hardouin 02:34, 12 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I have read the above and replaced the original city/metro infobox until a new one is made. I'm not quite sure if this was the proper conclusion to your conversation but this is what I did. I listen to reason - and consensus rules.  T HE P ROMENADER  10:08, 12 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Green Giant,


 * Would it be at all possible to get this infobox discussion out of the way as soon as we can? It is basically the only 'factually intricate' thing remaining to fix before we can get to the much more easier (and pleasant !) task of making the Paris article read better and look good for 'peer review' presentation. As it stands, I sense that Hardouin will take your last night's conversation as 'consensus' - I would like to make this very clear if we can. If you could, please have a look at my updated version on the template's own page - the metropolitan area info is there, as well as other additions, shortening it and giving everything its proper importance and place. For the time being I put it back to its old version until we can reach a concrete consensus on this. Not to pressure you ; ) Thank you, and good night.


 * T HE P ROMENADER 00:56, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Mumbai infobox
About Mumbai infobox, the population figure, land area figure, and population density figure are for the metropolitan area, they are not for the municipality (city). A year ago I had proposed a more complete infobox, that included both city figures and metro area figures, to clearly disambiguate between both. You can see that infobox here. Figures in there are the correct ones. Unfortunately, user Nichap opposed this pretty much on the same ground as ThePromenader is opposing now, arguing that the infobox should only contain city information. So he deleted all metro area info.

End result: a few months later, some people replaced all city info with metro info (it seems they thought 11.9 million people was not high enough for Mumbai, so they replaced it with 18 million figure, which is the population of the whole metropolitan area), so now the table is screwed up, offering metro area figures and pretending they are city figures. That's why I came to the conclusion long ago that it is better, with most city infoboxes, to clearly and un-ambiguously include both city and metro area figures, so that it leaves no space for doubt, and in order to avoid misguided edits like what happened with Mumbai. Hardouin 03:03, 12 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for saying that my idea for French city infoboxes is a good one. I wish ThePromenader were more reasonable. It's frustrating not to be able to argue things calmly and rationally with people. About Mumbai, you can use the infobox I proposed last year if you want. However, I let you do that. I don't want to upload the infobox in the Mumbai article myself, because Nichap would revert me right away. You'll probably have to talk with him. What I know for sure, is that if we leave the table as it is now, i.e. containing only city info, sooner or later someone will change the figures and replace them with metro area figures, because people simply can't believe that Mumbay (the municipality) has only 11.9 million people.


 * One last comment, the land area for Mumbai is not that small. After all it is more than 5 times larger than the city of Paris (excluding Bois de Boulogne and Bois de Vincennes). What's extraordinary is that they can pack 11.9 million people within that space. But then Mumbai has some of the highest densities in the world. I had started a list of the densest urban districts in the world a while ago, but then the task of referencing them all is so daunting that I never finished it. The list is still on my computer though. So far the densest district I have found is the Kwun Tong District of Hong Kong with 50,898 people per sq. km. in 2001. Some districts of Mumbai may beat that record. Hardouin 03:27, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Paris Rescue
You stepped in just at the right time yesterday - thanks. I haven't had time to read your edits yet but will do so later today. There have been few developments since - I did eliminate Hardouin's (rather sneaky) efforts to re-insert some of his original text, but I removed most of this again (and in the first place) because it was unreferencable - there exist no 2005 AU predictions, not even on the INSEE site, and his 'AU double-growth' phrase is just plain wrong. IMHO these aren't there for the facts themselves but more for the 'metropolitan area' chip-chip - but only facts are contestable. Let's hope this blows over soon so we can get to beautifying - but it is important that all things fact stick first. Oh, and someone should explain to Hardouin the proper use of 'on the other hand' - I left it in this time.

Thanks, take care,

T HE P ROMENADER 09:54, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Hello
Hello how do you feel about making a series of pages for each of the subdivision (tehsil?) of punjab (pakistan) i tried to and i have quite a bit of information about them, but i have no clue how the info box thing works and i really want them, can you help? id like the infobox to be basically the same as you historical regeons of pakistan one, except less boxes i suppose, just ones on population, area, pop desnsity... how do you feel about that? start on Attock District and so we can both work on it(if templates are avaliable for me to use).

cheers —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aarandir (talk • contribs) 23:15, February 12, 2006 (UTC)

still sleeping? well just start whenever your ready. if you want that is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aarandir (talk • contribs) 22:56, February 13, 2006

Sections for Pakistan article
Great job on the work you put in on those sections you completed for the Pakistan article. I started going through the climate section. I set it up how I think it looks best, but since this is a wiki and it will probably be edited, oh well. Anyways, I added in some pictures of the Indus and the Thar. There were a couple more I found, but I think more than two in this section will be more than neccessary. It would bog down the article if we just loaded it with pictures. Nonetheless, I commented out the additional pictures I found, feel free to put in the others ones if you want if you feel it looks better. Both pictures of the Indus River looked great, yet the dilemma lies in choosing one. The other picture of the Thar desert is a satelite picture, so its less practical than the picture I left up there. Any how, keep up the great work. Pepsidrinka 17:18, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I have finished copyediting, reviewing, and adding pictures to the Climate, Wildlife, and Holidays sections. If you feel they are up to the level, please add them where you feel they belong. Pepsidrinka 21:02, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes, the article is at 50KB. From my various reading around WP, FA should be about 30-50 KB in size. Most of the FA on countries are about 40 or less, except China which has grown massively within the past 7 months (grown 20KB, currently at 61). Cleaning through the history sections should cut at least 5 KB (hopefully), and then I suggest we have it peer edited in order to get some outside viewpoints on anything else to fit. Pepsidrinka 21:09, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Hello. Perhaps you can review my work on the entire history section located in my sandbox. Besides you, no one else has commented on my changes to the ancient history section. I have personally sent a message to Siddiqui and I posted on the Pakistan talk page, and he, nor anyone else, has yet to make any comment. It really seems you and I are on the only active editors on this page. Pepsidrinka 19:02, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Paris Revert Bedlam Bis
Hello - are you around? I have again 'lost it' on the Paris page but I give up for now - things have gone much too far for tonight. Thirteen reverts (I think) and now there are again Île-de-France statistics masquerading as 'metropolitan area' ones, texts saying that tourism is not important for Paris - and this is what was reverted to. Both of our edits are gone in several places - but I can't exactly say what or where and I don't want to verify. The introduction I had cut down is now blown up again as an all-in-one-breath declaration insinuating the importance of Paris' metropolitan area. Could you just go and have a look at the facts of everything? It's all on the talk page. I thought we were almost there. Sorry for the mess.

T HE P ROMENADER 20:57, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Thank you
Dear Green Giant, Walaikum Assalaam. Thank you for the link to the tutorial. I had read the other more detailed articles on editing and formatting, and struggled to remember all the information. Since printing out the tutorial you sent, I am having a happier time with articles!

I am grateful for the tip on using full names. Many Pakistanis use a shortened form of their full name, hence my hesitation. The clarity of Wikipedia is very welcome.

Nkosi Sikeleli Afrika!

Sincerely, —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zain Sadullah Khan (talk • contribs) 07:58, February 17, 2006 (UTC)

Pakistan
I have contributed to history section of Pakistan that have been removed by you. I think we should work together rather than play this game of reversions. I would appreciate that you do not revert my changes. I did not know you and your username Green Giant does not give indication of your nationality. I assumed that you were one of many who vandalize Islamic and Pakistani pages. So I am sorry if I reverted your changes. Please do not revert my changes to Pakistan page. Please discuss any objection that you may have. I am reverting back your reversions. Please indicate each and every line that you may find objectionable.

Siddiqui 01:29, 18 February 2006 (UTC)


 * You removed references used in the article without explaining why, especially since articles need citable references. The addition of a paragraph on Mehrgarh is not necessary because it should be a summary. Green Giant 01:34, 18 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Mehrgarh is very important site since predates Indus Valley Civilisation by about 3000 years. Clearly showing continuity of urban human civilization in Pakistan from 8000 BCE to present.
 * Siddiqui 01:38, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Definitely Mehrgarh needs a mention but let the paragraph go into the History of Pakistan article. I'm still not happy with your removal of references, so I am reinserting them until you can explain why they are not needed. Note I am not changing your editions of the article. Green Giant 01:42, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Firstly, The India page does not even mention one word about treatment of it's monorities and especially Gujarat genocide of Muslims. Then why should Pakistan page has a link to a site that is extremely critical of Pakistan's minorities. Indian will never allow one word about Gujarat genocide in India page. Secondly, the Indian deny Aryan invasion theory to claim themselves as the natives of South Asia. Clearly there was Aryan migration and settlement in India from Eurasia. They use the phrase like "Islamic invadors invaded India" while "Aryan settled in India". The whole Hindutva ideology is based on denying Aryan invasion and demonizing Islamic settlement.

Siddiqui 01:58, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Not all refrences should be glossy and positive about the subject of the article. However, having looked at both of the references, I can see your point, so I am removing them both. Green Giant 02:13, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Paris Talk
Green Giant, I've decided to take advantage of (and maintain) the Paris page's 'blocked' status to discuss and decide what should (or shouldn't) be changed there. Some wisdom from you there would be very welcome. I will also be contacting others knowledgable to see if they can help too.

Thanks,

T HE P ROMENADER 11:14, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Towns and Neiborhoods of Karachi
I created pages for most of the towns and neigborhoods of Karachi and categorized them. I hope you will contine to expand them. Please do not remove my summarized information about the towns and neighborhoods on the top of each page. You can add more information after the summary. Now I have to review all the towns and neighborhood pages that I created so that they have the same format. If you have any question, concerns or comment please contact me.

Siddiqui 17:02, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

You did a great job in Gulshan Town. Can you please reorganise all Towns of Karachi in the same format.

Siddiqui 23:02, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Good Idea. You can organize all Karachi Towns and neighborhoods.

Siddiqui 13:26, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

In the the towns page I cannot go to different neighborhood pages as it links back to the town page. Where are all neighborhood pages ? I think we also had Gulistan-e-Johar neigborhood page. I cannot find it either.

Siddiqui 12:50, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

A Western Sahara-related vote
-->Here Make your voice heard. Vote or die. And all that. -Justin (koavf), talk 20:27, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Your AfD Vote
At the demand of another Wikipedian, I have moved the three related articles in the Islamic athletics AfD to a different AfD page (since I added those three related articles after he/she voted). Since you voted Keep for the former and Delete for the latter in the Islamic athletics AfD, I'm asking that you move your votes to the proper locations or at least give me permission to do so. Either way, thanks for your input. joturner 04:33, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Re: Category:Special forces of Pakistan
I created it because actually the SSG is a specops unit and not a branch of the Pakistani armed forces, note also that lots of special forces categories have only one article. By the way, why do you want to move the page? --Nkcs 04:53, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Pakistan Peer Review
I don't know if you are aware, but in the case you don't, the Pakistan article is under a peer review. Several comments have arised which might warrant your response, seeing how your probably more knowledgeable on the topic than I am. Pepsidrinka 22:10, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Military of Pakistan
The Template:Military of Pakistan is a standard navigational template which is used for the militaries of other countries also- therefore it should not be deleted. Looking at the other template- I would say that it is really only relevant for the main Military of Pakistan article, and that perhaps more specific template should exist for the three branches. Astrotrain 18:01, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

An Apology
I'm sorry. I'm computor illitterate and new to the internet. I was actually surprized to see changes actually occur after I dared to explore the 'edit' option. I then went on to experiment with what i could do with editing in a misguided effort to learn how to edit. It was when I clicked my user name that i learned that all required information was available aswell as your messages. I am truly sorry to have caused you anguish. I did expect, however naively, for my additions to be deleted and then to recieve an inquiry from you about my 'oppinion' at my e-mail address. I would have then informed you about my sources.

History is a very tricky thing indeed as the oppressor needs to hide and justify oppression. In many countries the publishing of books against orthodox oppinion are banned. while more often than not the oppressed party does not have the financial resourses to publish books etc. Therefore history that has been altered will remain so. At times very little and inaccurate (to say the least) information is available on certain regions, cultures, nations etc. the question is - is wikipedia going to basically assist and promulgate such ignorance?

Thankyou very much for your tips about how my article about my homeland should be written. I shall improve it whenever I'm free to do so.

Yours Sincerely —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arsalanrkazi (talk • contribs) 21:02, February 24, 2006 (UTC)

Makran Coastal Highway
I created Makran Coastal Highway and uploaded few photos. Later I found Coastal Highway (Pakistan) for the same subject. I would prefer to use its full name Makran Coastal Highway rather than just Coastal Highway. In any case I would like hear your comments.

Siddiqui 01:17, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Airports of Pakistan and List of Pakistan Natural Disasters
Can you please format these two pages.

Thanks Siddiqui 19:41, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Jinnah picture
Well the picture that you put there for Jinnah isnt very good quality. Its not even a picture. It looks more like a drawing. Please replace it with one that is more realistic than iconic. Jinnah was a real person, and his picture should depict that.

I understand your logic and it makes sense, but as far as identification goes, currently Pakistanis can identify with either picture of Jinnah because both are prevalent. I will be replacing it with some other picture of Jinnah from his campaigning era soon. Also, I do not understand the four tildes thing you were talking about. Where should I leave the four tildes? in the description of changes made dialogue? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Swerveut (talk • contribs) 01:03, February 27, 2006 (UTC)

You are Offensive and Short Sighted
Dear Green Giant, Good Day.

Though I do not know how "Giant" you are, but I usually do not like to TALK NONESENSE nor I like someone else to do so with me.

The Sindhi pages at Wiki projects really have problem. These days I am trying my best to gather some help from other Sindhis and attract people to develop Sindhi pages. The Sindhi page of Wikipedia was lying UNATTENDED and DESERTED for a long time. No one had visited the Sindhi page with just one or two articles in Devenagri that were totally un-understandable. Those are still there. But I made a new MAIN PAGE in Sindhi Arabic Script. If you bothered to have a look at Sindhi Wikipedia, then you must also have taken some of your precious time to see its history as well. It is me who has sacrificed the time and effort to make the MAIN PAGE and some more articles in Sindhi. Although, every thing there needs time, dedication and effort, much more than I, for one, can contribute.

Same is the case with Sindhi page at Wiktionary. I also need to find some time to change and update its php files as well, so that people can at least FIND Sindhi pages. Presently, the name of the language appears everywhere in Devenagri, which is un-understabdable to 99.99% of Sindhi population. This is the main reason of why Sindhi people have not been attarcted towards the Wiki projects. These remain simply INVISIBLE to everyone.

It is true that the Govt. of India had approved a Sindhi Devenagri Script in India after 1948, but it was rejected by the Sindhi Hindus of India, and never received the acceptance among them. It is true that Sindhi language can be written in the Devenagri Script, but as a matter of fact, there is a negligeable number of people who can really read and write that.

Showing LINK FOR Sindhi pages everywhere ONLY IN DEVENAGRI is totally UNJUSTIFIED. The language remains of course associated with its land, the SINDH, where it is recognised as official language only in ARABIC Script.

About Mr. Siddiqui... Wikipedia is a Multilingual encyclopedia in every language. In fact, even the ENGLISH Wikipedia is supposed to be enriched with the names of places and various other terms from all other languages; with, of course, an explanation in ENGLISH. I wanted to write the names of the places in Sindhi script, and later, add a link to the Sindhi Wikipedia, as the Inter-language co-ordination is ENCOURAGED at Wikis. But those names, written in Sindhi Script, were removed by the user Siddiqui, without any DISCUSSION or Warning. IT WAS SIMPLE VANDALISM. I asked him several times for not doing so. But every time, he removed those. It is natural to find the WAY THE NAME OF PLACE AS IT IS WRITTEN IN THE NATIVE OR THE LOCAL LANGUAGE OF THE PLACE. And it is always usefull to have a link to the relevant LANGUAGE PAGE AS WELL. But the user Siddiqui, resorting to Vandalsim, acted unwarrantedly.

Do you find any reason of telling how TOKYO is written in URDU on the TOKYO PAGE right in the MAIN TEXT? Similarly, there is no reason of writing name of every Sindh's city and place in Urdu. And it is highly VANDAL to remove names written in Sindhi.

I belong to Sindh and am Sindhi. I have every right to CONTRIBUTE and ADD THE TRUTH. In the HISTORY SECTION of the cities of Sindh, the original names were COMPLETELY TRANSLATED IN URDU. The Sindhi Term "CHAR YAR" was reported as being URDU WORDS; yet these explained the Sindh's king and his three friends. The names of many places were not just DISTORTED in their PRONUNCIATION, but were copmletely TRANSLATED in URDU. And when I JUST added or at some places corrected the names, those were simply removed by Mr. POLITE SIDDIQUI unwarrantedly without bothering to DISCUSS. He even removed, for many times, the names of Sindhi TV channels from the page of Karachi, sub section ECONOMY, leaving the names of Urdu Channels only. All this showed his BIAS and UNSPOKEN HATTERED for Sindh and Sindhi language, being an Indian immigrant. One more thing, the WORD MOHAJIR mentioned every now and there in the Wikis is not JUSTIFIED. This is the word used for Prophet Muhammad (Peace be Uppon Him) and his followers who migrated from MAKKAH to MADINA. The actual word is simply REFUGEES, and in local language, PANNAHGIR and in Urdu, PANNAHGUZEER, as they were reffered to as by the famous URDU daily JANG (at the time of partition of India). The JANG was itself editted by Urdu Speaking Indian Immigrants. The word Mohajir is neither nationality nor an official declaration for Indian Immigrants into Pakistan.

AND FINALLY YOU ............... Don't be too smart. And do not send your OFFENSIVE MESSAGES again and again. And do not get worried about how my talk page looks like. Do not cross limits. Behave decently. Do not press me report VANDALISM on your part. Aursani 21:56, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for offering me help. Although I am very busy with my PhD work, I always find some time for Sindhi Wikipedia due to my enormous affection with my land and the language. I shall appreciate if siddiqui and all others DISCUSS before removing anything. I shall surely ask for help as and when I needed. Thanks once again. Aursani 22:30, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Khairpur State
The Khairpur state page has served its purpose. it has gotten your attention. you are free to use what ever materials you need and should you need information about the sources of history, I shall provide that as soon as I can. I hope the green in your name does not represent the green in the Pakistan flag. If so, then truth is damned.Arsalanrkazi

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Arsalanrkazi (talk • contribs) 00:34, March 1, 2006 (UTC)

From Mr 'Simpson' of Khairpur
Well thank God! I did not Know How to edit the NGO site under construction. But I managed to learn how to edit Wikipedia simply through experimentation. It was what I put here that the site builders copied on to that other NGO site under contruction. Hence the Sabre-Rattling.;) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arsalanrkazi (talk • contribs) 01:26, March 1, 2006 (UTC)

New Categories
I would like you to join following two categories of Muslims that have been censored by Zionista and Hindutva editors from posting your contributions.


 * Category:Wikipedians censored by Zionist editors
 * Category:Wikipedians censored by Hindutva editors

Siddiqui 03:09, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Template
Since you seem to be heavily involved in many Pakistani articles, I'd like to know if you have ever seen this template on any page. Its the infobox that's on the Pakistan article in template form. Seems kind of useless, as Pakistan is probably the only page that would use it. What links here shows no other article, but that may be because WLH has been malfunctioning lately and I don't know if its been fixed yet. Pepsidrinka 19:49, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Some additions
I,ve had a few dates and facts added and made a few alterations to the 3rd history chapter of http://www.khairpursindh.org. Please check them out. the sabre rattling is still there though. Arsalan.

Vedic civilization in the Pakistan page
For discussion, posted to Talk:Pakistan:

I propose to change the following paragraph:
 * The region was the site of one of the earliest towns in the world at Mehrgarh and later much of the Indus Valley Civilisation. That civilisation went into decline prior to the arrival of Indo-Aryan tribes from Central Asia. The two cultures mixed to produce the Vedic Civilisation that existed from Gandhara to the valley of the Ganges River, in what is now modern India, around 1500 BCE and helped shape subsequent South Asia cultures. However, this Aryan Invasion Theory has been challenged on the basis of new evidence which suggests that South Asian history shows continuity of progress from the earliest times to today and that changes brought by other cultures were not a major ingredient in the development of the Vedic Civilisation.

This version has a number of problems: In conclusion, the existing text has factual errors, and at many points, presents one view, to the exclusion of other views that have more support in the peer-reviewed literature, especially among those who are not motivated by religious or nationalistic chauvanism. Would anyone like to propose a factually-accurate neutrally-worded text here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by SkepticalContrarian (talk • contribs) 05:31, March 6, 2006 (UTC)
 * It omits the view, once almost universal and still widely-held, that invaders from Central Asia were responsible for the decline of the Harrapan civilization.
 * Whether, and to what extent the two cultures mixed or not is not known. One view is that the culture of the invaders largely replaced that of the natives. One widely-held view is that the caste system in India stems from an institutionalization of the racial differences between the new Caucasian rulers and the dark-skinned natives. This is supported by DNA analysis, which has found European genetic markers in the Y chromosomes of Brahmins, but not in other castes.
 * The text could be construed as claiming that the whole region from Gandhara to the Ganges is in modern India. However, Gandhara is not in modern India.
 * Whether the Vedic Civilization existed as early as 1500 BC is a matter of dispute between Hindu nationalists, who say that it did, and the vast majority of secular scholars who say that it evolved later. The text not only claims unequivocally that the Vedic civilisation is that old, but also that it extended from Gandhara to the Gangetic plain. I believe the preponderance of scholarly opinion is that the latter was heavily forested at that time, and was settled much later.
 * The text suggests that "new evidence" largely supports the indigenous-origin theory, and fails to mention that much new evidence tends to support the exogenous-origin theory.
 * It fails to mention the Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex, the most likely origin of the invaders.
 * It fails to mention that the vast majority of secular scholars worldwide believe that the origin of Indo-European languages was not in India, and that Sanskrit and other Indo-European languages are relatively recent arrivals in India. Dating methods such as glottochronology have been used to estimate the date of origin of the Sanskrit language. Sanskrit probably evolved out of proto-Avestan in or around the area of the Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex.

Formatting
Please format Air Bases of Pakistan Air Force page. Siddiqui 18:40, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

The idiot
Must I say dear sir that as a new user I haven't had the time to manage to decode the rules and regulation, for I understand what you are accussing me of in relativity to the section Of Geography in the article India. --ishu 19:21, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Your Kindness and goodwill is much accepted by myself, however, I have taken heed to the basic rules, and am beginning anew. --ishu 19:28, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Jinnah picture
The Muhammad Ali Jinnah picture on the Pakistan page is currently said to be fair use. More than likely, it has passed into the public domain. Indian public domain laws say that a picture taken prior to 1946 are now in the public domain. Pakistan public domain laws are even more lenient, dating back to the 1950s. Since Muhammad Ali Jinnah died in 1948, the picture surely meets the Pakistan PD law. However, I'm almost certain the picture was taken in India, and I'm inclined to believe that the picture was published in India as well. Would you say these are valid assumptions? The India tag is Template:PD-India, while the Pakistan tag is Template:PD-Pakistan, which provide the specifics of the PD law. Pepsidrinka 20:03, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

History of Pakistan
Thankyou very much for reverting my addition of History of Pakitsan section Pakistan page. I will be creating a new page for Pakistan's history and I hope you will not make same revertions in that page. Siddiqui 16:48, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Re:SouthAsiaWaters
Hi - find it hard to believe that its the most interesting, but definitely it can be expanded to include lakes. Please feel free to chip in. Rama&#39;s Arrow 03:35, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Paris fun again
Green Giant,

I'm in no state to deal with this (I'm in the midst of post-season photo editing), but it looks like the 'Paris' fun has begun again. Dealing with this Hardouin character is indeed like banging one's head against a brick wall - and repetition only makes it flatter. I cannot enter another one-on-one battle - those days are over - but to make any edits 'stick' we're going to have to come up with some sort of consensus. Yet I fear even this will be ignored, as Hardouin has reverted past many edits from many users, and even your infobox modifications. I'm really getting tired of this. I hope you can take a more active role, as alone, even when in reason, one can do nothing. T HE P ROMENADER 08:53, 11 March 2006 (UTC)


 * PS: I also took the time to submit a WP:RfC and add an announcement to the Wikipedia Community Portal - with added editors perhaps we can break this deadlock, because as long as Hardouin keeps 'reverting to the old', a deadlock it is. Thanks and have a great weekend.  T HE P ROMENADER  11:58, 11 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Just another quick note - I noticed that the same person mentioned above also updated 'his/her' infobox with statistics from the 'World gazeteer' site that you provided - I would be careful of this source, as I have mentioined before. I also note that in GEsources' writeup of the site they put "It offers 'current population figures for cities, towns and places of all countries'." - placed between quotations like this, as it is on the site, is hardly a solid recommendation - as this is the site's own claim - and the site itself does not cite its sources. But the most important fact is that, if the INSEE didn't publish any estimations, no publishable sources exist. It's unfortunate that placing 'information of choice' is more important to some than information itself, and it is for this that questioning the true valor of information presented is conveniently and abusively skipped.


 * BTW, I will be putting your version of the infobox back into place until we can reach a final consensus on which form it should take. That sort of disregard and imposition is inacceptable. All the same, I still don't know the when and what of it all, but will look hopefully later today. I don't understand why you just let this happen, but if you agree with it let me know and I will change nothing.  T HE P ROMENADER  13:40, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Can I ask you for your point of view on the above - should I just drop it? After last night's reverts, I intend to lodge a formal 'user conduct' complaint about Hardouin - that user's Paris page appropriation has gone on long enough. I especially want to focus on Hardouin's insistance on publishing (and reverting to) original research, personal opinions and factual errors and inventions - wiki should not be like this. I would like to ask you for some input there too - a word will do when I file the complaint. T HE P ROMENADER 07:39, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a lot (External link problem)
Wow! The procedure worked nicely ! The external link is now established.Thank you for your excellent help !! Thanks a lot.--Dwaipayanc 07:05, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Your Paris Page Suggestions
I just wanted to let you know that I agree totally with your Paris article recommendations and you have my total support, but I would like to leave off answering your messages on its talk page to let others reply first - my presence there has been a bit overbearing lately. I was in a similar 'proposition' situation quite some months ago and could get no consensus - but rest assured that this time you have mine.

Take care,

T HE P ROMENADER 17:01, 15 March 2006 (UTC)


 * LOL! Love your new userpage layout. Do let's continue our conversation on the Paris page about improvements - and let's hope others will join in too. In the meantime, I've begun the Paris metropolitan area article today - I think my writeup there sums what it is up nicely. I just saw your Paris sandbox - can I come play in it too? Joke aside, this is a great way to work out possible article writeup/layout solutions. Could we perhaps do this together - for starters?  T HE P ROMENADER  23:27, 16 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Never mind apologising for your absence - no problem at all. I must admit though that I was a bit puzzled at your lack of response to issues you yourself had brought up. You are not the only one overworked and underpaid - well, what is well-paid covers for when things get 'sparse' between fashion seasons.


 * Thanks for the invitation - you know, what you have undertaken lately is almost exactly (down to the sandbox 'Paris page') what I had attempted to do six months before - if it doesn't bore you, have a look (way) back in Paris' talk page history - I think I posted a link to this in one of my answers to you.


 * I'm looking forward to working with you towards bringing the Paris page up to featured status. Working positively, in reason, I'm sure we can pull this article out of its months-long stagnated state into something read-worthy - and even beautiful! Thank you so much for your support (past and future) in this - it is thanks to you that we can move forward. Once the improvements begin, I hope others will jump on too. I'm ready whenever you are - let's get to work!


 * T HE P ROMENADER 11:35, 17 March 2006 (UTC)


 * There's been a bit more reverting, but there is some discussion going on on the talk page - why don't you join in? I'm a bit puzzled at your not following up on your former change propositions - now is perhaps a good time to forward them again? There are some interesting ideas floating for now. Take care.  T HE P ROMENADER  10:50, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Pakistan
Do you think it is time to nominate Pakistan to featured article status, or would you rather work on it some more. In my opinion, it is ready, though I will defer if you prefer. Pepsidrinka 03:56, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Including
Your message was a tonic not a hazard – “including” takes care of “etc.” hahaha. --Bhadani 13:05, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Green Giant looks yellow. --Bhadani 13:06, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

But
Yeah, but that fine distinction might be lost on most readers. I thought 'and' might be better, except it's a rather long sentence then.

Good article. Tony 11:13, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Paris Sandbox
Made a few castles today. Left a note on the talk page!

T HE P ROMENADER 11:54, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

My Rfc
Please comment on my Rfc. Requests for comment/Jersey Devil--Jersey Devil 02:11, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

The AfD's
Yeah, I got tired of copy&amp;pasting the same thing everywhere :-) And I kept stumbling on new ones... Your suggestion of a dynasty article was an excellent one though! Weregerbil 09:33, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Latvian cities
Thanks for trying to help me, I do have few questions it would be very nice from you if you could answer - left them on my talk page -- Xil/talk 11:32, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

The test
Thanks for your greetings. I thought to take the Test, but decided not to -as it is dangerous for a wiki-addict to take the test - let me become "more-addict", then I may decide. --Bhadani 14:40, 24 March 2006 (UTC)


 * This page is beautiful, I am temted to copy it: Please remember, Bhadani is a great theaf, and he steals without warning! --Bhadani 14:44, 24 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Let us bait - who is more ugly-looking? --Bhadani 11:10, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Here we go again....
Articles for deletion/Turkish Kurdistan - Bertilvidet 00:36, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

About the templates
Hi, I just wanted to tell you that I totally agree with you about the templates being uneconomical as they will only be used on the Portal:Pakistan or the WP:PKWNB.But you suggested nothing about their future, Should I mark them for deletion and copy they code to the page instead of using template but they editing the page will be like hell becuase of all the coding with the text.Thankyou  Wol ver ine talk 21:24, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

FAC
Hello Coca Cola...err Green Giant. Was just reading your user page. Interesting that Green Giant (aka Coca Cola) and Pepsidrinka seem to get along so well in editing. I was wondering if you had any articles you in mind that you wanted to like work towards making another featured article (yes, I'm being premature, but the Pakistan-nom is all but finalized). Anyhow, this whole turning articles into one of the thousand best articles on WP seems rather fulfilling. Pepsidrinka 22:12, 25 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I haven't really gotten back to you on this, because well, I really don't know which article I myself would like to edit. I've come to a inconclusive conclusion and decided that I'm going to work on Karachi for a while and if you'd like to help, I'd very much appreciate it.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Pepsidrinka (talk • contribs) 23:12, March 25, 2006 (UTC)

Much appreciation
I do in fact feel like such a nerd, being an administrator to an encyclopedia. Who would have thought. Thank you for the support vote on the RfA (and the chocolate). I was in fact hesitant to accept the nomination, yet I saw three people supporting me prior to my acceptance (you being the first), so I figured I'd go ahead and accept and see what happened. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pepsidrinka (talk • contribs) 08:04, March 26, 2006 (UTC)

Syed Babar Ali Zaidi
Thanks for the heads up. I did consider speedying it myself but I wasn't 100% sure (despite the lack of Google hits and the lack of credibility on the face of it). Good have someone with more knowledge of the subject deal with it :-) &mdash;Whouk (talk) 11:40, 26 March 2006 (UTC)


 * PS: I liked your version of the talk page archivebox so I've "borrowed" it for my first talk page archiving. Hope that's OK. &mdash;Whouk (talk) 12:01, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

"Horosopic" astrology
Sorry about that! Ha, I feel like an idiot. Thank you. Samuella 01:55, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Hymn of Russia
I have no clue what you done at, but I been trying to get that same effect for who-knows how long now. So, for not only doing that, and for the grammar check, that barnstar to the right of the screen is officially yours for the taking. Thanks. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 04:46, 27 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the barnstar, it is my first so I will place it on my userpage. What I did was to remove the width code which was pushing the Russian column of the hymn table to 50% of the page. It should work with width at 33% but I don't think it's worth the effort. Anyway thanks for the barnstar and if I can help in anyway, feel free to ask. Green Giant 05:18, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Congrats
Hi ! Congrats for helping Pakistan become a Featured article!--Dwaipayanc 08:52, 27 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, Kolkata is a still very long run! And it needs help from wikipedians like you and all. Thanks!--Dwaipayanc 09:00, 27 March 2006 (UTC)


 * That full moon beach party looks like a blast. Incidently, it takes a "wiki-nerd" to know a "wiki-nerd". And since you were more instrumental in the article than I was, or any other editor, I would have to go out on a limb and say you are the bigger nerd of the two of us. Pepsidrinka 15:02, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Help Me with my artcile with your reviews
Green Gaint, you probably alread ysaw my article Islamic Rulings. I ma trying to expand it and I am trying to make it a resourceful article for those who want to see these rulings as Muslim scholars percieve it by citing the resources. Tell me how it is and ways I can improve it, I plan to expand the artcile much longer. Please comments on my talk page. Thanks alot. MuslimsofUmreka 01:59, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!
Hey Green Giant, I'd really like thank you for taking the time to vote at my RfA. I withdrew due to certain controversies, but I appreciated your vote and hope to see you here in the future. Thanks again. --Khoikhoi 05:08, 28 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Hey, thanks for your support. BTW, nice work on the Pakistan page! :) --Khoikhoi 02:36, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Much appreciated
Thanks lots for taking the time to clean up the spelling and grammar in Richard Francis Burton. Good work. --Richard Clegg 12:36, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Paris Demographics Section - edit war?
I was wondering in your (big grin) 'threats' you were referring to my promising to re-insert the shortened Demographics text reverted by Hardouin - would you consider this as continuing the 'war'? I would consider it as re-instating an improvement re-inserts but for sure I don't want to fan flames. I thought it best to ask you before I went ahead with this - Giants are sooooo scary. T HE P ROMENADER 07:46, 30 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your message, I'll go ahead when it is ready. In the meantime, I'm playing in your sandbox this morning : )  T HE P ROMENADER  08:31, 30 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I really get the impression that some things are going to 'reappear' tonight. Hope I'm wrong.  T HE P ROMENADER  20:31, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Visiting Paris?
Fasten your seat belt : )  T HE P ROMENADER  09:14, 2 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Hello Green-footed fellow,


 * Save for the just-recent questions of an 'intercommunality president' slot extensive dialogue (with no seeming conclusion) about two bottommost sections (that have their uses, but after today I am tempted to just chop altogether), the infobox is completed and compliant with consensus. Could you have a look and comment please? You may have to scan a bit towards the end.


 * Thanks.  T HE P ROMENADER  21:47, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

List of Arab scientists and scholars
Thank You for your entries in List of Arab scientists and scholars. Unfortunatly its being seen by some users as vandalism! Jidan 06:48, 4 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Wanted to say thank you for correcting my spelling and grammatic mistakes. Wow, didn't know that my english is that bad! Jidan 01:11, 8 April 2006 (UTC)


 * LOL. yes, you are right! ;-) Jidan

Karachi Page
The SeanMack has nominated Karachi page as a good article nominee, check Talk:Karachi. I think we have to form a team and work together to improve the page and get that nomination. Siddiqui 06:08, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi
Hi, thanks for the edits in Kolkata. I did not know the rule that references should be put up in the order! Bye.--Dwaipayanc 07:42, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Jinnah PR
Hi - I request your help on an effort to make this article an FA. I know you can really help us solve some serious problems and add reliable info. Please check it out whenever convenient. Rama&#39;s Arrow 16:09, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

List of Pakistan-related topics
Hello. I was searching around the List of lists the other day and found that many countries have a List of related topics article. Apparently Pakistan did not, so I started on. If you could, participate in the population effort. List of Pakistan-related topics. Thanks. Pepsidrinka 23:31, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Why not "Center" an image?
Hi RE http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Northern_Areas%2C_Pakistan&action=history, why not center an image? The image is very small and doesn't look good in the current resolution. (The link was a mistake) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Waqas.usman (talk • contribs) 17:23, April 16, 2006 (UTC)


 * The main reason for not centering an image is that it looks out of place when all the other images are right-aligned. If someone was to read an article, the best effect is when the text is not broken up by images but the images are at one side. I've been meaning to try to find a better image to replace that one anyway but I've not had the time. Also please sign your talk page messages using four tildes ~ which will automatically insert your username and time and date. Green Giant 21:50, 16 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh, you mean you weren't satisfied with the layout of the page in that particular case, I thought you were "prohibiting" any image to be centered :) (I forgot to sign it on the first message, and came back to write more and sign it, but forgot it again :P)


 * I have some images of my own from Nanga Parbat but don't have time to sort them out and upload. Waqas.usman 22:02, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Gujar Khan
What is ur problem.... Dont change the page of Gujar khan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrnaveed (talk • contribs) 18:13, April 17, 2006 (UTC)


 * My problem is that some people insist on ignoring Wikipedia rules. Look at the article carefully and you will see that there are images on the article with questionable copyright issues. What you did was to revert an automatic robot which had removed these images. If you can obtain permission to use those images, then there is no problem at all. If Wikipedia was to allow images to be added without permissions, then it would face legal action which would damage the project. I am changing your reversion back until the image copyright is sorted out. As to your statement, try to be more polite when you ask someone why they changed things. Remember anyone can edit these articles in good faith. Also, please sign your edits on talkpages using four tildes like this -> ~ to automatically add your username and time and date. Green Giant 17:31, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

apologies
sorry, i apologize for those edits. thank you for your help. I will not edit your web pages again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.50.255.96 (talk) 19:22, April 17, 2006 (UTC)


 * Reply posted on anon's talkpage Green Giant 18:27, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Karachi
I have a source for the info, it is in the article —Preceding unsigned comment added by Supiwani (talk • contribs) 22:14, April 17, 2006 (UTC)


 * Could you be more precise? Where in the article is the source? Green Giant 21:17, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

It is in the article of Karachi, under demographics, at the bottom of the table there. Supiwani 21:55, 17 April 2006 (UTC)


 * That is not a source and you can't cite other wikipedia articles as sources. It's an image created by another editor who did not cite his source either but made it clear that he had made the table himself. Please find a verifiable source such as a website by reputable organisation and then change the figures. Green Giant 22:55, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

What is wrong with http://www.karachicity.gov.pk/ top paragraph? Supiwani 18:46, 18 April 2006 (UTC)


 * The top paragraph figure is something the city government has suggested for a while but not backed up with a reasoning. After the 1998 census, there were claims that the real population including shanty towns was actually 14 million, so that figure was really for 1998. In eight years the original claimants have not updated the figure so it is unacceptable for use here. The main problem is that the Population Census Organization has not provided any recent estimates since the 1998 census -> . The reason I added the figure from the World Gazetteer is that it is a reliable source of information which has academic recommendations. If the city-government of Karachi or the population census people were to publish some estimates properly, it would be no problem inserting those instead of the gazetteer figures. Green Giant 22:11, 18 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Green Giant, if you could please put more pictures of Karachi's skyscrapers in the article. Supiwani 22:24, 18 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Reply posted on Supiwani's talkpage. Green Giant 22:26, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

What do u mean by free for use images? Supiwani 22:52, 18 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Reply posted on Supiwani's talkpage. Green Giant 22:53, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Gren Giant, there r some good photos of Karachi that r all public, go to the bottom of Karachi article,click on Flickr.com-photos of Karachi. Supiwani 23:08, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

What more needs to be done before Military history of Pakistan becomes a featured article?
Hi Green Giant,

I have worked on the Military history of Pakistan article. I was just wondering, what do you think is needed to be done on that page before it becomes a Featured Article.

Please let me know, so I can implement these changes.

Thanks

Mercenary2k April 17, 2006 8:51 PM

Qaumi Tarana
Has been deleted per your request A dmrb♉ltz ( T | C | E ) 22:40, 18 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I changed ترانه  to ترانہ and added ، to قوم ملک سلطنت to form قوم ، ملک ، سلطنت and added ! to ارض پاکستان and جان استقبال. Changed  تابنندہ  to  تابندہ.You did an excellent job !


 * Siddiqui 00:17, 19 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I will check the version of Pakistan's old National Anthem.
 * Siddiqui 04:23, 28 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I changed few word in the Qaumi Tarana. Hopefully they are correct. I will double check with a dictionary this weekend.
 * Siddiqui 11:49, 28 April 2006 (UTC)


 * You did all the work. Great job !
 * Siddiqui 13:12, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Under which category should PTDC lie?
Salam, I just created a page on PTDC, where to put it in the category tree? Also, I just put the "Category:Forts in Pakistan" directly under Pakistan, later I realized that it is a category of "Buildings and structures in Pakistan", which is a category of "Pakistani architecture" which is a category of "Pakistan". What do you suggest? Waqas.usman 06:55, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Cleaning up categories tree
I was cleaning up the categories tree, especially under "Northern Areas" of Pakistan category lots of stuff was mixed in, towns, valleys, districts... I've created a new Category under "Category:Northern Areas, Pakistan", and added a sub-category of "Category:Cities and towns in Northern Areas, Pakistan" and another sub-category of "Category:Regions in Northern Areas, Pakistan" which lists the previous or current states that are now consider as "Northern Areas" (cities are not included in this list). I have asked a moderator for deletion of these following categories: Category:Northern Areas Category:Valleys in Northern Areas, Pakistan

I hope it's going in the right direction. Waqas.usman 07:51, 19 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Excellent work, the whole area needs a thorough overhaul. I think the best place for the PTDC article whould be in Category:Tourism in Pakistan. As for the Category:Forts in Pakistan I would suggest it should go to Category:History of Pakistan but keep it in Category:Pakistani architecture as well because the forts have historical and architectural importance. I also agree with the new better-named categories for NA regions etc. Green Giant 23:07, 19 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I'm also adding more information on Kashmir articles because they are heavily Indian POV and hardly mention the Paksitani POV. Also, the list Azad Kashmir doesn't look good here, how to present it in a better way?


 * And about the PTDC article, I had figured it out later and put it under that category.Waqas.usman 23:21, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Karachi
what makes world gazetteer correct,it is also an estimate of population, plus it doesn't even seem like a profesional website. Supiwani 23:22, 19 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Reply posted on Supiwani's talkpage Green Giant 00:39, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

green giant, the first link to dawn is the migration info article, the second link is info on the port tower complex, i expanded an article on that subject, and that was my source Supiwani 00:34, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

how do u put images into the article?Supiwani 01:33, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Jinnah FAC
Hi - Jinnah is FAC. I decided to move on FAC becoz I believe that all remaining objective criticism will only be obtained there. I ask for your support and welcome all criticism. Rama&#39;s Arrow 15:02, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Chukar
Thanks! Glad to help! Did it from their respective natural distributions - RLP doesn't occur outside of western Europe, Chukar is native in Pakistan - MPF 15:38, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
Hi Green Giant - thanks for your compliments and support for my work, and also on Jinnah's FAC. Please lemme know whenever I can be of assistance. It is very pleasing to cross 10,000. Rama&#39;s Arrow 15:49, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
Hi Green Giant, thanks for your reply its really great to heare others appreciate the work were all doing.

Many thanks Fast track 23 April 2006 19:05 (UTC)

Re:Jinnah
Hi - I had added that reference from a source given to me by user:Nichalp. I'm going to sleep right now, but I assure you that when I log in 7 hours from now, I will provide an alternate, better source or take down the note. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Rama&#39;s Arrow 04:28, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

New 'Large French Cities' Infobox Template proposition
Hello - how are you? I've left the following comment on all of the 'French City' aricles using the 'Large French Cities' template - if you can help please do:

I'd like to bring your attention to a new - or other - version of the "Large French Cities" infobox presently at use in a few French cities pages. The present version is much too large, partly because it consecrates too much space to information having little importance to French demography and an only distant and indirect relevence to the city itself. Instead I propose to follow a less cumbersome model closer to that used by the New York City article - you can view the new version in the Paris talk page here. Please view and comment. T HE P ROMENADER 22:26, 24 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Here's the message I left on every talkpage containing the 'Large French Cities' infobox:
 * As a result of some discussion over the past weeks, there is an updated template available for perusal in its 'published ' form (filled with data) here - all comments welcome. --  T HE P ROMENADER  07:30, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Iran reversions
Can you please make the next reversion. I can't do it any longer, since I will be going past 3RR. -- Jeff3000 23:42, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Iran article revertions
Green Giant; I have asked you many times not to intitiate edit wars there, and try to work with other people. There is no reason why you should go and erase/revert so many sections, without discussing it with anybody else in that article.Zmmz 02:07, 25 April 2006 (UTC)


 * This thread is continued on User talk:Zmmz. Green Giant 03:09, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

2004 Indian Ocean earthquake
Hello. If your not busy, would you mind giving me some feedback for the current featured article nomination for 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake? And by the way, if the Iran article gets out of hand again, let me know. Pepsidrinka 18:36, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Hamedan
I was born and raised in Iran and as far as I know it is Hamedan (atleast thats the pronounciation in Persian, the only official language of Iran), so when I saw it with alternative spelling I was surprised, I moved it but I saw the alternative spelling as alternative spelling so I didn't check the article properly I think. I thought perhaps Zereshk or others would probably fix it up or revert my actions if they're wrong (I wasn't sure about it). -- - K a s h  Talk 22:58, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Islam
Sorry, Green Giant, I hadn't meant to revert your Ismaeli edit. You know how that happens, I was writing mine when you did yours. Feel free to restore.Timothy Usher 04:17, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the wishes
Yes, it is always comforting to see encouraging wishes from friends. Thank you, we shall make the wikipedia the best. Thank you. --Bhadani 06:01, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * And, also for clearing the "air" about Faisalabad District and City. Thank you. --Bhadani 10:42, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Iran
Hi, there was no whitespace reduced, and even if there was, the first image on a section should be in the same line as the content, not the reference to another article above the content :). Thank you for your understanding. --Darkred 23:43, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

I see, well thank you too for not reverting to your own edits without thinking about my edits. I understand that there is no rule for where the image should start, i merely meant it looks better or more serious that way. Also your suggestion about adding material to the economy section to wipe out whitespace sounds clever, i wish you good luck. --Darkred 00:57, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Sports In Pakistan
I was in process of editing this page when you made the changes. Your changes were overwritten. Can you please make those changes again or I can go back and make those changes later today. Sorry about it. Siddiqui 14:32, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Work together
In order to work together and cooperate with each other, there needs to be a minimum of compromising spirit. Unfortunately, for all the painful months that I have "experienced" Promenader's criticism, I have never detected any trace of compromise on his part. He doggedly wants to remove metropolitan area information, and whenever someone else dares to agree with me, he accuses them of being my sock puppets. Is that really the way to compromise?

French communes are like Australian local authorities, they are very small and don't accurately account for what people understand as being the city. Did you know that the city of Sydney only contained 120,000 people? What sense would it make to refer only to that tiny administrative city without refering to the larger metropolitan area. Furthermore, French communes are in a process of unification, with the creation of intercommunalities, and in places like Lille or Lyon the situation is very complex and needs to be fully accounted for in the infobox, otherwise there's no need for an infobox in the first place, like Captain Scarlet said. Hardouin 00:33, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
 * And what if we moved the strictly-speaking commune information to a City of Paris or City of Lyon article, and dedicated the Paris and Lyon articles to a more general presentation of the whole metro areas? That's what was done for Sydney (check Sydney vs City of Sydney). That's also what was done for Brussels (check Brussels vs City of Brussels). Hardouin 12:27, 29 April 2006 (UTC)


 * If you don't mind, I must insert another 'apples to oranges' alert here. Few city borders are as well-defined as Paris' are; few cities in the world have residents (in and out of the city) with such black-and-white ideals of what it 'in' or 'out' of Paris is. This should make this 'city article' even more simple to write, yet I am in agreement with the idea that, since Paris' natural growth does not stop at its borders, its article should speak to these limits as well within proper context. On the other hand, speaking of everything within an area including places of sometimes isolated villages of commuters to the city (rather, its urban spread) as the city itself is an idea not only ludicrous and shared by none (one has only to look at the introduction of the metropolitan area article for confirmation of this), but, more importantly, is an idea unreferencable - because it is an opinion mirrored by no referencable publication and not even in the official City of Paris, Île-de-France and INSEE websites. This fact has been related and proven perhaps hundreds of times before in the Paris talk pages.


 * The idea of splitting the article along the lines cited above is also ludicrous: are we suggesting that Wiki redefine 'Paris' even before its government does? This goes beyond original research. I'm sure you can cite many examples like London's "Square Mile" or the City of Sydney to try to justify a blurring of borders, but the city of Paris is nothing even remotely resembling either of these. The Brussels example is off the mark as well, as everything within a given region is generally known as 'Brussels' to its inhabitants - Paris does not share this trait in any way official or unofficial. Unlike Greater London (governed by the greater London Authority whose website (www.london.gov.uk) shows them officially using 'London' to encompass the whole Greater London area, there exists in France no governing authority greater than Paris operating under the name 'Paris' . There's Paris, its surrounding communes and more importantly, though strangely neglecting mention in the above comments, its départements, and the whole encompassed by the Île-de-France région. That's it.


 * The Paris article is the only in the (Wiki) world that goes to such desperate lengths to try to extend its borders in this way; I can only wonder at the motivation for this, but what I can assure is the reaction of those I'd asked to read the article (in its former state) - a schoolteacher and a newspaper journalist to name two, both of them French and lifetime Paris residents: both involved puzzlement followed by either a smile or a bout of chuckling. Or should we ignore reality, these reactions, and every reference in existence and assume that we know much better than they?


 * I hope my points are becoming clearer through repetition.  T HE P ROMENADER  16:56, 29 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Promenader, what's with your manner of intervening in conversation that don't involve you? Are you tracking any of my move on Wikipedia? That's becoming insane! Green Giant, maybe now you're starting to understand what I mean when I talk of my "experience" with Promenader in the past months... Hardouin 12:02, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
 * As for Promenader's comment that "Few city borders are as well-defined as Paris' are", that's about as ridiculous as saying that few country borders are as well-defined as France's are. Every municipality, at least in the developped world, have clearly defined borders. The borders of the City of Sydney are as clearly defined as the borders of the City of Paris. Just check any ordnance map. Yet it doesn't mean that administrative borders necessarily reflect the perception of the city by the people. In Paris they certainly don't. Hardouin 12:08, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Au contraire: for the people they certainly do, and it is exactly in this the meaning of my 'well-defined borders'. Exactly why this attempt at misinformation - here?  T HE P ROMENADER  12:36, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
 * What does your propos have to do with anything above it? I have a watchlist just like you do - and what you 'proposed' here was just plain wrong. Stick to the facts please.  T HE P ROMENADER  12:05, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Stop stalking, Promenader! Hardouin 12:13, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
 * LOL - who's watching who? Hardoin, I need do no more than hit 'refresh' on my watchlist and I see that you're already on my tail. Green Giant, please remove these last four hors-propos statements that are only a distraction from the discussion at hand.  T HE P ROMENADER  12:18, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I continue this on here because I want Green Giant to know exactly what kind of person is Promenader. Promenader always excuses his stalking by saying that it is so "easy" with IT technology (you just need to "hit refresh"). That's exactly what he said when he stalked User:Metropolitan. Green Giant, you really need to ask Metropolitan for an account of Promenader's stalking. Promenader thought that Metropolitan was my sock puppet, so he went into insane great length to prove that. Apparently, Promenader is a computer geek, so he used his computer know-how to dig Metropolitan's private life in a disgusting way. He uncovered his moves on the internet, discovered which forums on the internet Metropolitan is participating in, he even found out what internet provider are using the parents of Metropolitan!! Metropolitan was so enraged at that kind of stalking that he wrote insulting messages to Promenader, to which Promenader replied that there was no need to get upset, because it just takes 1 minute with his internet tools to find out that kind of information. As if technology was an excuse! That's the kind of person you're dealing with when you have Promenader in front of you. Now please don't believe me on my word and ask Metropolitan about the whole story. Or read his talk page. Hardouin 12:33, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Now you are simply being ridiculous, Hardouin. It took you a lot more work to find the info you based all that (greatly exaggerated/distorted nonesense - one IP number, one link and one Google search resulting in one forum - Metropolitan him/her self provided the rest) out about me than it took for me to follow a few links (hacker indeed - your email is 'noos.fr' right? voila your ISP). What has this to do with the facts discussed above, and what has this to do with anything contained in any article? A bit of maturity please. T HE P ROMENADER 12:45, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Definition of hybrid vehicle
I created the titular article as a repository for all the comments on Hybrid vehicle that degenerated into arguments on what one was. The comment page was huge for that article, and despite being a Wikinewbie, I thought it best to move it elsewhere. Thoughts? CGameProgrammer 02:34, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

copied from User talk:CGameProgrammer
 * I understand, sometimes editors lose sight of the original purpose of Wikipedia. The best place for the text however is either on the Hybrid vehicle talkpage or on a user subpage. You can create a subpage for your userspace by editing the userpage -> and then typing in the following -> /Hybrid vehicle . Save your userpage and you should have a redlink which you should click. It opens a blank page to which you can post the above material and then save the page. It will be linked directly to your userpage. Green Giant 02:43, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Qaumi Tarana
We all shall work togethaer and try to make all those as FA. We can do it for sure. Thanks for your interest. --Bhadani 12:57, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Karachi page
I haved added the info about TV networks removed by Aursani and Green Giant.
 * [] Removed by Green Giant
 * [] Removed by Aursani

Comment by in Karachi Discussion page:
 * === I'll remove other channel names too ===


 * If you remove names of Sindhi channels from the page, I'll remove names of other channels as well. Refrain from
 * Vandalism. Aursani 17:03, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Siddiqui 18:50, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome
My pleasure... Crum375 23:02, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

The Wiki Pakistan Community
Hi Green Giant,

I was wondering if you have seen the following page, its a place where alot of people work as a team to progress and work together on articles and images of Wikipedia.

The Pakistani community for sometime has been very dormant, as there were not many people here to write articles related to Pakistan. If you go the following "Project page" you will see a new community has been formed, where I think alot of us should asign tasks and work more as a community than individually. Here's the link;

Notice board for Pakistan-related topics. Do take a look at all the other communities the way they are working to improve articles and promote their communities.

I think its about time we all do the same. As you may notice everthing is just been laid out, so now its our turn to fill the gaps. Do pass the word on to other Pakistanis and people working on Pakistani articles.

Many thanks, Fast track 06:59 08 May 2006 (UTC)

Edit war
Hey! Giant! Another edit war has begun in Pakistan. See the changes made in economy by and deletion by. I reverted Anwar saadat's edits, as the references provided by Holy Ganga is reliable, one of BBC and other from Foreign Policy Magazine, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. At least, BBC source is ok.

However, I should not indulge in it much as there may be question regarding nationalities, once again! Please see.--Dwaipayan (talk) 20:23, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

List of airports in Pakistan
Salam! You reverted the extra spaces at the top, there was a reason for it; without the extra spaces the image overlaps with the table in firefox (and in opera 9 as well). See Talk:List of airports in Pakistan. I've reverted it. Waqas.usman 20:14, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Portal Link in Islam
Can you explain the reasoning behind moving the portal link to the bottom when Religion, Ayyavazhi, Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Jainism, Judaism, Shinto, Sikhism, Taoism, and Zoroastrianism have it placed near the top? Thanks. BhaiSaab talk 20:32, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the explanation. BhaiSaab talk 23:40, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Paris Pagination
Green Giant,

It has been a while since your tread has been felt in Paris. For the infobox discussion, only one point is being argued for now, but we've pretty well gone the round of that. I realise that you wanted to remove all of the metropolitan area info, but I thought that for reasons of explanation and clarity we should make some mention of it, albeit in a reduced and clearer form, and accompanied by the primary measure of Paris' real urban growth (that is not 'Paris' - and clearly shown as such!). You have yet to say anything about this, and it would be helpful if you make it know whether you approve, disapprove or have another suggestion. Thank you very much. -- T HE P ROMENADER  21:26, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

PS: If you would like a clear explanation of why I think those two rows should stay, scroll (way way) down to the bottom of the talk page where you'll see a paragraph in italics - that pretty well explains it in a nutshell. Goodnight! -- T HE P ROMENADER  22:09, 10 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Never fear, never mind any longer - the templates are now in place. When is the 'star drive' to begin? I'm ready whenever you are. Shall we dance?  T HE P ROMENADER  21:49, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

I would really appreciate your input on the Talk:Paris Page. Total revert; all template articles. Four times. Thanks. T HE P ROMENADER 01:27, 16 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I do lose it when I see things backtrack. Advice taken - goodnight.  T HE P ROMENADER  01:45, 16 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I left one more message on the Talk:Paris page that about sums it up: we can stop while dealing with the 'personal relations' of all this, but all that counts is fact, and if we stop halfway to fact just in order to 'play nice' then we will never have a recommendable article. User:Hardouin has thrown every roadblock possible between reason and fact, and you yourself have been witness to this - this can be very discouraging sometimes, and downright insulting when answering with fact turns to baseless (and mirrored) accusations so of course I get heated - and frustrated when nobody will take the time to verify who's got the facts straight or not.


 * There is absolutely no excuse for Hardouin's behaviour last night - it is of course that I complained about it, and it is of course that I was angry because of it. Remember that it was I who began the drive to garner consensus to change on that page, and in this case it was I who spent the time to do the graphic work resulting from all that. To a more pleasing end I hope! Not to mention even more talk page time wasted on re-verifying sources to clear talk page fog once again. To have a single contributor revert weeks of discussion and an afternoon's work to the very problem we were trying to fix is not a simple disagreement needing discussion to clear up: it is misconduct, and a flagrant and disruptive one at that. I don't see how anyone can see otherwise.


 * I do apologise for my sometime harsh tone in this affair, but it has gone on long enough - as things as they have been for the past year, the result will never be verifiable fact or reason, let alone a featured article. Here we should bend to fact ans esthetics, not the inventive aggressiveness of one contributor. Were you an admin I would ask you to mediate as you have been equally communacitive to both Hardouin and I - as it seems as though this is where this is going - but whoever does take that task will have to take a real look into the 'fact and act' of the matter - not an easy chore, I know.  T HE P ROMENADER  08:33, 16 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Green Giant: Please help to prevent any further reverting to anything not vandalism; this is the only way we can ever hope to move forward. This will also make talk pages the place for constructive discussion, instead of the heated and sometimes incomprehensible 'justifications' for reverting so discouraging to new editors. This act makes an article something to defend, not to improve, and generally polutes the editing atmosphere. So please, as you have for talk pages, please keep an eye open to make sure reverts are used for what they are intended - vandalism only. Thank you.  T HE P ROMENADER  10:46, 17 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Reverts are intended for vandalism and also for removing POV edits. Your infoboxes, which replaced all the infoboxes that I had spent a considerable amount of time working on (this, of course, is triffle to you!), are not only unnecessary (there is already the template that I created a year ago, and that can be improved on, if it needs to be improved), but they are also POV (your personal vision that metropolitan areas are irrelevant and misleading in France). Green Giant, sorry for writing this here, but I can only be totally infuriated when I read the kind of slandering Promenader is doing on everybody's talk page in my back (read User talk:Olivier for a blatant example of slandering). Hardouin 20:51, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Hunza Valley should be the main article on Hunza
SeeTalk:Hunza. Waqas.usman 19:59, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * We need an admin to move the Hunza pages. Btw are you an admin? I supposed you are, you oughta be... but if you're not, I'd nominate you. Waqas.usman 20:03, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Your message
Answered on my talk page. Hardouin 01:53, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Ok, new answer on my talk page, and let's leave some time then and consider things again over the week-end (although the formal complaint filed tonight against me might not allow me to take a few days break from this)... Hardouin 02:22, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Banu Musa
Thanks for pointing to Banu Musa, I haden't noticed there was already a page. I merged the two, and fixed the redirects. flammif e rtalk 07:19, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Supreme Leader of Iran
Actually, I had no idea that "Leader" was supposed to be capitalized either! I guess you learn something new everyday on Wikipedia. --HappyCamper 23:58, 16 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm glad I was of some help :-) Feel free to come by again if you need a hand! --HappyCamper 00:02, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Paris infobox – continued
Green Giant, there are now some other users that have expressed disagreement with Promenader's choices concerning his new infobox. You can read the messages at Talk:Paris. Several users have also complained about Promenader's new maps which do not display properly on everybody's screen. In light of this, and of what I had said before, I restored the previous infobox and made it very clear on the talk page that it was only a conservatory measure waiting for consensus to be reached about urban and metro areas and for problems solved with the maps. I think it is most reasonable to wait and not rush if the new Promenader's infobox is disputed by some and if the maps do not display correctly. Yet within 8 minutes of my edit Promenader reverted back to his infobox. There seems to be no way to reason this guy, not that I don't try. My message on the talk page was the most uncontroversial and compromising possible, I stressed that it was only a conservatory measure, but to no avail. I reckon Promenader listens to you, so perhaps you could try to talk to him. It seems only reasonable not to publish a new infobox as long as there are several users disagreeing with it. Have a look and let me know. Hardouin 18:26, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Help on Pakistan Occupied Kashmir page
Greetings. I wanted to get some other opinions on whether to keep this POK page or not. I think it serves as a propaganda page rather than adding anything of value and Indian Occupied Kashmir page was rightly deleted recently and I think the same should be done with this page to avoid one-sided arguments that are unbecoming for an encylopedia. Your input would be appreciated. Thanks. Tombseye 16:21, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Paris 'Star Drive'
There is quite a bit of movement on the Paris page these last days, and all to the better. If you would like to contribute to the Paris 'star drive' you spoke of before, now's the time. Looking forward to it. T HE P ROMENADER 09:18, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Can you lend me a helping hand?
Hi,

When the Indian Institutes of Technology article was first put for FAC, there were a lot of issues with it and as expected you voted against it. On my request, you also copyedited the article extensively to make the article clearer. Now I am planning to pose the article for FAC again. I feel a little cleanup may still be required. Can you help me by copyediting the article again. I would be grateful. Also, please tell if there are any issues that might be detrimental for its FAC. Thanks, -Ambuj Saxena (talk) 19:40, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Iqbal PR
Hi GG - I request your attention and help on making Muhammad Iqbal an FA. Please share your views on Peer review/Muhammad Iqbal/archive1. Rama&#39;s Arrow 14:11, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

India -> India + Pakistan + Bangladesh
I and User:Rama's Arrow were discussing linkage of pages to India when refer to pre-1947 India (undivided India). Please have a look at discussion, and comment. You can also invite user interested in Pakistan, India and Bangladesh. Following is statement to start:

'''India after 1947 consists of three countries, Pakistan, India and Bangladesh. When we use word India, in articles, refereeing to whole India, links are such that they bring us to present day India (Republic of India), reducing size of pre-1947 India considerably. Is it possible that when we refer to pre-1947 India we use a term which encompasses whole India not just present day India? Please comment'''.

Following are suggestions: --Spasage 10:56, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
 * British India
 * Indian Subcontinent
 * Undivided India
 * or disamg page of India.

Mansura Jamaat
I came across this article randomly and I'm not sure what it is. I asked at the Jamaat-e-Islami article with no response so far. I put in an RfC and nothing has come back yet. I was going to ask the creator, Siddiqui but he has a Wikibreak notice up. Since I noticed that you gave him two barnstars for Pakistan-related work and it is a Pakistan stub, I thought that you might be able to help or know someone who might be able to. I really know nothing in the area. Thanks. --JGGardiner 19:31, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Tallest structures - "Paris area"
A few of us have managed to come into agreement over an "in the Paris area" title - as a former participant in the discussion, your views and vote on the matter would much be welcome at Talk:List of tallest buildings and structures in Paris. Thank you. THE PROMENADER  18:03, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

ktip image
Hey, just wanted to let you know that Image:Crystal Clear Ktip.png has been replaced by Image:Crystal Clear app ktip.png and you will probably want to update your pages/templates. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 23:39, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Join the Wiki Pakistan Project!
Just found a link on the Pakistan talk page that is asking fellow Wikipedians to join so we can start to improve Pakistani related articles; Check it out - WikiProject/List of proposed projects --Fast track 16:28, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

History of Pakistan
Good to see you. This page has been target of Indian contributors for rewriting according to Hinduvta ideaology. Now it has been protected with Indian version of Pakistan history. Can you please also keep eye on this page. Siddiqui 14:29, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Urdu translations?
Hi, I'm trying to build up a database to create articles on political parties on different wikipedias. Could you have a look at User:Soman/Lang-Help-ur? Thanks, --Soman 14:36, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Question

 * Thank you for the suggestion. I’ve thought about it a couple of times but I keep going off-wiki for long periods, which is not good because of the danger of becoming unfamiliar with policies, guidelines and best practice. I’m going to prepare over the next few months - there are various necessary elements, of which probably the most important is whether I actually need admin tools. Green Giant (talk) 18:57, 17 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Just apply for it. With your experience, I am sure that you are aware about the important policies, guidelines, etc. And the ones that are unfamiliar, you'll get used to them as well. There are many admins on wikipedia, who are less experienced than you. So, go for it. It is time to take a bigger step. :)   M A A Z     T A L K   19:50, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Question....
Were you the one who emailed me about the picture of the Patriot? I noticed the name is why I asked. If so I responded to the email, I am the one who took the picture which I have said since this all began but I was told there had to be something from his website saying the picture could be on here. I've done the tool thing. I'm not sure what more I can do. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 01:11, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes that was me. The late reply was because we have a backlog of about 8,000 emails to go through and not enough volunteers to do it. Anyway, I’ve changed the license to the one you wrote in the email, author name to your username (I didn’t know if you wanted to use your real name but let me know if you do) and source to own (i.e. it is your own work) for which you don’t need to list a URL. I’ve moved the file to Wikimedia Commons, which is a central repository of free-licensed files; it will continue to appear on the two articles you added it to but can now also be reused on any language version of Wikipedia, Wikiversity, Wikinews, Wikisource, Wikiquote etc. So, for example I’ve added it to the Italian and Japanese versions of the article about Del. I hope that puts your mind at ease now. Green Giant (talk) 09:55, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you, I appreciate it your help, user name is fine. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 17:44, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Re: File:BosniaSarajevo.png listed for discussion
It was tagged GFDL originally. But the GFDL also requires original author attribution. It's a matter of whether the link is sufficient or if it has to be explicit. --Joy &#91;shallot&#93; (talk) 07:58, 20 January 2018 (UTC) Joy &#91;shallot&#93; (talk) 07:58, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
 * . Green Giant (talk) 10:01, 20 January 2018 (UTC)


 * It's fine, really. You could delete it on account of being unused, too. --Joy &#91;shallot&#93; (talk) 10:18, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
 * . Green Giant (talk) 11:18, 20 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Sure, but looks like someone already beat me to it after you tagged it with Now Commons. --Joy &#91;shallot&#93; (talk) 11:29, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

U5 speedy deletion taggin
Thanks for doing so many of these U5 taggings, how are you finding them? One thing I've noticed is that you don't seem to be leaving a message on the user talk page when you do if only U5 is the reason given. Just wanted to ask why. ~ Amory  (u • t • c) 11:37, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for deleting them, which I know is more of a chore than finding them because you’ve got to be sure the tag is correct. I find them by searching for spam phrases like "visit our website" or "we are dedicated" in userspace only, and then sifting through the results. It’s a crude method which might be better done by a bit but I’m not a coder. As for not leaving notifications, I think it’s a Twinkle problem which I can’t seem to change in the settings. I’ll make sure I do notify them in future. Cheers. Green Giant (talk) 11:45, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Twinkle/Preferences is the U5 box checked in the second section? ~ Amory  (u • t • c) 11:56, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅ I think I unchecked it for a test a while back and forgot to recheck it. Cheers. Green Giant (talk) 11:59, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you and much obliged. It's just a pity I haven't been able to edit much on South Asian topics lately but it was a fascinating learning experience when I was doing so. Green Giant (talk) 00:49, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * That's very kind of you. I’m just happy to help in any way I can. Green Giant (talk) 00:51, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
 * You deserve it.  samee  talk 21:47, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Congratulations ...
on your new role as steward. I must confess to being self-interested. I often request global locks at WP:SPI and now I have a new person to bother. I'm sure and especially  will be delighted to share the largesse.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:58, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you. You won't be bothering me because I'm happy to help where I can. :) Green Giant (talk) 15:59, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Excellent! :D -- Ajraddatz (talk) 17:15, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Congratulations! :) R adi X  ∞  17:26, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Congratulations ...
on your new role as steward. I must confess to being self-interested. I often request global locks at WP:SPI and now I have a new person to bother. I'm sure and especially  will be delighted to share the largesse.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:58, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you. You won't be bothering me because I'm happy to help where I can. :) Green Giant (talk) 15:59, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Excellent! :D -- Ajraddatz (talk) 17:15, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Congratulations! :) R adi X  ∞  17:26, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

WikiCup 2018 March newsletter
And so ends the first round of the competition, with 4 points required to qualify for round 2. With 53 contestants qualifying, the groups for round 2 are slightly smaller than usual, with the two leaders from each group due to qualify for round 3 as well as the top sixteen remaining users.

Our top scorers in round 1 were:


 * 🇺🇸 Aoba47 led the field with a featured article, 8 good articles and 42 GARs, giving a total of 666 points.
 * 🇩🇪 FrB.TG, a WikiCup newcomer, came next with 600 points, gained from a featured article and masses of bonus points.
 * 🇮🇳 Ssven2, another WikiCup newcomer, was in third place with 403 points, garnered from a featured article, a featured list, a good article and twelve GARs.
 * 🇺🇸 Ceranthor, 🇮🇳 Numerounovedant, Carbrera, 🇳🇱 Farang Rak Tham and 🇷🇴 Cartoon network freak all had over 200 points, but like all the other contestants, now have to start again from scratch. A good achievement was the 193 GARs performed by WikiCup contestants, comparing very favourably with the 54 GAs they achieved.

Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 1 but before the start of round 2 can be claimed in round 2. 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. 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. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Cwmhiraeth (talk) and Vanamonde (talk) 15:27, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Holi
Thank you for the revert of my edit on Holi. It was just that edit didn't seem problematic, and when there were something like 26 unreviewed edits, there were a lot of edits to check over, so sorry that edit missed my radar. T ed E dwards  18:41, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
 * No problem. I was about to leave you a message because I realised you didn’t do it deliberately. Keep up the good work and don’t be put off by this. Cheers. Green Giant (talk) 18:45, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: File:Ewisepaymentoverview.JPG
Hello Green Giant. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of File:Ewisepaymentoverview.JPG, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. Thank you. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:57, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * No problem, the prod will do fine. Thanks for letting me know. I tagged it because it has only ever been used to promote the uploaders business - see EWise network (deleted February 2007), User:Ewise/sandbox (deleted June 2010), and User:Ewise/sandbox2 (deleted 00:24 this morning). If it didn’t have the logo in the background, it might have been worth keeping). Anyway, cheers. Green Giant (talk) 02:59, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * No problem. Yeah, I saw the logo in the background, and got why you tagged it, but I thought PROD would do. Also, congrats on  . TonyBallioni (talk) 03:02, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Cheers. Green Giant (talk) 03:09, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: User:SimpleParadox/Sandbox
Hello Green Giant. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of User:SimpleParadox/Sandbox, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: User has made numerous edits outside of userspace, this was a draft before they created Taltopia. Thank you. ~ Amory  (u • t • c) 11:45, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Arif Nizami, Azhar Abbas (journalist)
Arif Nizami, Azhar Abbas (journalist) are up for deletion Articles for deletion/Azhar Abbas (journalist) Articles for deletion/Arif Nizami. Can you please help in improving these articles and defect deletion attempt.--Spasage (talk) 14:46, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Hey!
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DerHexer&action=history

You forgot something or removed the wrong content.

--Wizard 203 (talk) 18:10, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Hey! I got it! Cheers. Green Giant (talk) 18:13, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

IP block es:User:Caligatus
Problem solved. Thank you --Caligatus (talk) 05:34, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Your revdel on ClueBot commons
AFAIK, you are not a sysop on enwiki, I am wondering why you carried out an admin action on a wiki you are quite active on. Stewards are not supposed to get involved in wikis they are involved in, nor should they be using their tools if there exists a local group of users to do that.— CYBERPOWER  ( Chat ) 23:42, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello. Yes, I realise that I have to be careful on wikis where I’m active but I had to make a quick decision because the vandal was active. I was about to lock the account of Vandãlism Beetle, whose crosswiki vandalism involved grossly insulting or offensive language on numerous pages. Per WP:Global rights policy I felt it was better to hide these revisions quickly rather than tag each one separately, especially considering the account was locally blocked by but not hidden the edits nor were there any obvious requests for admins to do so. The same situation existed on four other wikis and I didn’t feel there was any benefit in leaving those comments in public view for longer. I hope that answers your question. Green Giant (talk) 00:10, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the insightful response. :-)— CYBERPOWER  ( Chat ) 00:21, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

WikiCup 2018 May newsletter
The second round of the 2018 WikiCup has now finished. Most contestants who advanced to the next round scored upwards of 100 points, but two with just 10 points managed to scrape through into round 3. Our top scorers in the last round were:


 * 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 Cas Liber, our winner in 2016, with three featured articles
 * Iazyges, with nine good articles and lots of bonus points
 * 🇮🇳 Yashthepunisher, a first time contestant, with two featured lists
 * SounderBruce, a finalist last year, with seventeen good topic articles
 * 🇺🇸 Usernameunique, a first time contestant, with fourteen DYKs
 * Muboshgu, a seasoned competitor, with three ITNs and
 * Courcelles, another first time contestant, with twenty-seven GARs

So far contestants have achieved twelve featured articles between them and a splendid 124 good articles. Commendably, 326 GARs have been completed during the course of the 2018 WikiCup, so the backlog of articles awaiting GA review has been reduced as a result of contestants' activities. As we enter the third round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met; most of the GARs are fine, but a few have been a bit skimpy.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere 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) 06:10, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Stewards' enquiry
You recently globally locked "Vote (X) for Change" and "Vote LAX For Change". A CheckUser was requested. Did you perform one or did you block on behavioural evidence (I note that "Vote LAX For Change" has not edited). It has been claimed that
 * Abnormallylong
 * KrampusC
 * Mister Sneeze A Lot
 * Passengerpigeon on tyres
 * Soft skin
 * Stylized as "stylized" currently; formerly "stylizeD"
 * Vote LAX For Change
 * Vote (X) for Change
 * Vote (Y) for Change

are the same person, but a year ago the Stewards refused to lock. On what evidence did you overturn the Stewards' decision? You were also asked to block the underlying IPs. Have you done this? 86.155.146.195 (talk) 15:29, 17 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Checkuser was done. Underlying IP was not blocked. Which Stewards decision was overturned? Does one of the accounts belong to you? Green Giant (talk) 16:48, 17 May 2018 (UTC)


 * What was the result (bearing in mind that CheckUser data only lasts for three months, and none of the listed accounts has edited any project inside this timeframe)? 86.155.146.195 (talk) 17:12, 17 May 2018 (UTC)


 * I can't reveal anymore than that. What is the purpose of this enquiry? Green Giant (talk) 17:15, 17 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Policy states:

The purpose of the enquiry is to confirm that there was no irregularity in the use of the tool here. 86.155.146.195 (talk) 17:29, 17 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Which of the situations listed above has prompted you to ask? Does one of the accounts belong to you? Green Giant (talk) 17:52, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
 * .— CYBERPOWER  ( Chat ) 17:57, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
 * It is Vote X. Man, she must be lovin' it. Cheeseburgers all round! —SerialNumber54129  paranoia / cheap shit room 18:03, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm very concerned that you are reluctant to respond in a timely manner to a request under WP:ADMINACCT.  If you make it a precondition to fulfilling your responsibilities under policy that the party answer questions posed by you I can see the possibility of an interminable series of questions resulting in you never fulfilling your responsibilities.   If I start answering questions this gives you the opportunity to argue that I have thereby waived my right to a speedy and satisfactory answer. 86.155.146.195 (talk) 18:10, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I’ve replied to each of your questions but you haven’t answered all of mine. In case you were not aware, I’m not a WP administrator, so WP:ADMINACCT doesn’t apply to me. It doesn’t set a timeframe for replies but I think replying in less than 100 minutes is fairly prompt. You should try not to mix up separate policies and wikis: stewards largely act through Meta-wiki. Green Giant (talk) 18:27, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Saying you're not going to provide information is hardly a reply.  It appears that the check was done by a local administrator with CheckUser right.   In any event, you locked the accounts and there are specific policy provisions covering this:

 Warning:  Accounts should never be locked except in cases of certain bad faith. Locking the account (not to be confused with global blocking for IPs) will cause the user to log out, and prevent their login on all wikis.

Oh, and take no notice of unwelcome talk page stalkers. Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive966. The "cheap shit room" is Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi. 86.155.146.195 (talk) 18:55, 17 May 2018 (UTC)


 * It was a reply nonetheless, and unless you have some evidence of a breach of policy, it is all you’re going to get. Steward policy is to minimise the public availability of CU data unless it is absolutely necessary. If you’re looking for me to publish the results of the CU to satisfy someone’s curiosity, you will be waiting a very long time. Perhaps you’d care to confirm if you are Vote X? For the avoidance of future doubt, most users are quite welcome to post constructively on my user talk page, stalker or not. Green Giant (talk) 19:08, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty certain this user is Vote X, and I'm inclined to block this IP, if they don't stop.— CYBERPOWER  ( Chat ) 19:49, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
 * The above comment by Cyberpower has an unpleasant whiff about it given his unqualified support earlier today for the restoration of editing rights to an editor who the Community has decided is going to remain banned for a very long time.  Stewards have administrator rights.   The reason is that they may need them in an emergency.   So the argument that WP:ADMINACCT doesn't apply to them isn't going to fly.   The prefix "WP" doesn't limit the applicability of policy to administrators (a group which includes you, despite your denial), it simply indicates where the policy page is located.   The "Terms of Use" are hosted on meta - that doesn't mean they don't apply to people who edit en:wp.   An administrator who abuses checkuser gets de-sysopped - simple as that Arbitration/Requests/Case/Sockpuppet_investigation_block.   And I've just seen "Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi"'s edit summary.
 * You're not suggesting that there is "certain bad faith", fairly obviously because one account hasn't edited at all and the others haven't edited for years.  The conflation of CheckUser data with CheckUser results doesn't look good for you either.   A steward who abuses steward rights gets them removed.   Simple as that.   You've only been a steward for a few weeks, anyway. 92.31.136.211 (talk) 21:12, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
 * All you have to do is say that your account has been wrongly locked and we can proceed from there. To reiterate, we do not hand out CU data to satisfy curiosity. I’m not a WP admin, no matter how much you interpret it. Stewards have full access but it does not make them local administrators/bureaucrats/checkusers etc. I have the ability to perform a local CU but will not do so if there are local checkusers. I have the ability to block users but will not do so if there local admins available. That "emergency" you are thinking of is a rare once-in-Blue-Moon situation e.g. an admin going rogue and causing havoc. If you’re not happy with my answer, you can take it up on the stewards noticeboard. Green Giant (talk) 22:09, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't have to say that your action was an abuse of steward rights, it's patently obvious.  Reverse it. 92.31.136.211 (talk) 22:28, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
 * So, is that a "Yes, I am User:Vote For LAX Change, I’m not related to any of those other accounts, and I’m going to contribute constructively"? If so, then we can proceed. If not, I don’t see a reason to unlock. Green Giant (talk) 22:56, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
 * X is sooooo boring. Drmies (talk) 01:38, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
 * ...never dreamt that X would get to be
 * The contributor that they always meant to be!...
 * One of my favourite songs. Cheers. :) —Green Giant (talk) 01:59, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I supported unbanning an editor today? News to me.— CYBERPOWER  (<span style="color:\#FF8C00">Around ) 02:18, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
 * It’s probably due to all that "unwelcome talk page stalking" you do. —Green Giant (talk) 08:55, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Maybe I should resort to talk page stapling in the future. :p— CYBERPOWER  ( Chat ) 13:28, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Hmm, does talk page stapling come with a good pension plan? Green Giant (talk) 13:39, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I hear you're set for life if you become a stapler.— CYBERPOWER  ( Chat ) 14:34, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

I'm watching the Royal Wedding as I write this - they're talking about how Meghan Markle stood up against misbehaviour, writing several letters (including one to the First Lady in the Clinton era). With high office comes high responsibility - it wouldn't be right to blame the local CheckUser, who was told what to do by a steward without knowing the reason for the request. That means that the responsibility, and the requirement to justify the action (which is in place to preserve the integrity of the process) falls squarely on you. You won't get anywhere by arguing that the General Data Protection Regulation has not yet come into force - what you did was as illegal then as it will be from Friday. You also won't be able to hide behind a silly made-up name - the Foundation knows exactly who you are and where to find you. If you had been deliberately trying to bring Wikipedia and the Foundation into disrepute you couldn't have made a better job of it. 92.31.136.211 (talk) 10:50, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
 * You finally wrote something interesting - I am writing this while they're doing the procession through Windsor with the sun shining. Then you descended back into the boring stuff. Which steward told a local checkuser what to do? That didn’t happen, so you’re already off to a terrible start. You’ve entirely missed the point of the GDPR with your subsequent words. To be provided the private information you requested, you would need to be the individual whose data it is, not just some self-appointed Guardian of the People. If you were that individual, you’d need to contact the WMF directly, rather than asking on a publicly viewable forum. It defeats the object of privacy (both policy and law) if we simply handed out such information in public to anyone who asks.
 * Anyway, my "silly made-up name" is no more silly than any other e.g. Vote for... but in case you weren’t aware, I picked the name of a popular food brand, whose mascot just happened to be on a can nearby when I was registering. You can find their products in your local supermarket if you wish to verify their existence. On your final point, the WMF knows my real name and roughly where I edit from but such information will never be provided to you unless you initiate criminal proceedings. I sincerely doubt any solicitor is going to take your ill-informed accusations seriously, particularly when the data is not specifically yours. Enjoy the rest of the weekend. Green Giant (talk) 12:45, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Your talk page archives
What I have found is that the sections are out of chronological order and a number of them are duplicated. With your permission I'll correct that :) 92.31.136.211 (talk) 14:50, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
 * What gives? Suddenly, you are trying to help me out? The archives do need sorting out but I don't want you to do it. Green Giant (talk) 14:59, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
 * WP:DENY :)    —SerialNumber54129  paranoia / cheap sh*t room 15:04, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
 * If you want the IP blocked, just say the word.— CYBERPOWER  ( Chat ) 16:02, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
 * thank you, that's very kind of you but I suspect they'll just find a new IP. WP:DENY is a good way of handling the boring interventions by them but I'll keep your offer in mind. Cheers. Green Giant (talk) 16:16, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Block me
Hi im sorry this is my last edit im sockpuppet block me thank you. Hansonjay (talk) 11:49, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅ albeit for a different request. Green Giant (talk) 01:54, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Global blocks
Hi Green Giant, please globally block and, two different LTAs. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:54, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅ cheers. Green Giant (talk) 01:52, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks!--Bbb23 (talk) 02:01, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Global locks
Hi GG, can you please globally lock the following accounts based on LTA and cross-wiki abuse?
 * Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:04, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:04, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:04, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:04, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:04, 8 June 2018 (UTC)


 * ✅ including deletion of all their Commons uploads. Cheers. Green Giant (talk) 14:58, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:04, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Reference function on the SWWP
Hi there! I'm Muddyb from Swahili Wikipedia. In our Wikipedia, we do not have an automatic reference function as the English Wikipedia. When you press CTRL+SHIFT+K to get reference TAB you find some functions are disabled including AUTOMATIC. On the English, I apply same method and it works so perfect fine. When I'm trying to use the same method on the Swahili Wikipedia, not working. I was wondering if you could help us fixing the auto-referencing function on our Wiki. Best!--Wikipedian (Activist) 18:30, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I’m afraid I can’t help with that. Have you tried asking on MediaWiki or Phabricator? Green Giant (talk) 19:25, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Nope, let me give it a shot. Thanks though!--Muddyb (talk) 13:03, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

Can you help me see my user page that you had a speedy deletion done on?
Your username appears on a speedy deletion done on my user page several months ago and I'm just now seeing the notice about it. The page has been deleted, and the process for seeing the page again doesn't seem to work and I don't understand it. There's a link provided with link text saying it's for contacting the deleting administrator and that link goes to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log?type=delete&page=User%3AChuck+Baggett which doesn't seem like a page for contacting anyone with and whatever it's for I don't understand how to use it. --Chuck Baggett (talk) 06:12, 22 June 2018 (UTC)


 * you can ask, the administrator who deleted your userpage, if they will give you a copy of it. Green Giant (talk) 07:14, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello, . The deleted page consisted of a list of links to your social media accounts, plus:


 * "20 years experience designing, printing, and cutting graphics and lettering for signs.


 * Skilled in Flexisign.


 * I'm interested in legitimate job offers or other income opportunities"


 * followed by a list of mnemonics. This content is inappropriate for an editor's user page. You can try LinkedIn for hosting this type of content. Your Wikipedia userpage should describe your work and interests as a Wikipedia editor. See WP:USERPAGE. Attempting to promote your career here is not appropriate. <b style="color:#070">Cullen</b><sup style="color:#707">328  Let's discuss it  07:44, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Raymondskie99
Hi GG, I've blocked as a confirmed sock of. Can you please globally lock Mayamaya7? Thanks!--Bbb23 (talk) 13:26, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅. Cheers. Green Giant (talk) 13:56, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks again.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:11, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

WikiCup 2018 July newsletter
The third round of the 2018 WikiCup has now come to an end. The 16 users who made it to the fourth round had at least 227 points. Our top scorers in round 3 were:


 * Courcelles, a first time contestant, with 1756 points, a tally built largely on 27 GAs related to the Olympics
 * 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 Cas Liber, our winner in 2016, with two featured articles and three GAs on natural history and astronomy topics
 * SounderBruce, a finalist last year, with a variety of submissions related to transport in the state of Washington

Contestants managed 7 featured articles, 4 featured lists, 120 good articles, 1 good topic, 124 DYK entries, 15 ITN entries, and 132 good article reviews. Over the course of the competition, contestants have completed 458 GA reviews, in comparison to 244 good articles submitted for review and promoted. 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. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met. Please also remember that all submissions must meet core Wikipedia policies, regardless of the review process; several submissions, particularly in abstruse or technical areas, have needed additional work to make them completely verifiable.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere 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), Cwmhiraeth (talk), Vanamonde (talk) 04:55, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Lets talk about that Cicada picture - I OWN IT
I will upload my driver license..what do you want to fix this? I will send a pic with myself and Jim DeWitt..who both live at the same address in. You want both our IDs? This is wrong...you need to fix this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roland311 (talk • contribs) 17:05, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Covered on my Commons talkpage. Green Giant (talk) 14:40, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

User:Whiteleaf30
Morning (my time). Please globally lock the above account. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:12, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Good afternoon. ✅ —Green Giant (talk) 14:38, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Clearly you live in the wrong time zone. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:06, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

112.209.167.186
Morning. Can you please globally block the user because he continues to vandalize JAM Liner and more. See WP:LTA/MRY for details. --2600:6C4E:580:46B:0:E653:2549:B879 (talk) 18:16, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

112.209.167.186
Morning. Can you please globally block the user because he continues to vandalize JAM Liner and more. See WP:LTA/MRY for details. --2600:6C4E:580:46B:0:E653:2549:B879 (talk) 18:16, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

User:Tyciol
Hi, can you please globally lock these two accounts:
 * The master, who was globally locked eight years ago, is stale, so I tagged them both as suspected, but they are ✅ to each other. More important, both are engaging in cross-wiki abuse, most glaringly at en.wikiquote. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:25, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅ Cheers. Green Giant (talk) 08:32, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks!--Bbb23 (talk) 12:42, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅ Cheers. Green Giant (talk) 08:32, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks!--Bbb23 (talk) 12:42, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

C177
Hi, I just blocked as a confirmed sock of  (globally locked). C177 has also edited abusively at another project, this time at mediawiki. Can you please globally lock? Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:26, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅. Green Giant (talk) 19:58, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
 * --Bbb23 (talk) 22:36, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Another
Sorry, but I have another request. Can you please globally lock as a confirmed sock of ? Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:27, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅ No apology needed, happy to help! Green Giant (talk) 08:15, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

WikiCup 2018 September newsletter
The fourth round of the 2018 WikiCup has now come to an end. The eight users who made it to the final round had to score a minimum of 422 points to qualify, with the top score in the round being 4869 points. The leaders in round 4 were:


 * Courcelles scored a magnificent 4869 points, with 92 good articles on Olympics-related themes. Courcelles' bonus points alone exceeded the total score of any of the other contestants!
 * Kees08 was second with 1155 points, including a high-scoring featured article for Neil Armstrong, two good topics and some Olympics-related good articles.
 * 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 Cas Liber, with 1066 points, was in third place this round, with two featured articles and a good article, all on natural history topics.
 * Other contestants who qualified for the final round were 🇲🇭 Nova Crystallis, Iazyges,  SounderBruce,  🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿 Kosack and 🇺🇸 Ceranthor.

During round four, 6 featured articles and 164 good articles were promoted by WikiCup contestants, 13 articles were included in good topics and 143 good article reviews were performed. There were also 10 "in the news" contributions on the main page and 53 "did you knows". Congratulations to all who participated! It was a generally high-scoring and productive round and I think we can expect a highly competitive finish to the competition.

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 10 days of "earning" them. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to 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, and let the best editor win! 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) 18:31, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Illuminati Official
Good afternoon. Can somebody please finally lock the Illuminati Official please. He keeps vandalizing the SPI page, attacking Aspening and edit the talk page. Please lock the one 172.221.50.147 (talk) 23:13, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

hr.wiki
Hi GG, can you please globally lock the following confirmed accounts? All have already been indeffed at hr.wiki:
 * Thanks!--Bbb23 (talk) 14:25, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks!--Bbb23 (talk) 14:25, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks!--Bbb23 (talk) 14:25, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks!--Bbb23 (talk) 14:25, 5 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Done as requested. Green Giant (talk) 12:41, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks. You were away for a while. Shame on you.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:44, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Ohmy45
Hi, is confirmed as a sock of. Can you please globally lock SkillsM674? As always, thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:51, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

WikiCup 2018 November newsletter
The WikiCup is over for another year! Our Champion this year is, who over the course of the competition has amassed 147 GAs, 111 GARs, 9 DYKs, 4 FLs and 1 ITN. Our finalists were as follows:



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


 * wins the FA prize, for three featured articles in round 2.
 * wins the GA prize, for 92 good articles in round 3.
 * wins the FL prize, for five featured lists overall.
 * wins the topic prize, for 30 articles in good topics overall.
 * wins the DYK prize, for 24 did you know articles in round 3.
 * wins the ITN prize, for 17 in the news articles overall.
 * wins the GAR prize, for 43 good article reviews in round 1.

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

Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have achieved much this year. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition.

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. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2019 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. ,, and.

Welcome to the 2019 WikiCup!
Hello and Happy New Year!

Welcome to the 2019 WikiCup, the competition begins today. If you have already joined, your submission page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and we will set up your submissions page. One important rule to remember is that only content on which you have completed significant work during 2019, and which you have nominated this year, is eligible for points in the competition, the judges will be checking! 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! The judges for the WikiCup are, , and. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:14, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Changing the name of a case after a "Notice of substitution"?
What can you tell me about the standard naming protocol when a public official is sued in his / her official capacity, and a party to the suit is replaced after an election?

I ask, because this recently happened in Fish v. Kobach: In this case, Kris Kobach was sued in his official capacity as Secretary of State of Kansas. "Final" rulings in this case were issued June 18 and 19, 2018, but Secretary Kobach appealed. I believe the appeal is still active, though it's harder for me to track the appeal than primary case itself. (The "www.courtlistener.com/recap" system developed by the "Free Law Project" sends me emails when there is any change in the case in the United States District Court for the District of Kansas, but the last I checked, that software did not work with the relevant appellate court.)

After the 2018 election, Kobach was replaced by Scott Schwab, sworn in on January 14, 2019. On January 18 the office of the Kansas Attorney General filed a "Notice of substitution" in this case, replacing Kobach as the defendant with Schwab. I'm prepared to make appropriate changes to the Wikipedia article on Fish v. Kobach, but I could use help determining what's appropriate.

This kind of thing happens sufficiently often that there is a standard protocol for the official part of this called a "Notice of substitution". However, it's not clear to me what should be done about this with the Fish v. Kobach article. I'm guessing that a reasonable thing might be to add the appeal and this substitution to the Fish v. Kobach section while also creating a redirect page for "Fish v. Schwab".

If you are not the right person to contact with this, whom would you suggest I ask? I posted a question on this on the "To Do" list on WikiProject Law on 2019-01-23 and got no replies in ~9 days.

Thanks, DavidMCEddy (talk) 16:04, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

WikiCup 2019 March newsletter
And so ends the first round of the competition. Everyone with a positive score moves on to Round 2. With 56 contestants qualifying, each group in Round 2 contains seven contestants, with the two leaders from each group due to qualify for Round 3 as well as the top sixteen remaining contestants.

Our top scorers in Round 1 were:


 * 🇺🇸 L293D, a WikiCup newcomer, led the field with ten good articles on submarines for a total of 357 points.
 * Pirate_Flag_of_Henry_Every.svg, a WikiCup veteran, came next with 274 points, mostly from eight featured pictures, restorations of artwork.
 * 🇩🇰 MPJ-DK, a wrestling enthusiast, was in third place with 263 points, garnered from a featured list, five good articles, two DYKs and four GARs.
 * 🇺🇸 Usernameunique came next at 243, with a featured article and a good article, both on ancient helmets.
 * Flag of the United States Library of Congress 2.svg Squeamish Ossifrage was in joint fifth place with 224 points, mostly garnered from bringing the 1937 Fox vault fire to featured article status.
 * Ed! was also on 224, with an amazing number of good article reviews (56 actually).

These contestants, like all the others, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. Between them, contestants completed reviews on 143 good articles, one hundred more than the number of good articles they claimed for, thus making a substantial dent in the review backlog. Well done all!

Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. 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. 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 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. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk).

Block in commons
Hello i´m JUAN BLAS tenerife, the user you blocked more than a year ago. I would like to go back to commons, I have already reflected and I am interested in uploading photos only mine. Sorry if the message is not understood, I do not speak English. Thank you. JUAN BLAS tenerife (talk) 07:11, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Hey!
Can I get a global block? I'm a cross-wiki-user, who vandalized around.

--Dr. Dentar 124 (talk) 02:03, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Best I can do was a local block. ✅ to and I assume .--Bbb23 (talk) 02:14, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

WikiCup 2019 May newsletter
The second round of the 2019 WikiCup has now finished. Contestants needed to scored 32 points to advance into round 3. Our top four scorers in round 2 all scored over 400 points and were:

Other notable performances were put in by Barkeep49 with six GAs, 🇺🇸 Ceranthor, 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Lee Vilenski, and  Canada Hky, each with seven GARs, and 🇩🇰 MPJ-DK with a seven item GT.
 * 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 Cas Liber (1210), our winner in 2016, with two featured articles and three DYKs. He also made good use of the bonus points available, more than doubling his score by choosing appropriate articles to work on.
 * 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿 Kosack (750), last year's runner up, with an FA, a GA, two FLs, and five DYKs.
 * Pirate_Flag_of_Henry_Every.svg (480), a WikiCup veteran, with 16 featured pictures, mostly restorations.
 * Zwerg Nase (461), a seasoned competitor, with a FA, a GA and an ITN item.

So far contestants have achieved nine featured articles between them and a splendid 80 good articles. Commendably, 227 GARs have been completed during the course of the 2019 WikiCup, so the backlog of articles awaiting GA review has been reduced as a result of contestants' activities. The judges are pleased with the thorough GARs that are being performed, and have hardly had to reject any. As we enter the third round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere 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) 17:46, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Why was my photo removed from Commons?
Hi, there... Why was my photo "Choir2018.jpg" deleted from the commons? I indicated that both the individual photos and the total photo was my own work, which it was. Since it was my entire work, what do I have to do to ensure that it is not deleted again? Thank you! TARDIS (talk) 05:12, 8 May 2019 (UTC)


 * See c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Choir2017.jpg. Green Giant (talk) 15:33, 8 May 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)

You have mail
I have emailed you from Meta where I have been caught in a rangeblock by you and cannot even edit my own talk page there to ask for help. There are current discussions there which I was taking part in and you are preventing me from doing so. DuncanHill (talk) 16:12, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Portal:Cape Verde
Portal:Cape Verde, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Cape Verde& and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Portal:Cape Verde during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Mark Schierbecker (talk) 05:23, 15 August 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)

WikiCup 2019 November newsletter
The WikiCup is over for another year! Our Champion this year is, who over the course of the competition has amassed 91 featured pictures, including 32 in the final round. Our finalists this year were:


 * 1) with 964 points
 * 2) with 899 points
 * 3) with 817 points
 * 4) with 691 points
 * 5) with 388 points
 * 6) with 146 points
 * 7) with 145 points
 * 8) with 74 points

All those who reached the final will win awards. The following special awards will be made based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, these prizes are awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round, or in the event of a tie, to the overall leader in this field. Awards will be handed out in the coming weeks. Please be patient!


 * wins the featured article prize, for a total of 7 FAs during the course of the competition.
 * wins the good article prize, for 14 GAs in round 5.
 * wins the featured list prize, for 4 FLs overall.
 * wins the featured picture prize, for 91 FPs overall.
 * wins the topic prize, for 7 articles in good topics in round 2.
 * wins the DYK prize, for 14 did you know articles in round 5.
 * wins the ITN prize, for 7 in the news articles in round 1.
 * wins the reviewer prize, for 56 good article reviews in round 1.

Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have achieved much this year. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition, not forgetting User:Jarry1250, who runs the scoring bot.

We have opened a scoring discussion on whether the rules and scoring need adjustment. Please have your say. Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2020 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. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66, Vanamonde and Cwmhiraeth 14:18, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2020 WikiCup!
Happy New Year, Happy New Decade and Happy New WikiCup! The competition begins today and all article creators, expanders and improvers are welcome to take part. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. We are relaxing the rule that only content on which you have completed significant work during 2020 will count; now to be eligible for points in the competition, you must have completed significant work on the content at some time! Any questions on the rules or on anything else connected to the Cup should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. 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 move on to round 2. Good luck! The judges for the WikiCup are, , and Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:43, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Happy new year
happy new year.

Welcome to the 2020 WikiCup!
Happy New Year, Happy New Decade and Happy New WikiCup! The competition begins today and all article creators, expanders and improvers are welcome to take part. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. We are relaxing the rule that only content on which you have completed significant work during 2020 will count; now to be eligible for points in the competition, you must have completed significant work on the content at some time! Any questions on the rules or on anything else connected to the Cup should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. 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 move on to round 2. Good luck! The judges for the WikiCup are, , and Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:43, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Happy new year
happy new year.

WikiCup 2020 March newsletter
And so ends the first round of the competition. Everyone with a positive score moves on to Round 2, with 57 contestants qualifying. We have abolished the groups this year, so to qualify for Round 3 you will need to finish Round 2 among the top thirty-two contestants.

Our top scorers in Round 1 were:


 * Epicgenius, a WikiCup newcomer, led the field with a featured article, five good articles and an assortment of other submissions, specialising on buildings and locations in New York, for a total of 895 points.
 * Royal Standard of England (1406-1603).svg Gog the Mild came next with 464 points, from a featured article, two good articles and a number of reviews, the main theme being naval warfare.
 * 🇺🇸 Raymie was in third place with 419 points, garnered from one good article and an impressive 34 DYKs on radio and TV stations in the United States.
 * Harrias came next at 414, with a featured article and three good articles, an English civil war battle specialist.
 * Pirate Flag.svg CaptainEek was in fifth place with 405 points, mostly garnered from bringing Cactus wren to featured article status.
 * The top ten contestants at the end of Round 1 all scored over 200 points; they also included 🇺🇸 L293D, 🇻🇪 Kingsif, 🇦🇶 Enwebb, 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Lee Vilenski and 🇳🇵 CAPTAIN MEDUSA. Seven of the top ten contestants in Round 1 are new to the WikiCup.

These contestants, like all the others, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. In Round 1 there were four featured articles, one featured list and two featured pictures, as well as around two hundred DYKs and twenty-seven ITNs. Between them, contestants completed 127 good article reviews, nearly a hundred more than the 43 good articles they claimed for, thus making a substantial dent in the review backlog. Contestants also claimed for 40 featured article / featured list reviews, and most even remembered to mention their WikiCup participation in their reviews (a requirement).

Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Some contestants made claims before the new submissions pages were set up, and they will need to resubmit them. 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. 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 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. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:46, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

WikiCup 2020 March newsletter
And so ends the first round of the competition. Everyone with a positive score moves on to Round 2, with 57 contestants qualifying. We have abolished the groups this year, so to qualify for Round 3 you will need to finish Round 2 among the top thirty-two contestants.

Our top scorers in Round 1 were:


 * Epicgenius, a WikiCup newcomer, led the field with a featured article, five good articles and an assortment of other submissions, specialising on buildings and locations in New York, for a total of 895 points.
 * Royal Standard of England (1406-1603).svg Gog the Mild came next with 464 points, from a featured article, two good articles and a number of reviews, the main theme being naval warfare.
 * 🇺🇸 Raymie was in third place with 419 points, garnered from one good article and an impressive 34 DYKs on radio and TV stations in the United States.
 * Harrias came next at 414, with a featured article and three good articles, an English civil war battle specialist.
 * Pirate Flag.svg CaptainEek was in fifth place with 405 points, mostly garnered from bringing Cactus wren to featured article status.
 * The top ten contestants at the end of Round 1 all scored over 200 points; they also included 🇺🇸 L293D, 🇻🇪 Kingsif, 🇦🇶 Enwebb, 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Lee Vilenski and 🇳🇵 CAPTAIN MEDUSA. Seven of the top ten contestants in Round 1 are new to the WikiCup.

These contestants, like all the others, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. In Round 1 there were four featured articles, one featured list and two featured pictures, as well as around two hundred DYKs and twenty-seven ITNs. Between them, contestants completed 127 good article reviews, nearly a hundred more than the 43 good articles they claimed for, thus making a substantial dent in the review backlog. Contestants also claimed for 40 featured article / featured list reviews, and most even remembered to mention their WikiCup participation in their reviews (a requirement).

Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Some contestants made claims before the new submissions pages were set up, and they will need to resubmit them. 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. 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 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. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:46, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

WikiCup newsletter correction
There was an error in the WikiCup 2020 March newsletter; 🇺🇸 L293D should not have been included in the list of top ten scorers in Round 1 (they led the list last year), instead, 🇺🇸 Dunkleosteus77 should have been included, having garnered 334 points from five good articles on animals, living or extinct, and various reviews. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:30, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

"Christ Church (Easton, Maryland) (new article)" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Christ Church (Easton, Maryland) (new article). Since you had some involvement with the Christ Church (Easton, Maryland) (new article) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Regards, SONIC  678  19:13, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅ --Green Giant (talk) 19:23, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

WikiCup 2020 May newsletter
The second round of the 2020 WikiCup has now finished. It was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 75 points to advance to round 3. There were some very impressive efforts in round 2, with the top ten contestants all scoring more than 500 points. A large number of the points came from the 12 featured articles and the 186 good articles achieved in total by contestants, and the 355 good article reviews they performed; the GAN backlog drive and the stay-at-home imperative during the COVID-19 pandemic may have been partially responsible for these impressive figures.

Our top scorers in round 2 were:


 * Epicgenius, with 2333 points from one featured article, forty-five good articles, fourteen DYKs and plenty of bonus points
 * Royal Standard of England (1406-1603).svg Gog the Mild, with 1784 points from three featured articles, eight good articles, a substantial number of featured article and good article reviews and lots of bonus points
 * 🇧🇼 The Rambling Man, with 1262 points from two featured articles, eight good articles and a hundred good article reviews
 * Harrias, with 1141 points from two featured articles, three featured lists, ten good articles, nine DYKs and a substantial number of featured article and good article reviews
 * 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Lee Vilenski with 869 points, Blason Gondor.svg Hog Farm with 801, 🇻🇪 Kingsif with 719, SounderBruce with 710, 🇺🇸 Dunkleosteus77 with 608 and 🇲🇽 MX with 515.

The rules for featured article reviews have been adjusted; reviews may cover three aspects of the article, content, images and sources, and contestants may receive points for each of these three types of review. Please also remember the requirement to mention the WikiCup when undertaking an FAR for which you intend to claim points. Remember also that DYKs cannot be claimed until they have appeared on the main page. As we enter the third round, any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed now, and anything you forgot to claim in round 2 cannot! Remember too, that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. 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. - MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:44, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Bell video
I'm just curious why the sounding bell at the Australian Centre for Christianity and Culture, that I contributed, was not considered worthy of retaining. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ACCC_bell_Canberra_ACT_2020-03-14.webm Please note that the sounding of that bell is unusual; it is not sounded very often, and I am unaware of ever being there when it was sounded. Hence, I got the sound and put up the video because it was so unlikely to have been gathered by anyone else. Thanks, - Peter Ellis - Talk 23:02, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Every file uploaded to Commons must have a license tag, explaining whether it is in the public domain or it is licensed for reuse by the copyright holder. This file did not have a license tag for more than seven days, at which point it had to be deleted. I will be happy to restore the file if you promise to add an appropriate license tag to the file summary. Green Giant (talk) 12:55, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Can you help?
---REDACTED for violation of terms--- As I said before, send an email to the stewards. There will be no correspondence entered into here. --Green Giant (talk) 18:35, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that.  It would be difficult to compose a suitable appeal for this editor explaining "why the lock should be lifted" without knowledge of why the lock was imposed in the first place.   Given that the editor has no email and the reasoning should be public for the edification of the Community can you nominate a venue where the reasons can be posted? 2A00:23C5:E117:6100:9180:E6F5:51C7:3E2F (talk) 18:47, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
 * "Given the user does not have an email" -- not our problem. If they want to appeal, create an email address.  That is not asking much. 103.254.128.134 (talk) 18:58, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Perhaps I didn’t make it clear. This is not a negotiation. The only venue is email correspondence between the stewards and the locked user. No representatives, advocates or lawyers. --Green Giant (talk) 19:10, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Can you help?
---REDACTED for violation of terms--- As I said before, send an email to the stewards. There will be no correspondence entered into here. --Green Giant (talk) 18:35, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that.  It would be difficult to compose a suitable appeal for this editor explaining "why the lock should be lifted" without knowledge of why the lock was imposed in the first place.   Given that the editor has no email and the reasoning should be public for the edification of the Community can you nominate a venue where the reasons can be posted? 2A00:23C5:E117:6100:9180:E6F5:51C7:3E2F (talk) 18:47, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
 * "Given the user does not have an email" -- not our problem. If they want to appeal, create an email address.  That is not asking much. 103.254.128.134 (talk) 18:58, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Perhaps I didn’t make it clear. This is not a negotiation. The only venue is email correspondence between the stewards and the locked user. No representatives, advocates or lawyers. --Green Giant (talk) 19:10, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

WikiCup 2020 July newsletter
The third round of the 2020 WikiCup has now come to an end. The 16 users who made it into the fourth round each had at least 353 points (compared to 68 in 2019). It was a highly competitive round, and a number of contestants were eliminated who would have moved on in earlier years. Our top scorers in round 3 were:


 * Epicgenius, with one featured article, 28 good articles and 17 DYKs, amassing 1836 points
 * 🇧🇼 The Rambling Man, with 1672 points gained from four featured articles and seventeen good articles, plus reviews of a large number of FACs and GAs
 * Royal Standard of England (1406-1603).svg Gog the Mild, a first time contestant, with 1540 points, a tally built largely on 4 featured articles and related bonus points.

Between them, contestants managed 14 featured articles, 9 featured lists, 3 featured pictures, 152 good articles, 136 DYK entries, 55 ITN entries, 65 featured article candidate reviews and 221 good article reviews. Additionally, 🇩🇰 MPJ-DK added 3 items to featured topics and 44 to good topics. Over the course of the competition, contestants have completed 710 good article reviews, in comparison to 387 good articles submitted for review and promoted. These large numbers are probably linked to a GAN backlog drive in April and May, and the changed patterns of editing during the COVID-19 pandemic. 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. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met. Please also remember that all submissions must meet core Wikipedia policies, regardless of the review process.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere 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), Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:33, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

WikiCup 2020 September newsletter
The fourth round of the competition has finished, with 865 points being required to qualify for the final round, nearly twice as many points as last year. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants with 598 and 605 points being eliminated, and all but two of the contestants who reached the final round having achieved an FA during the round. The highest scorers were


 * Free Hong Kong flag.svg Bloom6132, with 1478 points gained mainly from 5 featured lists, 12 DYKs and 63 in the news items;
 * 🇮🇩HaEr48 with 1318 points gained mainly from 2 featured articles, 5 good articles and 8 DYKs;
 * 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Lee Vilenski with 1201 points mainly gained from 2 featured articles and 10 good articles.

Between them, contestants achieved 14 featured articles, 14 featured lists, 2 featured pictures, 87 good articles, 90 DYK entries, 75 ITN entries, 95 featured article candidate reviews and 81 good article reviews. Congratulations to all who participated! It was a generally high-scoring and productive round and I think we can expect a highly competitive finish to the competition.

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 10 days of "earning" them. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to 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 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk), Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:52, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Join the Months of African Cinema Global Contest!
Ýou can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

Today's Wikipedian 10 years ago
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:32, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Cheers for the reminder. :) -- Green Giant (talk) 11:44, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

WikiCup 2020 November newsletter
The 2020 WikiCup has come to an end, with the final round going down to the wire. Our new Champion is, the runner-up last year, who was closely followed by. In the final round, Lee achieved 4 FAs and 30 GAs, mostly on cue sport topics, while Gog achieved 3 FAs and 15 GAs, mostly on important battles and wars, which earned him a high number of bonus points. was in third place with 4 FAs and 8 GAs on football topics, with close behind with 19 GAs and 16 DYK's, his interest being the buildings of New York.

The other finalists were, , and. The final round was very productive, and besides 15 FAs, contestants achieved 75 FAC reviews, 88 GAs and 108 GAN reviews. Altogether, Wikipedia has benefited greatly from the activities of WikiCup competitors all through the contest. Well done everyone!

All those who reached the final will receive awards and the following special awards will be made, based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, these prizes are awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round, or in the event of a tie, to the overall leader in this field.


 * wins the featured article prize, for a total of 14 FAs during the course of the competition.
 * win the featured list prize, for 5 FLs in round 4.
 * wins the featured picture prize, for 3 FPs in round 3 and 5 overall.
 * wins the featured article reviewer prize, for 23 FAC reviews in round 5.
 * wins the good article prize, for 45 GAs in round 2 and 113 overall.
 * wins the topic prize, for 33 articles in good topics in round 2.
 * wins the good article reviewer prize, for 100 good article reviews in round 2.
 * wins the DYK prize, for 22 Did you know articles in round 4 and 94 overall.
 * wins the ITN prize, for 63 In the news articles in round 4 and 136 overall.

Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2021 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. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66, Vanamonde and Cwmhiraeth MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:37, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

The Months of African Cinema Contest Continues in November!
You can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

Family Court (Ireland)
You worked on this a few years ago, Can you help to save it? Bearian (talk)

Welcome to the 2021 WikiCup!
Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The competition begins today and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. 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 move on to round 2. We thank Vanamonde93 and Godot13, who have retired as judges, and we thank them for their past dedication. The judges for the WikiCup this year are and. Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:11, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

WikiCup 2021 March newsletter
Round 1 of the competition has finished; it was a high-scoring round with 21 contestants scoring more than 100 points. Everyone with a positive score moves on to Round 2, with 55 contestants qualifying. You will need to finish among the top thirty-two contestants in Round 2 if you are to qualify for Round 3. Our top scorers in Round 1 were:


 * Epicgenius led the field with a featured article, nine good articles and an assortment of other submissions, specialising on buildings and locations in New York, for a total of 945 points.
 * Bloom6132 was close behind with 896 points, largely gained from 71 "In the news" items, mostly recent deaths.
 * 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 ImaginesTigers, who has been editing Wikipedia for less than a year, was in third place with 711 points, much helped by bringing League of Legends to featured article status, exemplifying how bonus points can boost a contestant's score.
 * 🇷🇼 Amakuru came next with 708 points, Kigali being another featured article that scored maximum bonus points.
 * Flag of the United Nations.svg Ktin, new to the WikiCup, was in fifth place with 523 points, garnered from 15 DYKs and 34 "In the news" items.
 * 🇧🇼 The Rambling Man scored 511 points, many from featured article candidate reviews and from football related DYKs.
 * Standard of Oliver Cromwell (1653–1659).svg Gog the Mild, last year's runner-up, came next with 498 points, from a featured article and numerous featured article candidate reviews.
 * Bennington Flag.svg Hog Farm, at 452, scored for a featured article, four good articles and a number of reviews.
 * 🇺🇸 Le Panini, another newcomer to the WikiCup, scored 438 for a featured article and three good articles.
 * 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Lee Vilenski, last year's champion, scored 332 points, from a featured article and various other sport-related topics.

These contestants, like all the others, now have to start again from scratch. In Round 1, contestants achieved eight featured articles, three featured lists and one featured picture, as well as around two hundred DYKs and twenty-seven ITNs. They completed 97 good article reviews, nearly double the 52 good articles they claimed. Contestants also claimed for 135 featured article and featured list candidate reviews. There is no longer a requirement to mention your WikiCup participation when undertaking these reviews.

Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. 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. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is a good article candidate, a featured process, or something 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 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. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:26, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Request to join a discussion
Greetings

Requesting you to have a look at a discussion Talk:Pakistan/Archive 20, please do join in to the discussion if the topic interests you.

This discussion invitation is made to you since previous you seem to have contributed to update article Pakistan.

Thanks and warm regards

Bookku (talk) 16:59, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

WikiCup 2021 May newsletter
The second round of the 2021 WikiCup has now finished; it was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 61 points to advance to Round 3. There were some impressive efforts in the round, with the top eight contestants all scoring more than 400 points. A large number of the points came from the 12 featured articles and the 110 good articles achieved in total by contestants, as well as the 216 good article reviews they performed; the GAN backlog drive and the stay-at-home imperative during the COVID-19 pandemic may have been partially responsible for these impressive figures.

Our top scorers in Round 2 were:


 * 🇧🇼 The Rambling Man, with 2963 points from three featured articles, 20 featured article reviews, 37 good articles, 73 good article reviews, as well as 22 DYKs.
 * Epicgenius, with 1718 points from one featured article, 29 good articles, 16 DYKs and plenty of bonus points.
 * Bloom6132, with 990 points from 13 DYKs and 64 "In the news" items, mostly recent deaths.
 * Bennington Flag.svg Hog Farm, with 834 points from two featured articles, five good articles, 14 featured article reviews and 15 good article reviews.
 * Standard of Oliver Cromwell (1653–1659).svg Gog the Mild, with 524 points from two featured articles and four featured article reviews.
 * 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Lee Vilenski, with 501 points from one featured article, three good articles, six featured article reviews and 25 good article reviews.
 * Transgender Pride flag.svg Sammi Brie, with 485 points from four good articles, eight good article reviews and 27 DYKs, on US radio and television stations.
 * Flag of the United Nations.svg Ktin, with 436 points from four good articles, seven DYKs and 11 "In the news" items.

Please remember that DYKs cannot be claimed until they have appeared on the main page. As we enter the third round, any content promoted after the end of Round 2 but before the start of Round 3 can be claimed now, and anything you forgot to claim in Round 2 cannot! Remember too, that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them (except for at the end of each round, when you must claim them before the cut-off date/time). 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. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Judges: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:27, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Category:Legislatures of Canadian provinces and territories has been nominated for merging to
Category:Legislatures of Canadian provinces and territories has been nominated for merging to. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Place Clichy (talk) 09:39, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Category:Legislatures of Canadian provinces and territories has been nominated for merging to
Category:Legislatures of Canadian provinces and territories has been nominated for merging to. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Place Clichy (talk) 09:39, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

WikiCup 2021 July newsletter
The third round of the 2021 WikiCup has now come to an end. Each of the sixteen contestants who made it into the fourth round had at least 294 points, and our top six scorers all had over 600 points. They were:


 * 🇧🇼 The Rambling Man, with 1825 points from 3 featured articles, 44 featured article reviews, 14 good articles, 30 good article reviews and 10 DYKs. In addition, he completed a 34-article good topic on the EFL Championship play-offs.
 * Epicgenius, a New York specialist, with 1083 points from 2 featured article reviews, 18 good articles, 30 DYKs and plenty of bonus points.
 * Bloom6132, with 869 points from 11 DYKs, all with bonus points, and 54 "In the news" items, mostly covering people who had recently died.
 * Standard of Oliver Cromwell (1653–1659).svg Gog the Mild, with 817 points from 3 featured articles on historic battles in Europe, 5 featured article reviews and 3 good articles.
 * Bennington Flag.svg Hog Farm, with 659 points from 2 featured articles and 2 good articles on American Civil War battles, 18 featured article reviews, 2 good articles, 6 good article reviews and 4 DYKs.
 * ICS Zulu.svg BennyOnTheLoose, a snooker specialist and new to the Cup, with 647 points from a featured article, 2 featured article reviews, 6 good articles, 6 good article reviews and 3 DYKs.

In round three, contestants achieved 19 featured articles, 7 featured lists, 106 featured article reviews, 72 good articles, 1 good topic, 62 good article reviews, 165 DYKs and 96 ITN items. We enter the fourth round with scores reset to zero; 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 (one contestant in round 3 lost out because of this). 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. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Judges: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:29, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

Username
This is just to let anyone who needs to know, I’m changing my username. --Green Giant (talk) 13:42, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

WikiCup 2021 September newsletter
The fourth round of the competition has finished with over 500 points being required to qualify for the final round. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants, 🇧🇼 The Rambling Man and Epicgenius, each scoring over 3000 points, and six contestants scoring over 1000. All but one of the finalists achieved one or more FAs during the round, the exception being Bloom6132 who demonstrated that 61 "in the news" items produces an impressive number of points. Other contestants who made it to the final are Gog the Mild, 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Lee Vilenski,  BennyOnTheLoose, 🇷🇼 Amakuru and  Hog Farm. However, all their points are now swept away and everyone starts afresh in the final round.

Round 4 saw the achievement of 18 featured articles and 157 good articles. Bilorv scored for a 25-article good topic on Black Mirror but narrowly missed out on qualifying for the final round. There was enthusiasm for FARs, with 89 being performed, and there were 63 GARs and around 100 DYKs during the round. As we start round 5, we say goodbye to the eight competitors who didn't quite make it to the final round; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia, and we hope you will join us again next year. For other contestants, 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.

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 your name from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:01, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Months of African Cinema Global Contest!
Ýou can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

Talk:Panckula/Archive 1
Hello, Cromium,

You archived talk page content to this page but I don't know from what article as there is no Talk:Panckula. Can you figure out where this should go or should I just delete it? Thank you. Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 23:37, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Never mind, I just figured it out that it was supposed to be Talk:Panchkula/Archive 1. Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 23:39, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

WikiCup 2021 November newsletter
The WikiCup is over for another year and the finalists can relax! Our Champion this year is, who amassed over 5000 points in the final round, achieving 8 featured articles and almost 500 reviews. It was a very competitive round; seven of the finalists achieved over 1000 points in the round (enough to win the 2019 contest), and three scored over 3000 (enough to win the 2020 event). Our 2021 finalists and their scores were:


 * 1) with 5072 points
 * 2) with 3276 points
 * 3) with 3197 points
 * 4) with 1611 points
 * 5) with 1571 points
 * 6) with 1420 points
 * 7) with 1043 points
 * 8) with 528 points

All those who reached the final round will win awards. The following special awards will be made based on high performance in particular areas of content creation and review. Awards will be handed out in the next few days.


 * wins the featured article prize, for 8 FAs in round 5.
 * wins the featured list prize, for 3 FLs in round 5.
 * wins the featured topic prize, for 13 articles in a featured topic in round 5.
 * wins the good article prize, for 63 GAs in round 4.
 * wins the good topic prize, for 86 articles in good topics in round 5.
 * wins the reviewer prize, for 68 FAC reviews and 213 GAN reviews, both in round 5.
 * wins the DYK prize, for 30 did you know articles in round 3 and 105 overall.
 * wins the ITN prize, for 71 in the news articles in round 1 and 284 overall.

Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether they made it to the final round or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup, some of whom did very well. Wikipedia has benefitted greatly from the quality creations, expansions and improvements made, and the numerous reviews performed. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition, not forgetting User:Jarry1250, who runs the scoring bot.

If you have views on whether the rules or scoring need adjustment for next year's contest, please comment on the WikiCup talk page. Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2022 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. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:55, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

The Months of African Cinema Contest Continues in November!
You can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

Welcome to the 2022 WikiCup!
Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2022 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. 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 move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: and. Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:36, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2022 WikiCup!
Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2022 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. 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 move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: and. Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:02, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

WikiCup 2022 March newsletter
And so ends the first round of the WikiCup. Last year anyone who scored more than zero points moved on to Round 2, but this was not the case this year, and a score of 13 or more was required to proceed. The top scorers in Round 1 were:


 * Epicgenius, a finalist last year, who led the field with 1906 points, gained from 32 GAs and 19 DYKs, all on the topic of New York buildings.
 * 🇨🇽 AryKun, new to the contest, was second with 1588 points, having achieved 2 FAs, 11 GAs and various other submissions, mostly on the subject of birds.
 * Bloom6132, a WikiCup veteran, was in third place with 682 points, garnered from 51 In the news items and several DYKs.
 * GhostRiver was close behind with 679 points, gained from achieving 12 GAs, mostly on ice hockey players, and 35 GARs.
 * 🇺🇳 Kavyansh.Singh was in fifth place with 551 points, with an FA, a FL, and many reviews.
 * Flag of Provo, Utah (1989–2015).svg SounderBruce was next with 454 points, gained from an FA and various other submissions, mostly on United States highways.
 * 🇺🇳 Ktin, another WikiCup veteran, was in seventh place with 412 points, mostly gained from In the news items.

These contestants, like all the others who qualified for Round 2, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. Between them, contestants completed reviews of a large number of good articles as the contest ran concurrently with a GAN backlog drive. Well done all! To qualify for Round 3, contestants will need to finish Round 2 among the top thirty-two participants.

Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Anything that should have been claimed for in Round 1 is no longer eligible for points. 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. 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 Needed.

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. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:06, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:40, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

WikiCup 2022 May newsletter
The second round of the 2022 WikiCup has now finished. It was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 115 points to advance to round 3. There were some very impressive efforts in round 2, with the top seven contestants all scoring more than 500 points. A large number of the points came from the 11 featured articles and the 79 good articles achieved in total by contestants.

Our top scorers in round 2 were:


 * 1) Epicgenius, with 1264 points from 2 featured article, 4 good articles and 18 DYKs. Epicgenius was a finalist last year but has now withdrawn from the contest as he pursues a new career path.
 * 2) 🇨🇽 AryKun, with 1172 points from two featured articles, one good article and a substantial number of featured article and good article reviews.
 * 3) Bloom6132, with 605 points from 44 in the news items and 4 DYKs.
 * 4) Transgender Pride flag.svg Sammi Brie, with 573 points from 8 GAs and 21 DYKs.
 * 5) Vexilloid of the Roman Empire.svg Ealdgyth, with 567 points from 11 GAs and 34 good and featured article reviews.
 * 6) Panini!, with 549 points from 1 FA, 4 GAs and several other sources.
 * 7) 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Lee Vilenski, with 545 points from 1 FA, 4 GAs and a number of reviews.

The rules for featured and good article reviews require the review to be of sufficient length; brief quick fails and very short reviews will generally not be awarded points. Remember also that DYKs cannot be claimed until they have appeared on the main page. As we enter the third round, any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed now, and anything you forgot to claim in round 2 cannot! Remember too, that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. 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. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:39, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

WikiCup 2022 July newsletter
The third round of the 2022 WikiCup has now come to an end. Each of the sixteen contestants who made it into the fourth round had at least 180 points, which is a lower figure than last year when 294 points were needed to progress to round 4. Our top scorers in round 3 were:


 * ICS Zulu.svg BennyOnTheLoose, with 746 points, a tally built both on snooker and other sports topics, and on more general subjects.
 * Bloom6132, with 683 points, garnered mostly from "In the news" items and related DYKs.
 * Transgender Pride flag.svg Sammi Brie, with 527, from a variety of submissions related to radio and television stations.

Between them contestants achieved 5 featured articles, 4 featured lists, 51 good articles, 149 DYK entries, 68 ITN entries, and 109 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. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met. Please also remember that all submissions must meet core Wikipedia policies, regardless of the review process.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is a good article nomination, 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. WikiCup judges: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:51, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

WikiCup 2022 September newsletter
The fourth round of the WikiCup has now finished. 383 points were required to reach the final, and the new round has got off to a flying start with all finalists already scoring. In round 4, Bloom6132 with 939 points was the highest points-scorer, with a combination of DYKs and In the news items, followed by BennyOnTheLoose, Sammi Brie and Lee Vilenski. The points of all contestants are swept away as we start afresh for the final round.

At this stage, 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. For the remaining competitors, 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, and importantly, before the deadline on October 31st!

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. The judges are Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:43, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

"Himalayan states (redirect)" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Himalayan states (redirect) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 November 2 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 1234qwer1234qwer4 14:53, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

WikiCup 2022 November newsletter
The 2022 WikiCup has drawn to a close with the final round going down to the wire. The 2022 champion is
 * 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Lee Vilenski (1752 points), who won in 2020 and was runner up in both 2019 and last year. In the final round he achieved 3 FAs and 15 GAs, mostly on cue sports. He was closely followed by
 * Bloom6132 (1732), who specialised in "In the news" items and DYKs, and who has reached the final round of the Cup for the past three years. Next was
 * ICS Zulu.svg BennyOnTheLoose (1238), another cue sports enthusiast, also interested in songs, followed by
 * Muboshgu (1082), an "In the news" contributor, a seasoned contestant who first took part in the Cup ten years ago. Other finalists were
 * Transgender Pride flag.svg Sammi Brie (930), who scored with a featured article, good articles and DYKs on TV and radio stations,
 * 🇺🇳 Kavyansh.Singh (370), who created various articles on famous Americans, including an FA on Louis H. Bean, famed for his prediction of election outcomes. Next was
 * PCN02WPS (292), who scored with good articles and DYKs on sporting and other topics and
 * Z1720 (25) who had DYKs on various topics including historic Canadians.

During the WikiCup, contestants achieved 37 featured articles, 349 good articles, 360 featured article reviews, 683 good article reviews and 480 In the news items, so Wikipedia has benefited greatly from the activities of WikiCup competitors. Well done everyone! All those who reached the final round will receive awards and the following special awards will be made, based on high performance in particular areas of content creation and review. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, these prizes are awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round, or the overall leader in this field.


 * 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Lee Vilenski wins the featured article prize, for a total of 6 FAs during the course of the competition and 3 in the final round.
 * 🇺🇳 Kavyansh.Singh wins the featured list prize, for 3 FLs in round 2.
 * Pirate Flag of Jack Rackham.svg Adam Cuerden wins the featured picture prize, for 39 FPs during the competition.
 * Z1720 wins the featured article reviewer prize, for 35 FARs in round 4.
 * Epicgenius wins the good article prize, for 32 GAs in round 1.
 * Flag of Provo, Utah (1989–2015).svg SounderBruce wins the featured topic prize, for 4 FT articles in round 1.
 * 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Lee Vilenski wins the good topic prize, for 34 GT articles in round 5.
 * Transgender Pride flag.svg Sammi Brie wins the good article reviewer prize, for 71 GARs overall.
 * Transgender Pride flag.svg Sammi Brie wins the Did you know prize, for 30 DYKs in round 3 and 106 overall.
 * Bloom6132 wins the In the news prize, for 106 ITNs in round 5 and 289 overall.

Next year's competition will begin on 1 January and possible changes to the rules and scoring are being discussed on the discussion page. You are invited to sign up to take part in the contest; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to have a good turnout for the 2023 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners and finalists, 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. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:28, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #AAA; background-color: ivory; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; "> Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:10, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2023 WikiCup!
Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2023 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page ready for you to take part. Any questions on the scoring, rules or anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. 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 move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: and. Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:16, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

WikiCup 2023 March newsletter
So ends the first round of the 2023 WikiCup. Everyone with a positive score moved on to Round 2, with 54 contestants qualifying. The top scorers in Round 1 were:


 * Unlimitedlead with 1205 points, a WikiCup newcomer, led the field with two featured articles on historical figures and several featured article candidate reviews.
 * Epicgenius was in second place with 789 points; a seasoned WikiCup competitor he specialises in buildings and locations in New York.
 * 🇩🇪 FrB.TG was in third place with 625 points, garnered from a featured article on a filmmaker which qualified for an impressive number of bonus points.
 * 🇺🇸 TheJoebro64, another WikiCup newcomer, came next with 600 points gained from two featured articles on video games.
 * Iazyges was in fifth place with 532 points, from two featured articles on classical history.

The top sixteen contestants at the end of Round 1 had all scored over 300 points; these included LunaEatsTuna,  Thebiguglyalien,  Sammi Brie,  Trainsandotherthings,  🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Lee Vilenski, 🇮🇩 Juxlos,  Unexpectedlydian,  SounderBruce, 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿 Kosack,  BennyOnTheLoose and  PCN02WPS. It was a high-scoring start to the competition.

These contestants, like all the others, now have to start again from scratch. The first round finished on February 26. Remember that any content promoted after that date but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Some contestants made claims before the new submissions pages were set up, and they will need to resubmit them. 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. 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 Needed.

If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to 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. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:36, 2 March 2023 (UTC)