User talk:Fourthords/Archive 9

WikiCup 2010 October newsletter
The 2010 WikiCup is over! It has been a long journey, but what has been achieved is impressive: combined, participants have produced over seventy featured articles, over five hundred good articles, over fifty featured lists, over one thousand one hundred "did you know" entries, in addition to various other pieces of recognised content. A full list (which has yet to be updated to reflect the scores in the final round) can be foundhere. Perhaps more importantly, we have our winner! The 2010 WikiCup champion is, with an unbelievable 4220 points in the final round. Second place goes to, with 2260, and third to, with 560. Congratulations to our other four finalists –, , and. Also, congratulations to, who withdrew from the competition with an impressive 2685 points earlier in this round.

Prizes will also be going to those who claimed the most points for different types of content in a single round. It was decided that the prizes would be awarded for those with the highest in a round, rather than overall, so that the finalists did not have an unfair advantage. Winning the featured article prize is, for five featured articles in round 4. Winning the good article prize is, for eighty-one good articles in round 5. Winning the featured list prize is, for six featured lists in round 1. Winning the picture and sound award is, for four featured pictures in round 3. Winning the topic award is, for forty-seven articles in various good topics in round 5. Winning the "did you know" award is, for over one hundred did you knows is round 5. Finally, winning the in the news award is, for nineteen articles in the news in round three.

The WikiCup has faced criticism in the last month – hopefully, we will take something positive from it and create a better contest for next year. Like Wikipedia itself, the Cup is a work in progress, and ideas for how it should work are more than welcome on the WikiCup talk page and on the scoring talk page. Also, people are more than welcome to sign up for next year's competition onthe signup page. Well done and thank you to everyone involved – the Cup has been a pleasure to run, and we, as judges, have been proud to be a part of it. We hope that next year, however the Cup is working, and whoever is running it, it will be back, stronger and more popular than ever. Until then, goodbye and happy editing! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 03:09, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

ARTICLE: Our Lady of Assumption College
I would like to ask what is the problem of the page? Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vien18 (talk • contribs) 06:37, 5 November 2010
 * I assume you mean Our Lady of Assumption College, Santa Rosa? Regardless, both articles have the same problems, which is that they don't have any sources for any of the information provided.  The English Wikipedia's Verifiability policy requires that all information in an article be cited to reliable, secondary sources.  The only source listed for both of the OLAC articles is the college "handbook", which is neither reliable nor secondary.  The sort of sources the article needs are references from books, newspapers, magazines, TV news reports, etc.  —  pd_THOR  undefined | 16:39, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages.Pending changes, also known as flagged revisions, underwent a two-month trial which ended on 15 August 2010. Its continued use is still being discussed by the community, you are free to participate in such discussions. Many articles still have pending changes protection applied, however, and the ability to review pending changes continues to be of use.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under level 1 pending changes and edits made by non-reviewers to level 2 pending changes protected articles (usually high traffic articles). Pending changes was applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't grant you status nor change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.Courcelles 05:25, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup/2011 signups
You signed up with the flag of St. Louis, Missouri, but left a note saying "until/unless something better occurs to me". I later signed up with the same flag in case you changed it later; I was just wondering if you were going to stick with St. Louis or not, because if not I'll just change mine to the flag of Missouri. Thanks, / ƒETCH COMMS  /  03:57, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * After you asked, I spent some time thinking about it, and I really can't think of anything that would be better. I don't want to chase you off though; if you want to use the St. Louisian flag as well, I think the signups page allows for two players to use the same flag.  —   pd_THOR  undefined | 07:10, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh! I missed that part in the rules, thanks :) / ƒETCH COMMS  /  22:42, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * No prob! May the best St. Louisian win!  ;^D  —   pd_THOR  undefined | 22:57, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2011 WikiCup!
Hello, happy new year and welcome to the 2011 WikiCup! Your submissions' page can be found here and instructions of how to update the page can be found here and on the submissions' page itself. From the submissions' page, a bot will update the main scoresheet. Our rules have been very slightly updated from last year; the full rules can be foundhere. Please remember that you can only receive points for content on which you have done significant work in 2011; nominations of work from last year and "drive-by" nominations will not be awarded points. Signups are going to remain open through January, so if you know of anyone who would like to take part, please direct them to WikiCup/2011 signups. The judges can be contacted on the WikiCup talk page, on their respective talk pages, or by email. Other than that, we will be in contact at the end of every month with the newsletter. If you want to stop or start receiving newsletters, please remove your name from or add your name to this list. Good luck! J Milburn and The ed17 12:59, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Commons rename proof
I am requesting a rename on Commons. My current Commons name is pd_THOR. —  Fourthords undefined | 03:43, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

.js triple redirects

 * 1) User:Pd THOR/monobook.js (edit) →‎ User:Fourthords/monobook.js →‎ User:Pd THOR/vector.js →‎ User:Fourthords/vector.js
 * Rich Farmbrough, 01:40, 18th day of January in the year 2011 (UTC).


 * Given your verbosity, I take it I've made reparations where requested? —   Fourthords undefined | 13:48, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 January newsletter
We are half way through round one of the WikiCup. Signups are now closed, and we have 129 listed competitors, 64 of whom will make it to round two. Congratulations to, who, at the time of writing, has a comfortable lead with 228 points, followed by, with 144 points. Four others have over 100 points. Congratulations also go to, who scored the first points in the competition, claiming for Talk:Hurricane King/GA1,, who scored the first non-review points in the competition, claiming for Dognapping, and who was the first in the competition to use our new "multiplier" mechanic (explanation), claiming for Grigory Potemkin, a subject covered on numerous Wikipedias. Thanks must also go to Jarry1250 for dealing with all bot work- without you, the competition wouldn't be happening!

A running total of claims can be seen here. However, numerous competitors are yet to score at all-please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. The number of points that will be needed to reach round two is not clear- everyone needs to get their entries in now to guarantee their places! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself fromWikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 22:32, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Rollback
I saw your question on WP:ROLLBACK about disabling rollback when using a mobile browser. Did you ever get an answer about that? I've been having the same problem. --Coemgenus 17:28, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I did get an answer, I'm sorry I didn't C&P it to the rollback page (I have now). What you're looking for is here: Village pump (technical)/Archive 83.  —   Fourthords  |=/\= | 17:43, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks! --Coemgenus 21:11, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 February newsletter
So begins round two of the WikiCup! We now have eight pools, each with eight random contestants. This round will continue until the end of April, when the top two of each pool, as well as the next 16 highest scorers of those remaining, will make it to round three. Congratulations to (first, with 487 points) and (second, with 459), who stormed the first round. finished third with 223. Twelve others finished with over 100 points- well done to all of you! The final standings in round one can be seen here. A mere 8 points were required to reach round two; competition will no doubt be much more fierce this round, so be ready for a challenge! A special thanks goes, again, to for dealing with all bot work. This year's bot, as well as running smoothly, is doing some very helpful things that last year's did not. Also, thanks to for some helpful behind-the-scenes updating and number crunching.

Some news for those who are interested- March will see a GAN backlog elimination drive, which you are still free to join. Organised by WikiProject Good articles, the drive aims to minimise the GAN backlog and offers prizes to those who help out. Of course, you may well be able to claim WikiCup points for the articles you review as part of the drive. Also ongoing is the Great Backlog Drive, looking to work on clearing all of the backlogs on Wikipedia; again, incentives are offered, and the spirit of friendly competition is alive, while helping the encyclopedia is the ultimate aim. Though unrelated to the WikiCup, these may well be of interest to some of you.

Just a reminder of the rules; if you have done significant work on content this year and it is promoted in this round, you may claim for it. Also, anything that was promoted after the end of round one but before the beginning of round two may be claimed for in round two. Details of the rules can be found on this page. For those interested in statistics, a running total of claims can be seenhere, and a very interesting table of that information (along with the highest scorers in each category) can be seen here. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome onWikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn andThe ed17 23:41, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of season one episode articles of House for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the articles Paternity (House), Occam's Razor (House), Maternity (House), Damned If You Do, The Socratic Method (House), Fidelity (House), Poison (House), DNR (House), Histories (House), Detox (House), Sports Medicine (House), Cursed (House), Control (House), Mob Rules (House), Heavy (House), Role Model (House), Babies & Bathwater, Kids (House), Love Hurts (House) andHoneymoon (House) are suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Paternity (House) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.  X  eworlebi (talk) 14:47, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

You were invited to the deletion discussion due to your earlier involvement in a similar matter but have not offered your opinion yet. While not required it would be greatly appreciated. The AfD is located at Articles for deletion/Paternity (House). Thanks.  X  eworlebi (talk) 18:40, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 March newsletter
We are half way through round two of the WikiCup, which will end on 28 April. Of the 64 current contestants, 32 will make it through to the next round; the two highest in each pool, and the 16 next highest scorers. At the time of writing, our current overall leader is with 231 points, who leads Pool H. (Pool G) also has over 200 points, while 9 others (three of whom are in Pool D) have over 100 points. Remember that certain content (specifically, articles/portals included in at least 20 Wikipedias as of 31 December 2010 or articles which are considered "vital") is worth double points if promoted to good or featured status, or if it appears on the main page in the Did You Know column. There were some articles last round which were eligible for double points, but which were not claimed for. For more details, see WikiCup/Scoring.

A running total of claims can be seen here. However, numerous competitors are yet to score at all-please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. The number of points that will be needed to reach round three is not clear- everyone needs to get their entries in now to guarantee their places! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself fromWikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 00:56, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 April newsletter
Round 2 of the 2011 WikiCup is over, and the new round will begin on 1 May. Note that any points scored in the interim (that is, for content promoted or reviews completed on 29-30 April) can be claimed in the next round, but please do not start updating your submissions' pages until the next round has begun. Fewer than a quarter of our original contestants remain; 32 enter round 3, and, in two months' time, only 16 will progress to our penultimate round. , who led Pool F, was our round champion, with 411 points, while 7 contestants scored between 200 and 300 points. At the other end of the scale, a score of 41 was high enough to reach round 3; more than five times the score required to reach round 2, and competition will no doubt become tighter now we're approaching the later rounds. Those progressing to round 3 were spread fairly evenly across the pools; 4 progressed from each of pools A, B, E and H, while 3 progressed from both pools C and F. Pools D and G were the most successful; each had 5 contestants advancing.

This round saw our first good topic points this year; congratulations to and who also led pool H and pool B respectively. However, there remain content types for which no points have yet been scored; featured sounds, featured portals and featured topics. In addition to prizes for leaderboard positions, the WikiCup awards other prizes; for instance, last year, a prize was awarded to (who has been eliminated) for his work on In The News. For this reason, working on more unusual content could be even more rewarding than usual!

Sorry this newsletter is going out a little earlier than expected- there is a busy weekend coming up! A running total of claims can be seenhere. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome onWikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn andThe ed17 19:17, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Promoted Featured Sound/Video

 * Awesome! Thanks!  —   Fourthords  | =/\= | 17:06, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 May newsletter
We're half way through round 3 of the 2011 WikiCup. There are currently 32 remaining in the competition, but only 16 will progress to our penultimate round. , of pool D, is our overall leader with nearly 200 points, while pools A, B and C are led by, and respectively. The score required to reach the next round is 35, though this will no doubt go up significantly as the round progresses. We have a good number of high scorers, but also a considerable number who are yet to score. Please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. Also, an important note concerning nominations at featured article candidates: if you are nominating content for which you intend to claim WikiCup points, please make this clear in the nomination statement so that the FAC director and his delegates are aware of the fact.

A running total of claims can be seen here. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 23:26, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Revert of Spamming
Hi, if you look at User:Linsammartin Contributions, you will notice they are the same line of text on random pages

Gavin Perch  talk 00:01, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * It's not inaccurate though; according to the citation they were nominated for this award. Are you ascribing ill intentions to, or contesting the legitimacy or relevancy of the claim?  —   Fourthords  |=/\= | 00:10, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Re: photo flesh tones for Molly Quinn
MissMJ (talk) 23:29, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 June newsletter
We are half way through 2011, and entering the penultimate round of this year's WikiCup; the semi-finals are upon us! Points scored in the interim (29/30 June) may be counted towards next round, but please do not update your submissions' pages until the next round has begun. 16 contestants remain, and all have shown dedication to the project to reach this far. Our round leader was who, among other things, successfully passed three articles through featured article candidates and claimed an impressive 29 articles at Did You Know, scoring 555 points. Casliber led pool D. Pool A was led by, claiming points for a featured article, a featured list and seven good article reviews, while pool C was led by , who claimed for two good articles, ten articles at Did You Know and four good article reviews. They scored 154 and 118 respectively. Pool B was by far our most competitive pool; six of the eight competitors made it through to round 4, with all of them scoring over 100 points. The pool was led by, who claimed for, among other things, three featured articles and five good articles. In addition to the four pool leaders, 12 others (the four second places, and the 8 next highest overall) make up our final 16. The lowest scorer who reached round 4 scored 76 points; a significant increase on the 41 needed to reach round 3. Eight of our semi-finalists scored at least twice as much as this.

No points were awarded this round for featured pictures, good topics or In the News, and no points have been awarded in the whole competition for featured topics, featured portals or featured sounds. Instead, the highest percentage of points has come from good articles. Featured articles, despite their high point cost, are low in number, and so, overall, share a comparable number of points with Did You Know, which are high in number but low in cost. A comparatively small but still considerable number of points come from featured lists and good article reviews, rounding out this round's overall scores.

We would again like to thank and  for invaluable background work, as well as all of those helping to provide reviews for the articles listed on WikiCup/Reviews. Please do keep using it, and please do help by providing reviews for the articles listed there. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews generally at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup.

Two final notes: Firstly, please remember to state your participation in the WikiCup when nominating articles at FAC. Finally, some WikiCup-related statistics can be seen here and here, for those interested, though it appears that neither are completely accurate at this time. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 23:31, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject St. Louis
As a member of WikiProject St. Louis, can you help out at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject St. Louis? Thanks, Goodvac (talk) 21:47, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 July newsletter
We are half way through the penultimate round of this year's WikiCup; there is less than a month to go before we have our final 8. Our pool leaders are (Pool A, 189 points) and (Pool B, 165 points). The number of points required to reach the next round is not clear at this time; there are some users who still do not have any recorded points. Please remember to update your submissions' pages promptly. In addition, congratulations to PresN, who scored the first featured topic points in the competition for his work onThatgamecompany related articles. Most points this round generally have, so far, come from good articles, with only one featured article (White-bellied Sea Eagle, from ) and two featured lists (Hugo Award for Best Graphic Story, from PresN andGrammy Award for Best Native American Music Album, from ). Points for Did You Know and good article reviews round out the scoring. No points have been awarded for In the News, good topics or featured pictures this round, and no points for featured sounds or portals have been awarded in the entire competition. On an unrelated note, preparation will be beginning soon for next year's WikiCup- watch this space!

There is little else to be said beyond the usual. Please list anything you need reviewing on WikiCup/Reviews, so others following the WikiCup can help, and please do help if you can by providing reviews for the articles listed there. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews generally at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup- points are, of course, offered for reviews at GAC. Two final notes: Firstly, please remember to state your participation in the WikiCup when nominating articles at FAC. Finally, some WikiCup-related statistics can be seen here and here. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 11:29, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 July newsletter
The finals are upon us; we're down to the last few. One of the eight remaining contestants will be this year's WikiCup champion! 150 was the score needed to progress to the final; just under double the 76 required to reach round 4, and more than triple the 41 required to reach round 3. Our eight finalists are:


 * , Pool A's winner. Casliber has the highest total score in the competition, with 1528, the bulk of which is made up of 8 featured articles. He has the highest number of total featured articles (8, 1 of which was eligible for double points) and total did you knows (72) of any finalist. Casliber writes mostly on biology, including ornithology, botany and mycology.
 * , Pool B's winner and the highest scorer this round. PresN is the only finalist who has scored featured topic points, and he has gathered an impressive 330, but most of his points come from his 4 featured articles, one of which scored double. PresN writes mostly on video games and the Hugo Awards.
 * , Pool A's runner-up. Hurricanehink's points are mostly from his 30 good articles, more than any other finalist, and he is also the only finalist to score good topic points. Hurricanehink, as his name suggests, writes mostly on meteorology.
 * , Pool B's runner-up. Wizardman has completed 86 good article reviews, more than any other finalist, but most of his points come from his 2 featured articles. Wizardman writes mostly on American sport, especially baseball.
 * , the "fastest loser" (Pool A). Miyagawa has written 3 featured lists, one of which was awarded double points, more than any other finalist, but he was awarded points mostly for his 68 did you knows. Miyagawa writes on a variety of topics, including dogs, military history and sport.
 * , the second "fastest loser" (Pool B). Most of Resolute's points come from his 9 good articles. He writes mostly on Canadian topics, including ice hockey.
 * , who was joint third "fastest loser" (Pool A). Most of Evan's points come from his 10 good articles, and he writes mostly on meteorology.
 * , who was joint third "fastest loser" (Pool B). Most of Phil's points come from his 9 good articles, 4 of which (more than any other finalist) were eligible for double points. He writes mostly on aeronautics.

We say goodbye to our seven other semi-finalists,, ,, , , and. Everyone still in the competition at this stage has done fantastically well, and contributed greatly to Wikipedia. We're on the home straight now, and we will know our winner in two months.

In other news, preparations for next year's competition have begun with a brainstorming thread. Please, feel free todrop by and share any thoughts you have about how the competition should work next year. Sign ups are not yet open, but will be opened in due course. Watch this space. Further, there has been a discussion about the rule whereby those in the WikiCup must delcare their participation when nominating articles at featured article candidates. This has resulted in a bot being created by new featured article delegate. The bot will leave a message on FAC pages if the nominator is a participant in the WikiCup.

A reminder of the rules: any points scored after August 29 may be claimed for the final round, and please remember to update submission pages promptly. If you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 23:58, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Rick Perry article
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Rick Perry. When removing content, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the content has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use thesandbox. Thank you. It appears that you deleted an image while stating in your edit summary that you were resizing it. Some may consider this action to be a misleading edit summary, possibly it was a mistake. Please be accurate in your edit summaries. Veriss (talk) 06:38, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
 * After ~26236 edits and 6.782 years, your welcome is not only unnecessary, but construably condescending. Furthermore, despite your assumption, itwas my intention to remove content from the Rick Perry article. In your reversion here, you called my edit summary "misleading" in that I removed the image File:Rick Perry for President Logo.png from the article.  My edit summary here was "- WP:NFCC#10c; - image sizing specification"; this described the two changes I'd performed in the single edit: (a) I removed an image (File:Rick Perry for President Logo.png) in contravention of WP:NFCC, and (b) I removed the image sizing specification from File:RickPerry Iowa Fair.jpg IAW WP:IMAGES. I have againremoved File:Rick Perry for President Logo.png from the Rick Perry article IAW WP:NFCC, as well as corrected your accidental placement of the main template inside an image caption.  —   Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124;  21:27, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 September newsletter
We are on this year's home straight, with less than a month to go until the winner of the 2011 WikiCup will be decided. The fight for first place is currently being contested by, and, all of whom have over 200 points. This round has already seen multiple featured articles (1991 Atlantic hurricane season from Hurricanehink and Northrop YF-23 from Sp33dyphil) and a double-scoring featured list (Miyagawa's 1948 Summer Olympics medal table). The scores will likely increase far further before the end of the round on October 31 as everyone ups their pace. There is not much more to say-thoughts about next year's competition are welcome on the WikiCup talk page or the scoring talk page, and signups will open once a few things have been sorted out.

If you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 12:35, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Jarhead (novel).png
 Thanks for uploading File:Jarhead (novel).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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk ) 03:35, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 October newsletter
The 2011 WikiCup is now over, and our new champion is, who joins the exclusive club of the previous winners: (2007),  (2008),  (2009) and  (2010). The final standings were as follows:



Prizes for first, second, third and fourth will be awarded, as will prizes for all those who reached the final eight. Every participant who scored in the competition will receive a ribbon of participation. In addition to the prizes based on placement, the following special prizes will be awarded based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, the prize is awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round.


 * The Featured Article Award:, for his performance in round 2. matched the score, but Casliber won the tiebreaker.
 * The Good Article Award:, for his performance in round 4.
 * The Featured List Award:, for his performance in round 4. matched the score, but Miyagawa won the tiebreaker.
 * The Recognised Topic Award (for good and featured topics):, for his performance in round 3.
 * The Did You Know Award:, for his performance in round 1.
 * The In the News Award:, for his performance in round 1.
 * The Reviewer Award (for good article reviews):, for his performance in round 3.

No prize was awarded for featured pictures, sounds or portals, as none were claimed throughout the competition. The awards will be handed out over the next few days. Congratulations to all our participants, and especially our winners; we've all had fun, and Wikipedia has benefitted massively from our content work.

Preparation for next year's WikiCup is ongoing. Interested parties are invited to sign up and participate in ourstraw polls. It's been a pleasure to work with you all this year, and, whoever's taking part in and running the competition in 2012, we hope to see you all in January! J Milburn and The ed17 00:38, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

2011 WikiCup participation


It was good to have you on board this time around- we hope you enjoyed the competition! In case you are interested, signups for next yearare open. Thanks, J Milburn and The ed17 20:42, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2012 WikiCup
Hello, and welcome to the 2012 WikiCup! The competition officially begins at the start of 2012 (UTC) after which time you may begin to claim points. Your submission page, where you must note any content for which you wish to claim points, can be foundhere, and formatting instructions can be found in hidden comments on the page. A bot will then update the main table, which can be seen on the WikiCup page. The full rules for what will and will not be awarded points can be found atWikiCup/Scoring. There's also a section on that page listing the changes that have been made to the rules this year, so that experienced participants can get up-to-date in a few seconds. One point of which we must remind everyone; you may only claim points for content upon which you have done significant work, and which you have nominated, in 2012. For instance, articles written or good article reviews started in 2011 are noteligible for points.

This round will last until late February, and signups will remain open until the middle of February. If you know of anyone who may like to take part, please let them know about the comeptition; the more the merrier! At the end of this round, the top 64 scorers will progress to the next round, where their scores will reset, and they will be split into pools. Note that, by default, you have been added to our newsletter list; we will be in contact at the end of every month with news. You're welcome to remove yourself from this list if you do not wish to hear from us. Conversely, those interested in following the competition are more than welcome to add themselves to the list. Please direct any questions towards the judges, or on the WikiCup talk page. Good luck! J Milburn (talk) and The ed17(talk) 17:53, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Rampage
My apologies, I've seen redirects portrayed both ways on disambiguation pages, and I'm sorry that I missed it. I know that the way you have the link forRampage (G.I. Joe) is in the preferred format, but I've actually had admins argue with me otherwise (see the link for The Day Will Dawn onThe Avengers disambiguation page). Thanks for bringing it to my attention though! Fortdj33 (talk) 21:34, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, no problem! I'm just glad you took my edits and summaries as amiably as I intended!  —   Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124;  17:42, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 January newsletter
WikiCup 2012 is off to a flying start. At the time of writing, we have 112 contestants; comparable to last year, but slightly fewer than 2010.Signups will remain open for another week, after which time they will be closed for this year. Our currrent far-away leader is, due mostly to his work on a slew of good articles about The X-Files; there remain many such articles waiting to be reviewed at good article candidates. Second place is currently held by, whose points come mostly from good articles about television episodes, although good article reviews, did you knows and an article about a baroness round out the score. In third place is, who has scored 200 points for his work on a single featured article, as well as points for work on others, mostly in the area of pop music. In all, nine users have 100 or more points. However, at the other end of the scale, there are still dozens of participants who are yet to score. Please remember to update your submission pages promptly!

The 64 highest scoring participants will advance to round 2 in a month's time. There, they will be split into eight random groups of eight. The score needed to reach the next round is not at all clear; last year, 8 points guaranteed a place. The year before, 20.

A few participants and their work warrant a mention for achieving "firsts" in this competition.
 * was the first to score, with his good article review of Illinois v. McArthur.
 * was also the first to score points for an article, thanks to his work on Hurricane Debby (1982)- now a good article. Tropical storms have featured heavily in the Cup, and good articles currently have a relatively fast turnaround time for reviews.
 * was the first to score points for a did you know, with Russian submarine K-114 Tula. Military history is another subject which has seen a lot of Cup activity.
 * is also the first person to successfully claim bonus points. Terminator 2: Judgment Day is now a good article, and was eligible for bonus points because the subject was covered on more than 20 other Wikipedias at the start of the competition. It is fantastic to see bonus points being claimed so early!
 * was the first to score points for an In the News entry, with Paedophryne amauensis. The lead image from the article was also used on the main page for a time, and it's certainly eye-catching!
 * was the first to score points for a featured article, and is, at the moment, the only competitor to claim for one. The article, "Halo" (Beyoncé Knowles song), was also worth double points because of its wide coverage. While this is an article that Jivesh and others have worked on for some time, it is undeniable that he has put considerable work into it this year, pushing it over the edge.

We are yet to see any featured lists, featured topics or good topics, but this is unsurprising; firstly, the nomination processes with each of these can take some time, and, secondly, it can take a considerable amount of time to work content to this level. In a similar vein, we have seen only one featured article. The requirement that content must have been worked on this year to be eligible means that we did not expect to see these at the start of the competition. No points have been claimed for featured portals or pictures, but these are not content types which are often claimed; the former has never made a big impact on the WikiCup, while the latter has not done so since 2009's competition.

A quick rules clarification before the regular notices: If you are concerned that another user is claiming points inappropriately, please contact a judge to take a look at the article. Competitors policing one another can create a bad atmosphere, and may lead to inconsistencies and mistakes. Rest assured that we, the judges, are making an effort to check submissions, but it is possible that we will miss something. On a loosely related note: If you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 00:04, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

File:Child cast of Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory at the 2011 Wizard World Chicago.JPG
Nice job on the image! Any chance you can identify the others in the shot and add them to their respective articles as well? Thanks, –Connormah (talk) 04:09, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I actually took individual photos of each of the child cast members, but I screwed up the Ostrum one (he blinked and I didn't realize); that's why I had to extract it (File:Peter Ostrum at the 2011 Wizard World Chicago.jpg).  I'll put up the other individual ones I took later when I have more time.  —   Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124;  04:31, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm also attempting to get some released from flickr, I'll tell you how that goes. Not overly optimistic, though. – Connormah (talk) 04:44, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I'll try to get the other individual photos online either Friday or Saturday; would you like me to drop you a line if I do? —   Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124;  06:13, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 February newsletter
Round 1 is already over! The 64 highest scorers have progressed to round 2. Our highest scorer was, again thanks mostly to a swathe of good articles on The X-Files. In second place was, thanks an impressive list of did you knows about racehorses. Both scored over 400 points. Following behind with over 300 points were,, and. February also saw the competition's first featured list: List of colleges and universities in North Dakota, from. At the other end of the scale, 11 points was enough to secure a place in this round, and some contestants with 10 points made it into the round on a tiebreaker. This is higher than the 8 points that were needed last year, but lower than the 20 points required the year before. The number of points required to progress to round 3 will be significantly higher.

The remaining contestants have been split into 8 pools of 8, named A through H. Round two will finish in two months time on 28 April, when the two highest scorers in each pool, as well as the next 16 highest scorers, will progress to round 3. The pools were entirely random, so while some pools may end up being more competitive than others, this is by chance rather than design.

The judges would like to point out two quick rules reminders. First, any content promoted during the interim period (that is, on or after 27 February) is eligible for points in round 2. Second, any content worked on significantly this year is eligible for points if promoted in this round. On a related note, if you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which would otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCupand the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk •email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 23:56, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

File:62 AW English.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:62 AW English.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Cloudbound (talk) 19:56, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

WP:WikiProject Stargate
I propose a conversion of this Project into a task force. You may improve a consensus by clicking WT:WikiProject Stargate and discussing a proposal. --George Ho (talk) 17:18, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Something from 2006
This is way back in your editing history but you may still wish to take an interest in it. File:Crash Dummies Working.png and File:Crash Dummies Junkbots.png have flawed licenses, both were uploaded under fairuse criteria, and after your suggestion on the talk page the copyright was modified to say they were freely useable here. However these images are derivative works, and two copyrights are at play, that of the photographer and that of the creator of the subject of the image, the photographer is free to release the rights to his image but has no right to release that of the subject. Although policies at Commons and wikipedia differ, reading Derivative works may help. Some one has to decide if these images are still vital to the article and construct a fair use criteria to keep them.--KTo288(talk) 19:52, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Crash Dummies Working.png
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Crash Dummies Working.png, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. KTo288 (talk) 20:23, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I neither uploaded or altered this file. I tagged it as lacking a rationale about six years ago.  —   Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124;  06:46, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Crash Dummies Junkbots.png
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Crash Dummies Junkbots.png, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. KTo288 (talk) 20:23, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I neither uploaded or altered this file. I tagged it as lacking a rationale about six years ago.  —   Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124;  06:46, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
 Neil N   talk to me  01:34, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Bully / Sugarbomb
You cite no grounds for removing my edit. Please be part of the solution, not part of the problem here. Geĸrίtzl (talk) 16:04, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I didn't explain my reversion because it was the same rationale as the previous reversion. You were previously reverted by  because, in contravention of WP:DAB and WP:DABMOS, you're trying to list a disambiguation entry with no links to any articles.  That's useless with regards to a disambiguation page's purpose of redirecting users to the articles for which they're looking.  If there were an article for the album, or an article for the band which discussed the album, then it would be an appropriate entry; there is not, and so it doesn't need to be listed.  —   fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124;  20:06, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Um, wrong. I first posted that WITH TWO LINKS to two articles. Someone deleted it saying links were not allowed. So I reverted but removed the links. Are links allowed, or not??? Geĸrίtzl (talk) 14:47, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
 * No, you originally listed it with two external links; I'm talking about internal Wikipedia links. Let me take you through your three edits:
 * Edit 1: There are no links to any Wikipedia articles in the entry you made. Further, there are not supposed to be any references on disambiguation pages (WP:DABNOT).
 * Edit 2: There are no links to any Wikipedia articles in the entry you made.
 * Edit 3: There are no links to any Wikipedia articles in the entry you made.
 * Do you understand what I mean about links to Wikipedia articles versus links to external sites? Disambiguation pages' only purpose is to provide readers with a list of Wikipedia articles that have similar names or similarly-named topics.  Neither the song "Bully", the album Bully, nor the artist Sugarbomb have articles on the English Wikipedia, and therefore there's nothing to link to.  Does that make sense?  —   fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124;  21:47, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay, WP articles. That's a pretty lame rule, that there has to be a WP article, but I went ahead and made a stub page for the band and made the link from "Bully". Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gekritzl (talk • contribs) 21:56, 5 June 2012

Re: Tuvix
Hey, I posted some of my thoughts at the WT:TREK thread. If you have any follow-up queries let me know. You seem like you did a thorough survey of a lot of the material, but once I've got access back to my databases I'll try and see if there's anything extra I can find. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 22:47, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Awesome, thanks so much! —   fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124;  05:50, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Heather O'Rourke as Carol Anne.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Heather O'Rourke as Carol Anne.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:06, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads-up, I've reverted the orphaning of the image. —   fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124;  20:41, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

"Oh, Bo, play that oboe"
FYI, Bo Burnham actually does play an oboe for a few seconds at the end of the "Oh Bo" video, although I agree with you that it probably doesn't rise to the level of being one of his instruments for purposes of the infobox. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 17:23, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * You're right, I didn't know that. I just reflexively reverted it as an addition without any substantiating citations for verifiability.  I agree with you though, if he's actually playing it in the video, it's still not a standard of his.  —   fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124;  17:40, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

You're invited to Wikipedia Takes St. Louis!


Dust off your Polaroid camera and pack your best lenses. The first-ever Wikipedia Takes St. Louis photo hunt kicks off Sat, Sept. 15, at 12:30pm in downtown St. Louis. Tour the streets of the Rome of the West with other Wikipedians and even learn a little St. Louis history. This event is a fun and collaborative way to enhance St. Louis articles with visual content. Novice photographers welcome! Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 14:26, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

You're userbox broke, but I fixed it
You're userbox broke, but I fixed it (see Wikipedia_talk:Redirects_for_discussion). Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 10:15, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Hey, I appreciate you doing that. It's actually the brainchild of ; I just moved it into my userspace as a part of the German userbox solution back in 2006.  I don't even have it on a watchlist, so thanks for letting me know!  —   fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124;  21:38, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Talkback at User:trlkly
Yes, you say you're watching, but I know that notifications like that are often done by bot, so you might not have watched my talk page. Hence my request that you do so. Here's a link to the section in question: — trlkly 22:38, 21 October 2012 (UTC)