User talk:Grapple X/Archive 5

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)

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)

Aqualung/Jethro Tull album
You are quite correct that my contribution was unsourced. I couldn't find a source.

My parents gave me an electronics construction kit in about 1972 (I was about 12). I built a radio receiver, with a piezo earpiece, which I used to listen to pop music in bed, "under the covers". I listened to the whole album; I had never heard anything similar. It blew me away, and the memory is very vivid.

Obviously this is WP:OR. But I had hoped it might stay in the article for a few days longer, so that someone else might come along with a WP:RS. There are sources for Tull doing JP sessions both before and after the release of this album; but those sessions (a) have dates, and (b) are still in circulation. It's harder to find evidence that a certain very popular album was played as released, in full, without interruptions, by a particular radio DJ on a particular date.

Anyway, your revert is correct (if perhaps a little hasty), and I did expect to be reverted. MrDemeanour (talk) 10:00, 27 August 2019 (UTC)


 * While I don't doubt the information is true, it's never advisable to add something to an article in the hope someone else will cite it--this kind of thing could however be brought up on an article's talk page, which would be watched by anyone watching the article. As to finding a source for it, I suppose it's probably the kind of thing that wouldn't be readily stated anywhere, since transcribing the contents of all of Peel's shows would be an enormous task for any publication, so I'm not sure where to even begin looking, sorry. G RAPPLE   X  11:45, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

September 2019 GOCE Newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:58, 24 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)

FA review for the article Dangal (film)
Hi, I saw that you were interested in films here, and I am not sure whether you will help me in this or not, but this is to inform you that I feel that the article Dangal (film) is ready to get featured. I have been observing and editing this article for about 6 months now, and now I feel it meets all the WP:FACR, and is perfectly ready for WP:FAC. Should I go ahead and place it for review? Any suggestions? Thanks! Justlookingforthemoment (talk) 07:21, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

GOCE December 2019 Newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:05, 4 December 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)

DYK for Anne's Song
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 12:01, 16 February 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)

Thank you
Thank you for being one of the only sane people in that ANI thread. I'm happy to hear that at least some of us don't condone "ironic" racist "jokes". Praxidicae (talk) 11:55, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
 * It's genuinely got my ire up this morning. I had assumed a community building an encyclopaedia would be more sensible than this. Gʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ˣ 11:57, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:18, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Laborintus II (album)
Hello:

The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Laborintus II (album) has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 20:38, 12 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Greatly appreciated, thank you very much. Gʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ˣ 21:43, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Film articles
The film director Akira Kurosawa currently has a fairly good GA biography which might be brought up to FAC. The instructions at FAC indicate you might be a co-nominator/mentor since I have not done a featured article but only GA articles. Would you being interested in a co-nomination/mentor for this film director? JohnWickTwo (talk) 19:03, 20 February 2020 (UTC)


 * I wouldn't be comfortable being named as co-nominator as I've not actually contributed to the article, but I can have a look at it to see what points might be worth working on in the mean time and can help address anything that comes up in a potential FAC. Try listing it for peer review for now, or even just bringing up a comment at the Film wikiproject asking for opinions, and I'll contribute to that--it means you might also get a few other eyes on it as well. Gʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ˣ 20:51, 20 February 2020 (UTC)


 * That sounds good, especially if you have comments to improve the film biography further. Someone has placed your name on the mentor list at FAC for films and then I left the message for you above. It seems that editors new to FAC like myself need to have an experienced FAC editor to team with in order for things to move forward constructively. JohnWickTwo (talk) 13:17, 21 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Looking it over, it is quite a lengthy article--10,000 words is usually the higher limit on when an article is better served by summary style; and while this is present in some sections it feels like the biography might still be over-long. I wouldn't lose anything from it as yet but be prepared to possibly trim it at FAC. It's a good idea to comb through it currently to make sure that the images are all used appropriately, that no passages go uncited, and that the refs are formatted uniformly and don't lead to any dead links--it's probably unfeasible to check every source thoroughly without going mad right away, but try taking a random sampling of the sources to check they support what they're being attributed to. Formal prose isn't my strong suit but it looks fine to me here; that's often something harshly scrutinised at FAC however so expect to see it gone over with a fine-tooth comb. Like I say, I'm happy to assist at FAC so you'd still have someone mentoring the process but I just wouldn't want a formal co-nomination for an article I didn't write. Gʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ˣ 13:07, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for getting back on the week-end. The images went through a pretty thorough review which should still hold up here . There was also a fairly long FAC 2 years ago which you should see which did not have a big turn-out and the bio was not promoted. I could add some information from the Wikipedia article for the List of creative works of Kurosawa, though I hesitate when you say the article is already long. I'll trim or rewrite any paragraphs to shorten which you identify to me. Nice of you to offer to mentor this, and how does this work; do I nominate and then you co-sign as mentor under the nomination? Let me know the best way to do it. JohnWickTwo (talk) 17:20, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't worry about adding material from the "list of creative works" article--so long as that article is appropriately summarised then you don't need to include too much material from it. It's fine as is. And if you nominate the article as FAC I'll just keep an eye on it to assist with any comments, there's no need to formally co-sign anything, it's just so you're not responding to everything solo. Gʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ˣ 22:25, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Have just put in the nom and will look forward to your comments. If my intro comments there need to be adjusted then feel free to adjust them. JohnWickTwo (talk) 00:23, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Good luck. I've watchlisted the nomination page and I'll keep an eye on any points that are raised. In the meantime, have a look over other active nominations and get a feel for the things that reviewers tend to look for. Reviewing a nomination can be a little daunting so familiarise yourself with the issues that tend to come up, with how things like source and image reviews are conducted, etc--it will help you with this nomination but also the more comfortable you are with reviewing, the more you can add to other reviews to help the process. By Monday I should be able to have a little more time to look at anything that comes up but don't be put off if things move slowly, it's a new nomination and these things often work back from the oldest ones. Gʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ˣ 02:48, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
 * One week into the assessment and your music article nomination appears to be getting more comments than the film director article. Any concerns? JohnWickTwo (talk) 01:18, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't consider it unusual. It's a lengthy article and so it's harder to review, plus it's a little more recent. Remember, there are articles on the nominations page that have been there for nearly two months--this is a slow but steady process. Gʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ˣ 11:24, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
 * There is a suggestion to add a tools extension on the assessment page for Harvard errors extensions. Have you added this to your account previously or currently to check your own articles and this biography article? JohnWickTwo (talk) 13:05, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I installed it and had a look; it seems that the errors amount to several of the sources listed in the bibliography not being used--the script can detect that no harv cites actually point to those sources. If that's the case it would make sense to remove them or move them to a "further reading" section. I don't think there's an issue with comprehensiveness so if a source isn't used I think it's okay to just not use it. Would maybe be worth looking to see if any of the sources are just not cited properly but I think they're just listed without being cited. Gʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ˣ 14:27, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I also installed it. It looks like it will not let me move unused cites to further reading as you suggest, since it still gives the uncited error flags. These further reading cites can be left or deleted as needed. Otherwise, the references bibliography citations appears to be clean. Leave them in or should I delete them? JohnWickTwo (talk) 22:04, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

The flags are okay if they're not treated as references; a false positive can be overlooked if it's in the right place. Maybe removing the "ref=harv" anchor in the book template would help? Gʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ˣ 10:14, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I've added the Yamamoto image data at Commons which you indicated as useful on the review page earlier this week and as requested by NikkiM earlier today. Is that enough info at Commons for the image? JohnWickTwo (talk) 03:00, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Really you'd need to show where the image was first published so as to prove its dating. The article might be better without it if we can't demonstrate that the image is public domain. Try reverse image searching the picture online in case it turns up a source discussing it? Gʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ˣ 20:57, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * That's a good suggestion which I have related at the review. The only option seems to be a movie still on Commons from a film directed by Yamamoto where Kurosawa was the assistant director here . JohnWickTwo (talk) 21:31, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * That's not a bad alternative. The caption would allow you to mention the relationship while illustrating something they both worked on. It might be a better choice. Gʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ˣ 14:53, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Another editor has joined the discussion and seems to be on the same point which you raised a few days ago about shortening the prose in parts. He has presented a schedule on the review page. JohnWickTwo (talk) 16:22, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
 * F&F is a much stronger copy-editor than I am so I would trust his instinct. If the overall word count can come down without losing information then that's the best way forward. Gʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ˣ 21:37, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
 * F&F is underway and the article appears to have transitioned from the new nom category to the older nom category. I am receiving notification from the real world that I will need to be out of state for at least several weeks without access to my computer due to real world obligations. Since the main issues for this Wikipedia article appear to be going reasonably well, would it be possible for you to look in on the article and keep the review going forward. I have already left some back up images in case they are needed though F&F seems to know exactly what he wants to accomplish. He also seems open to word choice suggestions on his edits if you could look in from time to time. You are welcome to take credit for the article if all goes well and I'm somewhat chagrined by real world obligations and by not being around for this especially with all your good steering comments. In either case let me know the correct procedure is if this does or does not work for you since I will be around for a few more days. JohnWickTwo (talk) 00:39, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
 * No worries; these things happen. I'll keep an eye on the nomination; if you've been happy with F&F's changes so far I would suggest to drop them a note to say you're fine to let any of their changes stand. Gʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ˣ 00:51, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that. F&F apparently did know about the on-going discussion here on your Talk page and possibly you could mention to him this on-going Talk page discussion for him to continue with his edits. Real world notification are taking over as of today and possibly you can keep the review with F&F moving forward. JohnWickTwo (talk) 12:58, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Good luck with the commitments. I'll try to keep things to the review page but if wants to review this discussion I've pinged them. Gʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ˣ 13:08, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
 * :) Silly me. Had no knowledge of this discussion.  Sorry about getting a little frazzled on the FAC review page. Thanks, GrappleX for pinging me.  OK, so now I understand.  I'm happy to do this whichever way it works for everyone.  John if you have to be away, no probs; GrappleX is a very smart editor, so he'll keep me on the straight and narrow.  John: obviously I can't guarantee that it will be promoted, but I'll do the best I can if you trust me, that is.   Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  13:27, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Director's Cut
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Director's Cut you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kingsif -- Kingsif (talk) 22:20, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Director's Cut
The article The Director's Cut you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:The Director's Cut for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kingsif -- Kingsif (talk) 18:40, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Director's Cut
The article The Director's Cut you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Director's Cut for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kingsif -- Kingsif (talk) 20:41, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Quiet in Heaven/Song of Liberty
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Quiet in Heaven/Song of Liberty you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MarioSoulTruthFan -- MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 15:20, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Quiet in Heaven/Song of Liberty
The article Quiet in Heaven/Song of Liberty you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Quiet in Heaven/Song of Liberty for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MarioSoulTruthFan -- MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 19:01, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Quiet in Heaven/Song of Liberty
The article Quiet in Heaven/Song of Liberty you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Quiet in Heaven/Song of Liberty for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MarioSoulTruthFan -- MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 15:02, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Anne's Song
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Anne's Song you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MarioSoulTruthFan -- MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 00:01, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Anne's Song
The article Anne's Song you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Anne's Song for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MarioSoulTruthFan -- MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 14:41, 3 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)

Your GA nomination of Anne's Song
The article Anne's Song you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Anne's Song for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MarioSoulTruthFan -- MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 18:01, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Wikipedia featured topics Kolberg class cruisers


A tag has been placed on Category:Wikipedia featured topics Kolberg class cruisers requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. This message was automatically delivered by QEDKbot. 01:52, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Wikipedia featured topics Königsberg class cruisers (1915)


A tag has been placed on Category:Wikipedia featured topics Königsberg class cruisers (1915) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. This message was automatically delivered by QEDKbot. 01:53, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Could someone help me with my article Laura Harrier?
It's a Good Article and a current Featured Article nominee. It's been reviewed and edited significantly and three editors told me to look for other editors to review it. Here's the featured article page: Laura Harrier FAC. Please help. Thanks. Factfanatic1 (talk) 07:23, 18 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)

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

TFA
Thank you today for your share to Episode 14 (Twin Peaks), introduced: "Another week, another television episode (sorry...). This one is the culmination of one of the larger pop-culture mysteries of the 1990s, finally revealing who killed Laura Palmer; as such I'd avoid it if you don't want the series spoilt for you (it is really good)."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:51, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Good Article Reassessment of Dave Stamper
Dave Stamper, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. --Animalparty! (talk) 01:05, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

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)

Nomination of Marita Covarrubias for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Marita Covarrubias, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Articles for deletion/Marita Covarrubias until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:04, 6 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)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:47, 12 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)

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)

DYK for Tonic Immobility
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 00:03, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

DYK for List of songs recorded by Chuck Mosley
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:03, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank for good DYK reviewing in August! I liked yesterday's Main page, with 4 bolded names I brought there, all in memory: the TFA, nominated for a missed user, the pictured DYK (Alfred Biolek), and two under Recent deaths, Siegfried Matthus and Teresa Żylis-Gara. August harvest. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:23, 31 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Sounds like the fruits of a fine harvest to me, well done with it all. Gʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ˣ 21:50, 31 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)

Your GA nomination of Another Body Murdered
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Another Body Murdered you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 21:01, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Digging the Grave
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Digging the Grave you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 11:40, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ricochet (Faith No More song)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Ricochet (Faith No More song) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 11:41, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Another Body Murdered
The article Another Body Murdered you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Another Body Murdered for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 11:41, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Digging the Grave
The article Digging the Grave you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Digging the Grave for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 18:40, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ricochet (Faith No More song)
The article Ricochet (Faith No More song) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Ricochet (Faith No More song) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 18:40, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Another Body Murdered
The article Another Body Murdered you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Another Body Murdered for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 09:21, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Digging the Grave
The article Digging the Grave you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Digging the Grave for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 09:22, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ricochet (Faith No More song)
The article Ricochet (Faith No More song) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Ricochet (Faith No More song) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 09:22, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Evidence (Faith No More song)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Evidence (Faith No More song) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 13:01, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Evidence (Faith No More song)
The article Evidence (Faith No More song) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Evidence (Faith No More song) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 18:20, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Evidence (Faith No More song)
The article Evidence (Faith No More song) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Evidence (Faith No More song) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 12:21, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Recent edits with apostrophe convention in decade
I noticed you made an edit to primary color that edited a quote from a source to adjust the convention of having an apostrophe in a reference to a decade. I see that you've made a large number of such edits across many different pages recently. I'm not sure that it's a good idea to enforce this convention across so many pages...I haven't checked to see that you haven't altered quotes in other pages, but you may want to check that however you are going about making these edits. It seems that each article can have its own convention, and it seems that using an apostrophe is accepted convention. Maneesh (talk) 01:52, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I've been actively trying to avoid editing anything in quotes although it seems that one slipped my attention; however MOS:DECADE does specify not to use the apostrophe here so although it may be acceptable by some style guides, it's not included in ours ("always use four digits as in the 1980s. Do not use the 1980's"). However yes, if I've mistakenly altered one in a quote that was an error on my part and I've intended to leave those typos alone when I see them. 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ X 09:44, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

September 2021
Hello. I have noticed that you edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! User:力 (power~enwiki, π,  ν ) 16:48, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
 * If you plant to do a substantial number of similar minor edits in a row, please consider using an editing tool that will automatically populate the edit summary. User:力 (power~enwiki, π,  ν ) 16:49, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. I generally leave a summary when the edit isn't self explanatory (ie not for small typo fixes or markup fixes) but I can try to note those too going forward. 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ X 17:18, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Anonymous (Tomahawk album)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Anonymous (Tomahawk album) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 20:00, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Triple Crown


It might interest you to know of the 14 recipients of the Timeless Triple Crown, yours is for the highest number of articles :). I'm also happy for you to update your list of articles in your standard Triple Crown award as you clearly understand the criteria, though I'd prefer if we don't encourage editors in general to do the same. Cheers. Damien Linnane (talk) 03:44, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Anonymous (Tomahawk album)
The article Anonymous (Tomahawk album) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Anonymous (Tomahawk album) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 16:20, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Anonymous (Tomahawk album)
The article Anonymous (Tomahawk album) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Anonymous (Tomahawk album) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 09:42, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

List of songs recorded by Chuck Mosley
Hello:

The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article List of songs recorded by Chuck Mosley has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Best of luck with the FLC.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 15:42, 21 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Much appreciated, thank you very much. 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 15:43, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Another Body Murdered
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 12:03, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Ricochet (Faith No More song)
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 12:02, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Digging the Grave
— Maile (talk) 00:03, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Out Where the Buses Don't Run
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Out Where the Buses Don't Run you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 20:20, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Out Where the Buses Don't Run
The article Out Where the Buses Don't Run you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Out Where the Buses Don't Run for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 08:40, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Renaming the 1970s–1980s section on horror film
Dear Grapple X I appreciate what what you edit on horror film I have a request for you and it involves editing horror film again it's not you know the 1890s–1910s section it's fine that way because 1910s is 20 years apart from 1890s but the 1970s–1980s section 1970s is only 10 years apart from 1980s is it okay if you change it into the 1970s and 1980s section you know just change the "–" into an "and" that would make it sound better 1970s and 1980s. Grapple wyz (talk) 18:52, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

The reason I assume the 1970s–1980s section is a typo can you change into the 1970s and 1980s section? Grapple wyz (talk) 18:57, 3 October 2021 (UTC)


 * If you wish to make any changes to the article, by all means feel free. Any recent edits I've made would simply have been small typo fixes and I'm not involved in actively expanding or revamping it, you're free to jump in with any improvements you see fit. 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 20:05, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Well could you least improve the 1970s–1980s section on horror film to become a 1970s and 1980s section it would be just one minor edit and you where the last one to edit horror film I was you could do it for everyone Grapple wyz (talk) 20:38, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Do you think these new decade sections would make any difference on horror film? 1890s–1910s 1920s 1930s 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s and 1980s 1990s 2000s 2010s Grapple wyz (talk) 20:47, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

I would do it myself but the article and the talk page are both protected I was wondering if you could deliver them our message. Grapple wyz (talk) 20:57, 3 October 2021 (UTC)


 * I'm not actively involved with this article at all, but looking at why its talk page has been protected, it's connected to an editor repeatedly requesting the same change you're asking for now, which leads me to believe this is an attempt at sock puppeteering. I'm not interested in this article nor in aiding in socking, please move along. 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 21:25, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Out Where the Buses Don't Run
The article Out Where the Buses Don't Run you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Out Where the Buses Don't Run for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 13:01, 6 October 2021 (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.

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).

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

DYK for Evidence (Faith No More song)
 Schwede 66  00:02, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

GOCE copyedit request
• 📝 ) 18:16, 15 October 2021 (UTC) — Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:16, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

GAN FAC for article you read
Thank you for reviewing my DYK nomination, Grapple X! Given your comment, I just opened a GAN for Seventy-Six (novel). Since you already read through it for the DYK review, do you feel like you could lead the GAN review as well? If so, you'll find it here: Good article nominations. Thanks in advance! Dugan Murphy (talk) 16:45, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I'll have a look at it, if I don't get to it tonight then I should be able to review it during the day tomorrow. From what I saw at DYK it should be pretty much ready to go but I'll give it a more thorough review since it's a higher standard than DYK now, and it might be a good idea to comb it over now in case you take it further later. 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 19:22, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Great. I would like to take it to FAN next, so a thorough GAN review in advance of that will be very helpful. Looking forward to it! Dugan Murphy (talk) 20:51, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
 * The FA nomination for this article is now live: Featured article candidates/Seventy-Six (novel)/archive1. I am writing this to take you up on your offer to add a source and image review to the FAC, since you did that work already for the GAN. I really appreciate you helping to improve this article. Before I opened the FAN, I expanded the article's Reception section per your comment, and I think it is a better article for it. If you have any comments on that post-GAN expansion, please raise them in the FAC. Thanks again for the help! Dugan Murphy (talk) 20:36, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I'll get those comments added to it soon, but make sure you add it to WP:FAC as well or other reviewers won't see it. Just add the nomination to the top of the list there. 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 22:41, 18 October 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

WP:INDENT
Howdy. It's your post, so... do it your way. GoodDay (talk) 17:44, 30 October 2021 (UTC)


 * WP:INDENT is an informal essay, and either way does not offer any recommendation about threading one's own follow-ups. It's easier to see that a second comment was added in a separate edit if they're indented separately, and avoids comments appearing to run together into a wall of text. ᵹʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 17:52, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

A catalyst moment?
Right after I (more or less) left the RFC on "Wheelchair language", in a huff over another matter. It quickly increased the 'Yes' side's strength in numbers. You may (or may not) want to thank another editor, for my departure from the RFC ;) GoodDay (talk) 18:50, 5 November 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

DYK for Living the Book of My Life
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:03, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

1914 Lubin vault fire
Thank you very much for reviewing my DYK nomination and for your comments. Strudjum (talk) 15:37, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

UEFA Euro 2020 Final source review
Hey Grapple X, a bit of an ask I know, but I was wondering if you be able to do a source review at the UEFA Euro 2020 Final FAC? Trying to squeeze it over the line before the end of the WikiCup, but of course no stress if you can't get to it or aren't inclined. Cheers. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 19:44, 26 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Just getting to bed here but if you ping me on the nomination page I'll be able to look at it in the office tomorrow morning. 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 20:47, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination
Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/David Arquette in World Championship Wrestling at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with db-g7, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 00:47, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Reggie Parks
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 31 October 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)

DYK for Umberto Lenzi filmography
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 9 November 2021 (UTC)