User talk:Guerillero/Archives/2021/March

Pre-FAC Peer Review for Lion Attacking a Dromedary
Please give me your thoughts, here -- Guerillero  Parlez Moi 05:10, 1 March 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)

Notice of noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. (Direct link). &#58;bloodofox: (talk) 05:17, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

AE archiving
About 2 reports have been automatically archived today without action. You had commented on one. Can you unarchive both? Thanks. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 13:24, 12 March 2021 (UTC)


 * I have unarchived them for 24 hours -- Guerillero  Parlez Moi 18:25, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

DYK for MewithoutYou discography
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 00:01, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Arbcom statement
Your statement seems out of character to me. How can a remedy that no one has voted in support of be "an incredible show of the disdain you all have"? I know you know that drafting arbs sometimes include principles, FOFs, and remedies they don't agree with; sometimes they include mutually-exclusive ones, for the purpose of presenting options to choose from. Including an option isn't an endorsement by the drafting arbs or any arbs. Also, this year's committee hasn't declined any admin cases. Surely you're not holding this year's committee accountable for what past committees did (especially given the explicitly reformist platforms of many of this year's arbs)? I agree with your fundamental point, and I'd agree more with your statement if those remedies had majority support, but as no one has voted in favor of them yet, your statement has left me scratching my head. I guess it would make more sense to me written as, "If Remedies 5 and 1.5 pass, they would be insults to the Wikipedia community and an incredible show of distain for the core work of the committee: arbitrating." Levivich harass/hound 17:16, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Having been on the other side, these sort of reminders are added because someone on the committee wants it to happen. I wanted to send the statement that that passing the buck back to the community is not okay. -- In actu (Guerillero) Parlez Moi 19:45, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Modest flowers
Thank you for what you said on Yoninah's talk, - see also Wikipedia Signpost/2021-03-28/Obituary! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:31, 29 March 2021 (UTC)