User talk:Igordebraga/Archive5

Welcome to the 2013 WikiCup
Hello, Igordebraga, and welcome to the 2013 WikiCup! Your submissions' page is here. The first round will last until the end of February, at which point the top 64 scorers will advance to the second round. We will be in touch at the end of every month, and signups are going to remain open until the end of January; if you know of anyone else who may like to take part, please let them know! A few reminders:
 * The rules can be found here. There have been a few changes from last year, which are listed on that page.
 * Anything you submit must have been nominated and promoted in 2013, and you need to have completed significant work upon it in 2013. (The articles you review at good article reviews does not need to have been nominated in 2013, but you do need to have started and completed the review in 2013.) We will be checking.
 * If you feel that another competitor is breaking the rules or abusing the competition in some way, please let a judge know. Please do not remove entries from the submissions' pages of others yourself.
 * Don't worry about calculating precisely how many points everything is worth. The bot will do that. The bot may occasionally get something wrong- let a judge know, or post on the WikiCup talk page if that happens.
 * Please try to be prompt in updating submissions' pages so that they can be double-checked.

Overall, however, don't worry, and have fun. It doesn't matter if you make the odd mistake; these things happen. Questions can be asked on the WikiCup talk page. Good luck! J Milburn and The ed17 13:03, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sanguinarium
The article Sanguinarium 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 needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Sanguinarium for things which need to be addressed.  Ruby  2010/  2013  00:49, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I got two more reviews added in. Strangely enough, they are sorta positive about the episode. They're not much, but they're the best I could do. Hope that helps.-- Gen. Quon   (Talk)   15:09, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Bond topic
Hi Igor, The good news is that we have Wikipedia talk:Featured topic questions until the end of February to get it to GA. The article is in pretty good shape as it stands and I think it could go through fairly easily, but there is a problem of stability, with too many people still seeing the film for the first time and wanting to come in and have their say. Ideally I would want to get it through before mid-Feb, as that is when the DVD versions come out and, once again, everyone is going to want to have their say, which will be awkward if we're in the middle of a review at the time. The other option—if we can't get it through because of the stability issue—is to let the topic lapse in the short term and re-apply once the article has calmed down a bit and passed GA. That's not an ideal scenario, but it is a possibility if the worst comes to the worst. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 16:00, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Skyfall through as GA, so the topic is nice and safe. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 02:34, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter (4th Quarter 2012)
 The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter

Volume 5, No. 4 — 4th Quarter, 2012

Previous issue | Index | Next issue  Project At a Glance As of Q4 2012, the project has:


 * 150 Featured Articles
 * 50 Featured Lists
 * 6 Featured Topics
 * 3 Featured Pictures


 * 45 A-Class Articles
 * 555 Good Articles
 * 12 Good Topics

Content


 * Changes to Featured and Good content
 * News items and announcements


 * Feature: "Strengthening and utilizing WP:VGs inter-language links"
 * Interview: Khanassassin

Project Navigation

To receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to sign up on the distribution list. This newsletter was delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 03:20, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * VG Project Main pages
 * Main project – talk
 * Project category – talk
 * Portal – talk
 * VG Project Departments
 * Assessment – talk
 * Cleanup – talk
 * Peer review – talk
 * Reference library – talk
 * Newsletter – talk
 * Video game images – talk
 * Video game images – talk

DYK for Predatoroonops
Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:17, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 January newsletter
Signups are now closed; we have our final 127 contestants for this year's competition. 64 contestants will make it to the next round at the end of February, but we're already seeing strong scoring compared to previous years. currently leads, with 358 points. At this stage in 2012, the leader had 342 points, while in 2011, the leader had 228 points. We also have a large number of scorers when compared with this stage in previous years. was the first competitor to score this year, as he was last year, with a detailed good article review. Some other firsts:
 * was also the first to score for an article, with the good article Hurricane Gordon (2000). Again, this is a repeat of last year!
 * was the first to score for a did you know, with Marquis Flowers.
 * was the first to score for an in the news, with 2013 Houphouët-Boigny stampede.
 * was the first to score for a featured list, with list of Billboard Social 50 number-one artists.
 * was the first to score for a featured picture, with File:Thure de Thulstrup - L. Prang and Co. - Battle of Gettysburg - Restoration by Adam Cuerden.jpg.

Featured articles, portals and topics, as well as good topics, are yet to feature in the competition.

This year, the bonus points system has been reworked, with bonus points on offer for old articles prepared for did you know, and "multiplier" points reworked to become more linear. For details, please see WikiCup/Scoring. There have been some teething problems as the bot has worked its way around the new system, but issues should mostly be ironed out- please report any problems to the WikiCup talk page. Here are some participants worthy of note with regards to the bonus points:


 * was the first to score bonus points, with Portland-class cruiser, a good article.
 * has the highest overall bonus points, as well as the highest scoring article, thanks to his work on Enrico Fermi, now a good article. The biography of such a significant figure to the history of science warrants nearly five times the normal score.
 * claimed bonus points for René Vautier and Nicolas de Fer, articles that did not exist on the English Wikipedia at the start of the year; a first for the WikiCup. The articles were eligible for bonus points because of fact they were both covered on a number of other Wikipedias.

Also, a quick mention of, who may well have already written the oddest article of the WikiCup this year: did you know that the Fucking mayor objected to Fucking Hell on the grounds that there was no Fucking brewery? The gauntlet has been thrown down; can anyone beat it?

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. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 00:26, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Crimewave
I've begun a GA review for Crimewave; take a look on the talk page. Thanks as always for your work, Khazar2 (talk) 05:04, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

WP:NBA at WP:FAC
I see that you were once active at WP:FAC. Of the 6 WP:NBA WP:FAs, you reviewed 3 of them (Michael Jordan, Yao Ming and Toronto Raptors). No NBA FAC has passed since Magic Johnson did on 2009-04-19. Recently, I have been frustrated by almost no comments on my FAC nominations of Juwan Howard. I was wondering if you might be willing to participate in the review for Howard if I renominated him in a couple of months.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:43, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Featured article candidates/Juwan Howard/archive5 now open.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:58, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I responded to your comment from a couple of days ago and would appreciate further commentary.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:16, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 February newsletter
Round 1 is now over. The top 64 scorers have progressed to round 2, where they have been randomly split into eight pools of eight. At the end of April, the top two from each pool, as well as the 16 highest scorers from those remaining, will progress to round 3. Commiserations to those eliminated; if you're interested in still being involved in the WikiCup, able and willing reviewers will always be needed, and if you're interested in getting involved with other collaborative projects, take a look at the WikiWomen's Month discussed below.

Round 1 saw 21 competitors with over 100 points, which is fantastic; that suggests that this year's competition is going to be highly competative. Our lower scores indicate this, too: A score of 19 was required to reach round 2, which was significantly higher than the 11 points required in 2012 and 8 points required in 2011. The score needed to reach round 3 will be higher, and may depend on pool groupings. In 2011, 41 points secured a round 3 place, while in 2012, 65 was needed. Our top three scorers in round 1 were:
 * , primarily for an array of warship GAs.
 * , primarily for an array of did you knows and good articles, some of which were awarded bonus points.
 * , due in no small part to Canis Minor, a featured article awarded a total of 340 points. A joint submission with, this is the highest scoring single article yet submitted in this year's competition.

Other contributors of note include:
 * , whose Portal:Massachusetts is the first featured portal this year. The featured portal process is one of the less well-known featured processes, and featured portals have traditionally had little impact on WikiCup scores.
 * , whose Mycena aurantiomarginata was the first featured article this year.
 * and, who both claimed points for articles in the Major League Baseball tie-breakers topic, the first topic points in the competition.
 * , who claimed for the first full good topic with the Casting Crowns studio albums topic.

Featured topics have still played no part in this year's competition, but once again, a curious contribution has been offered by : did you know that there is a Shit Brook in Shropshire? With April Fools' Day during the next round, there will probably be a good chance of more unusual articles...

March sees the WikiWomen's History Month, a series of collaborative efforts to aid the women's history WikiProject to coincide with Women's History Month and International Women's Day. A number of WikiCup participants have already started to take part. The project has a to-do list of articles needing work on the topic of women's history. Those interested in helping out with the project can find articles in need of attention there, or, alternatively, add articles to the list. Those interested in collaborating on articles on women's history are also welcome to use the WikiCup talk page to find others willing to lend a helping hand. Another collaboration currently running is an an effort from WikiCup participants to coordinate a number of Easter-themed did you know articles. Contributions are welcome!

A few final administrative issues. From now on, submission pages will need only a link to the article and a link to the nomination page, or, in the case of good article reviews, a link to the review only. See your submissions' page for details. This will hopefully make updating submission pages a little less tedious. 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. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) J Milburn (talk) 11:59, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks...
I thought about submitting the article FIFA Club World Cup to become a GA nomination. But I have seen the GA nomination reviews to be extremely backed-up. And seeing how it is going there, it could be months before anything gets seen with the article I am trying to promote. Between that and waiting for two more weeks, it simply seems better to wait the two weeks to promote it to the best quality label than one that will get it months later. EpidemiaCorinthiana (talk) 23:06, 11 March 2013 (UTC)


 * If you would help me support it, I will nominate it as a GA. Would you? EpidemiaCorinthiana (talk) 15:28, 13 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Here it is. Just click on the "follow this link" link, please... EpidemiaCorinthiana (talk) 17:51, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Bleed Like Me
Someone picked up the review 5 minutes before I was about to! Never mind. The only thing I'd say is that the date format i you've got is American, rather than British. Cheers! - SchroCat (talk) 13:37, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

FAC comment
Hi. Would you care to comment at my nomination here for the article Song of Innocence? A support, oppose, or any other comment to start the process would be appreciated. If not, no need to reply to this. Dan56 (talk) 00:14, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Bleed Like Me
There are some serious prose issues in the article, I hope you can address them. Come to the review page. — Indian: BIO  · [ ChitChat  ] 07:31, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

The College Dropout promotion
Hey, I just bumped The College Dropout up to GA. Thanks for addressing all my review points and thanks for your patience. Great work! --Brandt Luke Zorn (talk) 18:35, 9 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Certainly, I can probably get to it later today or tomorrow. I also have two album articles up at GAC at the moment, Far Side Virtual and Rain in England, if you'd like to review either. --Brandt Luke Zorn (talk) 18:52, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Fred Baron (producer)
Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Question about The Evil Dead
Hi there Igordebraga, hope you're doing well! :)

Just curious, how'd you come by to nominate The Evil Dead as a WP:GAN candidate, it appears you don't have any contributions to that article page's edit history, erm, going back to its earliest existence?

No worries or anything, I'm just a bit confused?

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:33, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the helpful explanation! I'll take a look, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:56, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh and also - Did you see the cites needed and unsourcedsect I added to The Evil Dead? &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:58, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Update: Your edits were undone with no explanation? &mdash; Cirt (talk) 06:05, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Please see Talk:The Evil Dead. Unfortunately, this means this is now a stability problem, harming chances for GA status due to stability criterion being risked due to this user undoing productive edits with zero explanation as to why he is doing this reverting. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 12:09, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Reply
Found these, listed at Good article nominations/Topic lists/Media and drama. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:41, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) The Evil Dead
 * 2) Star Trek: Insurrection
 * 3) Nefarious: Merchant of Souls


 * Did what I could in the first. Also, I meant to take a look at Bleed Like Me to see if a clean-up of the prose as the reviewer complained is possible (but thanks for your input, even changed a bit of the article). igordebraga ≠ 05:28, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, okay thanks for the update, I'll take another look at those. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 06:04, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

GA Review on Hold for The Evil Dead
Please see comments at Talk:The Evil Dead/GA1.

Unfortunately, there are a lot of issues here to address.

Please keep me posted on your progress, with notes at Talk:The Evil Dead/GA1.

Good luck,

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:25, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Interspersed comments at Talk:The Evil Dead/GA1
Minor easy fix: Could you please move your comments below all mine, at Talk:The Evil Dead/GA1, instead of interspersed replies?

Thank you, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 01:29, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

GOCE requests
Hi. When making requests on the GOCE Requests board, please place them at the very end. I have moved your latest to the correct place. --Stfg (talk) 09:11, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Copyedit of The Evil Dead
Hi! I'm almost finished with my copyedit of The Evil Dead per the request at the Horror Wikiproject, and I was wondering if you could clarify a few points. Thank you! Rapunzel-bellflower (talk) 16:38, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Featured article candidates/Tommy Amaker/archive1
Following the recent successful WP:FAC nomination of Juwan Howard, I am now nominating Featured article candidates/Tommy Amaker/archive1. Please come comment.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:26, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I could use some more feedback.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:30, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

re GA
It's difficult to understand through all the indented-replies-in-between-original-comments at the GA Review subpage. I've asked the copyeditor to revisit and comment about the state of the article. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:21, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
 Et 3  rnal  11:02, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

"Skyfall"
SchroCat removed his nomination because I told him that the article wasn't ready and had a lot of discrepancies. All you've done is expand, and now it's even worse. I can see spelling mistakes, awful MOS and a general lack of cohesiveness needed for a music article. I'm not going to even start on the references... You shouldn't be taking "risks" with GAN, as you said, that means you clearly don't think it's ready. You may have expanded it a bit, but you've paid no attention to detail or MOS. It is more of a mess than now than it was before. — AARON  &bull; TALK   11:40, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
— AARON  &bull; TALK   23:59, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

X-Files A-Class articles
Is there anyway you could drop by the A-class X-Files nomination and add suggestions/support/opposition to these articles: "Vienen", "The Gift", "Millennium", and "X-Cops". They've been waiting there forever, and I feel they may have been forgotten. I'd like to get them out of the limbo they're stuck in.-- Gen. Quon   (Talk)   16:36, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Skyfall review
I've begun the GA review for Skyfall (song) and have noted a few initial concerns. Could you comment there when you have a chance? Thanks for your work on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:27, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Copy-edit of Bleed Like Me
Hi Igordebraga, I'm beginning the copy-edit you requested to the above article at the GOCE Request page. Please feel free to contact me, and to correct of revert my edits if I'm doing something I shouldn't. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 23:54, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Done—feel free to contact me about any issues arising from the copy-edit. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 00:07, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q2 2013
MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 15:46, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

The Evil Dead
It's finished! I hope you're happy with the work. If you have any other questions or want me to take another look at anything, leave me a message at my talk page. Thanks. —Torchiest talkedits 12:35, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

FAN Request
Hello! Since you have been very helpful with The X-Files project, I was wondering if you could drop by Featured article candidates/X-Cops (The X-Files)/archive1 and cast a vote/provide suggestions. Thanks!-- Gen. Quon   (Talk)   17:39, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
 STATic  message me!  13:39, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Sorcerer
I'll gladly apply your proposed changes - this was something I thought of myself, but I have 10 days to finish my master's thesis now, so I cannot contribute, but thanks!!! Salt The Fries 86 (talk) 17:47, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Million Award
The Million Award is a new initiative to recognize the editors of Wikipedia's most-read content; you can read more about the award and its possible tiers (Quarter Million Award, Half Million Award, and Million Award) at Million Award. You're also welcome to display this userbox:

If I've made any error in this listing, please don't hesitate to correct it; if for any reason you don't feel you deserve it, please don't hesitate to remove it; if you know of any other editor who merits one of these awards, please don't hesitate to give it; if you yourself deserve another award from any of the three tiers, please don't hesitate to take it! Cheers and all best, -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:20, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Looks like I owe you at least one more of these--congrats! Only a very short list of editors have earned two. -- Khazar2 (talk) 15:23, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

2012–13 Michigan Wolverines men's basketball team
Because of your active involvement in Featured article candidates/Juwan Howard/archive5 and Featured article candidates/Tommy Amaker/archive1, I thought you might be interested in commenting at Featured article candidates/2012–13 Michigan Wolverines men's basketball team/archive1.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 00:22, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Re:Sorcerer
Hello, sorry that I couldn't get back earlier to you, I've been busy writing my master's thesis but now I officially graduated! So thank you for your kind words and I'll try to contribute to your The Evil Dead page! Cheers! Salt The Fries 86 (talk) 19:04, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q3 2013
MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 05:00, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Pearl Jam's Featured Topic
Hello Igor. I am letting you know that, since you started the nomination to get the Pearl Jam studio albums topic to Good Topic status, that Lightning Bolt (Pearl Jam album) has been released and as such there is a retention period to have it reach at least Good Article status by January 11th, 2014. If it does not reach at least Good Article status by the time the grace period ends, the topic will be placed at GTRC and will be decided to have its status remain or taken away. Thank you for reading this. GamerPro64 20:03, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm bumping this to remind you that the topic has about a month and a half left until it's put up for removal. If Lightning Bolt (Pearl Jam album) is at least at WP:GAN before January 15, 2014, the topic won't be put up for removal pending the result of the GA review.--  十  八  23:17, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Bleed Like Me
The article Bleed Like Me 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 needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Bleed Like Me for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of LazyBastardGuy -- 20:50, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

WP:FT topic question
Hello, you recently commented on the Featured Topic nomination Featured topic candidates/Battlecruisers of the World/archive1. There have been three different versions of the topic box proposed - could you take a look at them and offer an opinion as to which is best? Thanks. Parsecboy (talk) 18:37, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

FAC?
Hi. I noticed that you tagged Talk:Black Ice (album) as a featured article candidate, but didn't complete the nomination process. If you want the nomination to proceed, you need to create the nomination page (from the link in the template) and then add the nomination page at WP:FAC. Thanks! Maralia (talk) 02:14, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the confusion; the article talk page somehow hadn't updated, so I was still seeing the redlink to create the nom page. I've never seen a false redlink there, so I presumed you hadn't completed the nom. It was still there for me just now—had to purge the page to get it to update properly. Anyway, looks good now (and nice nom statement!). Maralia (talk) 02:21, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for review and link
Huge thanks for taking a peek at A Cure for Pokeritis, reminding me that I need to spend some time with the anemic lead, and -- most importantly, perhaps -- finding an example of a silent short that made GA (and even has a failed FAC to crib from). It's all quite appreciated. I've just managed to scrape up a few more sources for the article as well, and hope to get ready for the push toward GA within the next week or so. Thanks! Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 06:03, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Pearl Jam studio albums
Hi. I am letting you know that the Good Topic Pearl Jam studio albums is on a retention period as the article Lightning Bolt (Pearl Jam album) has been be at least up to GA status by January 15th. If on the 15th the article is not up to at least GA status, the topic has to go to GTRC where it would be determined whether it should have its status removed or not. Thank you for your time. GamerPro64 00:43, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Update - A review for the topic has been started here. GamerPro64  19:21, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2014 WikiCup!
Hello Igordebraga, and welcome to the 2014 WikiCup! Your submission page can be found here. The competition began on 1 January. There have been a few small changes from last year; the rules can be read in full at WikiCup/Scoring, and the page also includes a summary of changes. One important rule to remember is that only content on which you have completed significant work, and nominated, in 2014 is eligible for points in the competition- the judges will be checking! As ever, this year's competition includes some younger editors. If you are a younger editor, you are certainly welcome, but we have written an advice page at WikiCup/Advice for younger editors for you. Please do take a look. Any questions should be directed to one of the judges, or left on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will make it to round 2. Good luck! , and  18:17, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Pearl Jam albums
Please stop There is a thread at at the template's talk page about this right now and there is ample consensus about this&mdash;it's also in the template documentation. These chronologies include all albums, not just studio albums. Why would Pearl Jam's two most recent studio albums be an exception? —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:25, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Misuse Someone has gone by and undone the proper chronologies which I created. I'll have to go back and fix them when I have the free time. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:30, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Yeezus
Hey Igordebraga, I recently nominated Yeezus for GA status, so we are closer to the goal of Good Topic for his albums. If you have anytime at all, if you could either review and/or give it a copy edit if anything is needed to be changed, it would all be appreciated.  STATic  message me!  17:21, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Jurassic Park (film)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Jurassic Park (film) 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 FunkMonk -- 04:31, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Jurassic Park (film)
The article Jurassic Park (film) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Jurassic Park (film) for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of FunkMonk -- 18:02, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 January newsletter
The 2014 WikiCup is off to a flying start, with, at time of writing, 138 participants. The is the largest number of participants we have seen since 2010. If you are yet to join the competition, don't worry- the judges have agreed to keep the signups open for a few more days. By a wide margin, our current leader is newcomer, whose set of 14 featured pictures, the first FPs of the competition, was worth 490 points. Here are some more noteworthy scorers:


 * and were the first people to score, for the good article Tropical Storm Bret (1981) and its good article review respectively. 12george1 was also the first person to score in 2012 and 2013.
 * scored the first ITN points for 2014 North American polar vortex.
 * scored points for an early good topic, finishing off Featured topics/She Wolf.
 * scored the first bonus points of the competition, for his work on Typhoon Vera.
 * has scored the highest number of bonus points for a single article, for the high-importance Jurassic Park (film).

Featured articles, featured lists, featured topics and featured portals are yet to play a part in the competition. The judges have removed a number of submissions which were deemed ineligible. Typically, we aim to see work on a project, followed by a nomination, followed by promotion, this year. We apologise for any disappointment caused by our strict enforcement this year; we're aiming to keep the competition as fair as possible.

Wikipedians interested in friendly competition may be interested to take part in The Core Contest; unlike the WikiCup, The Core Contest is not about audited content, but, like the WikiCup, it is about article improvement; specifically, The Core Contest is about contribution to some of Wikipedia's most important article. Of course, any work done for The Core Contest, if it leads to a DYK, GA or FA, can earn WikiCup points.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email), The ed17 (talk • email) and Miyagawa (talk • email) 19:54, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Devil May Cry 3: Dante's Awakening at WP:FAR
I have nominated Devil May Cry 3: Dante's Awakening for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. IX | (C"&#60;) 06:56, 11 February 2014 (UTC)


 * The amazing Dana boomer had just put the FAR on hold because I failed to see any collabrations/responses from other users before I started it. I agreed with her that I should continue discussing "Devil May Cry 3"'s problems on the article talk page with other users like you. I want you to collaborate on improving this article because you've done FAs and GAs on video games, and you're pretty active and great. Let's go to the article talk page to discuss the article's flaws. IX | (C"&#60;)  23:23, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Well okay, I see you did the Metroid Prime FA, which was okay for the time you improved it backed in 2008. It went through three FACs to become an FA, and it was previously a Good Article (GA). The article's first revision as an FA does not qualify for "featured" status by today's standards, with an incomplete intro, outdated prose standards, instances of amateur-quality citations/references, and even some grammar issues. The current revision has problems too. The prose has expanded, but some more references can be added, and the grammar seems unbalanced. IX | (C"&#60;) 01:52, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Compared to Devil May Cry 3: Dante's Awakening as an FA, Metroid Prime was more likely to be improved. Devil May Cry 3 is shorter and lower quality than Metroid Prime: "DMC3:DA" has unsourced statements, poor grammar, no screenshots, and is not comprehensive enough. "MP" is better than DMC3 but still contains unbalanced grammar. Both need FARs. IX | (C"&#60;)  02:06, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Can you please answer the three questions I left in Devil May Cry 3's talk page? The first one is related to its FAC, the second wants you to compare it to a recent FA, the third just needs your opinion on the article and how it does not meet the FA standards. IX | (C"&#60;) 02:17, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Of course, we hope that happens. We made requests for two articles to be copyedited: Devil May Cry 3 and Metroid Prime. I asked PresN to do three tasks that I wrote down on the article page. The first one demands he'd rewrite and expand the "Sales" section and include reliable information about the game's sales in Japan, the United States, the United Kingdom, etc. (everywhere else around the world). The second says the article needs additional references. The third gives him chances to upload a screenshot of the game with a "Fair use rationale" template. IX | (C"&#60;) 02:34, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
 * PresN instead made good comments about the article. IX | (C"&#60;)  00:07, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

It seems to me like I'm difficult at finding someone who's VERY interested in improving this article, which needs lots of cleanup on the prose, grammar, etc. to maintain its FA status. So here's a list of problems PresN found on DMC3 that must be addressed:


 * Unreferenced sentences (Gameplay)
 * Choppy, short paragraphs in Development, and the section as a whole could stand to be expanded if any sources exist.
 * The reception table is way too long, while the reception prose is vague and short. Seriously, there's link one medium-sized paragraph of actual reception on the game elements, from North America-only.
 * No need for a separate sales section unless more information can be found- usually it can't.
 * Choppy, short paragraphs in Other Releases.
 * Poor sources (the-laser.com, devilmaycry.org, Gamingtarget.com, Devil's Chapel, Gameslave)
 * Lead does not sufficiently cover the article (nothing about the development, almost nothing about gameplay)
 * Awkward wording and grammar throughout- needs a copyedit
 * Bad reference formatting (dates aren't consistent, there's a dead link, authors missing on several sources)

There will be a copyedit to the DMC3 article, hopefully since I made such request for the WP:GOCE. However, maybe you can fix the article with this list. IX | (C"&#60;) 19:52, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

I started a section on WT:VG called "Devil May Cry 3: Dante's Awakening needs rewrites/cleanup to maintain FA status". It starts with a question to improve the Devil May Cry 3 article as many users aren't interested in maintaining its FA status since the article's old. Indeed, more users are interested in writing new Good Articles (GAs) and Featured Articles (FAs) than deal with old ones, which is a topic what users there are discussing, even me. The section is pretty interesting since the point is "old is asleep, new is awake." IX | (C"&#60;) 19:44, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Lightning Bolt (Pearl Jam album)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Lightning Bolt (Pearl Jam 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 Adam Cuerden -- 20:12, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Lightning Bolt (Pearl Jam album)
The article Lightning Bolt (Pearl Jam album) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Lightning Bolt (Pearl Jam album) for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Adam Cuerden -- 21:22, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

X-Men: The Last Stand
Although we both seem interested in taking it to GA status, you seem restricted by "procrastination". Still, I feel some statements need sourcing. Can you please have a look into the article and tag the unsourced statements if any? I'll fill them later. Kailash29792 (talk) 05:20, 25 February 2014 (UTC)


 * The GOCE editing is complete. Does it look worthy of GA status at the moment? I feel it does, but do you know of more content that can be added? Kailash29792 (talk) 14:59, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 February newsletter
And so ends the most competitive first round we have ever seen, with 38 points required to qualify for round 2. Last year, 19 points secured a place; before that, 11 (2012) or 8 (2011) were enough. This is both a blessing and a curse. While it shows the vigourous good health of the competition, it also means that we have already lost many worthy competitors. Our top three scorers were:


 * , a WikiCup newcomer whose high-quality scans of rare banknotes represent an unusual, interesting and valuable contribution to Wikipedia. Most of Godot's points this round have come from a large set of pictures used in Treasury Note (1890–91).
 * , a WikiCup veteran and a finalist last year, Adam is also a featured picture specialist, focusing on the restoration of historical images. This month's promotions have included a carefully restored set of artist William Russell Flint's work.
 * , another WikiCup newcomer. WikiRedactor has claimed points for good article reviews and good articles relating to pop music, many of which were awarded bonus points. Articles include Sky Ferreira, Hannah Montana 2: Meet Miley Cyrus and "Wrecking Ball" (Miley Cyrus song).

Other competitors of note include:


 * , who helped take Thirty Flights of Loving through good article candidates and featured article candidates, claiming the first first featured article of the competition.
 * , who claimed the first featured list of the competition with Natalia Kills discography.
 * , who takes the title of the contributor awarded the highest bonus point multiplier (resulting in the highest scoring article) of the competition so far. Her high-importance salamander, now a good article, scored 108 points.

After such a competitive first round, expect the second round to also be fiercely fought. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 1 but before the start of round 2 can be claimed in round 2, but please do not update your submission page until March (UTC). Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email), The ed17 (talk • email) and Miyagawa (talk • email) 00:01, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Iron Man 3
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Iron Man 3 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 Corvoe -- 05:41, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Iron Man 3
The article Iron Man 3 you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Iron Man 3 for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Corvoe -- 12:51, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Lost request
Hello fellow Lost fan! I'm trying to get Walkabout (Lost) to FA-status as part of my Operation Lost project. I noticed from your edits that you have the season 1 audio commentary, and I was wondering if there's anything discussed on it about the 'Walkabout' episode that isn't already in the article. If there is, could you please tell me what? Also, if you wanna help me with my project, please do

Thanks! Newyorkadam (talk) 02:14, 4 March 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam

Edit: Never mind, found it! However, if I find anything in the future that doesn't have a transcript, can I ask you for help? Thanks!

Nice :D
Nice work on reducing the plot summaries, I generally have trouble doing that :)

I've nominated Walkabout (Lost) for FA, and as you saw Pilot (Lost) is now a GA :D This is going great! -Newyorkadam (talk) 23:39, 9 March 2014 (UTC)Newyradam

X-Men 3 GA
So does it go this way? You have edited X-Men: The Last Stand more often than me, so that means you shall nominate it for GA soon enough. The only question is, when? Or does it already look GA-worthy at the moment? Kailash29792 (talk) 04:23, 18 March 2014 (UTC)


 * I wish you all the best for the GA review of X-Men 3. Kailash29792 (talk) 03:04, 26 March 2014 (UTC)


 * I have opened a discussion here that may interest you. Kailash29792 (talk) 05:27, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Stuff
I'm glad somebody finally got around to doing that, it was something I was planning before the release of Yeezus! Wonderful work to everyone involved, however Dan56 should really be credited as the main contributor I feel, he must be the hardest working editor on this site. I pray for the poor soul who decides to eventually take one of them to FAC though, those are some huge articles. Bruce Campbell (talk) 23:56, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 March newsletter
A quick update as we are half way through round two of this year's competition. WikiCup newcomer (Pool E) leads, having produced a massive set of featured pictures for Silver certificate (United States), an article also brought to featured list status. Former finalist (Pool G) is in second, which he owes mostly to his work with historical images, including a number of images from Urania's Mirror, an article also brought to good status. 2010 champion (Pool C) is third overall, thanks to contributions relating to naval history, including the newly featured Japanese battleship Nagato. , who currently leads Pool A and is sixth overall, takes the title for the highest scoring individual article of the competition so far, with the top importance featured article Ian Smith.

With 26 people having already scored over 100 points, it is likely that well over 100 points will be needed to secure a place in round 3. Recent years have required 123 (2013), 65 (2012), 41 (2011) and 100 (2010). Remember that only 64 will progress to round 3 at the end of April. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page; if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email), The ed17 (talk • email) and Miyagawa (talk • email) 22:55, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup error
Hi there- this is just a quick note to apologise for a small but important mistake in the last WikiCup newsletter; it is not 64 users who will progress to the next round, but 32. J Milburn (talk) 18:55, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Your user page compressed into a navbox.
Your friend Gonna is back! I converted and compressed your user page into a navbox template [here]. It wasn't too long to make, but I already used it for my whole userpage. This use of the Navbox template makes userpages seem either taller or shorter without any need of a "Table of Contents" part, and it make plain userpages look like the insides of boxes. (=D) }I Mr* &#124; (60nna) I{ 01:28, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Lion King
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Lion King 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 XXSNUGGUMSXX -- XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 19:00, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
 * You just have a few things left to do and it's back up to GA! XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 22:55, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Lion King
The article The Lion King you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Lion King for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of XXSNUGGUMSXX -- XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 04:21, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Million award
Good job getting it back together. Bobnorwal (talk) 23:41, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 April newsletter
Round 3 of the 2014 WikiCup has just begun; 32 competitors remain. Pool G's was Round 2's highest scorer, with a large number of featured picture credits. In March/April, he restored star charts from Urania's Mirror, lithographs of various warships (such as SMS Gefion) and assorted other historical media. Second overall was Pool E's, whose featured list Silver certificate (United States) contains dozens of scans of banknotes recently promoted to featured picture status. Third was Pool G's who has produced a large number of good articles, many, including Falkner Island, on Connecticut-related topics. Other successful participants included, who saw three articles (including the top-importance Ian Smith) through featured article candidacies, and , who saw three lists (including the beautifully-illustrated list of plantations in West Virginia) through featured list candidacies. High-importance good articles promoted this round include narwhal from, tiger from and The Lion King from. We also saw our first featured topic points of the competition, awarded to and  for their work on the Sega Genesis topic. No points have been claimed so far for good topics or featured portals.

192 was our lowest qualifying score, again showing that this WikiCup is the most competitive ever. In previous years, 123 (2013), 65 (2012), 41 (2011) or 100 (2010) secured a place in Round 3. Pool H was the strongest performer, with all but one of its members advancing, while only the two highest scorers in Pools G and F advanced. At the end of June, 16 users will advance into the semi-finals. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email), The ed17 (talk • email) and Miyagawa (talk • email) 17:56, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

A review of you will
Hi Igor. Do you have some spare time to go through Megadeth and perhaps cast your vote whether you think the article deserves to be promoted at the review page? Given your experience in working with hard rock albums and bands, I think you can contribute with helpful suggestions if you fund anything that needs to be addressed. Appreciate the input!--Вик Ретлхед (talk) 14:02, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

X-Men film continuity
It seems like the events of X-Men: Days of Future Past completely wiped out those of The Last Stand and X-Men Origins Wolverine, I mean they prevented them from happening. Even as TLS awaits its GA review, I felt that fact could be added to the article. But since you were more committed to the article than me, I think you know where in the article can this statement be added — that it was erased from continuity. Kailash29792 (talk) 07:25, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Re: X-Men: The Last Stand
Have you addressed all of the concerns expressed during the last GA review? The coverage of the topic expressed by the last reviewer doesn't seem to have been directly addressed, although the cast section has grown in response. "Other characters" is still mostly unsourced, and the recommendations from the reviewer in regards to this problem have not been followed. Should this article be failed? Viriditas (talk) 02:25, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 June newsletter
After an extremely close race, Round 3 is over. 244 points secured a place in Round 4, which is comparable to previous years- 321 was required in 2013, while 243 points were needed in 2012. Pool C's was the round's highest scorer, mostly due to a 32 featured pictures, including both scans and photographs. Also from Pool C, finished second overall, claiming three featured articles, including the high-importance Grus (constellation). Third place was Pool B's, whose contributions included featured articles Russian battleship Poltava (1894) and Russian battleship Peresvet. Pool C saw the highest number of participants advance, with six out of eight making it to the next round.

The round saw this year's first featured portal, with taking Portal:Literature to featured status. The round also saw the first good topic points, thanks to and the 2013 Atlantic hurricane season. This means that all content types have been claimed this year. Other contributions of note this round include a featured topic on Maya Angelou's autobiographies from, a good article on the noted Czech footballer Tomáš Rosický from and a now-featured video game screenshot, freely released due to the efforts of.

The judges would like to remind participants to update submission pages promptly. This means that content can be checked, and allows those following the competition (including those participating) to keep track of scores effectively. This round has seen discussion about various aspects of the WikiCup's rules and procedures. Those interested in the competition can be assured that formal discussions about how next year's competition will work will be opened shortly, and all are welcome to voice their views then. 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 Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. and 18:48, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Garbage genres discussion
Hi. You're a past editor in the Garbage articles, would you mind giving your input on the latest discussion? Talk:Garbage_(band) --Lpdte77 (talk) 02:05, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q2 2014
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:06, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Cost of Living (Lost)
The article The Cost of Living (Lost) 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 Cost of Living (Lost) for things which need to be addressed. 23W 04:14, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Cost of Living (Lost)
The article The Cost of Living (Lost) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Cost of Living (Lost) 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. 23W 05:04, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Robert Maxwell
I removed your reference to Tomorrow Never Dies from the Robert Maxwell because of the guidelines in the WP:TRIVIA article. As the reference to Maxwell in the Bond film's article was somewhat underdeveloped, I have now moved your addition (with appropriate minor changes). Philip Cross (talk) 08:40, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 August newsletter
The final of the 2014 WikiCup begins in a few short minutes! Our eight finalists are listed below, along with their placement in Round 4:


 * , a WikiCup newcomer, finished top of Pool A and was the round's highest scorer. Godot is a featured picture specialist, claiming large numbers of points due to high-quality scans of historical documents, especially banknotes.
 * 1) is a WikiCup veteran, having been a finalist every year since 2010. In the semi-final, he was Pool B's highest scorer. Cas's points primarily come from articles on the natural sciences.
 * 2) was Pool A's runner-up. Czar's points come mostly from content related to independent video games, including both articles and topics.
 * 3) was Pool B's runner-up. Another featured picture specialist, many of Adam's points come from the restoration of historical media. He has been a WikiCup finalist twice before.
 * 4) won the WikiCup in 2012 and 2013, and enters this final as the first wildcard. She focuses on biology-related articles, and has worked on several high-importance articles.
 * 5) is the second wildcard. George's points come primarily from meteorology-related articles. This year and last year, George was the first person in the competition to score.
 * , the third wildcard, was the 2010 champion and a finalist last year. His writes mostly on military history, especially naval history.
 * , the fourth and final wildcard, has participated in previous WikiCups, but not reached any finals. Bloom's points are mostly thanks to did you knows, featured lists and good articles related to sport and national symbols.

We say goodbye to this year's semi-finalists. ,, , , , and  have all performed well to reach this stage of the competition, and we hope they will all be joining us again next year.

There are two upcoming competitions unrelated to the WikiCup which may be of interest to those who receive this newsletter. The Stub Contest will run through September, and revolves around expanding stub articles, especially high-importance or old stubs. In addition, a proposal has been made for a new competition, the GA Cup, which the organisers plan to run next year. This competition is based on the WikiCup and aims to reduce the good article review backlog.

There is now a thread for brainstorming on how next year's WikiCup competition should work. Please come along and share your thoughts- What works? What doesn't work? What needs changing? Signups for next year's competition will be open soon; we will be in touch. If, at this stage of the competition, you are keen to help the with the WikiCup, please do what you can to participate in review processes. Our finalists will find things much easier if the backlogs at good article candidates, featured article candidates, featured picture candidates and the rest are kept at a minimum. 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 or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. and 22:09, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 September newsletter
In one month's time, we will know our WikiCup 2014 champion. Newcomer has taken a strong lead with a featured list (historical coats of arms of the U.S. states from 1876) and a raft of featured pictures. Reigning champion is in second place with a number of high-importance biology articles, including new FA Isopoda and new GA least weasel. , who is in his fifth WikiCup final, is in third, with featured articles Pictor and Epacris impressa.

Signups for the 2015 WikiCup are open. All Wikipedians, new and experienced, are warmly invited to sign up for the competition. Wikipedians interested in friendly competition may also like to sign up for the GA Cup, a new WikiCup-inspired competition which revolves around completing good article reviews. 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 or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. and 22:11, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Garbage talk
Hi, I noticed you were a past editor on Garbage's page and I'd appreciate if you could give your input on the current discussion under Electronic rock, Power pop, and Poll on pop. There are two editor buddies there with a biased agenda ganging up on myself (my points and contributions), currently the only other active editor in the discussion, so I'd appreciate outside input. --Lpdte77 (talk) 19:03, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi, I appreciate you assume good faith, and not claim that me or any other editor has some agenda for or against anything. I try to be as neutral and follow the wikipedia rules as most long-time members try to be. Andrzejbanas (talk) 13:47, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh sure, you definitely follow Wikipedia policies, WP:UNDUE, WP:TE, WP:OWN, WP:IMPARTIAL, these in particular, very good at.... --Lpdte77 (talk) 22:35, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q3 2014
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of X-Men: The Last Stand
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article X-Men: The Last Stand 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 SNUGGUMS -- SNUGGUMS (talk) 06:20, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of X-Men: The Last Stand
The article X-Men: The Last Stand 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:X-Men: The Last Stand for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of SNUGGUMS -- SNUGGUMS (talk) 06:40, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of X-Men: The Last Stand
The article X-Men: The Last Stand you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:X-Men: The Last Stand 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 SNUGGUMS -- SNUGGUMS (talk) 04:22, 10 October 2014 (UTC) h

Today's_featured_article/requests
Just FYI, 10 year anniversary of the game's release, so I nominated it for TFAR. Gary ( talk  ·  scripts )  18:11, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Crew list
A crew list is like a cast list; it will list more names in the appropriate section than in the infobox. There are three names in the crew list that cannot be in the infobox, and in addition, a complete crew list neighbors production details, just like a complete cast list neighbors casting details. There is nothing detrimental about having such a list. Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 02:49, 20 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Still: how does putting such a list improves the article in any way? The infobox lists key crew members. The production section will provide others, with more information and in prose form. And most important: how many recent Good and Featured film articles saw the need for a crew list? igordebraga ≠ 13:53, 20 October 2014 (UTC)


 * How else are we going to identify crew members that cannot be listed in the infobox? The crew list encourages navigation of crew members, like the cast list encourages navigation of cast members. There have been frequent requests to add fields to the infobox, the most recent being for sound engineer, but it is not going to be expanded anytime soon. The crew list is flexible in adding pertinent crew members, depending on the nature of the film. Lastly, what is your point about Good and Featured Articles? Don't do anything that's never been done before? Some of these articles don't even have cast lists to navigate because of traditional dislike and inability to fit a list of names in the article body, which to me is a poor practice. Here, we should not assume we are stuck listing only crew members that are permitted in the infobox. We've long run on the false assumption that if we can't list it in the infobox, we can't list it anywhere, despite us doing just that for cast lists. It does not have to be used everywhere, especially if the production coverage is brief, but if the coverage is extensive and/or there are notable crew members (such as in the case of Interstellar), a crew list can be useful for easy lookup. Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 14:21, 20 October 2014 (UTC)


 * If you want to have a discussion at Talk:Edge of Tomorrow (film) or WT:FILM, we can do that. Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 14:31, 20 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Usually if it's not in the infobox, it might not be notable at all. And "encouraging navigation of crew members" it's hard when most names there don't even have a page! (Interstellar is a rare exception where such a list has only blue links) Yes, going by the infobox is not necessary - sound engineer is not a field despite various film articles having sections about sound design - and sometimes excluding the cast list does not work. But while the format of GA\FA is always changing, if the people aiming for "the best Wikipedia has to offer" don't feel like replicating a credit section only to be comprehensive, instead resorting to mentioning the professionals as their roles in production appear in the text, it might be an example to follow. igordebraga ≠ 16:55, 20 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I do agree with you that a crew list will be more useful when it has blue links, with Interstellar (film) being the best example. I would not advocate crew lists for films that have weak notability and thus unknown crew members. My thinking is to promote cross-navigation where feasible. (I've been motivated to create/expand some crew member articles when I set up a crew list.) The billing block, after all, frequently mentions crew members like costume designers and production designers, who are also mentioned in reviews that provide a rundown of the crew. My experience with film infobox discussions is that we want to cut off the list of crew-related credits lest the infobox become too long of a sidebar, even if a costume designer or production designer made valuable contributions to the film. As for simply mentioning them in prose, I don't think it is mutually exclusive. After all, it is easier to look up an actor and their role in a list (and not to mention, we list such actors even if their contributions are less than certain crew members').


 * Lastly, perhaps "sound engineer" is not the best example of a requested addition, but there have been a few others politely declined to maintain the infobox length. A possible in-between approach we could do is to make the crew list collapsible so readers interested in seeing the names could uncollapse it. If not, we could continue this discussion at Talk:Edge of Tomorrow (film) or WT:FILM. Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 16:28, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
 * For now, better don't think about it. The article is comprehensive, but possibly more can be added (specially given all the possible sources you listed), to make sure the GA nom I put there goes well once it happens - after waiting nearly 7 months, I know it can take long - and such a dispute won't help things. igordebraga ≠ 18:44, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Halloween cheer!


Happy Halloween!

Hello Igordebraga: Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!   –   Snuggums  ( talk  /  edits ) 22:18, 28 October 2014 (UTC) Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

WikiCup 2014: The results
The 2014 WikiCup champion is, who flew the flag of the Smithsonian Institution. This was Godot13's first WikiCup competition and, over the 10 months of the competition, he has produced (among other contributions) two featured lists and an incredible 292 featured pictures, including architectural photographs and scans of historical documents. , 2012 and 2013 WikiCup champion, came in second, having written a large number of biology-related articles. , WikiCup finalist every year since 2010, finished in third.

A full list of our prize-winners follows:


 * wins the prize for first place and the FP prize for 181 featured pictures in the final round.
 * wins the prize for second place and the DYK prize for 65 did you knows in the final round.
 * wins the prize for third place and the FA prize for four featured articles in the final round.
 * wins the prize for fourth place
 * wins a final 8 prize.
 * wins a final 8 prize.
 * wins a final 8 prize.
 * wins the GA prize for 27 good articles in round 2 and the review prize for 28 good article reviews in round 1.
 * wins the FL prize for three featured lists in round 2.
 * wins the FPo prize his work on featured portals.
 * wins the topic prize for a nine-article featured topic in round 3.
 * wins the news prize for 28 in the news articles in round 3.

Congratulations to everyone who has been successful in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and a particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have participated this year. We warmly invite all of you to sign up for next year's competition. Discussions and polls concerning potential rules changes are also open, and all are welcome to participate. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2014 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. and 22:51, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Beautiful Garbage
Do you think the article needs any improvements? I'll be nominating it for GA review soon. --Lpdte77 (talk) 07:59, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Precious
  quality over quantity

Thank you, user from Brazil, for your contributions to quality articles on games, film and music, such as Metroid Prime 2: Echoes, Inception and The Lion King, for featured topics, list and reviews, for "quality over quantity", - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:17, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Edge of Tomorrow (film)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Edge of Tomorrow (film) 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 Viriditas -- Viriditas (talk) 23:22, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Spectre (2015 film)
Since there's been confirmation of a new James Bond film, that means that Featured topics/James Bond films will need to have a Supp Nom for the article to be part of it. So for the time being, Spectre is going to need a Peer Review to be part of the topic. GamerPro64 21:46, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Igor, a peer review isn't needed until the film is released (see my talk). - SchroCat (talk) 09:36, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Re: EdgeOfTomorrowMimic.jpg

 * Igordebraga uploaded a new version of File:EdgeOfTomorrowMimic.jpg)


 * A Mimic during the beach battle...A monster with various tentacle-like limbs in a beach.

Heh. Are you sure about that? Did you upload the right image? That image takes place at the Bavarian Dam. Viriditas (talk) 01:49, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * It's finally showing up now. I guess it was a caching problem. Viriditas (talk) 02:06, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015 is just around the corner...
Hello everyone, and may we wish you all a happy holiday season. As you will probably already know, the 2015 WikiCup begins in the new year; there is still time to sign up. We have a few important announcements concerning the future of the WikiCup.


 * We would like to announce that Josh (J Milburn) and Ed (The ed17), who have been WikiCup judges since 2009 and 2010 respectively, are stepping down. This decision has been made for a number of reasons, but the main one is time. Both Josh and Ed have found that, over the previous year, they have been unable to devote the time necessary to the WikiCup, and it is not likely that they will be able to do this in the near future. Furthermore, new people at the helm can only help to invigorate the WikiCup and keep it dynamic. Josh and Ed will still be around, and will likely be participating in the Cup this following year as competitors, which is where both started out.
 * In a similar vein, we hope you will all join us in welcoming Jason (Sturmvogel 66) and Christine (Figureskatingfan), who are joining Brian (Miyagawa) to form the 2015 WikiCup judging team. Jason is a WikiCup veteran, having won in 2010 and finishing in fifth this year. Christine has participated in two WikiCups, reaching the semi-finals in both, and is responsible for the GA Cup, which she now co-runs.
 * The discussions/polls concerning the next competition's rules will be closed soon, and rules changes will be made clear on WikiCup/Scoring and talk pages. While it may be impossible to please everyone, the judges will make every effort to ensure that the new rules are both fair and in the best interests of the competition, which is, first and foremost, about improving Wikipedia.

If you have any questions or concerns, the judges can be reached on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, on their talk pages, or by email. We hope you will all join us in trying to make the 2015 WikiCup the most productive and enjoyable yet. You are receiving this message because you are listed on WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk), The ed17 (talk), Miyagawa (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Figureskatingfan (talk) 18:53, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Beautiful Garbage liner notes
Do you happen to have the liner notes for this album, or know where I can access the credits? The personnel section of the article lacks the band members' contributions. Lapadite (talk) 06:54, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Edge of Tomorrow (film)
The article Edge of Tomorrow (film) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Edge of Tomorrow (film) 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 Viriditas -- Viriditas (talk) 11:22, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

A very old claim you made on the Super Metroid article
Hello, I know it's been a really long time for you, but this has been driving me nuts for a while now.

Way back in 2005 you made this edit concerning sales information for Super Metroid. Please, I simply must know where you obtained these numbers.

I frankly do not trust Andy Robinson from GamesRadar's claim that Super Metroid supposedly sold "poorly" in Japan, but more in North America and Europe, which has been cited in the current version of the article for some time now. I have tried to contact Robinson before to obtain his own source for his claim but he has never responded to any of my attempts. This claim doesn't jive with things I've read elsewhere before, and raw numbers from VGChartz directly contradict it--in fact Super Metroid seems to have sold better in Japan. This makes sense that Super Metroid didn't do as well in North America too, because Donkey Kong Country was released around the same time and likely stole some of its sales. I am aware that VGChartz is not considered a reliable source. However, what is interesting is that their numbers cited are very similar to the numbers you gave so long ago. I would really like to track down the root of your sales data to finally get rid of what I believe is an awful rumor that's been circulating around the internet ever since it was added to that Wikipedia article. If VGChartz isn't the only source that contradicts it then it becomes substantially more dubious.174.45.178.216 (talk) 05:21, 18 December 2014 (UTC)