User talk:Jarry1250/Archive 10

Signpost
Sorry to bug you! I was wondering where you were up to on the Technology report? An editor had marked it as ready for publication but this has since been reverted. Could you update the status at the Newsroom please? :) Cheers, Ncmvocalist (talk) 16:15, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Transclusion counter broken?
Seems to report 0 for any template. –xeno talk 20:59, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

PED
Hey Jarry- Thanks for your comments on PED. See my talk page for responses. Measure for Measure (talk) 05:24, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Name of the Technology report
Jarry, I've analysed the page visits to every SP page over the past month. It seems that the titles (subtitles) really matter; they appear, of course, on subscribers' messages. I wonder whether you might consider changing the current greyish "Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News". I can't think of exactly what, apart from "The IT behind Wikipedia". Tony  (talk)  18:57, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I didn't realise it was intentionally directed at techies. Tony   (talk)  19:27, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

GA review for 1971 Iraq poison grain disaster
I place the article on hold pending some clarifications. Renata (talk) 01:39, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I have some unexpected real life drama going on. I hope to have few minutes to look into it tomorrow. Please provide ref for the executions. Renata (talk) 00:33, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

BRION
I've only just got it. So that is why those upper-case letters are used. Tony  (talk)  03:45, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Suggestion for the Image Existance Checker
I was using the subject tool for the first time today, great work. I suggest that the SQL query should check for the existance of an 'of=' parm on the reqphoto tag. If one exists, it is possible that the article is incorrectly tagged as needing an image, but not likely.Jarhed (talk) 22:06, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 July newsletter
We are half-way through our penultimate round, and nothing is yet certain. Pool A, currently led by has ended up the more competitive, with three contestants (,  and ) scoring over 500 points already. Pool B is led by, who has also scored well over 500. The top two from each pool, as well as the next four highest scorers regardless of pool, will make it through to our final eight. As ever, anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.

Planning has begun for the 2011 WikiCup, with open discussions concerning scoring and flags for next year's competition. Contributions to those discussions would be appreciated, especially concerning the flags, as next year's signups cannot begin until the flag issue has been resolved. Signups will hopefully open at some point in this round, with discussion about possible changing in the scoring/process opening some time afterwards.

Earlier this round, we said goodbye to, who has bowed out to spend more time on the book he is authoring with his wife. We wish him all the best. In other news, the start of this round also saw some WikiCup awards sent out by. We appreciate his enthusiasm, and contestants are of course welcome to award each other prizes as they see fit, but rest assured that we will be sending out "official" awards at the end of the competition. If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 22:40, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Page-view counter still sick?
Jarry, I see the "In brief" note at the TR says it's fixed. It seems to have broken down five days ago, and August isn't yet available on the pull-down menu. Tony  (talk)  15:32, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Inverted PPF figure
Hi, Jarry1250. Don't know if you could help w this, but you are last listed at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PPF_opportunity_cost_inverted.svg & so might have worked on it last.

What would add another feature worth talking about at Production possibility frontier is a straight line connecting the vertical and horizontal axes of the PPF end-points with a midpoint labelled E on the line. That could be used to discuss how + economies of scale for 2 countries having identical PPFs could increase their consumption possibilities by specializing in production on respective opposite goods & trading half their output for the other countries production at the midpoint E. An oversimplification of course, but that's the gist of such specialization advantages w economies of scale. Paul Krugman pretty much got a Nobel Prize for expanding on that little parable. I'll look for your response here (or my page). Thx. P.S. If I should try someone else, please let me know. --Thomasmeeks (talk) 22:56, 3 August 2010 (UTC)


 * With all due respect to my learned colleague Thomas :-), this seems like far too advanced and detailed a point for a general encyclopedia article on the PPF. For an economy to have a linear PPF is a special case (generally used in introductory texts to simplify illustrating gains from trade).  For 2 different economies to have identical linear PPFs would be a special case indeed!  One might even say it would be an extra special case!  ;-)  This (sub)topic would also seem misplaced here — it would be more appropriate (perhaps even essential) in the articles on gains from trade, comparative advantage, etc.  (The topic explicitly gets into specialization and gains from trade, which aren't even alluded to anywhere else in the PPF article — and really don't need to be; that's an article unto itself.)


 * And no, I'm not "back" yet. I'll be away for another couple of weeks.  --Jackftwist (talk) 08:17, 12 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Talk about back-chanelling, Jack. Please let me hear at such time as the above could be discussed. Hope things are all right for you. --Thomasmeeks (talk) 11:21, 14 August 2010 (UTC)n copy edit. Thomasmeeks (talk) 02:48, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

OK, Jack. I totally agree with you that any WP article on the above should be a simple as possible. If you'll forgive me, I don't think this is the place to get into much discussion on the usefulness of simplifying economic assumptions in describing the real world. Despite the case above, they need not even be mentioned in a WP article. Spelling them out might add rigor, but much rigor need not be necessary to get a point across, any more than Whitehead and Russell needed hundreds of pages to reach the conclusion in their Principia Mathematica that 1+1= 2.

There's no reason to limit discussion to increasing returns as a way of increasing total output & consumption possibilities through trade. And that's what I'd like to do next before getting back to the above. Linear PPFs with different slopes between regions or countries are presented in intro econ texts, e.g. Samuelson & (now) Nordhaus's Economics (textbook) (& Lipsey's et al.) to illustrate a similar major use of PPFs: to show that total output and consumption possibilities after production specialization according to comparative advantage can increase. IMO this can be explained more simply than supply and demand. So, it's not too difficult for WP.

If I get sufficiently tiresome from this point on, that will be enough reason to not reply. But if you're willing to humor me, consider 2 linear PPF diagrams of 2 countries say North and South that each can produce Apples (A) or Bananas (B), at most 4 A or 1 B and 1 A or 4 B respectively (that is, with all inputs used to produce only one good at the 2 endpoints of the PPFs for each country).

Let's say you put those in the same figure but separately (that is not a total PPF for the 2 countries). And suppose North & South produce 4 A and 4 B respectively. Now with a dotted line, join the (4A, 0 B) of 1 country and (0 A, 4 B) of the 2 countries. If they each trade 2 of the good they are producing for 2 of other good, they each end up midway on the dotted trading line for each at (2 A, 2 B) available for consumption, well beyond their respective PPFs, illustrating the bolded "major use" above. (Of course if their tastes are sufficiently specialized, for example, no one wants B,  no trade and consumption gains may occur.) Does this make any sense, or is the discussion too condensed? Thanks for your patience. --Thomasmeeks (talk) 02:56, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

ImageAnnotator -> signpost
I'm going mostly offline for a week or so; if you think the ImageAnnotator thing is worth mentioning in the forthcoming Signpost, I've written some basic copy at User:Finlay McWalter/sandbox. Feel free to edit or cull with however little mercy you think appropriate. Thanks. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 01:33, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

News story?
Hi Jarry, I am new contributor at the Signpost. I saw a tweet that siebot recently made its 10 million edit on the projects, is it news-worthy enough to be mentioned on the Technology Report section? Thanks.--Theo10011 (talk) 11:42, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Userfy deleted article
Hello Jarry1250, I was wondering if you could help me with reviving a page as you have done for me before, I had a page created but it was deleted but was undergoing maintenence while being created which was stopped temporarily due to my computer problems. However in a seeming violation against WP:INSPECTOR it was deleted. The page was List of sponsored sports competitions so could you please bring back it's contents in a userfied version so I may continue my work on it along with alter the critiera? I have already asked this of Billinghurst but he hasn't replied so could you do it please? The C of E.          God Save The Queen! (talk) 20:01, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

A message
Seems you have a message waiting for you over at WP:VPM. :-) Just a heads up! Killiondude (talk) 06:12, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Microformats
You recently !voted on Requests for comment/Microformats. This is a courtesy note to let you now that I have now posted, as promised, my view there, and to ask you revisit the debate. Andy Mabbett (User: Pigsonthewing ); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 16:13, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Uganda Development Corporation
 — Rlevse • Talk  • 18:02, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Nakivubo Pronouncement
Calmer  Waters  18:02, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 August newsletter
We have our final eight! The best of luck to those who remain. A bumper newsletter this week as we start our home straight.


 * Pool A's winner was . Awarded the top score overall this round, Sturmvogel_66 writes primarily on military history, favouring Naval warfare.
 * Pool B's winner was . Awarded the top score for featured articles this round, Casliber writes primarily on natural sciences, especially botany and ornithology.
 * Pool A's close second was . Awarded the top score for featured pictures this round, Sasata writes primarily on natural sciences, favouring mycology.
 * Pool B's close second was . Awarded the top score for good articles and topics this round, ThinkBlue primarily writes content related to television and film, including 30 Rock.
 * The first wildcard was . Awarded the top score for did you knows and valued pictures this round, TonyTheTiger writes on a number of topics, including baseball, American football and Chicago.
 * The second wildcard was . Someone who has helped the Cup behind the scenes all year, White Shadows said "I'm still in shock that I made it this far" and writes primarily on Naval warfare, especially U-boats.
 * The third wildcard was . Awarded the top score for featured lists and topics this round, Staxringold primarily writes on sport and television, including baseball and 30 Rock.
 * The fourth wildcard was . Entering the final eight only on the final day of the round, William S. Saturn writes on a number of topics, mostly related to Texas.

We say goodbye to the six who fell at the final hurdle. only just missed out on a place in the final eight. was not far behind. was awarded top points for in the news this round. contributed a variety of did you know articles. said "I'm surprised to have survived so far into the competition", but was extactic to see Finland in the semi-finals. did not score this round, but has scored highly in previous rounds. We also say goodbye to, who withdrew earlier this month after spending six weeks overseas. Anyone interested in this round's results can see them here and here. Thank you to for these.

Signups for next year's competition are now open. Planning is ongoing, with a key discussion about judges for next year open. Discussion about how next year's scoring will work is ongoing, and thoughts are more than welcome at Wikipedia talk:WikiCup/Scoring. Also, TonyTheTiger is compiling some information and statistics on the finalists here- the final eight are encouraged to add themselves to the list.

Our final eight will play it out for two months, after which we will know 2010's WikiCup winner, and a variety of prizes will be awarded. As ever, anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page. If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 23:11, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

New DNB WikiProject
For information: I have set up WikiProject Dictionary of National Biography, since the time has certainly come when there should be a place for collective discussion of the DNB adaptation effort. Please come and participate. Charles Matthews (talk) 09:28, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Template:Infobox UK school
Hi, unfortunately you were right: you have broken something at Template:Infobox UK school. Articles now display if there is no image, e.g. Sixth Form College, Farnborough. - Fayenatic (talk) 22:29, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Aisha Y. Musa
That was the fastest CSD I think I have ever witnessed! Supertouch (talk) 19:23, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Adopt-a-user reminder
Hello, I have completed a general cleanup of the adopter information page for the adopt-a-user project, located here. During my cleanup, I have removed several inactive and retired users. In order to provide interested adoptees with an easy location to find adopters, it is essential that the page be up-to-date with the latest information possible. Thus:


 * If you are no longer interested in being an adopter, please remove yourself from the list.
 * If you are still interested, please check the list to see if any information needs to be updated or added - especially your availability. Thank you.


 * You are receiving this message because you are listed as an adopter here.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Netalarm (talk) at 03:39, 23 September 2010 (UTC).

sorry I can't join your wiki econ project (you asked me too in January)
I am permabanned (TCO). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.246.156.232 (talk) 19:59, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

WP:ECON and Richard Cantillon
Since you put out the WP:ECON newsletter, I thought you would be interested in knowing that Richard Cantillon is a current featured article candidate. JonCatalán(Talk) 06:34, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 September newsletter
We are half-way through our final round, entering the home straight. leads at the time of writing with 1180 points, immediately followed by with 1175 points. closely follows in third place with 1100 points. For those who are interested, data about the finalists has been compiled at WikiCup/History/2010/finalists, while a list of content submitted by all WikiCup contestants prior to this round has been compiled at WikiCup/History/2010/Submissions. As ever, anything contestants worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.

Despite controversy, the WikiCup remains open. Signups for next year's competition are more than welcome, and suggestions for how next year's competition will work are appreciated at Wikipedia talk:WikiCup/Scoring. More general comments and discussions should be directed at the WikiCup talk page. One month remains in the 2010 WikiCup, after which we will know our champion. Good luck everyone! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 23:05, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Pending changes
As it happens, I've already written it up at n&n. So...where do we put it? Res Mar 00:33, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm going to steal it for Tech, it's been a slow tech week. I'll leave a note, of course :) - Jarry1250 [Who? Discuss.] 12:49, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi, we just had an e.c. I've incorporated your changes to News and notes, but since I added lots of invisible queries and copy-edited the Pending changes entry, I've included it here (for want of a better place; please remove when you're finished with it): Tony  (talk)  14:26, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks Tony, all done. Of course, you are welcome to review the final version, I changed it myself, you see. The only factual thing was that I believe ResMar was right in saying only admins can/could apply PC to articles, AFAIK there is no way of extending this ability to other editors. - Jarry1250 [Who? Discuss.] 14:51, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Great&mdash;my "list of parts of the Signpost I have contributed to" is expanding. That only leaves the Arb Reports and ITN. :P Res Mar 15:45, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

An update from adopt a user
Hi there ! You may be wondering, what have I done to sound the alarm this time? Nothing. I'm messaging you in regards to the adopt-a-user program, which currently has a backlog of users wishing to be adopted. This doesn't make much sense, as we have a considerable list of users offer adoption, so there shouldn't be any backlog. I've begun to eliminate this backlog myself through a matching program, but I need your help to make it work. Of course, adoptees and adopters don't have to go through there, but I believe it helps eliminate the backlog because someone is actively matching pairs.

On the list of adopters, I have modified the middle column to say "Interests." It's easier working with other users that have similar interests, so if it's not too much to ask, could you add your interests in the middle column? For example, if I was interested in hurricanes, computers, business, and ... reptiles? I would place those in the middle column. Counter-vandalism and the like can also be included (maintenance should be used as the general term). The more interests, the better, since adoptees can learn more about you and choose the one they feel most comfortable working with. The information about when you're most active and other stuff can go into the "Notes" section to the right.

Finally, I've gone around and asked adoptees (and will in the future) to fill in a short survey so adopters can take the initiative and contact users they feel comfortable working with. We all know that most adoptees just place the adopt me template on their user page and leave it - so it's up to us to approach them and offer adoption. So, please take a look at the survey, adopt those that fit your interests, and maybe watchlist it so you can see the interests of adoptees and adopt one that fits your interests in the future.

Once again, thank you for participating in the adopt-a-user program! If you wish to respond to this post, please message me on my talk page.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Netalarm (talk) at 05:18, 11 October 2010 (UTC).

Minor bug with tranclusion counter
The entry box has problems if the name contains "&". Rgds, Rich Farmbrough, 19:52, 12 October 2010 (UTC).

WP:Good articles/recent
Hi, it seems that LivingBot has not been updating WP:Good articles/recent since WP:GA was split into subpages (very large diff). Just bringing it to your attention. Ucucha 02:16, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * It cut off again about 18 hours ago and has missed about a dozen promotions.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:22, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * It is my opinion that if it goes down and then comes back up it should list what it found when it was down. I don't know if you should change based on my opinion, but I would change it.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:02, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
 * What are you going to do. It just missed two of my GAs.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:44, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Signpost Help
No problem Jarry, I will look into it on monday. Please feel free to leave a mention in the article status notes, if there is something specific you want me to check or update before publishing time. Sorry for the late reply. Regards. Theo10011 (talk) 21:27, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

template tool
Do you have a tool or something that can tell which templates have zero or less than 10 transclusions? I am trying to resurrect WikiProject United States and there appear to be hundreds of templates that relate to United States related topics and a lot arent being used or aren't used enough to be worth keeping/need to be merged. --Kumioko (talk) 00:20, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

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

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

The WikiCup has faced criticism in the last month – hopefully, we will take something positive from it and create a better contest for next year. Like Wikipedia itself, the Cup is a work in progress, and ideas for how it should work are more than welcome on the WikiCup talk page and on the scoring talk page. Also, people are more than welcome to sign up for next year's competition on the signup page. Well done and thank you to everyone involved – the Cup has been a pleasure to run, and we, as judges, have been proud to be a part of it. We hope that next year, however the Cup is working, and whoever is running it, it will be back, stronger and more popular than ever. Until then, goodbye and happy editing! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 03:07, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Talk
76.66.203.138 (talk) 06:24, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I was looking for some information about open information intermediaries and saw that you had deleted the page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_innovation_intermediaries in August 2009 because of unambiguous copyright infringement. The page still exists under wapedia (http://wapedia.mobi/en/Open_innovation_intermediaries) and people use it there because it provides useful information.

Can you tell me what the problem with the wikipedia page was? If there is only something small that needs to be changed, can the wiki page be un-deleted and edited to fix the problem?

Thanks in advance, Sigma0 1 (talk) 23:48, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note on 'open innovation intermediaries' article. The page numbers quoted on http://wapedia.mobi/en/Open_innovation_intermediaries mention a range of 25 pages, it seems that only one sentence in quotation marks is taken verbatim from the book (which is ok, right?), the rest is a summary of pp 139-164. Several companies listed after the first paragraph have been founded later than the book was published, that information is wholly independent of the book. I am wondering if you could un-delete the article? Sigma0 1 (talk) 17:57, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi -- thanks for the quick reply. I agree about the unsuitability of examples, especially if they form most of the article. If the examples are removed, though, most references will be removed with the content, and the article will remain a stub. What would you recommend to do about it? Sigma0 1 (talk) 20:11, 11 November 2010 (UTC) Thanks a lot, I appreciate. Thanks also for the reference to the wikipedia--work-in-progress article, I had not read it before but I subscribe to what it says. Sigma0 1 (talk) 21:03, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

"▲" to "?"
What happened here? Anomie⚔ 18:31, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

BRFA
Thanks, it is a relief to have that one out of the way. (Really I only attract drama in comparatively short chunks - well this one has run for a bit - but usually it's annual and short.) Rich Farmbrough, 04:31, 17 November 2010 (UTC).

OgreBot
In this edit you marked OgreBot as already having the flag, but it doesn't seem to have it. Did you do that intentionally, or was it an oversight? Anomie⚔ 14:51, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Probably needs a flag. I'm glad one of us hasn't forgotten how to administer BRFA properly :) - Jarry1250 [Who? Discuss.] 19:40, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I actually only noticed because I was testing for AnomieBOT 48 and threw some old revisions at it to see if it would correctly update the Approved section. ;) Anomie⚔ 23:08, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh my, I just posted this question at Bots/Requests for approval/OgreBot 2 and came here to place a tb template. Guess that's not necessary, as long as someone notifies a crat. :) Magog the Ogre (talk) 02:17, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Announcements
LivingBot seems to be repeatedly adding an incorrect "good articles" announcement to Announcements. - dcljr (talk) 01:45, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Template talk:Infobox UK school
Hi Jarry. We have hundreds of school crests and logos showing as a huge blur in the UK school infobox. The image slot in the infobox is meant  for crests and logos that  are never generally  larger than 100 - 150px, and is not  intended for a photo  of the school. What we could have, is a 250px slot at  the bottom  of the infobox for a photo. The great advantage is that  instead of looking  for parameters to  prune out, we could be looking  for new one that  a re needed. Any parameters that  are not  populated just  don't  show so  there's no  problem leaving  them  in  the template. I think it would be a good idea to leave a message at  Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Schools and get  some feedback before anyone does anything  that  might  have site-wide consequences. Cheers, --Kudpung (talk) 10:31, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Trial Edits for User:CactusBot
Hi Jarry, when saving page captcha is required due to change of external link. How can I avoid this? --Cactus26 (talk) 16:56, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
 * It's ok, I found out that I needed 10 edits before to be autoconfirmed.--Cactus26 (talk) 17:16, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Schools
Hi Jarry1250. Please bear with me if you  are already  aware of this. In early  September changes were made to  an infobox template that  affected the display of hundreds of school crests/logos in  the UK schools infobox. This is now being taken care of and you  may  find the discussions on  this page interesting: Template talk:Infobox UK school,  do  however leave a message here or here if you  come across any  that  are still  not displaying  correctly. If you are still  actively  interested in schools and and are not  already  a member, and would like to  help  out on  school pages and school  templates, you  may  wish  to  consider joining  the WP:WPSCHOOLS project where you  can also  stay  abreast  of developments by  adding  its talk  page to  your watchlist. Happy editing!--Kudpung (talk) 03:40, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Deployments this week
Hi Jarry - one last minute notes that you may want to note in this week's tech update:
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)/Archive_82#Pending_Changes_feature_update

I'm planning a techblog post and wikitech-l post today as well, but thought I'd get a note here for you. -- RobLa-WMF (talk) 21:20, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

infobox UK school
Hi, Jarry1250. You may recall that you mentioned that you could do the bot part of this proposed change. Well, I've made the change to the template, and now a bot is needed. Kanguole 12:54, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Resource request
I have filled your request at RR. Please respond there. trespassers william (talk) 21:34, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Announcements - Wikiproject:TV
10 Good articles or Featured_articles? Wiklol (talk) 13:43, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Your post on my talk page
Hi, I've responded to you on my talk page. Regards Lightmouse (talk) 11:41, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Bot editing question
Jarry, I posed a question to User:Cyde here, but a TPS informs me that Cyde may have left the project.

I don't know what procedures we have for editing bots in this case, but I hope you will know.

In short, I think the list at should list prods which are eligible for deletion, not those whose eligibility is going to come up sometime during the day. While it isn't hard to check the time, I don't think there's any need to check the time. There's enough to do, why not modify the settings so all listed articles are eligible?-- SPhilbrick  T  18:42, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Signpost review of the year
I've started the page for our annual review of the year, and I was wondering if, as our regular "Technology report" writer, you wanted to write the section on technical changed. Ideally, this would be a few paragraphs summing up the major technology changes this year. I was wondering if you'd fancy doing it? Thanks,  wacky wace  10:20, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for doing that, an interesting and engaging read!  wacky wace  16:44, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Template count - unicode/utf8
I tried to find a template in non-english characters here in http://toolserver.org/~jarry/templatecount/index.php but not returning but received junk characters in the search box. I tried இந்திய அதிகார அமைப்புகள் தகவல்பெட்டி in sub domain ta. -- Mahir78 (talk) 17:52, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup bot
Hey. You said here that you'd be happy to script a bot, and the WikiCup starts the day after tomorrow... Sorry, I may have left this a tiny bit last minute :) I'm sure you know what it needs to do; the points things will be awarded are listed here. All it needs to do is multiply the number of entries on the list by the number of points it's worth, and slam it in the appropriate column. I will knock up an example table in a few minutes for you so that you know what it looks like. Think you're up for it? J Milburn (talk) 13:02, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * It wasn't massively reliable. Any chance we could get the thing speedy approved? If it's only going to edit a few very select Wikipedia pages... Drawing up the table for you now. J Milburn (talk) 13:30, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * This will give you an idea of what the table will look like. The submissions page will look pretty much the same as it did last year, the the point changes (obviously) and "GAR" replacing "VP". J Milburn (talk) 13:48, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * More frequent updates would be very appreciated. J Milburn (talk) 13:57, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * They were every 6 last year... I was actually hoping for them to be a bit more frequent than that :) Would that not be practical? J Milburn (talk) 14:00, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that's brilliant. It's all coming together... J Milburn (talk) 14:29, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Hey, if you're still about, could you just double-check this sheet; if that's what they look like, (click edit this page) will the bot be accidentially awarding people points or anything? If you're not here, I'll just assume I've guessed rightly. J Milburn (talk) 13:02, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2011 WikiCup!
Hello, happy new year and welcome to the 2011 WikiCup! Your submissions' page can be found here and instructions of how to update the page can be found here and on the submissions' page itself. From the submissions' page, a bot will update the main scoresheet. Our rules have been very slightly updated from last year; the full rules can be found here. Please remember that you can only receive points for content on which you have done significant work in 2011; nominations of work from last year and "drive-by" nominations will not be awarded points. Signups are going to remain open through January, so if you know of anyone who would like to take part, please direct them to WikiCup/2011 signups. The judges can be contacted on the WikiCup talk page, on their respective talk pages, or by email. Other than that, we will be in contact at the end of every month with the newsletter. If you want to stop or start receiving newsletters, please remove your name from or add your name to this list. Good luck! J Milburn and The ed17 12:58, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

2010 in review
You should add the discovery of the Wikipedia backups to the Technical section-it's pretty big news, and it's in your jurisdiction. Cheers, Res Mar 04:09, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

User talk:J Milburn/archive31
Myself and others have replied there. J Milburn (talk) 20:22, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Minor goof in Signpost
Just fyi - my full name is George William Herbert - not Herbet.

No offense taken or anything, I just spotted it and wanted to make sure you knew. Other than that, good writeup of the discussions. Thanks!

Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 01:06, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Grigory Potemkin
The DYK project (nominate) 12:02, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Kerala image rotation
Template:Kerala image rotation has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:05, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Request for amendment
Hi Jarry,

I'm filing another Arbcom request for amendment. You can see where it is from my contributions. If I can, I'll get you the link. Thanks. Lightmouse (talk) 15:01, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Ivan Vladislav of Bulgaria
Greetings! I am grateful for your review, contributions and remarks on the article. However, I am currently in a session and my exams will finish om 30 January. Is it possible the nomination to stay on hold that long, so that I can address the issues? Regards, --Gligan (talk) 17:35, 16 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the swift answer :) I have put a note in the talk page of the nomination. I will write again on your talk page when I address your remarks. Best, --Gligan (talk) 18:07, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Template transclusion count
Dear Jarry,

your tool "Template transclusion count" suddenly doesn't work. At least on es.wikipedia, and fr.wikipedia. It did that, but not now and I don't know why. Could you check it out?

Some days ago for "Plantilla:IUCN" on es.wikipedia, it was 3107 transclusions. Today it is 0 and there was no changes in the template. I checked also other templates both in es. and fr.wikipedia.

Thanks for your program and your help. Flakinho (talk) 06:05, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Cobweb diagrams
Hi Jarry-- I believe you updated the diagrams in Cobweb model. Your graphs are correct, but the labels are wrong. I've explained how to correct them here: Talk:Cobweb_model. Would you correct them, please? I don't know how to edit those files. Thanks! Rinconsoleao (talk) 14:18, 20 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Great job, thanks for your fast response. The diagrams look very good now. Just one small problem remains. On the convergent case, the three prices shown (from top to bottom) should be P1, P3, P2. Currently P3 appears twice. Rinconsoleao (talk) 11:15, 21 January 2011 (UTC)


 * All perfect now. Thanks again!! Rinconsoleao (talk) 12:41, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program is looking for new Online Ambassadors
Hi! I noticed your activity as a Good Article reviewer (and of course, I'm familiar with your excellent work for The Signpost), and wanted to let you know about the Wikipedia Ambassador Program, and specifically the role of Online Ambassador. We're looking for friendly Wikipedians who are good at reviewing articles and giving feedback to serve as mentors for students who are assigned to write for Wikipedia in their classes.

If you're interested, I encourage you to take a look at the Online Ambassador guidelines; the "mentorship process" describes roughly what will be expected of mentors in the coming term. If that's something you want to do, please apply!

You can find instructions for applying at WP:ONLINE. The main things we're looking for in Online Ambassadors are friendliness, regular activity (since mentorship is a commitment that spans several months), and the ability to give detailed, substantive feedback on articles (both short new articles, and longer, more mature ones).

I hope to hear from you soon.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 20:18, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Can you delist my bot request
I do not know how to do it myself but you can delist my bot request. It has been there for over a month with no action and I no longer need it. --Kumioko (talk) 20:00, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Yep if it hasn't been done by know then there isn't any interest in the task. I have seen other bots come and go and mine is still there so I can take a hint. I have also withdrawn as a member of WikiProject United States which is more what I needed it for so I don't really need it. Thanks. --Kumioko (talk) 00:46, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. --Kumioko (talk) 21:54, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Good articles/recent and LivingBot
Hi. LivingBot recently listed British Pakistanis at Good articles/recent, however, the articles does not appear to be a GA. Something probably went wrong. Cheers P. S. Burton  (talk)  20:32, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't know what's really going on. It now listed Patna which is still at GAN. I'm not sure, bot I don't think the problem is my cache.   P. S. Burton  (talk)  16:21, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Mentor
Hi there. My name is Tanisha, I'm a student at Montana State University in Bozeman. In my Federal Indian Law and Policy class for Native American Studies, we are working on a WikiProject. I am VERY new at all of this and have only used Wikipedia for research up until this point. We need to get set up with a mentor for class and I'm hoping you would not mind being a mentor for me :) Thanks!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tanishadk (talk • contribs) 18:02, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

In need of a mentor
Hi, I am a student at Western Carolina University working on my Masters in Public Affairs. Seeing as how I am very new to wikipedia, I am in need of a mentor. Please let me know if you are interested! Thanks, Heather Smile234 (talk) 18:23, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

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

A running total of claims can be seen here. However, numerous competitors are yet to score at all- please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. The number of points that will be needed to reach round two is not clear- everyone needs to get their entries in now to guarantee their places! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 22:36, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Ivan Vladislav of Bulgaria
Greetings! I have responded as much as I could on your comments about the GA candidature of Ivan Vladislav. Thank you for your patience. Best, --Gligan (talk) 18:13, 29 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I would like to thank you for promoting Ivan Vladislav for a FA. I am sorry for responding so lately but I was not at home these day... relaxing after the exams :):):) As for the reviewing of articles, my skills in English are inadequate for such a responsibility. Regards, --Gligan (talk) 15:53, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

User agent
Just beginning to get my head round Wikibot.php5. After a lot of struggle, I found that the problem was that instead of returning the requested page, the en.wikipedia.org server returns: Scripts should use an informative User-Agent string with contact information, or they may be IP-blocked without notice. Have fixed my own copy. &mdash; RHaworth 17:28, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Help with cookies - please!
I really am stuck! Please see this sequence of HTTP request and response headers made from the wolfsbane toolserver. The first pair are from the use of login in Wikibot.php5. The next is a GET which sends the expected six cookies apparently correctly. But the response to it has completely ignored the cookies. Can you spot what I am doing wrong? That report was generated with this call and the source of the script can be seen here. &mdash; RHaworth 21:02, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Not my specialist subject but I can give it a look. What's the problem? How do you know something's gone wrong? Missing the cache is indicative of being logged in. - Jarry1250 [Who? Discuss.] 21:33, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

When I try to fetch a straight Wikipedia page - index.php?title=foo it has "Log in / create account" at top right instead of my details! Because every page returned to a logged in user should have six Set-Cookie: lines in the header. &mdash; RHaworth 22:07, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Template transclusion count tool question
I like your "Template transclusion count" tool and use it regularly.

I was wondering if you knew about another tool or built-in Wikipedia feature to get a list of articles using a given template, instead of just a count?

To see samples of a template usage.

Thanks, Bonzon (talk) 02:03, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup bot problem
Please see here. I'm not sure what's going on. J Milburn (talk) 09:08, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much. I typed out the name of the submissions page manually when I was working on the template, so obviously some errors creeped in... J Milburn (talk) 13:00, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Question
Hi there. I have a question on one of our assignments. We are supposed to research 3-5 articles and list them on our user page. I cannot figure out how to list them on my user page. I am usually very internet/computer/etc. savvy but for some reason, I am having a hard time figuring out our Wikiproject assignments. Thank you for your help!

Tanishadk (talk) 22:15, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you!
Thank you so much for your help! I appreciate it! Tanishadk (talk) 22:40, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program Newsletter: 13 February 2011
Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 18:23, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
FYI Kudpung (talk) 15:18, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup bot not recognizing template output
Hi, at WikiCup/History/2011/Submissions/Gary King I use cupnom to generate a nomination instead of typing it out. Could you please make it so that the bot recognizes this output? Last year, the bot recognized the template's output so I don't know why it doesn't this year. Thanks in advance! Gary King ( talk  ·  scripts )  18:23, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

"Oxford Dictionary of Economics"
Please excuse me for writing on your other Talk Page. I am answering the criticism of the "Oxford Dictionary of Economics". First, here is what you wrote in your criticism: <Blockquote> While looking for something else, I ran across a link to the "ODE" (not to be confused with the "OED"!). Out of curiousity, I checked its entries for both the PPF and PED, and I was unpleasantly surprised to find that both consist of earlier versions of the WP articles! See, e.g., http://www.enotes.com/topic/Price_elasticity_of_demand

We are not amused. We expected a bit more from an "Oxford Dictionary of ..." anything!

However, the "Research" tab at the same site (enotes.com) has a "Business" tab that links to a separate "encyclopedia" section: http://www.enotes.com/econ-encyclopedia

This section does contain separate articles (not from WP) on a very wide variety of the topics you'd expect it to, but access to more than the 1st paragraph or so of a longer article requires membership (US $14.95/month, or about ₤10 at current exchange rates). The "Business Group" tab provides "expert" answers to questions submitted by others. My quick, unscientific sampling of the answers found that they spanned the spectrum from extremely weak to quite good. (This part apparently doesn't require membership.)

I noticed the query above re the status of the PPC article. I'm almost through with my taxes, so I hope I'll be able to turn my attention back to the article within a few days. During breaks from my tax return, I've done some research into the necessary and sufficient conditions for the linear and convex PPC cases. I'm pretty sure there's more to it than just constant and increasing returns to scale (respectively). I vaguely recall that there are 3 conditions that are necessary and sufficient, at least for the linear PPC, and constant returns to scale is one of them. (I haven't taught this topic in a very long time, so those synapses have atrophied, and this is a fairly complex topic.) I've found quite a few sources that cover 1 or 2 of the necessary conditions, but not always the same ones, which is what's making the search so time-consuming and frustrating! I've yet to find an authoritative discussion of the sufficient conditions, though. This may end up as another "synthesis" problem!

BTW, the last time you left me a message, I didn't get an Orange Box notification. I discovered your message completely by accident. --Jackftwist (talk) 17:21, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

</Blockquote>

</BR> Now please understand my response to this in the following: </BR>


 * I looked at the "Oxford Dictionary of Economics" for the "Price Elasticity" (of demand) to compare what it said to what is said in the link you referenced in your discussion above (http://www.enotes.com/topic/Price_elasticity_of_demand). The wording in the explanation used in the link you indicated above and the "Oxford Dictionary of Economics" is completely different!  Of course the explanations/"Definitions" must be similar, as this is a very basic concept in Economics that is taught in every "Micro Economics 101" course; and the Economics Community accept only 1 definition (and its implications) for the PED.  The wording and methodology used to teach this concept differs from professor to professor, and from book to book.  However, the basic jist must always be the same.   To say that it is taken from an earlier WP article is disingenuous; since the original definition has been well established for more than 3 quarters of a century.  Was the Definition/explanation taken from an earlier WP article, or did both the WP article and the "Oxford Dictionary of Economics” use the same original explanation (and "Source") as the basis for this explanation.  I believe the latter is true!  Please do not disparage a book/source that accurately reproduce valid explanations (even if a bit sparse) of Economic Principles, Economic Principles for Analysis, and Economic Events without (true and) proper justification in doing so.  You have no proof that this book simply used the prior WP article!  You can only prove that (at least) both used the same original source (all economists use the definition propagated by the original source).  Have you not taken the same definition?  Did you get it from the WP article; or did the WP article writer (Attend your class and) take it from you?  Consider the "Necessary Condition" versus the "Sufficient Condition".  The "Necessary Conditions" for saying that the "Oxford Dictionary of Economics” took its definition from the WP article are that the WP Article was written first and the 2 definitions are at least similar.  However, this is not a "Sufficient Condition" for asserting the validity of this statement; in much the same way a "Correlation" is not "Sufficient" to show one Event that is Correlated with another is in fact the cause for the other.  Case in point; 2 students might always be in the Social Science Building together and speak to one another before class, but it doesn't mean that the reason for them to meet in the Social Science building is to talk!!  They could just (by chance) have a class at the same time, and have (by chance) struck up a conversation that led them to later become friends (and to want to talk again).  Do you get what I'm saying?  Please do not be disparage others/sources without proper justification.

</BR> Thanks in advance for your understanding in this matter and for you future action. </BR>

New messages
Wikicopter what i do s + c cup&#124;former 17:54, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Mentoring students: be sure to check in on them
This message is going out to all of the Online Ambassadors who are, or will be, serving as mentors this term.

Hi there! This is just a friendly reminder to check in on what your mentees are doing. If they've started making edits, take a look and help them out or do some example fixes for them, if they need it. And if they are doing good, let them know it!

If you aren't mentoring anyone yet, it looks like you will be soon; at least one large class is asking us to assign mentors for them, and students in a number of others haven't yet gotten to asking ambassadors to be their mentors, but may soon. --Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 20:06, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Final warning
I will ask the roots to disable your Toolserver account if you do not fix your vulnerabilities as described in my emails. — Dispenser 22:57, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Footnotess
</BR> </BR> /* "Oxford Dictionary of Economics" */ MGMontini (talk) 04:07, 25 February 2011 (UTC)Did you really read the entries in the "Oxford Dictionary of Economics"???

Economic Profit vs Monopoly Profit
You have not answered my Post in Economic Profit responding to you statements/questions. I left at least a little bit of detail for you to consider. The source I left I believe is a relatively good one to (at least) just explain my points there; Monopoly Profit and Oligopoly Profit situations are significantly different in the considerations that must be taken into account. Please respond to my post appropriately, taking into account the explanation my (brief) source, and any other professional/scholarly source you may want to refer to, actually says. I believe intellectual honesty will mean that you will have to at least concede all of the points I make, and understand why it is so important to clearly differentiate, and treat separately the Oligopoly situation and the Pure Monopoly situation. </BR> Thanks in advance for your consideration and response,

Regards,

MGMontini (talk) 04:16, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Grigory Potemkin
Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Grigory Potemkin 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.  Chzz  ► 14:55, 26 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Congratulations on getting that through GA - for working so hard on it, despite my being so pedantic :-)


 * I certainly think it has a good chance at moving on to FAC. As we discussed, there are certainly improvements that can be made. You're already well-aware of the sourcing issue; anything you can do to make progress on that would be beneficial.


 * And mostly, I suggest two things; a) get as many people as possible to look it over - of course, without pestering. So - project groups, copyeditor / peer-review, people you know, and so forth. And b) find similar topic-area FA's, and really have a close look at them for ideas. Look at their FAR too.


 * Hope to speak soon. Thanks again - it really was a pleasure working with you.  Chzz  ►  17:32, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Æthelberht II of East Anglia
Hi Jarry1250, thanks for taking a look at the article, a few points from me: --Amitchell125 (talk) 14:57, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I not sure what you want me to do about the copyright tagging of File:St Ethelbert the King.jpg, could you explain?
 * I've used the map I created (File:The kingdom of East Anglia (Early Saxon period).svg) on two of my other good articles, so I'm keen to keep it in! I've asked 'Wikipedia:Media copyright questions' about this file, as you suggested.
 * I'm British, so my spelling is too - are there some mistakes that you know of (I will check for myself as well?
 * I've never been able to put images onto Wikimedia Commons successfully, is there a way of getting it done by someone else?

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

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

Just a reminder of the rules; if you have done significant work on content this year and it is promoted in this round, you may claim for it. Also, anything that was promoted after the end of round one but before the beginning of round two may be claimed for in round two. Details of the rules can be found on this page. For those interested in statistics, a running total of claims can be seen here, and a very interesting table of that information (along with the highest scorers in each category) can be seen here. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 23:44, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

EPTA
Hello Jarry, I am relatively new to all this. Could you please explain me how (resp. how fast) it will be after having sent the note from the copyright owner to permissions-en AT wikimedia DOT org that the copyright infringment tag would be removed? Do I have to do something or will this be done by an admin or robot? Thx in advance. --Mnent (talk) 12:22, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Thx for your answer. In the meantime the issue has been resolved. Everything is ok. I was just not patient enough ;-) --Mnent (talk) 08:52, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Proposal to expand Frescobot 6
It sounds a good idea... I will have to double check it's the correct category, but it could be done. I will write a script and ask for a new approval as soon as possible. -- Basilicofresco  (msg) 23:47, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Good articles/recent
Hi, has the recent flurry of GA reviews caused by the WikiProject Good articles/GAN backlog elimination drives/March 2011 caused the bot to fall over? I ask as it doesn't seem to be updating. Jezhotwells (talk) 00:00, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi again, it still doesn't seem to be working. Jezhotwells (talk) 15:01, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

infobox UK school again
Hi, Jarry1250. Regarding Bots/Requests for approval/LivingBot 14, I see it did some runs in December and January, but there are still 1300 odd of them left. Will it be running again? Kanguole 00:13, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

I've placed a list at User:Kanguole/LivingBot. Thanks. Kanguole 19:27, 2 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks, that's got most of them. I see there are 304 of them using dcsfurn that weren't changed to urn (updated list at User:Kanguole/LivingBot).  Is that because it's a non-visual change not permitted by the bot approval?  Kanguole 14:37, 6 March 2011 (UTC)


 * OK, fair enough. Thanks for your work.  Kanguole 14:58, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Southern Bug (Boh) not Bug
Hi, in this map created by you the Ukrainian river Southern Bug is marked as Polish river Western Bug (simply Bug). There is a little confusion on en wiki because both names are derevated from Ukrainian point of view. Britannica states that proper name for Polish river is Bug (this name is in majority of national wikis). Name of this article Western Bug should be changed to Bug and saved additional Ukrainian name Western Bug. regards Mathiasrex (talk) 16:38, 4 March 2011 (UTC)