User talk:John M Wolfson/Archive 1

Barnstar
Aw shucks, thanks so much!! --John M Wolfson (talk) 23:47, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Dorsey Crowe
Alex Shih (talk) 00:02, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2019 WikiCup!
Hello and Happy New Year!

Welcome to the 2019 WikiCup, the competition begins today. If you have already joined, your submission page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and we will set up your submissions page. One important rule to remember is that only content on which you have completed significant work during 2019, and which you have nominated this year, is eligible for points in the competition, the judges will be checking! 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! The judges for the WikiCup are, , and. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:14, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

WikiCup 2019 Reminder
Hi. I'm DannyS712 (talk), and I just wanted to remind you that you have signed up to compete in this year's WikiCup! There are about 2 weeks left before the first round ends – if you haven't yet made your first submission, there is still time to start; if you have already started, keep up the good work. See your submissions page: here. Good luck!

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 07:33, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

WikiCup 2019 March newsletter
And so ends the first round of the competition. Everyone with a positive score moves on to Round 2. With 56 contestants qualifying, each group in Round 2 contains seven contestants, with the two leaders from each group due to qualify for Round 3 as well as the top sixteen remaining contestants.

Our top scorers in Round 1 were:


 * 🇺🇸 L293D, a WikiCup newcomer, led the field with ten good articles on submarines for a total of 357 points.
 * Pirate_Flag_of_Henry_Every.svg, a WikiCup veteran, came next with 274 points, mostly from eight featured pictures, restorations of artwork.
 * 🇩🇰 MPJ-DK, a wrestling enthusiast, was in third place with 263 points, garnered from a featured list, five good articles, two DYKs and four GARs.
 * 🇺🇸 Usernameunique came next at 243, with a featured article and a good article, both on ancient helmets.
 * Flag of the United States Library of Congress 2.svg Squeamish Ossifrage was in joint fifth place with 224 points, mostly garnered from bringing the 1937 Fox vault fire to featured article status.
 * Ed! was also on 224, with an amazing number of good article reviews (56 actually).

These contestants, like all the others, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. Between them, contestants completed reviews on 143 good articles, one hundred more than the number of good articles they claimed for, thus making a substantial dent in the review backlog. Well done all!

Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews.

If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk).

A page you started (Brendan Reilly (politician)) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Brendan Reilly (politician).

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with. And, don't forget to sign your reply with.

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

MainlyTwelve (talk) 14:29, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

FAC mentorship
Sorry to have been AWOL, work has been busy. I didn't realize you were going to submit the article for FA right away. If you do withdraw, send me a link to the peer review page and I'll give you the thorough comments I meant to do earlier. If not, I'll try to help at FAC, but it's harder to do there with everyone else chiming in at the same time. --Coemgenus (talk) 14:57, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
 * No problem at all, I probably should have waited a bit before starting the FAC. It doesn't seem to be going so well at the moment, so I'll probably start a peer review later today or tomorrow and invite you to it. Thanks for your help! -John M Wolfson (talk) 15:12, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

DYK for 1927 Chicago mayoral election
— Maile (talk) 00:01, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

WikiCup 2019 Reminder
Hi. I'm DannyS712 (talk), and I just wanted to remind you that you are a current participant in round 2 of this year's WikiCup! There are only a few days until the second round ends – if you haven't made you first submission for this round yet, there is still time to start; if you have already started, keep up the good work. See your submissions page: here. Good luck!

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 05:00, 25 April 2019 (UTC) on behalf of DannyS712 (talk)

WikiCup 2019 May newsletter
The second round of the 2019 WikiCup has now finished. Contestants needed to scored 32 points to advance into round 3. Our top four scorers in round 2 all scored over 400 points and were:

Other notable performances were put in by Barkeep49 with six GAs, 🇺🇸 Ceranthor, 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Lee Vilenski, and  Canada Hky, each with seven GARs, and 🇩🇰 MPJ-DK with a seven item GT.
 * 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 Cas Liber (1210), our winner in 2016, with two featured articles and three DYKs. He also made good use of the bonus points available, more than doubling his score by choosing appropriate articles to work on.
 * 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿 Kosack (750), last year's runner up, with an FA, a GA, two FLs, and five DYKs.
 * Pirate_Flag_of_Henry_Every.svg (480), a WikiCup veteran, with 16 featured pictures, mostly restorations.
 * Zwerg Nase (461), a seasoned competitor, with a FA, a GA and an ITN item.

So far contestants have achieved nine featured articles between them and a splendid 80 good articles. Commendably, 227 GARs have been completed during the course of the 2019 WikiCup, so the backlog of articles awaiting GA review has been reduced as a result of contestants' activities. The judges are pleased with the thorough GARs that are being performed, and have hardly had to reject any. As we enter the third round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:46, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Suggestion
I saw your reward offer regarding the Presidents of the US. I suggest you post a notice at the talk page of the Guild of Copy Editors. Cheers! Thinker78 (talk) 22:49, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you, I shall do so. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 22:52, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

New York City Board of Aldermen
I'm having difficulty understanding two points in article [New York City Board of Aldermen]].


 * "... either person possessing only a casting vote in the Board."

Never having heard the term "casting vote" I searched and found article casting vote. From that I saw that this is the situation more recognizable as "deciding vote" or "tie-breaking vote". I suppose it depends on whether you favor the technical term, in which case you should link to casting vote, or the descriptive "tie-breaking vote". Again, *never* having heard that particular term though having heard of the same situation repeatedly over a long time, I'd love to see something helpful done here.


 * "... corruption, which lavished on the assistant aldermen."

The word 'lavished' looks misused. Perhaps the intent was to say that Tweed's corrupt system 'depended' on the system of electing (corrupt) assistant aldermen?

Shenme (talk) 02:25, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

--UTRSBot (talk) 16:54, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Perhaps this should have been put on that article's talk page. In any event, "casting vote" is widely used in the US if I am not mistaken, but I guess I can link it if felt appropriate. And from what I remember of the Times article, assistant aldermen were lavished with gifts courtesy of the machine, though I can check again on that. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 03:54, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

IP block exempt
I have granted your account an exemption from IP blocking. This will allow you to edit through full blocks affecting your IP address when you are logged in.

Please read the page IP block exemption carefully, especially the section on IP block exemption conditions.

Appropriate usage and compliance with the policy may be checked (through the use of CheckUser) periodically, due to the nature of block exemption, and block exemption will be removed when no longer needed (for example, when the block it is related to expires).

I hope this will enhance your editing, and allow you to edit successfully and without disruption. I saw your request on meta and went ahead and assessed for local IPBE. This should solve the global block issues. I granted it for a year since I suspect that IP will be blocked again in the future. Local IPBE allows you to edit through global blocks on en.wiki. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:37, 23 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Thank you, I will use it well. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 19:56, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

DYK for New York City Board of Aldermen
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 00:04, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Housekeeping
G'day (I am always happy to see anyone pay attention to the WP:FAR process!). I was made one of the coordinators of the FAR process, which sort of hamstrings me a bit from finding Featured Articles that have degraded and nominating them. The etiquette usually is to post a note on the talk page and if there is no action after a fortnight then to nominate. This page - User:Dweller/Featured Articles that haven't been on Main Page - is another repository of articles that have not been mainpaged. A few of us have been trying to go through and fix or review them, so all input here would be greatly appreciated. Also, we greatly value any comments at FAR due to the sounds of tumbleweds blowing through it :) Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:59, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I'll have to take a look at it. Thanks for reaching out. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 15:00, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Great, any questions just ask Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:34, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Four Award
Aw shucks, thanks! – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 18:23, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

AoE II
I was in the midst of self-reverting. The game clearly uses St. Vitus as the model for the Frank wonder, but the significance (ff any) is lost since that's a Prague cathedral, not Frankish. Best to just leave it out, I agree. -- ferret (talk) 20:18, 7 June 2019 (UTC)


 * My apologies for any interruption of your editing. Since the article is currently in the midst of potential Featured Article Removal, we'll need sources for such information, as well as other content in the article. Best wishes! – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 20:20, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Louis B. Anderson
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

1927 Chicago mayoral election scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the 1927 Chicago mayoral election article has been scheduled as today's featured article for July 4, 2019. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Today's featured article/July 4, 2019, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.

We also suggest that you watchlist Main Page/Errors up to the day of this TFA. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me?  10:36, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Precious
You are recipient no. 2242 of Precious, a prize of QAI. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:01, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Aw shucks, thanks! – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 06:02, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
 * You are also fast ;) - only now does the link from the number work, check it out. Proud coauthor of "yesterday's Franz Kafka --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:07, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Edit war warning
Your recent editing history at Larry Sanger shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. QuackGuru ( talk ) 18:59, 27 June 2019 (UTC)