User talk:Kaiser matias/Archive 2010–2011

Articles for deletion nomination of Arthur Griffiths
I have nominated Arthur Griffiths, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Arthur Griffiths. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ash (talk) 16:32, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Category:HC Davos players
It's good that you're adding this but could you also remove Category:Nationalliga A players when doing so? Unless, there are other NLA teams the player has played for which do not have their own categories. RandySavageFTW (talk) 03:02, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Tangradi
Thanks, no worries, he passed ATHLETE now.  Grsz 11  02:50, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!
For your comments on Nikita Filatov, I appreciate the guidance. Canada Hky (talk) 18:37, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

File:Lindenmclean1994.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Lindenmclean1994.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Mosmof (talk) 17:38, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

File:Trevor Linden draft photo 1988.JPG listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Trevor Linden draft photo 1988.JPG, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Mosmof (talk) 17:38, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Asia League
Yeah I can probably whip something up this weekend.--Crossmr (talk) 00:38, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Patrick White
Hi there. I've opened proceedings  YellowMonkey  ( vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll )  09:12, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

WP:Hockey Navbox policy
Since you spoke up in my recent thread, I ask that you please check User:TonyTheTiger/sandbox/Hockey mafia issue and make sure that I am representing WP:HOCKEY correctly.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:17, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

ooh, hey
I remember you from micronations! Remember me, from Amerada? I'm sure I've seen you on Wikipedia before, but I just put two and two together :) -- Earl Andrew - talk 01:58, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

File:Trevor Linden draft photo 1988.JPG listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Trevor Linden draft photo 1988.JPG, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. VernoWhitney (talk) 15:07, 5 June 2010 (UTC) VernoWhitney (talk) 15:07, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

File:Lindenmclean1994.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Lindenmclean1994.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. VernoWhitney (talk) 15:07, 5 June 2010 (UTC) VernoWhitney (talk) 15:07, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Hod Stuart
I finally got around to the copy edit - only a week late! Looks pretty good, though I noted several spelling errors and typos. I've corrected what I've found, but I would suggest going over it again looking for more. Also, I don't think the see-also link to players who died during their careers is accurate. He died after quitting the game, did he not? Good luck when you go to FAC! Resolute 15:53, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Art Ross
I have begun to review Art Ross here. I've made a few initial comments and will do more over the next day or two. Hope to have the review finished by the end of the week at the latest. --Sarastro1 (talk) 21:33, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Review just about done. I've put it on hold for now. --Sarastro1 (talk) 21:43, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Passed, well done. I've made a few minor alterations, but if they change what you wanted to say, feel free to revert. I've also made a couple of other points which you might want to consider if you go for FA. Let me know if you do, and I'd be happy to comment. Finally, please feel free to review some of the GAN articles as the list is getting very long! --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:26, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Bain
I was noticing the images you added and started thinking "I wonder why I never nominated it at GAN?", then saw you did. You'd think for the amount of time I spent digging up sources I would have gone all the way, lol. Resolute 23:59, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Grammar
Hi Kaiser,

Can you tell me what grammar changes were made in this edit? I can't tell from the diff what was actually changed. It doesn't appear that any grammar was modified. Best, Firsfron of Ronchester  17:36, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note, Kaiser. I just couldn't spot the change. Happy editing, Firsfron of Ronchester  17:54, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your work on the WP:Ice Hockey unassessed articles backlog
Kaiser matias,

Thanks for your work on the WP:Ice Hockey unassessed articles backlog. I've noticed that we're working in the same section and have triggered a couple of edit conflicts (at least on my side). I will work from the back of the backlog (from Z, working towards A) to resolve this. Cheers!

TFCforever (talk) 00:37, 5 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Sounds like a plan! TFCforever (talk) 00:41, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Want to congratulate both of you on getting that cleared up. Most of those have been sitting there since I did a run through the hockey articles 2 years ago tagging any that were missing the tag. Unfortunately you started just as I was getting my list together for another go at doing the same thing. So the category is filled back up again. :( -DJSasso (talk) 16:43, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Hockey Mountain
Yeah I put the list together recently after I saw your goal of getting the 1945 class to GA or better, and Resolute had made a comment about the poor shape of the Hall of Famers. I totally agree that the scope was way more than I had anticipated when I first started putting it together. It at least puts it perspective, and as you said it gives something to work towards.--Mo Rock...Monstrous (talk) 21:05, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 * That's good to hear hope you keep up the good work--Mo Rock...Monstrous (talk) 21:15, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Mike Comrie heading
Some sort of problem with the heading? I don't think it's biased at all, more factual than anything else... --Russ Jericho (talk) 02:10, 6 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree with your point on "encyclopedic", definitely. Very well. It stays as it is. Thank you for your assistance. :)

Russ Jericho (talk) 02:30, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Bouchard
I appreciate your nominating Emile Bouchard as a good article. I'd put a fair bit of work into it and was happy with it. Thanks! BashBrannigan (talk) 00:51, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

GA Review of Emile Bouchard
I started a review of the article to help with the overflow of the Sports section. There were a lot of little things that I suggested and a couple of dead links but it shouldn't be too much to do. This is my first GA review so I appreciate any feed back on the process as I know you have written several Good and Featured articles and are probably more adept at this than I am. Also since you only did one edit to this article it might be advisable to do a full copy edit of it, but that's just a suggestion. Thanks--Mo Rock...Monstrous (talk) 19:22, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Art Ross FAC
It's starting to look good. Hope you don't mind me copy-editing it, and if I change anything that should be left or chop too much up, just let me know or revert it. If possible, try to get another copy-editor to have a look, ideally a FA regular, as the only thing I can see being a stumbling block to getting support is the prose. That, and getting anyone to review sports articles... :( --Sarastro1 (talk) 21:47, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I've finished copy-editing. There are just a few questions I've left which I wasn't sure about and I'll be happy to support when they are cleared up. --Sarastro1 (talk) 07:31, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

WP Ice Hockey in the Signpost
"WikiProject Report" would like to focus on WikiProject Ice Hockey for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Also, if you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 02:27, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Michael Grabner GA Review
Hi, I just finished doing a GA review for Michael Grabner. Grammatically there isn't much that needs to be done, but the links are in bad shape. I have placed the article on hold, I'm not going to stick to the 7 days that recommend keeping an article on hold since finding replacements for the dead links could prove to be difficult. As long as I know your working on the issues it will be fine. Cheers--Mo Rock...Monstrous (talk) 04:16, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Dan Bain
You know how I said I was trying to find some kind of information on his family? Out of nowhere, I just happened across this. There is a chance we might pull off an FAC on this article yet! Resolute 03:01, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

2008-09 Pittsburgh Penguins season
Hey Kaiser, I've made the edits you've requested. If there are any more needed, please let me know. Thanks,  Grsz 11 01:47, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Main page appearance
Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on December 31, 2010. You can view the TFA blurb at Today's featured article/December 31, 2010. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article director,. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tbh®tch Talk © Happy Holidays 05:02, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

 

Georges Vézina (1887–1926) was a Canadian professional ice hockey goaltender who played seven seasons in the National Hockey Association (NHA) and nine in the National Hockey League (NHL), all with the Montreal Canadiens. After being signed by the Canadiens in 1910, Vézina played in 327 consecutive regular season games and 39 playoff games, before leaving a game in 1925 due to illness. Vézina was diagnosed with tuberculosis, and died in 1926. The only goaltender to play for the Canadiens between 1910 and 1925, Vézina helped the team win the Stanley Cup in 1916 and 1924, while reaching the Finals three more times. Nicknamed the "Chicoutimi Cucumber" for his calm composure, Vézina allowed the fewest goals against in the league seven times in his career: four times in the NHA and three times in the NHL. In 1918, Vézina became the first NHL goaltender to both record a shutout and earn an assist on a goal. At the start of the 1926–27 NHL season, the Canadiens donated the Vezina Trophy to the NHL as an award to the goaltender who allowed the fewest goals during the season. When the Hockey Hall of Fame opened in 1945, Vézina was one of the original twelve inductees. (more...)


 * Good to see this on the main page :) I remember being one of the FAC reviewers, at the time. Article still looks great! Cheers. --Aude (talk) 00:43, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Nodar Kumaritashvili
The article Nodar Kumaritashvili 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 seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Nodar Kumaritashvili for things which need to be addressed. Brad78 (talk) 21:12, 1 January 2011 (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 12:51, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Louis Leblanc GA
Put this GA on hold. Good luck! Orlandkurtenbach (talk) 23:41, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program is looking for new Online Ambassadors
Hi! I noticed your activity as a Good Article reviewer, 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) 20:17, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Ice hockey personnel from Pennsylvania
Category:Ice hockey personnel from Pennsylvania, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mike Selinker (talk) 22:35, 23 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)

Sergei Shirokov/GA1
Just a heads up Sergei Shirokov is being reviewed, I noticed the reviewer didn't let you know and I thought you might not see it on your watch list. Cheers. --Mo Rock...Monstrous (leech44) 16:09, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

List of San Jose Sharks players FLRC
nominated List of San Jose Sharks players for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Courcelles 12:31, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

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 23:45, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 March newsletter
We are half way through round two of the WikiCup, which will end on 28 April. Of the 64 current contestants, 32 will make it through to the next round; the two highest in each pool, and the 16 next highest scorers. At the time of writing, our current overall leader is with 231 points, who leads Pool H.  (Pool G) also has over 200 points, while 9 others (three of whom are in Pool D) have over 100 points. Remember that certain content (specifically, articles/portals included in at least 20 Wikipedias as of 31 December 2010 or articles which are considered "vital") is worth double points if promoted to good or featured status, or if it appears on the main page in the Did You Know column. There were some articles last round which were eligible for double points, but which were not claimed for. For more details, see WikiCup/Scoring.

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 three 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 00:59, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Salt Spring dollar


The article Salt Spring dollar has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * The subject of this article does not appear to meet the general notability guideline. I am unable to find significant coverage of this local promotional currency in third party sources.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Onthegogo (talk) 23:08, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 April newsletter
Round 2 of the 2011 WikiCup is over, and the new round will begin on 1 May. Note that any points scored in the interim (that is, for content promoted or reviews completed on 29-30 April) can be claimed in the next round, but please do not start updating your submissions' pages until the next round has begun. Fewer than a quarter of our original contestants remain; 32 enter round 3, and, in two months' time, only 16 will progress to our penultimate round. , who led Pool F, was our round champion, with 411 points, while 7 contestants scored between 200 and 300 points. At the other end of the scale, a score of 41 was high enough to reach round 3; more than five times the score required to reach round 2, and competition will no doubt become tighter now we're approaching the later rounds. Those progressing to round 3 were spread fairly evenly across the pools; 4 progressed from each of pools A, B, E and H, while 3 progressed from both pools C and F. Pools D and G were the most successful; each had 5 contestants advancing.

This round saw our first good topic points this year; congratulations to and  who also led pool H and pool B respectively. However, there remain content types for which no points have yet been scored; featured sounds, featured portals and featured topics. In addition to prizes for leaderboard positions, the WikiCup awards other prizes; for instance, last year, a prize was awarded to (who has been eliminated) for his work on In The News. For this reason, working on more unusual content could be even more rewarding than usual!

Sorry this newsletter is going out a little earlier than expected- there is a busy weekend coming up! A running total of claims 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 19:23, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Hobey Baker
I've reviewed the article here and placed it on hold for the moment. I've copy-edited the article quite a bit, mainly for prose fixes. If I've messed anything up or changed any meanings, please revert me! --Sarastro1 (talk) 21:09, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I've passed it now. I've listed it under Ice Hockey GAs as that seemed more appropriate than football. --Sarastro1 (talk) 19:58, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 May newsletter
We're half way through round 3 of the 2011 WikiCup. There are currently 32 remaining in the competition, but only 16 will progress to our penultimate round. , of pool D, is our overall leader with nearly 200 points, while pools A, B and C are led by, and  respectively. The score required to reach the next round is 35, though this will no doubt go up significantly as the round progresses. We have a good number of high scorers, but also a considerable number who are yet to score. Please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. Also, an important note concerning nominations at featured article candidates: if you are nominating content for which you intend to claim WikiCup points, please make this clear in the nomination statement so that the FAC director and his delegates are aware of the fact.

A running total of claims 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 23:30, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Reassessment of the Las Vegas Wranglers article
Hello, four years ago you assessed the Las Vegas Wranglers article. Over the past four years, I have expanded and redesigned the article and believe I have brought it up to Class-B article standards. Since you initially assessed the article and have assessed numerous articles in the WikiProject Ice Hockey scope, I'm asking you to reassess the article and see whether it fits the criteria for a B-Class article. I would also like your opinion of what needs to be done to improve the article to a higher status. Thank You. Rik (talk) 23:13, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 June newsletter
We are half way through 2011, and entering the penultimate round of this year's WikiCup; the semi-finals are upon us! Points scored in the interim (29/30 June) may be counted towards next round, but please do not update your submissions' pages until the next round has begun. 16 contestants remain, and all have shown dedication to the project to reach this far. Our round leader was who, among other things, successfully passed three articles through featured article candidates and claimed an impressive 29 articles at Did You Know, scoring 555 points. Casliber led pool D. Pool A was led by, claiming points for a featured article, a featured list and seven good article reviews, while pool C was led by , who claimed for two good articles, ten articles at Did You Know and four good article reviews. They scored 154 and 118 respectively. Pool B was by far our most competitive pool; six of the eight competitors made it through to round 4, with all of them scoring over 100 points. The pool was led by, who claimed for, among other things, three featured articles and five good articles. In addition to the four pool leaders, 12 others (the four second places, and the 8 next highest overall) make up our final 16. The lowest scorer who reached round 4 scored 76 points; a significant increase on the 41 needed to reach round 3. Eight of our semi-finalists scored at least twice as much as this.

No points were awarded this round for featured pictures, good topics or In the News, and no points have been awarded in the whole competition for featured topics, featured portals or featured sounds. Instead, the highest percentage of points has come from good articles. Featured articles, despite their high point cost, are low in number, and so, overall, share a comparable number of points with Did You Know, which are high in number but low in cost. A comparatively small but still considerable number of points come from featured lists and good article reviews, rounding out this round's overall scores.

We would again like to thank and  for invaluable background work, as well as all of those helping to provide reviews for the articles listed on WikiCup/Reviews. Please do keep using it, and please do help by providing reviews for the articles listed there. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews generally at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup.

Two final notes: Firstly, please remember to state your participation in the WikiCup when nominating articles at FAC. Finally, some WikiCup-related statistics can be seen here and here, for those interested, though it appears that neither are completely accurate at this time. 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 23:34, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Nicklas Jensen
Heads up, your recent edit to Nicklas Jensen is being discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey. Dolovis (talk) 13:41, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 July newsletter
We are half way through the penultimate round of this year's WikiCup; there is less than a month to go before we have our final 8. Our pool leaders are (Pool A, 189 points) and  (Pool B, 165 points). The number of points required to reach the next round is not clear at this time; there are some users who still do not have any recorded points. Please remember to update your submissions' pages promptly. In addition, congratulations to PresN, who scored the first featured topic points in the competition for his work on Thatgamecompany related articles. Most points this round generally have, so far, come from good articles, with only one featured article (White-bellied Sea Eagle, from ) and two featured lists (Hugo Award for Best Graphic Story, from PresN and Grammy Award for Best Native American Music Album, from ). Points for Did You Know and good article reviews round out the scoring. No points have been awarded for In the News, good topics or featured pictures this round, and no points for featured sounds or portals have been awarded in the entire competition. On an unrelated note, preparation will be beginning soon for next year's WikiCup- watch this space!

There is little else to be said beyond the usual. Please list anything you need reviewing on WikiCup/Reviews, so others following the WikiCup can help, and please do help if you can by providing reviews for the articles listed there. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews generally at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup- points are, of course, offered for reviews at GAC. Two final notes: Firstly, please remember to state your participation in the WikiCup when nominating articles at FAC. Finally, some WikiCup-related statistics can be seen here and here. 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 11:35, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, thanks for your editorial contribution --TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:44, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Dubbie Bowie
Hi

I'm working on Dubbie Bowie on wp.fr (fr:Dubbie Bowie) and I see in the history that you put that he was dead in Montreal. Have you got a ref for me on this information?

Thanks in advance. --TaraO (talk) 17:14, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks you. --TaraO (talk) 20:27, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Héhé, I want to do the same thing that you: User:Kaiser matias/Sandbox2 and User:Kaiser matias/HHOF. Go on, I'm following you !!! - Bain is BA, Baker is on his way, Bowie is finished and must be reviewed, and Morenz FA. Working on Gardiner!!! GO ON !!!! --TaraO (talk) 20:55, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 July newsletter
The finals are upon us; we're down to the last few. One of the eight remaining contestants will be this year's WikiCup champion! 150 was the score needed to progress to the final; just under double the 76 required to reach round 4, and more than triple the 41 required to reach round 3. Our eight finalists are:


 * , Pool A's winner. Casliber has the highest total score in the competition, with 1528, the bulk of which is made up of 8 featured articles. He has the highest number of total featured articles (8, 1 of which was eligible for double points) and total did you knows (72) of any finalist. Casliber writes mostly on biology, including ornithology, botany and mycology.
 * , Pool B's winner and the highest scorer this round. PresN is the only finalist who has scored featured topic points, and he has gathered an impressive 330, but most of his points come from his 4 featured articles, one of which scored double. PresN writes mostly on video games and the Hugo Awards.
 * , Pool A's runner-up. Hurricanehink's points are mostly from his 30 good articles, more than any other finalist, and he is also the only finalist to score good topic points. Hurricanehink, as his name suggests, writes mostly on meteorology.
 * , Pool B's runner-up. Wizardman has completed 86 good article reviews, more than any other finalist, but most of his points come from his 2 featured articles. Wizardman writes mostly on American sport, especially baseball.
 * , the "fastest loser" (Pool A). Miyagawa has written 3 featured lists, one of which was awarded double points, more than any other finalist, but he was awarded points mostly for his 68 did you knows. Miyagawa writes on a variety of topics, including dogs, military history and sport.
 * , the second "fastest loser" (Pool B). Most of Resolute's points come from his 9 good articles. He writes mostly on Canadian topics, including ice hockey.
 * , who was joint third "fastest loser" (Pool A). Most of Evan's points come from his 10 good articles, and he writes mostly on meteorology.
 * , who was joint third "fastest loser" (Pool B). Most of Phil's points come from his 9 good articles, 4 of which (more than any other finalist) were eligible for double points. He writes mostly on aeronautics.

We say goodbye to our seven other semi-finalists,, , , , , and. Everyone still in the competition at this stage has done fantastically well, and contributed greatly to Wikipedia. We're on the home straight now, and we will know our winner in two months.

In other news, preparations for next year's competition have begun with a brainstorming thread. Please, feel free to drop by and share any thoughts you have about how the competition should work next year. Sign ups are not yet open, but will be opened in due course. Watch this space. Further, there has been a discussion about the rule whereby those in the WikiCup must delcare their participation when nominating articles at featured article candidates. This has resulted in a bot being created by new featured article delegate. The bot will leave a message on FAC pages if the nominator is a participant in the WikiCup.

A reminder of the rules: any points scored after August 29 may be claimed for the final round, and please remember to update submission pages promptly. If you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, 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 00:05, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Research into the user pages of Wikipedians: Invitation to participate
Greetings,

My name is John-Paul and I am a student with the University of Alberta specializing in Communications and Technology.

I would like to include your Wikipedia user page in a study I am doing about how people present themselves online. I am interested in whether people see themselves in different ways, online and offline. One of the things I am looking at is how contributors to Wikipedia present themselves to each other through their user pages. Would you consider letting me include your user page in my study?

With your consent, I will read and analyze your user page, and ask you five short questions about it that will take about ten to fifteen minutes to answer. I am looking at about twenty user pages belonging to twenty different people. I will be looking at all user pages together, looking for common threads in the way people introduce themselves to other Wikipedians.

I hope that my research will help answer questions about how people collaborate, work together, and share knowledge. If you are open to participating in this study, please reply to this message, on your User Talk page or on mine. I will provide you with a complete description of my research, which you can use to decide if you want to participate.

Thank-you,

John-Paul Mcvea

University of Alberta

jmcvea@ualberta.ca

Johnpaulmcvea (talk) 22:02, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 September newsletter
We are on this year's home straight, with less than a month to go until the winner of the 2011 WikiCup will be decided. The fight for first place is currently being contested by, and , all of whom have over 200 points. This round has already seen multiple featured articles (1991 Atlantic hurricane season from Hurricanehink and Northrop YF-23 from Sp33dyphil) and a double-scoring featured list (Miyagawa's 1948 Summer Olympics medal table). The scores will likely increase far further before the end of the round on October 31 as everyone ups their pace. There is not much more to say- thoughts about next year's competition are welcome on the WikiCup talk page or the scoring talk page, and signups will open once a few things have been sorted out.

If you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, 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 12:41, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

WP:Featured article candidates/Hobey Baker/archive2
Hi, I noticed that the delegate's edit summary when she removed this from FAC was: "removing, may come back as soon as Nikkimaria's previous concerns are addressed". That suggests to me that you won't lose any time if you can deal with those 3 things in a hurry. If you have questions or would like help, let me know, and I'll add the request to Milhist's weekly FAC todo list soon after the Signpost comes out (probably today). - Dank (push to talk) 18:14, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

sigh, this article is nothing but a problem for you, man! ;) I'll try to give it a copyedit tonight.  We need to get this off your plate! Resolute 18:23, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks much ... please see my comments at the FAC for the first half of the article. - Dank (push to talk) 19:09, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I've done a first pass on everything but Princeton, but want to do a second on the weekend. There's a lot of multi-comma sentences that I'd like to break up but haven't quite figured out yet.  Please feel free to revert any changes I have made that change the meaning.  For Princeton, I think you have the same problem I've experienced with my on-again, off-again work at Lionel Conacher.  I am not certain if it is better to do Baker's football and hockey careers in separate sub sections or to leave them interlaced.  Any thoughts? Resolute 00:15, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 October newsletter
The 2011 WikiCup is now over, and our new champion is, who joins the exclusive club of the previous winners: (2007),  (2008),  (2009) and  (2010). The final standings were as follows:



Prizes for first, second, third and fourth will be awarded, as will prizes for all those who reached the final eight. Every participant who scored in the competition will receive a ribbon of participation. In addition to the prizes based on placement, the following special prizes will be awarded based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, the prize is awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round.


 * The Featured Article Award:, for his performance in round 2. matched the score, but Casliber won the tiebreaker.
 * The Good Article Award:, for his performance in round 4.
 * The Featured List Award:, for his performance in round 4. matched the score, but Miyagawa won the tiebreaker.
 * The Recognised Topic Award (for good and featured topics):, for his performance in round 3.
 * The Did You Know Award:, for his performance in round 1.
 * The In the News Award:, for his performance in round 1.
 * The Reviewer Award (for good article reviews):, for his performance in round 3.

No prize was awarded for featured pictures, sounds or portals, as none were claimed throughout the competition. The awards will be handed out over the next few days. Congratulations to all our participants, and especially our winners; we've all had fun, and Wikipedia has benefitted massively from our content work.

Preparation for next year's WikiCup is ongoing. Interested parties are invited to sign up and participate in our straw polls. It's been a pleasure to work with you all this year, and, whoever's taking part in and running the competition in 2012, we hope to see you all in January! J Milburn and The ed17 00:42, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

2011 WikiCup participation


It was good to have you on board this time around- we hope you enjoyed the competition! In case you are interested, signups for next year are open. Thanks, J Milburn and The ed17 20:51, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Main page appearance: Hod Stuart
This is a note to let the main editors of Hod Stuart know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on November 24, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Today's featured article/November 24, 2011. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director or his delegate, or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:



Hod Stuart (1879–1907) was a Canadian professional ice hockey cover-point (now known as a defenceman) who played nine seasons for several teams in different leagues. He also played briefly for the Ottawa Rough Riders football team. With his brother Bruce, Stuart played in the first professional ice hockey league, the American-based International Professional Hockey League (IPHL), where he was regarded as one of the best players in the league. Frustrated with the violence associated with the IPHL, he left the league late in 1906 and returned to Canada, where in 1907 he helped the Montreal Wanderers win the Stanley Cup, the championship trophy for hockey. Two months later, he died in a diving accident. To raise money for his widow and children, the Eastern Canada Amateur Hockey Association hosted an all-star game, the first of its kind to be played in any sport. In an era where defencemen were expected to stay behind during the play, Stuart became known for his ability to score goals while playing a defensive role, and for his ability to remain calm during matches that often turned violent. His efforts were acknowledged when the Hockey Hall of Fame was created in 1945 and he became one of the first twelve players to be inducted. (more...) UcuchaBot (talk) 00:02, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

2012 WikiCup
Hi! As you've previously expressed interest in the competition, I'm just letting you know that the 2012 WikiCup is due to start in less than 24 hours. Signups are open, and will remain so for a few weeks after the beginning of the competition. The competition itself will follow basically the same format as last year, with a few small tweaks to point costs to reflect the opinions of the community. If you're interested in taking part, you're more than welcome, and if you know anyone who might be, please let them know too- the more the merrier! To join, simply add your name to WikiCup/2012 signups, and we will be in touch. Please feel free to direct any questions to me, or leave a note on the WikiCup talk page. Thanks! You are receiving this note as you are listed on WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Please feel free to add or remove yourself. EdwardsBot (talk) 01:22, 31 December 2011 (UTC)