User talk:Muboshgu/Archive 17

Re: Tip O'Neill Award FLC?
Are you still up for co-nominating this as an FLC? There's just the prose in the lead left for expansion/revising. I currently have one active FLC that only has one support vote, so the only way the Tip O'Neill Award list can be nominated is if you do the co-nomination. Cheers! —Bloom6132 (talk) 22:46, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, still interested. Just busy. I'll work on it this week and nominate it shortly thereafter. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:07, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks! —Bloom6132 (talk) 19:23, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I've made some edits. I'll look at it again later today (with an eye on similar FLs) and nominate within 24 hours. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:49, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 May 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 19:55, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the readership and quality of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale. For readership the scale goes from Low to High, while for quality the scale goes from Low  to High.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 03:14, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

May 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=555218810 your edit] to United States Senate election in Indiana, 2016 may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry, just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page].

The Signpost: 13 May 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 03:45, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Braden Shipley
Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:11, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks
Hey thanks man I checked mlb.com the and the angles 40 man roster and It didn't show him on there yesterday! But now I just saw that you undid it and then I checked mlb.com again and he was on the roster haha so I appreciate it bro.Kingryan227 (talk) 21:08, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem. Weird mistake on MLB.com's part. It's always good to look at the reports to confirm. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:36, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

I know I usually use mlb.com so I think that it is pretty valid but they will make that mistake when they remove someone from the roster than add them again the next day. Plus I use mlbtraderumors.com for my changes as well like the one that I did to Chris Nelson when the angles claimed him off of waivers from the Yankees.Kingryan227 (talk) 04:40, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Chris Bando
Here it is. Feel free to add an alternate hook. AutomaticStrikeout ?  20:14, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 20
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Evan Reed (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Quincy High School


 * Joe Tinker (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Saloon


 * Minnesota Twins minor league players (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Randolph High School

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 00:02, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Joe Tinker
 Harrias  talk 16:36, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Help with Jim DeMint article
Hi Muboshgu, I see that you're interested in Politics and have made a couple of minor edits to Jim DeMint's article this year. I'm hoping you would be willing to take a look at a request I have for this page. I'm asking for help with this request because I work for The Heritage Foundation, where DeMint is now the president, so I don't think I should edit this article myself. The request is pretty simple, I'm just looking to revise and update the "Business career" section of his article, which is currently incomplete. If you have a moment to look at my request it's on DeMint's talk page here. Thanks! Thurmant (talk) 20:33, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi. I appreciate that you're aware enough of the conflict of interest policies on this. It looks good, and I'll do it today. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:36, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

ITN credit
ThaddeusB (talk) 01:06, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks as always for the quality contributions! -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:28, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

A modest proposal
Hi Muboshgu. I've done a fair amount of expansion on Chris Bando, but, while it is most of the way to DYK eligibility, it is also still rather barebones. I would appreciate if you'd be willing to fill it in a little bit more. Of course, you'd be able to get DYK credit for it too. AutomaticStrikeout ?  22:11, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Alright. I can join in. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:15, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Superb! Thanks. By the way, I've already taken care of the DYK review. AutomaticStrikeout ?  22:16, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * What's the hook? – Muboshgu (talk) 22:39, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, there is the fact that Bando's batting average was .291 in 1984 and then dropped all the way to .139 the following season. That was the information I was planning to use in the hook. AutomaticStrikeout ?  22:41, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Not sure how "interesting" a reviewer will find that. I don't know that I find it so interesting; I feel like that happens in baseball all the time. His CWS catcher of the 1970s might be more interesting. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:09, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * It's up to you. You're more in tune with the pulse of the reviewers. AutomaticStrikeout ?  23:10, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * FWIW, there's an unwritten rule that Indians from 1960-1990 are automatically uninteresting. Though he did hit a home run to help clinch the CWS title, perhaps that's something. Wizardman  23:22, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, aside from Carlos Baerga, Len Barker, Buddy Bell, Joe Carter, Joe Charboneau, Rocky Colavito, Mike Hargrove, George Hendrick, Duane Kuiper, Sam McDowell, Gaylord Perry, Jim Perry, Frank Robinson and Luis Tiant, you may have a point there. AutomaticStrikeout ?  23:32, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * LOL Wizardman. That's just a feeling, but there's no harm in proposing multiple hooks. In fact that's always a good idea. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:36, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Sounds fine to me. AutomaticStrikeout ?  02:39, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Wizardman is right, Jim Thome wasn't around until '91. By the way, I just went through an unsuccessful FAC and am at a bit of a loss for what to do with that article. Any of the three of you mind taking a look? Thanks. Go  Phightins  !  23:23, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Marvin Miller Man of the Year Award
FYI- since you created the original redirect, I thought it prudent to notify you I created a stub of the article. Go  Phightins  !  00:48, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Stryker Trahan
— Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:57, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 May 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 09:13, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Chris Bando
The DYK project (nominate) 00:36, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Preston Claiborne
Hello! Your submission of Preston Claiborne at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! — btphelps (talk) (contribs) 01:13, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Shelby Miller
Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:02, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 27
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alabama's 1st congressional district special election, 2013, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Robert Bentley (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:34, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Jim Bottomley GAN
Hey, Muboshgu. I've started a review page for Jim Bottomley, which you sent to GAN. I did not notice until after I created the page, which included a date I would most likely review it, that you implied that the article was not fully ready yet. Would you like me to wait a while before reviewing it? T C  N7 JM  04:50, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Wow that was quick. I think it's ready for a review now, but I'll be out of town for all of Memorial Day weekend, so no rush at all. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:36, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I have finished my review of Jim Bottomley. I apologize if you do not like receiving messages like this concerning GANs, but I had no way of knowing, so I left this just in case. Anyway, it's just a few minor issues that should be fixable in minutes. T  C  N7 JM  05:51, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Tip O'Neill Award FLC
Could you help address some of the comments made at Featured list candidates/Tip O'Neill Award/archive1? I've responded to some, but I'm kinda unsure of how to tackle the rest. Cheers! —Bloom6132 (talk) 23:14, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, just back from a Memorial Day weekend trip. I'll take a look today. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:59, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 May 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 09:16, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

United States Senate special election in New Jersey, 2013
You created a page for a Special US Senate race to fill the vacancy left from the late Frank Lautenberg. However in New Jersey, as well as most states, a vacancy for the US Senate is appointed by the Governor.

I am assuming you created the page due to the special election in Massachusetts. However this has only been the case since 2004, when the Democratic legislature took away then-Governor Mitt Romney's power to appoint a US Senator in the case John Kerry won the Presidential Election.

I have edited the page to inform people there will be no special election for the US Senate, and if you can please delete the page. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.12.148.116 (talk) 17:21, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Please read this. There will be a special election. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:10, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

More help with Jim DeMint article
Hi Muboshgu. Since we last spoke I've continued to work on Jim DeMint's article. I have prepared a new draft for the existing U.S. Representative section, which is actually entirely blank right now. If you are interested in helping with this article further I'd really appreciate it. You can see my draft on the article's talk page. Thanks! Thurmant (talk) 15:25, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Muboshgu, I forgot to add that I responded to you and ZigZig20s' comments over on the James Carafano talk page a few weeks ago. If you have time to look at that, I've provided an alternate source that I would like your thoughts on. Thanks again! Thurmant (talk) 20:45, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Preston Claiborne
The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

high school players
Why are you creating all these articles for high school players? Shouldn't you at least wait to see if they get drafted first? "Likely first round pick" isn't listed anywhere on the notability guidelines. Spanneraol (talk) 17:19, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm only creating articles for people I see who I think meet GNG based on having sufficient coverage in reliable sources. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:21, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
 * The coverage for some of these players is extremely weak. Especially Dominic Smith (baseball) whose coverage appears to be only routine at best.--Yankees10 17:27, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree that the coverage is fairly weak.. just pre-draft hype and game recaps ... most of these guys will probably get merged after they sign anyway. Spanneraol (talk) 17:31, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I think the coverage there is more than routine, and all are at least sufficient as stubs. Feel free to nominate any of them for deletion that you wish, I think all of the players listed at 2013 MLB Draft would survive. There aren't any others I'm planning on creating at this time. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:32, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, didn't feel that information on how many dollars per month he was earning was relevant info, but I admit to a lack of detailed knowledge as to what constitutes relevant information worthy of Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.15.139.247 (talk) 20:27, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 June 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 00:15, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Invitation to join WikiProject Freedom of speech
There is a WikiProject about Freedom of speech, called WP:WikiProject Freedom of speech. If you're interested, here are some easy things you can do: Thank you for your interest in Freedom of speech, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:17, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
 * WP:WikiProject Freedom of speech
 * 1) List yourself as a participant in the WikiProject, by adding your username here: WikiProject_Freedom_of_speech.
 * 2) Add userbox User Freedom of speech to your userpage, which lists you as a member of the WikiProject.
 * 3) Tag relevant talk pages of articles and other relevant pages using WikiProject Freedom of speech.
 * 4) Join in discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Freedom of speech.
 * 5) Notify others you think might be interested in Freedom of speech to join the WikiProject.

Bickford
Well the difference is one was actually drafted in the top 10, while you created Smith before the draft even took place with the assumption that he was going to be drafted high.--Yankees10 00:49, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
 * It's sources that matter, not when one is drafted. A 40th round pick with adequate sourcing is notable. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:51, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Xernona Clayton April 2013
Hello, I'm Muboshgu. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Xernona Clayton, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:15, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Hi Mubosgu, I didnt make a mistake. I saw a dvd of famous African Americans so this is how I know about her family. Too instead of deleting, did you look for a source? WP is COLLABORATIVE. I see you keep reverting, how about editing? 72.66.78.118 (talk) 01:07, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Marco Gonzales
I see my Cards just picked Marco Gonzales, the DYK of yours I happened to review--suddenly I feel like one of those guys who knows all about the draft -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:17, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Never mind, I see you're way ahead of me  -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:18, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh you're a Cards fan... I see. Well, you should get him to the majors quickly. The Cardinals are amazing at developing pitchers. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:19, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
 * They really are... it's almost creepy these days. -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:25, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm jealous. My Yankees haven't developed any pitchers since Hughes and Joba, even though they messed him up. Well, Nova, but he's in the minors now. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:27, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Pat on the back
Hey, just a quick thanks for being on the ball (bad pun I know) the last few days in transferring the St. Louis Cardinals youngsters from minor leauge page to ones of their own after they're called up. I've been working on trying to find pics via Flickr, etc. for them and wll try to flesh out their stubs too. Anyhoo, just letting you know your work is appreciated! Have a great Wiki kinda day! Sector001 (talk) 02:41, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
 * -- Khazar2 (talk) 02:48, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 7
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Reviving Baseball in Inner Cities, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Kansas City and Chris Young (baseball) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:21, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Reviving Baseball in Inner Cities
Hello! Your submission of Reviving Baseball in Inner Cities at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! —Bagumba (talk) 02:13, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Marco Gonzales
— Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:23, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Nick Ciuffo
Gatoclass 08:02, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Recruitment Centre
{||}

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information.

Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions
We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:


 * Views/Day : Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.
 * Quality : Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.

The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:


 * Content : Is more content needed?
 * Headings : Does this article have an appropriate section structure?
 * Images : Is the number of illustrative images about right?
 * Links : Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?
 * Sources : For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:47, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Re-directs
I thought we decided that the re-directs had to come close to meeting WP:GNG? I don't see enough coverage for Billy McKinney (baseball).--Yankees10 17:53, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
 * You see more for Eric Jagielo, Aaron Judge, and Ian Clarkin? I think McKinney has more coverage than those guys. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:55, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Well not Clarkin, but Jagielo was the Big East Player of the Year, which I belive is a notable enough award. And  would merit at least a re-direct for Judge.--Yankees10 18:06, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I personally don't think conference player of the year is enough. It certainly doesn't get the presumption of notability per NSPORTS. I looked into Jagielo before the draft and decided there wasn't enough coverage to merit an article. Maybe now there's enough for a redirect. I'll agree about Judge. Clarkin might now have enough, we'd have to check the sources. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:00, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Eddy Furniss
Just a heads up that I reviewed this article now, just waiting on your fixes. Wizardman 19:29, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh thanks for notifying me. I didn't see that the review had started. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:21, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 June 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 08:25, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Our Tip O'Neill Award FLC co-nom has just been passed, so you can include it as part of your WikiCup points which will place you in line for qualification for Round 4. P.S. Would you like to co-nominate the Luis Aparicio Award for FL (eventhough it has only 9 items)?  Cheers! —Bloom6132 (talk) 06:42, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * We can try. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:16, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Your move request
You put a move request under "Contested technical requests" at Requested moves/Technical requests. I think you meant to put it under "Technical requests" instead. Can you please check that? When you put something under "Contested technical requests", that means you with someone else's suggestion to make a move. —BarrelProof (talk) 19:45, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Whoops. Yes, you're right, I meant to put it in the non-contested section. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:29, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Rob Ford archiving
Thanks for putting the auto archiving on. It wasn't on previously, because there wasn't much traffic to the page. Then there was a spike a few weeks ago, and I've not gotten around to adding the bot. Alaney2k (talk) 15:51, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. I just noticed you manually archiving it all and wondered why not use the bot? I do understand the page was of lower interest before the crack scandal. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:32, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Hillary Clinton move review
You are invited to join the discussion at Move_review/Log/2013_June. Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 16:04, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 June 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 22:48, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Request for Comment
As someone who has participated extensively in the Wikipedia MLB articles, your input would be greatly appreciated in a request for comment regarding postseason droughts. Another editor and I have reached an impasse and are looking for third parties to chime in. Thank you very much! TempDog123 (talk) 19:05, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Will Middlebrooks, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jose Iglesias (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:22, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Reviving Baseball in Inner Cities‎
Gatoclass (talk) 00:03, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

DYK for John Young (baseball)‎
Gatoclass (talk) 00:03, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 June 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 21:50, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

DYK for David Berg (pitcher)
Gatoclass (talk) 19:23, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 June newsletter
We are down to our final 16: the 2013 semi-finals are upon us. A score of 321 was required to survive round 3, further cementing this as the most competitive WikiCup yet; round 3 was survived in 2012 with 243 points, in 2011 with 76 points and in 2010 with 250 points. The change may in part be to do with the fact that more articles are now awarded bonus points, in addition to more competitive play. Reaching the final has, in the past, required 573 points (2012, a 135% increase on the score needed to reach round 4), 150 points (2011, a 97% increase) and 417 points (2010, a 72% increase). This round has seen over a third of participants claiming points for featured articles (with seven users claiming for multiple featured articles) and most users have also gained bonus points. However, the majority of points continue to come from good articles, followed by did you know articles. In this round, every content type was utilised by at least one user, proving that the WikiCup brings together content contributors from all corners of the project.

Round 3 saw a number of contributions of note. claimed the first featured topic points in this year's competition for her excellent work on topics related to Maya Angelou, the noted American author and poet. We have also continued to see high-importance articles improved as part of the competition: was awarded a thoroughly well-earned 560 points for her featured article Middle Ages and 102 points for her good article Battle of Hastings. Good articles James Chadwick and Stanislaw Ulam netted 102 and 72 points respectively, while 72 points were awarded to  for each of Władysław Sikorski and Emilia Plater, both recently promoted to good article status. Collaborative efforts between WikiCup participants have continued, with, for example, and  being awarded 180 points each for their featured article on Boletus luridus.

A rules reminder: content promoted between rounds can be claimed in the round after the break, but not the round before. The case in point is content promoted on the 29/30 June, which may be claimed in this round. 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. We are currently seeing concern about the amount of time people have to wait for reviews, especially at GAC- if you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 09:52, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 03 July 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 23:47, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information.

Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions
We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:


 * Views/Day : Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.
 * Quality : Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.

The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:


 * Content : Is more content needed?
 * Headings : Does this article have an appropriate section structure?
 * Images : Is the number of illustrative images about right?
 * Links : Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?
 * Sources : For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:46, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 July 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 09:13, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 16
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gonzalez Germen, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page La Romana (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:06, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Admin?
Hi Muboshgu. I know this question has been raised in the past, but as far as I know you never gave an official answer (although I haven't been very active, so I may have missed it). Are you still considering running for adminship? I would still be glad to nominate you and I expect others would too. Regards, AutomaticStrikeout ?  16:49, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 July 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 17:56, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Preston Larrison
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 24
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Vic Black (baseball), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Eastern League (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:17, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Wisconsin recall election
How is it relevant? Please tell me. All these sources say are that the person decided not to run. The Erpanbach, Kind, and Obey sources are actually just the fact that they endorsed Barrett, not actual declinations! I'm all for the endorsement sections, but the fact that they didn't run has nothing to do with the election. Is the reader too stupid to realize that only people who ran actually did run, or does the fact some people didn't run need to be spelled out to them? We could list every other politician in the state who didn't run, but it doesn't help the reader. If someone who didn't run somehow had an impact on the race (say, Clinton if she doesn't in 2016), that should absolutely be mentioned - in prose, explaining their connection to the election. A bullet-point list provides zero information and falsely implies that a declination (or none at all!) ties the person to the race. Reywas92 Talk 15:09, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
 * The Wisconsin recall election set off a free for all of candidates who talked about the race and considered running. That's part of the historical event that is the election, especially people who were high profile during the events that led up to the recall, like Erpanbach. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:05, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
 * But the article simply lists these people as declining to run, and the sources given do not necessarily discuss their consideration. It would be great to see in the article these people's connection to the historical event, but a bullet-point list of people who obviously didn't run is unhelpful. Would you agree, though, that individuals who never made statements about potentially running in an election should not be included? In other articles some people are listed despite remaining silent about the election, simply not running like millions of others. Reywas92 Talk 16:44, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
 * You've argued this point before on various pages for years now and you're clearly in the minority. The consensus exists that the "declined" section shouldn't be arbitrarily removed. Tiller54 (talk) 20:58, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
 * And these people shouldn't be arbitrarily added! Once again, I'm not sure if you've ever given me a damn explanation, just revert after revert. I point to United States Senate election in Indiana, 2012, where Don Bates (who doesn't have an article) is listed with this as a source. HOW is he part of the process?? This is the source of Walorski there, again not having any evidence that she actually considered running, not actually declining to run, not having any influence on other candidates, just being "rumored". By whom? And who cares? Some writer arbitrarily pulling names of any politicians out of his ass as someone who could theoretically run does not affect the race. As I've said before, if someone does have a connection to the election, please explain how, but listing random people is worthless simply because they ran in a different election. There is precedent for removing those who don't run:, , , among others. And don't effing undo those old edits too. Reywas92 <b style="color:#45E03A;">Talk</b> 03:12, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah, we get that you disagree with us but could you please be civl. Thanks. Tiller54 (talk) 17:41, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

I found an old discussion with Muboshgu where I offered a compromise, though without response. Can we keep the people who actually did something, but not those who did nothing themselves?
 * I still stand by that offer. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:24, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 July 2013
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 21:38, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

NC State Wolfpack baseball edits
Hey there. With regards to the |an edit you made to NC State Wolfpack baseball recently, I wanted to lay out my argument for including some of the information you removed and to see what your thoughts are.

If your edits were meant to make the "Notable former players" section strictly about notable former players, my suggestion would be to change the section headers rather than remove the information. If this was your intent, a change from "Notable former players" to "Notable players" would allow us to include links to Rodon and others. As for the recent draftees, a separate level 2 section titled "MLB Draft" might work. Ejgreen77 has been doing great work to add lists of alumni draftees to program pages (an example is Canisius Golden Griffins baseball), and a table like that could add some meat to an MLB Draft section. (If your concern was indeed making it a true notable former players section, feel free to ignore the next paragraph.)

If, on the other hand, you made the edits because you don't feel the information about current players or recent drafts should be included at all, here are my arguments for inclusion of both. First, for current players. I'm personally not crazy about pages for college baseball players, and I generally argue for deletion if a player page comes on AfD. However, if a consensus of editors has decided a college player is notable, it seems self-evident that we should include links to those pages. This is simple reasoning in line with WP:LINK, "Internal links can add to the cohesion and utility of Wikipedia, allowing readers to deepen their understanding of a topic by conveniently accessing other articles." If the clearly related player articles exist, we should include links to them. Second, for recent draft history. In a list of topics important to a college baseball program, developing players for professional baseball ranks highly, in my opinion, along with the program's venue, coaches, history, championships, individual awards, etc. And if we do include information about professional alumni, it makes sense to include precise, detailed information (number of draftees, when (in what years and rounds) the players were drafted, whether the players were pitchers or position players, whether they chose to sign professional contracts, etc). This seems like a better way to let the reader draw conclusions than vague statements about former players' being drafted or appearing in MLB or sections that talk only about one or two high-profile players. (Again, this paragraph is irrelevant if you intended only to make the notable former players section strictly about players with articles who no longer play for the program.)

To sum up, I disagree with your decision to remove the information about recent draft history and current players, but wanted to lay out my argument for inclusion and ask about your reasoning rather than reverting. I'll watch your talk page, but feel free to respond here, on my talk page, or on the program talk page. Cheers, and thanks for all the work you put in. Kithira (talk) 20:37, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Jake Peavy - Red Sox
There have been many reports all over sports about this trade. Is ESPN a reliable source? Turn on your TV. Do you live under a rock idiot boy? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mridgway232 (talk • contribs) 04:11, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
 * No personal attacks. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:13, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 31
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tino Martinez, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Coach (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:39, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Junior Lake (baseball)
I don't know if the hysteria surrounding Lake has cooled off yet, so it might be nice if his article was in better shape. Would you mind giving it a makeover (even if it's just a small makeover)? AutomaticStrikeout ?  21:23, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 July newsletter
We're halfway through this year's penultimate round, and the competition is moving along well. Pool A's currently leads overall, while Pool B's  is second. Both leaders are WikiCup veterans, and both have already scored over 600 points this month. If the round were to end today,, with 274 points, would be the lowest-scoring participant to make it through. This indicates that participants will need a score comparable to last year's (573, the highest ever) to qualify for the final. The high scores this year are a testament both to the quality of participants and to the increased focus on significant content (eligible for bonus points) in this year's competition. So far this round, both Sasata and have made up over half of their score through bonus points, with, for example, high importance FA koala earning Sasata a total of 440 points (from a multiplier of 4.4) and high-importance GA sea earning Cwmhiraeth a total of 216 points (from a multiplier of 7.2). Other articles on important topics submitted this round include a featured article on the Norman conquest of England by, and good articles on Nobel laureate in literature Henryk Sienkiewicz, Nobel laureate in physics Hans Bethe, and the noted Japanese aircraft carrier Hiryū. These articles are by, and Sturmvogel_66 respectively.

Other than that, there is not much to report! 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 reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 23:18, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 July 2013
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 03:55, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Trea Turner
The DYK project (nominate) 16:03, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

A Rod
If we are not a newspaper, please take down more info on Alex Rodriguez. I just did, it's more speculation. Kennvido (talk) 21:11, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * That page does need more cleaning up, sure. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:12, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Let's work together and clean up...great! Kennvido (talk) 21:13, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Will do my best NOT to put in any SPEC. I did put in the deadline, which is not SPEC. Kennvido (talk) 21:41, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's fine. Thanks for your work. The Biogenesis part of the page is much better. It could still use some paring around the other steroid/PED issues and his marital infidelity, I think, and I may take a stab at that. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:51, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Good luck, I have around 9000 edits. A lot of them fixing. Some articles are easier to fix than others as you know. I'll keep an eye on it too. Are there any articles you see that needs organization. If so, let me know and I'll work on it. Thanks. 22:11, 3 August 2013 (UTC)Kennvido (talk)
 * Can you help me with something. Can you go on my talk page and condense it? I would like the help or tell me a SIMPLE way to do it. Thanks Kennvido (talk) 22:17, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I just set up archiving for you. It should start moving old threads into archives soon. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:27, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much! How does it know what to do? I just find some of these instructions so tedious, I get frustrated.Kennvido (talk) 22:36, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Would it be too much of the asking if you could, when you can, clean up my talk page and make it look purtttttttttie like yours? Kennvido (talk) 22:44, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Members are putting in SPEC again. I took out some, but don't want to get into edit warring. Kennvido (talk) 23:55, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * My talk looks so much better, thanks again. How do I get to the older stuff folder? And can you pretty it up, only if you have the time? God Bless you again Muboshgu
 * Right, forgot the last part. You need something like talkheader or archive box to contain links to your archive pages. Choose whichever you like best. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:01, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
 * OOOOOh no, I will not mess up your great work. You do, that voodoo, that you do so well. Please... and make pretty like your page. Kennvido (talk) 23:16, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Can you put the few barnstars and kudos I have in as you did yours? I'll bake you some cookies...Kennvido (talk) 23:19, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

User:HangingCurve is trying to jump the shark. I already warned him and asked him to wait for official word. Kennvido (talk) 14:06, 5 August 2013 (UTC) He left a message on my Talk and I answered him. Feel free to share you three cents. Kennvido (talk) 14:11, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Can you find my folder with all my Talk that was saved and my stars? Thanks Kennvido (talk) 14:55, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the folders. Now lastly, can you put my few stars up somewhere, so people think I'm real important and 'they love me, they love me'? Kennvido (talk) 01:51, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information.

Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions
We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:


 * Views/Day : Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.
 * Quality : Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.

The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:


 * Content : Is more content needed?
 * Headings : Does this article have an appropriate section structure?
 * Images : Is the number of illustrative images about right?
 * Links : Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?
 * Sources : For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:13, 6 August 2013 (UTC)