User talk:Mukkakukaku/Sum-2009

D.C. Meetup, Saturday, June 6, 2009
The 7th DC Meetup dinner will be held this Saturday, June 6th, starting at 5 p.m. The event will be at Bertucci's, near George Washington University and the Foggy Bottom metro station. It will follow the Apps for Democracy open source event at GWU. For details or to RSVP if you haven't already, see Meetup/DC 7. (You have received this announcement because your user page indicates that you live in Maryland, Virginia, or DC.) Delivered by The  Helpful  Bot   at 20:08, 2 June 2009 (UTC) to report errors, please leave a note here.

Volunteer opportunity in Bethesda, Thursday, July 16
The Wikimedia Foundation will be conducting an all-day Academy at the National Institutes of Health, in Bethesda, Maryland, on Thursday, July 16. The team that will be teaching at the Academy, a mix of paid staff and volunteers, is looking for four more volunteers to be teaching assistants, providing one-to-one assistance in workshops whenever a workshop participant has a problem following the instructional directions. (We currently have two editors signed up as teaching assistants, and are looking for a total of six.)

The NIH editing workshops are only for two hours, but volunteers are asked to meet the Wikimedia Foundation team at the hotel in Bethesda at about 7:15 a.m. (time to be finalized shortly) and to stay for the entire day, which ends at 4:30 p.m. Lunch will be provided. (The full schedule can be found here.)

The team is not necessarily looking for expert editors (though they are welcome), just people who can help novices who might get stuck when trying to do some basic things. If you've been an editor for at least 3 months, and have done at least 500 edits, you probably qualify.

If you're interested, please send John Broughton an email. If you might be interested, but would like further information, please post a note on his user talk page, so that he can respond there, and others can see what was asked.

(You have received this posting because your user page indicates that you live in Maryland or DC. --EdwardsBot (talk) 03:34, 10 July 2009 (UTC))

An exciting opportunity to get involved!
As a member of the Aviation WikiProject or one of its subprojects, you may be interested in testing your skills in the Aviation Contest! I created this contest, not to pit editor against editor, but to promote article improvement and project participation and camraderie. Hopefully you will agree with its usefulness. Sign up here, read up on the rules here, and discuss the contest here. The first round of the contest may not start until September 1st-unless a large number of editors signup and are ready to compete immediately! Since this contest is just beginning, please give feedback here, or let me know what you think on my talkpage. -  Trevor  MacInnis   contribs  03:24, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Contest update
Well, it's just 1 day until the contest begins, so I thought I'd check in with everyone and make sure you're all ready to go. First I'd like everyone to check out the main contest page and read over the rules and the scoring system. If you have any final questions or concerns, make them known on the talk page. WikiProject Aviation/Contest/History/2009 is the scoreboard that will be updated, you can watchlist it. Check out WikiProject Aviation/Contest/Submissions which shows how your submission page should look. Another example is at WikiProject Aviation/Contest/Submissions Example, and your personal page should be listed at the footer of the page, which is also at WikiProject Aviation/Contest/Users. Again, take any questions to the contest talk page.

Good luck! -  Trevor  MacInnis   contribs  20:59, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Contest scoring change
I've realized there may be an issue with the scoring system, and I have a solution, which I've explained here. Feedback is requested. -  Trevor  MacInnis   contribs  23:56, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Nominations open for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 12 September! Many thanks,  Roger Davies  talk 04:24, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Military history coordinator elections: voting has started!
Voting in the Military history WikiProject coordinator election has now started. The aim is to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of sixteen candidates. Please vote here by 23:59 (UTC) on 26 September! For the coordinators,  Roger Davies  talk 22:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

D.C. Meetup, Saturday, September 26
The 8th DC Meetup dinner will be held this Saturday, September 26, starting at 6 p.m. The event will be at Burma Restaurant (740 6th St, NW near the Gallery Place-Chinatown Metro station). For details or to RSVP if you haven't already, see Meetup/DC 8. (You have received this announcement because your user page indicates that you live in Maryland, Virginia, or DC.) --EdwardsBot (talk) 07:02, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Getafe
Hi Mukkakukaku, i changed the sizes of images in the Getafe article cuz is more atractive like that, (i think)... I put most of the images too, in ALL cities of the all provinces in Spain and others, check the history page in each articles. i putthe images too in the Spain article. I hope you like. Cheers --Venerock (talk) 23:31, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

If you want, check my contributions. in all articles of Spain. if you want, you can better someelse. Saludos --Venerock (talk) 23:39, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Warcraft: Orcs & Humans GA review
Hey there, I just wanted to let you know I wrote a secondary review on Warcraft: Orcs & Humans to supplement you review found HERE. While I am just a second opinion, I thought my input could help you reach a pass/fail decision. Personally, I feel this is a definite 'FAIL for now due to multiple issues. The length of time it would take also is longer than the time necessary to put the "on hold" sticker onto for the GA attempt. So, I would quick-fail this (if you would call it that, it seems we both conducted thorough reviews) so it may be improved and re-listed later. Again, this is just my opinion but I thought I would help out. Good luck on you decision and happy edits, GroundZ3R0 002 (talk) 09:13, 23 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi GroundZ3R0!
 * Thanks for your opinion. Considering the amount of work that's gone into this page so far, and the fact that there are active editors working on it now, I feel that with a bit of nudging in the right direction it can be worked into a GA pretty easily. Generally speaking, when I see this amount of work gone into it I'm loathe to quick-fail it because it really demoralizes editors -- and I really hated it when it got done to me -- and I'd much rather work with editors than against them.
 * That being said, yes, my GA review is turning out to be more of a peer review than a GA review, but if it ends up getting to the point eventually, I'll be happy to have helped it along. When I finish up my review, I'm going to put it on hold rather than failing it, so as to give the editors a bit of time to work on it. Just looking over the article, I think it's quite do-able to whip the thing into shape for GA, especially since the page history shows there's a good two or three people actively working on the page.
 * Another reason I don't want to quick-fail it is because it's already been quick-failed once. Yeah, ok, I'm a bit of a softie and I hate to hurt peoples' feelings. But I feel that if I'm willing to baby this thing along to GA status, I'll do it.
 * It was great hearing from you, and I'm sure the page editors would appreciate a second look as well. Thanks again! -- Mû??â?û?â?û 09:20, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Good decision and I admire your dedication to improving articles and yes, it does look like this could be fixed up pretty well to GA-status. I agree, quick-failing is demoralizing and does not help editors very much. Anyways good luck and keep up the good review work. On a side note, the Good article nominations page said that we should recommend others to review an article, so I was thinking it would be acceptable to ask you to review Saw (video game) for it's GA-attempt? I would appreciate this if you had the time and I have carefully edited every nook and cranny of the article to fit every Wiki policy and I have modeled them like other FA and GA video game articles like Halo 3 and Gears of War 2 to a tee, so it could potentially be a quick review. Anyways, it would be nice of you could, no harm if you can't. Happy edits, GroundZ3R0 002 (talk) 09:32, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure how much time I'll have to give it justice -- I'm leaving for a brief 4-or-5-day vacation on Wednesday -- but if it's still up there when I get back (Sunday), I'll get right on it. I don't suppose the video game has anything to do with the film? Because if it does, I have to warn you ahead of time that my opinion of the film is very low, mostly because I guessed the ending within 30 seconds of the start.... - Mû??â?û?â?û 09:37, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it is in the same franchise as the Saw (2004 film). But, even if you didn't like the film, I'm sure you'll be amazed at the article's writing quality and depth. And I'm almost positive it will still be there by sunday as there is a massive GA backlog and many articles have over a month delay, Saw was only nominated a week or so ago. Anyways, that would be great if you could and apologies if my constant messages are interrupting your review. Cheers, GroundZ3R0 002 (talk) 09:44, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Eh, no problem. Keeps me concentrating. By the way, have you seen User:Philcha's response to your secondary opinion on the W:O&H GA review? -- Mû??â?û?â?û 09:48, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi, sorry for holding the reviews for so long - I've been ill, and will back in hospital again Tues to Wed back week. I've done some tweaks. If you could find some time to at them I'd be grateful, but I realise you may be busy on other thing, as around Christmas. --Philcha (talk) 23:45, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles needs you!
Ahoy there! We're conducting our annual purge of the participants list for WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles, in an effort to make sure our members stay current with events at the WikiProject. If you would like to renew your participation with the WikiProject, simply drop by the participants list and re-add your name to the list in alphabetical order using the following format:. Also feel free to add your specialties or points of interest. If you don't have the time or don't feel like rejoining, then ignore this request; you can rejoin at any time you'd like. Cheers,  bibliomaniac 1  5  00:13, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Comarca
I moved a transitional version of the Comarca template to User:Mukkakukaku/comarca (if you want it) and ran a script to replace the old links to use it in your sandbox. I hope you don't mind. I was just cleaning up after the TFD closed. Best regards. Plastikspork ?Œ (talk) 23:54, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Sure that's no problem. Thanks. -- Mû??â?û?â?û 04:33, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

GA for American Airlines 1
It was manufactured on 12 February 1959, and entered service with American Airlines on that same day

Sounds like wrong information. As soon as a plane is built, it was sent over to American Airlines and flown on a flight? I would think that they would have to fly the plane to an American Airlines base then put the magazines and safety cards and other things. Certainly not all in the same day? Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 20:16, 4 December 2009 (UTC)


 * That's what I thought at first, but the Civil Aeronautics Bord report says the following:

""A Boeing 707-123B aircraft, manufacturer's serial No. 17633, U. S. Registry N 7506A, bore a manufacturer's date of February 12, 1959, and was delivered to American Airlines, Inc., on the same date.""


 * p. 30. I just took "delivered to American Airlines" to mean "entered service with American Airlines." (Unless it means something different?) -- Mû??â?û?â?û 20:23, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Maybe change it to "It was manufactured on 12 February 1959, and delivered to American Airlines on that same day".

Good luck on the GA! Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 20:28, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Horatio Caine
You don't know me but: Horatio caine is definitly the coolest person on earth :D 83.86.5.196 (talk) 22:06, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Reply, concerning NWO Flight 421 changes
Hi, Mukkakukaku:

Concerning your question of the style changes I made, they were these: the undefined undefined template expanded your abbreviation "km" to "kilometre" rather than "kilometer." According to the Manual of Style, American spelling (rather than Commonwealth) is pretty much required in an article about American events.

The other change was to replace "feet" by "foot" in the place where it was used as an adjective. The phrase, as I recall it, was something like "descended to the 7000 feet (sic) altitude level." The singular form of the unit is required here.

You may be relieved that both of these errors (if such they are) were caused by the template and not by you. Because of this, I wrote a message at the talk page of the template, as if any corrective action is taken, it must be there. I guess I also should have written my message on the article talk page, but I just didn't think of it. My apologies if this caused you any distress.

Cheers, PKKloeppel (talk) 02:07, 6 December 2009 (UTC)


 * After I had finished this note, I discovered that someone had replied to my note at the template talk page. It seems that the changes I asked for already exist, in the form of switches: "sp=us" and "adj=on". I didn't know about them, or almost anything else about the template, for that matter. That is why I did the conversions by hand. PKKloeppel (talk) 02:34, 6 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Replied at User Talk: Pkkphysicist. -- Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû 03:19, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

huge backlog
I see that there is a huge backlog at the good article nominations. How about this work schedule? You review Nokian Tyres and I review Braathens Helikopter. They are similar length. They are both Nordic related articles, albeit there is a huge difference between Norway and Finland. I think I can guide to the get an GA as your article is very close to meeting the standard. You are qualified to review Nokian Tyres because you have written some GA or close to GA articles as well as Nordic related articles. Willing to help cut the backlog? Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 23:30, 7 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Deal. I'll do the review as soon as I get home from work. Regards -- Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû  00:16, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your many, many comments. I will work on them. I am exhausted, will look at Braathens tomorrow. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 17:38, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Do you want to glance at it now. I've gone through your nice list and made improvements. I've been careful to use Nokian Tyre references for the objective facts but haven't used them for the really positive stuff to avoid bias. Some references are Nokia references, which is a different, now unrelated, company. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 20:41, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the re-review. I've addressed those points and added a tiny bit of new information that fits the article. You are so kind. I just found out that you never edited Braathens Helikopter at all so you're doing this out the kindness. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 01:15, 9 December 2009 (UTC)


 * No problem. I was getting some heat elsewhere for attempting to overload WP:GA with airliner crash articles, so now I can say that I've been doing my part. And Braathens Helikopter is somewhat related to my normal fare. -- Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû 01:23, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Check out TWA Flight 159. I am no expert but hopefully the comments make sense. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 01:44, 9 December 2009 (UTC)  I will re-review it.  If it makes GA, I hope it will last more than 10 minutes before someone slaps a "but wait, I don't think so" tag on it! Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 16:03, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Nokian Tyres GA review
I have nominated the article for community reassessment as I believe that the article does not meet the GA criteria. My concerns are at Good article reassessment/Nokian Tyres/1. Jezhotwells (talk) 01:49, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

GAN
Hey there. I noticed you were the one who reviewed the Warcraft: Orcs & Humans article for its GA attempt. While the customary process is to put the article on hold for a week if it does not meet the criteria, it has been over a month since you put it on hold. I realize you wish to allow the reviewers more time to get this article to better standards, but the increasing backlog has made it difficult to keep this entry on there. I am going to notify the nominator as well and remove it from the list for the time being. Apologies, GroundZ3R0 002 (talk) 02:17, 23 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi, I've reverted the Warcraft: Orcs & Humans review at WP:GAN, i.e. restored the review. I will now draw to GroundZ3R0 002's notice the rules for GAs.
 * Meanwhile my operation has been put back up 29 Dec 2009. If you find time for the review that's nice - but the real priority is a great Merry Christmas and Happy New Year, have a great one. --Philcha (talk) 06:18, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Help with Midwest Airlines edit war
There has been an edit war going on articles such as Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport and General Mitchell International Airport, regarding whether Midwest Airlines, as operated by Frontier Airlines, should be listed separately on the "Airlines and Destinations" lists. As someone who apparently is heavily involved in aviation articles, could you help resolve this dispute? Thanks much! --BaronLarf 09:33, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

The 2010 WikiCup begins tomorrow!
Welcome to the biggest WikiCup Wikipedia has yet seen! Round one will take place over two months, and finish on February 26. There is only one pool, and the top 64 will progress. The competition will be tough, as more than half of the current competitors will not make it to round 2. Details about scoring have been finalized and are explained at WikiCup/Scoring. Please make sure you're familiar with the scoring rules, because any submissions made that violate these rules will be removed. Like always, the judges can be reached through the WikiCup talk pages, on their talk page, or over IRC with any issues concerning anything tied to the Cup. We will keep in contact with you via weekly newsletters; if you do not want to receive them, please remove yourself from the list here. Conversely, if a non-WikiCup participant wishes to receive the newsletters, they may add themselves to that list. Well, enough talk- get writing! Your submission's page is located here. Details on how to submit your content is located here, so be sure to check that out! Once content has been recognized, it can be added to your submissions page, from which our bot will update the main score table. Remember that only articles worked on and nominated during the competition are eligible for points. Have fun, and good luck! Garden, iMatthew, J Milburn, and The ed17 19:21, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

User:AnmaFinotera/NanoUser Updated
Hi and thanks for using this userbox! I thought you'd like to know that it can now support a second parameter to indicate how many times you have won NaNoWriMo! To implement this, just use. The colors have also been updated to better match the "official" NaNo colors. Thanks again! -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 06:45, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

EAL 663
Hello all --

I'm usually rather good at this locating old NTSB accident reports business, but for the life of me I can't seem to find the full report of Eastern Air Lines Flight 663. I found the brief, but what I need is the actual report. The NTSB website doesn't have a copy (it only has the last 15 or 20 years' of reports available), and Embry-Riddle University's collection doesn't have it (they're really only useful from 1967 forward, and this accident took place in 1965), and AirDisaster.com's collection doesn't reach back that far.

Frankly, I'm stumped. Does anyone have any other magical sources of accident reports they know of?

Thanks --

-- Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû 03:16, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Addendum: and yes, I know the Civil Aeronautics Board released a report, but since the NTSB released a brief, wouldn't it make sense they released a report too? Wasn't 1965 a transitional period when both the CAB and NTSB investigated? --Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû 07:41, 7 December 2009 (UTC)


 * I have that report in my files. It was published by the CAB on November 14th, 1966, and released on November 17th, and is 27 pages in length. EditorASC (talk) 14:01, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 January newsletter
We are half way through round one of the WikiCup. We've had some shakeups regarding late entries, flag changes and early dropouts, but the competition is now established- there will be no more flag changes or new competitors. Congratulations to, our current leader, who, at the time of writing, has more listed points than and   (second and third place respectively) combined. A special well done also goes to - his artcle Jewel Box (St. Louis, Missouri) was the first content to score points in the competition.

Around half of competitors are yet to score. Please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. 64 of the 149 current competitors will advance to round 2- if you currently have no points, do not worry, as over half of the current top 64 have under 50 points. Everyone needs to get their entries in now to guarantee their places in round 2! 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, by email or on IRC. Good luck! J Milburn, Garden, iMatthew and The ed17 Delivered by JCbot (talk) at 00:18, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Aviation Contest
Hi Mukkakukaku! This note is to inform you that your Aviation Contest submissions page has been archived from the previous round! You are now free to add submissions for this round! Note: This next round will run from January through February, so feel free to update your submission page with work from both months! Thanks, and happy editing! (Note: I will not be watching this space. If you have any questions, feel free to ask at the Contest discussion page. -SidewinderX (talk) 14:07, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 February newsletter
Round one is over, and round two has begun! Congratulations to the 64 contestants who have made it through, but well done and thank you to all contestants who took part in our first round. A special well done goes to, our round one winner (1010 points), and to and , who were second and third respectively (640 points/605 points). Sasata was awarded the most points for both good articles (300 points) and featured articles (600 points), and TonyTheTiger was awarded the most for featured topics (225 points), while Hunter Kahn claimed the most for good topics (70). claimed the most featured lists (240 points) and featured pictures (35 points), claimed the most for Did you know? entries (490 points),  claimed the most for featured sounds (70 points) and  claimed the most for In the news entries (40 points). No one claimed a featured portal or valued picture.

Credits awarded after the end of round one but before round two may be claimed in round two, but remember the rule that content must have been worked on in some significant way during 2010 by you for you to claim points. The groups for round two will be placed up shortly, and the submissions' pages will be blanked. This round will continue until 28 April, when the top two users from each group, as well as 16 wildcards, will progress to round three. 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; thank you to all doing this last round, and particularly to those helping at WikiCup/Reviews. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, by email or on IRC. 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, Fox, iMatthew and The ed17 Delivered by JCbot (talk) at 00:50, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Nominations for the March 2010 Military history Project Coordinator elections now open!
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 8 March 2010! More information on coordinatorship may be found on the coordinator academy course and in the responsibilities section on the coordinator page. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:04, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Coordinator elections have opened!
Voting for the Military history WikiProject coordinator elections has opened; all users are encouraged to participate in the elections. Voting will conclude 23:59 (UTC) on 28 March 2010. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:08, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 March newsletter
We're half way through round two, and everything is running smoothly. leads overall with 650 points this round, and heads pool B. currently leads pool C, dubbed the "Group of Death", which has a only a single contestant yet to score this round (the fewest of any group), as well five contestants over 100 points (the most). With a month still to go, as well as 16 wildcard places, everything is still to play for. Anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.

Although unrelated to the WikiCup, April sees a Good Article Nominations backlog elimination drive, formulated as a friendly competition with small awards, as the Cup is. Several WikiCup contestants and judges have already signed up, but regular reviewers and those who hope to do more reviewing are more than welcome to join at the drive page. If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox, iMatthew and The ed17 Delivered by JCbot (talk) 22:19, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
Aviator006 (talk) 07:23, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 April newsletter
Round two is over, and we are down to our final 32. For anyone interested in the final standings (though not arranged by group) this page has been compiled. Congratulations to, our clear overall round winner, and to and , who were solidly second and third respectively. There were a good number of high scorers this round- competition was certainly tough! Round three begins tomorrow, but anything promoted after the end of round two is eligible for points. 16 contestants (eight pool leaders and eight wildcards) will progress to round four in two months- things are really starting to get competitive. Anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.

Judge iMatthew has retired from Wikipedia, and we wish him the best. The competition has been ticking over well with minimal need for judge intervention, so thank you to everyone making that possible. A special thank you goes to participants and  for their help in preparing for round three. Good luck everyone! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 17:37, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Happy first edit day!
Hi878 (talk) 04:55, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 May newsletter
We are half way through round 3, with a little under a month to go. The current overall leader is, who has 570 points. He leads pool C. Pools A, B and D are led by, and  respectively. Anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.

Two of last year's final 8, and, have dropped out of the competition, saying they would rather their place went to someone who will have more time on their hands than them next round. On a related note, a special thank you goes to for his help behind the scenes once again. There is currently a problem with the poster, perhaps caused by the new skin- take a look at this discussion and see if you can help. The competition has continued to tick over well with minimal need for judge intervention, so thank you to everyone making that possible. Good luck to all! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 20:51, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 June newsletter
We're half way through 2010, and the end of the WikiCup is in sight! Round 3 is over, and we're down to our final 16. Our pool winners were (A),  (B, and the round's overall leader),  (C)  and  (D, joint), but, with the scores reset, everything is to play for in our last pooled round. The pools will be up before midnight tonight, and have been selected randomly by J Milburn. This will be the toughest round yet, and so, as ever, anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.

Though unaffiliated with the WikiCup, July sees the third Great Wikipedia Dramaout- a project with not dissimilar goals to the WikiCup. Everyone is welcome to take part and do their bit to contribute to the encyclopedia itself.

If you're interested in the scores for the last round of the Cup, please take a look at WikiCup/History/2010/Round 3 and WikiCup/History/2010/Full/Round 3. Our thanks go to for compiling these. As was predicted, Group C ended up the "Group of Death", with 670 points required for second place, and, therefore, automatic promotion. This round will probably be even tougher- again, the top two from each of the two groups will make it through, while the twelve remaining participants will compete for four wildcard places- good luck everyone! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17

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

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

Earlier this round, we said goodbye to, who has bowed out to spend more time on the book he is authoring with his wife. We wish him all the best. In other news, the start of this round also saw some WikiCup awards sent out by. We appreciate his enthusiasm, and contestants are of course welcome to award each other prizes as they see fit, but rest assured that we will be sending out "official" awards at the end of the competition. If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 22:43, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

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


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

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

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

Our final eight will play it out for two months, after which we will know 2010's WikiCup winner, and a variety of prizes will be awarded. As ever, anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page. If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 23:13, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

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

Despite controversy, the WikiCup remains open. Signups for next year's competition are more than welcome, and suggestions for how next year's competition will work are appreciated at Wikipedia talk:WikiCup/Scoring. More general comments and discussions should be directed at the WikiCup talk page. One month remains in the 2010 WikiCup, after which we will know our champion. Good luck everyone! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 23:07, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

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

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

The WikiCup has faced criticism in the last month – hopefully, we will take something positive from it and create a better contest for next year. Like Wikipedia itself, the Cup is a work in progress, and ideas for how it should work are more than welcome on the WikiCup talk page and on the scoring talk page. Also, people are more than welcome to sign up for next year's competition on the signup page. Well done and thank you to everyone involved – the Cup has been a pleasure to run, and we, as judges, have been proud to be a part of it. We hope that next year, however the Cup is working, and whoever is running it, it will be back, stronger and more popular than ever. Until then, goodbye and happy editing! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 03:09, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

For when you get back...
 S o p h i e  ( Talk ) 14:02, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

GOCE elections
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors via SMasters using AWB on 01:52, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Poland activity check
We are doing another activity check on members of WikiProject Poland. I've noticed that you have not been active in the Poland-related articles in the past few months (we define it as doing 10 or more Poland-related edits per month in the last three months period), and as such I took the liberty to adjust your position in our Participants list from active to semi-active. Please note that this is just a method of keeping track of how many editors are currently active on Poland-related topics. Feel free to move yourself back if you disagree with this, and/or comment on WT:POLAND. In case you are not aware of that, our project has many active discussions on its talk page, we also list Poland-related article news (hee), Poland-related new articles for review (hee), Poland-related articles in need of cleanup (here), a listing of most popula Poland-related articles (here), a portal (here), and other tools. If the activity incrases, we would like to implement other tools, such as project A-class reviews and a newsletter. We are looking forward to seeing you around more often! Take care, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 21:30, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

GOCE Year-end Report
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 06:34, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011
Hello. You are being contacted because you have previously shown interest in the WikiCup but have not yet signed up for the 2011 WikiCup, which starts at midnight. It is not too late to sign up! The competition will remain open until at least January 31, and so it is not too late to enter. If you are interested, simply follow the instructions to add your username to the signup page, and a judge will contact you as soon as possible with an explanation of how to participate. The WikiCup is a friendly competition open to all Wikipedians, old and new, experienced and inexperienced, providing a fun and rewarding way to contribute quality content to Wikipedia. If you do not want to receive any further messages about the WikiCup, or you want to start receiving messages about the WikiCup, you may add or remove your name from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. If you have any questions, feel free to ask on the WikiCup talk page or contact the judges directly. J Milburn and The ed17 06:50, 31 December 2010 (UTC)