User talk:Oakley77

Welcome, Visitors!

Corsica and Brittany
Can you please refrain from adding Brittany and Corsica in the football squad template for player nationality as you did here and here. I have reverted you because Corsican and Breton are ethnic groups and not nationalities. —  JS   Rant Away 05:25, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Re: Xabi Alonso's Nationality
Hi. I changed Alonso's little nationality flag back to Spain because according to FIFA, the highest football authority, lists him as Spanish. Official nationalities are determined by what FIFA-sanctioned national team one plays for. I'm sure Basque is a nationality, but it's not really recognized by FIFA. (And I guess if you've never played for a full national team, you go by your affiliation at the youth level. If your not a youth team member, then you probably go by the country you're from politically.) If you look at the roster for Athletic Bilbao, all the players are listed as Spanish, even though they're also technically Basque. Except for, interestingly, Fernando Amorebieta, who now plays for the Venezuelan national team. He was born in Venezuela, and part of his family comes from there. He's still home-grown in Basque Country, though, so Athletic will still keep him.

You could argue that Alonso be considered Basque because of his appearances for the Basque team, but the team isn't officially sanctioned by FIFA or UEFA. It's allowed to play in friendly matches, but it can take part in official competitions like the World Cup or the Euros. The Catalan national team is in the same boat; that's why Xavi & Co. over at FC Barcelona (as well as Bojan Krkic and Joan Capdevila) have Spanish flags next to their names instead of Catalan ones. So Xabi may be Basque, but in FIFA's eyes, he's a World-Cup-winning Spaniard.

Hope that clears everything up.

Cheers, Otaku-jin (talk) 05:27, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I changed it back too and if you insist on going against WP:MOSFLAG and push a Basque separatist agenda you will find your account blocked. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:44, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

December 2011
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary&#32;for your edits. Doing so helps everyone understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for vandalism). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:53, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

North Korea national football team
North Korea national football team is not what I would call ready. The player list is way too long. I'd only have the current squad. The current squad also needs some sources. The text is very, very limited and isn't fully supported by sources. The World Cup part of their history isn't organised logically. I would actually ding the assessment down to a C, because the article is NOT fully sources and it feels really incomplete. The article only has 15 sources. For a team that has as many world cup appearances as they do, I would be expecting AT LEAST 50 sources. I'd also be expecting the See also section to be gone as the article should be so complete, these are not necessary. --LauraHale (talk) 21:58, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
 * having a quick look on my iPhone, none of the B class men articles are at solace where I would be comfortable nominating them without extensive work. Brazil requires a lot of work, much editorial plus other work. Australia has a tag that says problems since 2010. India needs a fair amount of sourcing. India and Australia could both be assessed C easily. If a men's team was easily reachable, some nationalistic fan of the country would have done it already. --LauraHale (talk) 23:05, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Potential GA candidates
Rschen7754 thinks if you work with me, this might be one way to eventually get your GA participation restrictions lifted. I'm willing to nominally serve as a mentor to help you get back by making sure you understand what is GA ready... but I edit primarily in Australian sport, women's sport and Paralympic sport. That said, I have about 9 articles that are Good Articles. I would like to take the remaining six articles to GA to have a good topic. These articles are:


 * Jane Moran
 * Gemma Beadsworth
 * Melissa Rippon
 * Sophie Smith
 * Kate Gynther
 * Greg McFadden

These articles are pretty close to being ready to nominate as the articles are mostly complete. I've just been distracted by getting other Australian Olympians to DYK and GA nominations for women's football teams. The following needs to be done:


 * Jane Moran
 * Water Polo Australia information needs to be included: Supporting facts need to be added to the article and cited to Water Polo Australia. Water Polo Australia source needs to be used to support existing facts. WPA source.
 * Added and sourced some useful nuggets of information. Oakley77 (talk) 16:27, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Australian Olympic Committee information needs to be included: Supporting facts need to be added to the article and cited to Australian Olympic Committee.   Australian Olympic Committee source needs to be used to support existing facts. AOC Source
 * Added some info here as well. Oakley77 (talk) 14:44, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Where was Moran playing club water polo in 2009 and 2010? Information needs to be included in the article.
 * Info found and placed. Oakley77 (talk) 02:51, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Lead needs to be written in a better summary style.
 * I believe it has been. Oakley77 (talk) 02:42, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Red links need to be checked for each article: Find correct links if they exist or selectively remove some of them if they appear redundant.
 * All look fine here. Oakley77 (talk) 02:34, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Flow of the article needs to be checked. I write point. point. point. point.  This can be choppy.
 * After reading the article, the flow seems to suffice. Oakley77 (talk) 16:56, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm looking at http://www.australianwaterpolo.com.au/high-performance/senior-women-profiles/profiles/moran-jane/, and the club water polo stuff is very much in this article. There is no indication she took time off: 1st, NWPL Championship with Brisbane Barracudas 2009, 2010, 2011

Pretty much EVERYTHING on Australian Water Polo's page needs to be included in the article. The article doesn't say what position she plays in it. That is like writing a football article without mentioning what position a person plays (forward, fullback, goalie). Australian Water Polo's page needs to be used a lot more in the article to fill in the details as a GA needs to be fully sourced and complete information wise. --LauraHale (talk) 21:43, 26 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Gemma Beadsworth
 * Water Polo Australia information needs to be included: Supporting facts need to be added to the article and cited to Water Polo Australia. Water Polo Australia source needs to be used to support existing facts. WPA Source
 * Australian Olympic Committee information needs to be included: Supporting facts need to be added to the article and cited to Australian Olympic Committee.   Australian Olympic Committee source needs to be used to support existing facts. AOC Source
 * Club water polo: 2007, 2008, 2010 and 2012 were years she played. Where was she in 2009 and 2011?  Source needed and information needs to be put into the article.
 * Lead needs to be written in a better summary style.
 * Red links need to be checked for each article: Find correct links if they exist or selectively remove some of them if they appear redundant.
 * Flow of the article needs to be checked. I write point. point. point. point.  This can be choppy.


 * Melissa Rippon
 * Water Polo Australia information needs to be included: Supporting facts need to be added to the article and cited to Water Polo Australia. Water Polo Australia source needs to be used to support existing facts. WPA Source
 * Australian Olympic Committee information needs to be included: Supporting facts need to be added to the article and cited to Australian Olympic Committee.   Australian Olympic Committee source needs to be used to support existing facts. AOC Source
 * Club play is a bit of a blank slate. Who did she play for?  When?  What did she accomplish? NWPL may have additional sources.
 * Lead needs to be written in a better summary style.
 * Red links need to be checked for each article: Find correct links if they exist or selectively remove some of them if they appear redundant.
 * Flow of the article needs to be checked. I write point. point. point. point.  This can be choppy.


 * Sophie Smith
 * Water Polo Australia information needs to be included: Supporting facts need to be added to the article and cited to Water Polo Australia. Water Polo Australia source needs to be used to support existing facts. WPA Source
 * Australian Olympic Committee information needs to be included: Supporting facts need to be added to the article and cited to Australian Olympic Committee.   Australian Olympic Committee source needs to be used to support existing facts. AOC Source.
 * Club play is a bit of a blank slate. What happened between 2008 and 2012?  Previous sources may answer. NWPL may have additional sources.
 * Lead needs to be written in a better summary style.
 * Red links need to be checked for each article: Find correct links if they exist or selectively remove some of them if they appear redundant.
 * Flow of the article needs to be checked. I write point. point. point. point.  This can be choppy.


 * Kate Gynther
 * Water Polo Australia information needs to be included: Supporting facts need to be added to the article and cited to Water Polo Australia. Water Polo Australia source needs to be used to support existing facts. WPA Source.
 * Australian Olympic Committee information needs to be included: Supporting facts need to be added to the article and cited to Australian Olympic Committee.   Australian Olympic Committee source needs to be used to support existing facts.
 * Duplicate citation needs to be fixed: "Four named in national squad". The Courier-Mail. Retrieved 21 February 2012.
 * Lead needs to be written in a better summary style.
 * Red links need to be checked for each article: Find correct links if they exist or selectively remove some of them if they appear redundant.
 * Flow of the article needs to be checked. I write point. point. point. point.  This can be choppy.

I would estimate each of these articles would require an hour to three hours worth of work each to address those points. If you can get these things done, I will nominate these articles for GA, and I will allow you to fix changes any reviewer requests, then comment on the GA itself to say this was done, so you do not violate the conditions of your community band. You can then claim that you did substantial work on these articles (and helped take a topic to Good Topic.). These articles are important to me because I suspect the Australian media will plagiarise them if the team does what is expected and medals at the Games. At the same time, I know the girls on the team have seen these articles and are very happy with them having been created/massively improved. We got permission for the head shots. --LauraHale (talk) 02:24, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Hello Oakley77, A few months ago you asked me a question about the Eritrea page being listed as GA. I did not quite understand the question. Do you think you could clarify? Thank you, Merhawie (talk) 19:00, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Mir Almaat Ali Almaat  ☏  From Trivandrum, Kerala, India(UTC+5:30) 10:55, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
 Beijing Coma, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation. Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! Electriccatfish2 (talk) 01:19, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Indefinitely blocked
From Sockpuppet investigations/Oakley77, it is clear that you are editing while logged-out in order to evade your ban from the Good Article process. Given that you were blocked earlier this month for violating this ban, and that you have already required the community to spend time in crafting a custom sanction (as an alternative to simply banning you outright), I have blocked you indefinitely until we can rely on your compliance with your sanctions and with our sock-puppetry policy. You may appeal this block using the instructions here. AGK [•] 00:58, 30 July 2012 (UTC)


 * You said that you would comply with the ban beforehand, and you clearly went around it, multiple times. Why should we believe you this time? --Rschen7754 22:50, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, here is my take on it. Many editors will back me up when I say I have a well-appreciated constructive mindset when I edit or attempt to. Most of them just believe that I don't have the right methodology or understanding, per se, to be 100% positively constructive. As I go, I gain more understanding and adopt the proper protocol. I have imbued these methods into my editing, and get to know them when I make a mistake or blunder, however significant it is. This, I admit, is one of my biggest and worse "offences". This aside, due to my track record, I implore you to see the passion for Wikipedia I have, and please instill the trust in me to abide by every proper modus operandi Wikipedia has. My constructive edits make me refreshingly different from most every other blocked account, and wish to continue making them if you just give the chance, albeit my second. Thank you for helping edit again, Oakley77 (talk) 00:14, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Given your apparent good faith efforts to improve Wikipedia, rather than seeking indefinite blocks earlier, a topic ban was enacted to give you time to learn how to edit and how to improve Wikipedia. You were not prohibited from improving articles: you were blocked from certain processes.  Rather than seeking to improve Wikipedia inside the context of your topic ban, you went around it in ways that were not helpful.  You were blocked short term for doing this once, and didn't get the message: improve Wikipedia and avoid assessment processes.  Not sure I see a demonstration that you want to  improve Wikipedia and avoid assessment processes. --LauraHale (talk) 00:33, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) Oakley77, this would be your fourth chance. Your disregard of the bans got you blocked twice, and your sockpuppetry around the bans got you an indefinite block. Your last edit before the investigation and ban was, "I will help with anything you need, including the peer review" (emphasis added) while you still had three months to go on the "no reviews anywhere" ban (talk page notice). Your socking to nominate articles for GA status shows the same problems that got you banned from GAN 3 months before. You have not shown any ability to "gain more understanding and adopt the proper protocol."
 * I suggest you read the standard offer and take in the first item: "Wait six months without sockpuppetry." I believe you need that time to understand the rules and policies (the "protocol"). 71.234.215.133 (talk) 00:42, 31 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Note to reviewing admin - Not reviewing this one as I've already blocked this user twice, but I endorse the indefinite block until we have something more concrete. WP:AGF is not a suicide pact, and also there are clear WP:COMPETENCE issues. The user has had at least a month to show improvement and has been given mentorship, and has not improved. --Rschen7754 00:23, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Just wanted to also comment that at least one of the articles nominates for GA Oakley77 was SPECIFICALLY told was not ready for GAN. It is still not ready.  Specifically nominating an article he was told he was not ready and going around a block to do that is disruptive to GAN. --LauraHale (talk) 00:28, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Let me please clarify that yes, in hindsight, my recent actions at GAN were slightly disruptive. At the time of perpetration, I was believing to be doing something constructive, by giving articles a distinction they deserve, as well as the editors. I apologize to any editor I disrupted, and to disrupting the entire process, but it was all done in a mindset of good faith. I am sorry, but did not mean to cause trouble in any way, shape, or form. Oakley77 (talk) 00:45, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Anna's offer
As you know, I'm always recruiting. If an admin decides to allow him to redeem himself, and Oakley77 is willing, I would be willing to provide him with a set of stubs to create and expand, and keep an eye on his contribs.

Competency issues were mentioned, but with GA, I also have competency issues.

This user has shown trouble staying out of areas from which he is prohibited. So, restricting him to a very few articles may be a good test, make him productive, help him reform, and benefit the project with some new content. If he can't contain himself, and starts to put fingers into other pies, indef him. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:05, 31 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Anna, thank you for your comments; but historically those types of experiments have ended rather poorly, so I'm afraid I couldn't endorse your proposal. Some editors are simply not able to collaborate with others, and as a community we can do nothing except gently exclude them—even if we periodically re-assess whether they might have (through real-life experience, maturation, or other factors) become equipped with the skills they previously lacked. At this stage, it's clear we can do nothing for Oakley77 (or he for us), and that the best advise is he take a few months' break from Wikipedia. The Arbitration Committee usually hear appeals every 6 months, and the community every year; blocking indefinitely (with the presumption that he can request to return after an extended time) seems to me like the best way of proceeding. At the time of any appeal (for example, in 6 months from now), if Oakley is still interested in contributing, then whether or not he had socked would stand to tell us if he is able to comply with the community's policies and decisions. AGK  [•] 01:13, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
 * AGK: Fair enough, my friend. I trust your judgement.
 * Oakley: Listen to AGK. Take a break. Don't sock or you'll never be allowed back. Good luck. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:18, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
 * If the offer is still on the table, I metaphorically reach over and take it. I appreciate greatly for helping me, and will diligently do what is asked of me. Oakley77 (talk)
 * I am with AGK on this. Mentorship has been tried with Oakley77.  Oakley77 managed for about a day or so before losing interest in the narrow confines of the conditions which would have allowed him back to GA, proposed articles outside of that area (which required a lot of time and effort to explain why they did not meet them).  If Oakley77 had said "I want to get back to GA.  I was told to do things on Talk:Jane Moran and I will do them.  After I get this done, I will ask for permission to get back to GA or select which articles my mentor will oversee me improving to GA that they can them nominate on my behalf" I might be okay with this.  Oakley77 wasted time by not doing that. When told something was not GA ready and would take a huge amount of work to get to GA, Oakley77 then basically said "I don't want you as a mentor anymore", found a new mentor (where he failed to explain his sanctions), required a lot of clean up work after that person helped him and with the article STILL not ready, nominated the article as an IP address.  I don't think Oakley77 is ready now.  Maybe in a few months, after reading a lot of quality articles and not editing, Oakley77 will begin to see what quality content is and how to properly interact with it. --LauraHale (talk) 01:42, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

I understand. I will read up on articles, and focus on their content. A mentor still would be nice though, if anyone is willing to be one for me. I will comply with what you say, and suggest. Thanks alot! Oakley77 (talk) 01:55, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
 * You are blocked; there is no need for a mentor. Also note that if we catch you using a sock again (and we're pretty good at catching this sort of thing), it will decrease your chances of a successful appeal. --Rschen7754 01:57, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Right, I never will use one again (unless of course I ever am running a bot, which is unlikely). Rschen7754, you have provided me with much helpful advice, and I am thankful for that. I would greatly benefit, and in turn Wikipedia would, if you could just simply outline the steps you would take if you were me. It would be immensely beneficial. Oakley77 (talk) 02:01, 31 July 2012 (UTC)


 * 1) Wait six months. Don't click the edit button during that time.
 * 2) Read quality articles on Wikipedia. Try to improve your writing skills in general. User:Tony1 has some good tips on writing in his userspace; I'm sure there are others on and off Wikipedia.
 * 3) Read the MOS. Read WP:WIAGA and all pages it links to.
 * 4) After six months, follow the steps at WP:OFFER and 2nd chance.
 * 5) If you are unblocked, there will be strings attached. You will probably still be under the same topic ban. Don't violate it, or you will be blocked again, and that time you will probably not have a successful appeal. --Rschen7754 02:10, 31 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Could I al the very least see a list of the stubs Anna wants me to work on? Oakley77 (talk) 18:12, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Maybe a possible trial run, one that only permits me to work on the assigned stub, can not only be helpful to Wikipedia but can show my competence. Is that a viable proposal? Oakley77 (talk) 23:35, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
 * No. You need to take a break from editing. --Rschen7754 00:32, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Is an entire six months necessary? Oakley77 (talk) 02:35, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes. Frankly, it is starting to sound unhealthy that you cannot take a break from Wikipedia for that long. --Rschen7754 03:57, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
 * No, I certainly can take a break that long, I was just wondering, that's all. Oakley77 (talk) 18:51, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 July newsletter
We're approaching the beginning of 2012's final round. Pool A sees as the leader, with 300 points being awarded for the featured article Bivalvia, and Pool B sees  in the lead, with 10 good articles, and over 35 articles eligible for good topic points. Pool A sees in second place with a number of articles relating to baseball, while Pool B's  follows Grapple X, with a variety of contributions including the high-scoring, high-importance featured article on the 2010 film Pride & Prejudice. Ruby2010, like Grapple X, also claimed a number of good topic points; despite this, not a single point has been claimed for featured topics in the contest so far. The same is true for featured portals.

Currently, the eighth-place competitor (and so the lowest scorer who would reach the final round right now) has scored 332, more than double the 150 needed to reach the final round last year. In 2010, however, 430 was the lowest qualifying score. In this competition, we have generally seen scores closer to those in 2010 than those in 2011. Let's see what kind of benchmark we can set for future competitions! As ever, 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. 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) 22:30, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Bamê for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bamê is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Bamê until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. 2011wp (talk) 01:45, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Wikify and the future of wikification
Hi! There is an ongoing proposal at the project talkpage concerning the future of wikification, including possible deprecation of the wikify template which is being discussed at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2012 August 10. Your input would be greatly appreciated!

You are receiving this message because you are listed as an active member of the wikify project. To update your status, go here.

Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 15:48, 12 August 2012 (UTC) on behalf of Project Wikify

WikiCup 2012 August newsletter
The final is upon us! We are down to our final 8. A massive 573 was our lowest qualifying score; this is higher than the 150 points needed last year and the 430 needed in 2010. Even in 2009, when points were acquired for mainspace edit count in addition to audited content, 417 points secured a place. That leaves this year's WikiCup, by one measure at least, our most competitive ever. Our finalists, ordered by round 4 score, are:
 * 1) once again finishes the round in first place, leading Pool B. Grapple X writes articles about television, and especially The X-Files and Millenium, with good articles making up the bulk of the score.
 * 2) led Pool A this round. Fourth-place finalist last year, Miyagawa writes on a variety of topics, and has reached the final primarily off the back of his massive number of did you knows.
 * 3) was second in Pool B. Ruby2010 writes primarily on television and film, and scores primarily from good articles.
 * 4) finished third in Pool B. Casliber is something of a WikiCup veteran, having finished sixth in 2011 and fourth in 2010. Casliber writes on the natural sciences, including ornithology, botany and astronomy. Over half of Casliber's points this round were bonus points from the high-importance articles he has worked on.
 * 5) came second in Pool A. Also writing on biology, especially marine biology, Cwmhiraeth received 390 points for one featured article (Bivalvia) and one good article (pelican), topping up with a large number of did you knows.
 * 6) was third in Pool A. Muboshgu writes primarily on baseball, and this round saw Muboshgu's first featured article, Derek Jeter, promoted on its fourth attempt at FAC.
 * 7) was fourth in Pool A. She writes on a variety of topics, including horses, but this round also saw the high-importance lettuce reach featured article status.
 * 8) is another WikiCup veteran, having been a finalist in 2009 and 2010. He writes mostly on mycology.

However, we must also say goodbye to the eight who did not make the final, having fallen at the last hurdle:, , , , , , and. We hope to see you all next year.

On the subject of next year, a discussion has been opened here. Come and have your say about the competition, and how you'd like it to run in the future. This brainstorming will go on for some time before more focused discussions/polls are opened. As ever, 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. 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) 00:20, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Anote Tong


Anote Tong (born 11 June 1952) is an I-Kiribati politician with Chinese heritage who is the President of Kiribati. He won the election in July 2003 with a slim plurality of votes cast (47.4%) against his brother, Dr. Harry Tong (43.5%) and the private lawyer Banuera Berina (9.1%). The elections were contested by the opposition, due to allegations of electoral fraud but the High Court of Tarawa had confirmed that there was no fraud. He was easily re-elected on 17 October 2007, for a second term (64%), over Nabuti Mwemwenikarawa (33.43%), the nearest competitor. In 2012, Tong was reelected for a third term, although with a significantly smaller percentage than in the previous two elections, winning 42.18% of the vote, while fellow candidates Tetaua Taitai (35.02%) and Rimeta Beniamina (22.80%) came in second and third, respectively.

Personal life
Born in Tabuaeran, he is the son of a Chinese migrant who settled in the Gilberts after World War II and of Nei Keke, from the island of Maiana in Kiribati, he went to St Bede's College for his secondary school education, graduated from Canterbury University with a degree in Science, and then gained a Masters in Economics degree from the London School of Economics.

He is married to an I-Kiribati woman, First Lady Nei Meme, and has seven children. Tong is originally from the island of Maiana, located in central Kiribati.

Political career
Before his presidency, Tong served as a minster within the government of Teburoro Tito, a member of the Protect the Maneaba party, for a short spell, before resigning and switching party alliances to his current party, the Pillars of Truth. President Tito spuriously declared this resignation to be a product of unpaid taxes, but this claim went unproven due to its circumstantial reactivity.

During the campaign, he promised to review the lease of a spy and satellite tracking base used by the People's Republic of China and "to take appropriate actions at the right time." On 7 November, he established relations with the Republic of China on Taiwan, which led the People's Republic of China to sever relations and vacate its satellite base nearly a month later.

Tong was overwhelmingly re-elected to his seat in parliament in the August 2007 parliamentary election. On 17 October 2007, he was re-elected as president by a large majority. The opposition boycotted the election due to the exclusion of two opposition candidates, including Tong's brother Harry.

Tong was re-elected to a third, and final, four-year term as President in the January 2012 election. Tong won a little over 40% of the popular vote. He defeated two challengers, including his nearest rival, Tetaua Taitai, by more than 2,000 votes. Tong reappointed Teima Onorio to a third term as Vice President of Kiribati on 19 January 2012, as part of his cabinet appointments for his third term.

A women's rights group, the Kiribati National Council of Women, has been formed recently for the primary purpose of advocating for a proposed new government entity, one that would be the Ministry of Women and Children. A bill that among other actions would create this bureau passed through the House of Assembly of Kiribati on 23 August, 2012 and reached the second round of voting, but was ultimately voted against due to a blurry outline on budgetary proportioning. After the National Council of Women voiced its discontent, President Tong stated that "the defeat was unfortunate, but it does not mean that we will not continue to support the women’s issues. As a government, we will do it via other means, and perhaps it will come back to Parliament in the future.” This variably leaves the door open for women's rights to become an even greater issue than it already is in Kiribati.

In response to President Tong's efforts within the climate adaptation field, the President was awarded the distinction of 2012 Hillary Global Laureate. Says Institute Chairman David Caygill: "No nation symbolizes more dramatically than Kiribati both the impact of climate change and the inequity of that impact on different nations. President Tong has been tireless in his efforts to draw these concerns to the attention of the world. We hope this award assists his endeavours." In response to this accolade, a spokesperson for President Tong stated "His Excellency Te Beretitenti is most delighted and honoured to have been considered as the recipient of this award and would be extremely pleased to accept such honour on behalf of his people and his nation and others similarly affected by climate change". President Tong similarly won the Peter Benchley Ocean Award for Excellence in National Stewardship of the Ocean for 2012, with the reason provided for his victory as "For his role in creating one of the world’s largest and most biologically rich marine protected areas, the Phoenix Islands Protected Area".

Speaking up on climate change
President Tong has attracted international attention by warning that his country may become uninhabitable by the 2050s due to rising sea levels and salination provoked by climate change. Tong has stated on several occasions that Kiribati may cease to exist altogether, and that its entire population of 94,000 may need to be resettled as climate refugees. In June 2008, he stated that Kiribati may already have reached "the point of no return"; he added: "To plan for the day when you no longer have a country is indeed painful but I think we have to do that."

President Tong has sought possibilities for ultimately relocating the entire population of his country to other countries. His stated plan is for the people of Kiribati to "receive job training and then seek skilled jobs in other nations", so that they may become productive members of their host society, and avoid becoming merely "environmental refugees". "The plan has already begun to be implemented, with small groups of nurses going to Australia for training and other workers to New Zealand."

Specifically, Tong's government has "signed on to New Zealand’s Recognised Seasonal Employer (RSE) scheme and Australia’s Pacific Seasonal Worker Pilot Scheme (PSWPS), which provide seasonal employment opportunities in fruit-picking and horticulture industries". Only small numbers of I-Kiribati have been able to benefit so far. Tong has also reached an agreement with Australia to set up a Kiribati-Australia Nurses Initiative, whereby about eighty I-Kiribati receive nursing training in Australia, with an aim to "attain Australian nursing qualifications and industry experience". "[S]ome will go back to Kiribati to work the health system, but others will stay in Australia to send remittances home to households and community."

So far, however, no country has agreed to relocate substantial numbers of I-Kiribati. President Levy Mwanawasa of Zambia did tell President Tong that there was "plenty of room" in his country for I-Kiribati migrants, but he died suddenly in office in August 2008. In February 2012, Tong visited Fiji to seek to buy lands from the Fijian government, to resettle I-Kiribati migrants. . Speaking on Fiji One, Tong explained that the migration of his country's population would begin with a fairly small number of trained, skilled workers, while others were in the process of obtaining similar skills, to make themselves useful to the host nation: "We don't want 100,000 people from Kiribati coming to Fiji in one go. They need to find employment, not as refugees but as immigrant people with skills to offer, people who have a place in the community".

In 2008, his government declared 150,000 sqmi "of [the] Phoenix Islands marine area a fully protected marine park, making it off limits to fishing and other extractive uses". This, the Phoenix Islands Protected Area, was made a United Nations World Heritage Site. Its "rich biodiversity includ[es] an abundance of healthy corals, big sharks, groupers, tuna, giant clams and other critters that have been depleted in much of the rest of the world". Tong explained that it was intended as "a significant contribution to the world community in the hope they would also act".

Declaring himself "extremely disappointed" by the outcome of the 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference, Tong has "call[ed] a meeting in November [2010] in Kiribati, inviting large countries—the big polluters—and have them meet with the victims, the most vulnerable states: ours and the Marshall Islands and the Maldives". This meeting manifested in the 2010 Tarawa Climate Change Conference (TCCC), which was held during mid-November. The goal of the conference was to pass resolutions regarding global climate change, mainly citing lax climate restrictions in place in developing nations. The conference served as a precursor to the COP16 conference, which was to be held later that year in Cancun, and was successor to the 2009 Climate Vulnerable Forum, held in the Maldives. The conference was attended by many major nations and organizations, including, but not limited to, China, India, the United Kingdom, the European Union, and Japan. The ultimate goal of the conference, the passing and ratifying of climate-oriented laws and ordinances, succeeded in the form of the Ambo Declaration, a declaration calling for more immediate addressing and attention towards global climate change. This was ratified by 12 attendees of the conference, and contributed greatly to the effectiveness of the COP16 conference, due to its paving of fault lines and dichotomies between member nations, and leading to more cooperation between attendees of the conference.

During the 2011 Pacific Islands Forum, President Tong raised the notion of a possible floating island that would hold I-Kiribati citizens, and protect them from ever-rising shorelines. President Tong stated that "he'd seen models for a $2 billion floating island", which he likened to a giant offshore oil platform. He said while it sounded "like something from science fiction, every idea had to be considered given the dire situation facing Kiribati". President Tong also proposed other plans, including one for a "series of seawalls at a cost of nearly $1 billion", as well as the prior-mentioned relocation of I-Kiribati to other nations. The President also kvetched that "he's yet to see much in the way of financial aid from Europe despite ambitious pledges."

In an interview with ABC Radio Australia, President Tong highlighted his malcontent regarding the rising shorelines of his country. He expressed excitement at a potential refugee relocation deal with East Timor, stating that "East Timor has made a concrete offer and we've yet to discuss that in more detail. This is a new development and it's very encouraging because we don't choose just to go somewhere because we cannot do that. It's something that's got to be worked out between countries". He also reiterated his oft-spoken points of disdain regarding climate change, and rising global tidal levels in general, and how they affect Kiribati.

Speedy deletion nomination of Mr. Price Home


A tag has been placed on Mr. Price Home requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. WWGB (talk) 12:53, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 starting soon
Hi there; you're receiving this message because you have previously shown interest in the WikiCup. This is just to remind you that the 2013 WikiCup will be starting on 1 January, and that signups will remain open throughout January. Old and new Wikipedians and WikiCup participants are warmly invited to take part in this year's competition. (Though, as a note to the more experienced participants, there have been a few small rules changes in the last few months.) If you have already signed up, let this be a reminder; you will receive a message with your submissions' page soon. Please direct any questions to the WikiCup talk page. Thanks! J Milburn 19:46, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 January newsletter
Signups are now closed; we have our final 127 contestants for this year's competition. 64 contestants will make it to the next round at the end of February, but we're already seeing strong scoring compared to previous years. currently leads, with 358 points. At this stage in 2012, the leader had 342 points, while in 2011, the leader had 228 points. We also have a large number of scorers when compared with this stage in previous years. was the first competitor to score this year, as he was last year, with a detailed good article review. Some other firsts:
 * was also the first to score for an article, with the good article Hurricane Gordon (2000). Again, this is a repeat of last year!
 * was the first to score for a did you know, with Marquis Flowers.
 * was the first to score for an in the news, with 2013 Houphouët-Boigny stampede.
 * was the first to score for a featured list, with list of Billboard Social 50 number-one artists.
 * was the first to score for a featured picture, with File:Thure de Thulstrup - L. Prang and Co. - Battle of Gettysburg - Restoration by Adam Cuerden.jpg.

Featured articles, portals and topics, as well as good topics, are yet to feature in the competition.

This year, the bonus points system has been reworked, with bonus points on offer for old articles prepared for did you know, and "multiplier" points reworked to become more linear. For details, please see WikiCup/Scoring. There have been some teething problems as the bot has worked its way around the new system, but issues should mostly be ironed out- please report any problems to the WikiCup talk page. Here are some participants worthy of note with regards to the bonus points:


 * was the first to score bonus points, with Portland-class cruiser, a good article.
 * has the highest overall bonus points, as well as the highest scoring article, thanks to his work on Enrico Fermi, now a good article. The biography of such a significant figure to the history of science warrants nearly five times the normal score.
 * claimed bonus points for René Vautier and Nicolas de Fer, articles that did not exist on the English Wikipedia at the start of the year; a first for the WikiCup. The articles were eligible for bonus points because of fact they were both covered on a number of other Wikipedias.

Also, a quick mention of, who may well have already written the oddest article of the WikiCup this year: did you know that the Fucking mayor objected to Fucking Hell on the grounds that there was no Fucking brewery? The gauntlet has been thrown down; can anyone beat it?

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. 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) 01:04, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 February newsletter
Round 1 is now over. The top 64 scorers have progressed to round 2, where they have been randomly split into eight pools of eight. At the end of April, the top two from each pool, as well as the 16 highest scorers from those remaining, will progress to round 3. Commiserations to those eliminated; if you're interested in still being involved in the WikiCup, able and willing reviewers will always be needed, and if you're interested in getting involved with other collaborative projects, take a look at the WikiWomen's Month discussed below.

Round 1 saw 21 competitors with over 100 points, which is fantastic; that suggests that this year's competition is going to be highly competative. Our lower scores indicate this, too: A score of 19 was required to reach round 2, which was significantly higher than the 11 points required in 2012 and 8 points required in 2011. The score needed to reach round 3 will be higher, and may depend on pool groupings. In 2011, 41 points secured a round 3 place, while in 2012, 65 was needed. Our top three scorers in round 1 were:
 * , primarily for an array of warship GAs.
 * , primarily for an array of did you knows and good articles, some of which were awarded bonus points.
 * , due in no small part to Canis Minor, a featured article awarded a total of 340 points. A joint submission with, this is the highest scoring single article yet submitted in this year's competition.

Other contributors of note include:
 * , whose Portal:Massachusetts is the first featured portal this year. The featured portal process is one of the less well-known featured processes, and featured portals have traditionally had little impact on WikiCup scores.
 * , whose Mycena aurantiomarginata was the first featured article this year.
 * and, who both claimed points for articles in the Major League Baseball tie-breakers topic, the first topic points in the competition.
 * , who claimed for the first full good topic with the Casting Crowns studio albums topic.

Featured topics have still played no part in this year's competition, but once again, a curious contribution has been offered by : did you know that there is a Shit Brook in Shropshire? With April Fools' Day during the next round, there will probably be a good chance of more unusual articles...

March sees the WikiWomen's History Month, a series of collaborative efforts to aid the women's history WikiProject to coincide with Women's History Month and International Women's Day. A number of WikiCup participants have already started to take part. The project has a to-do list of articles needing work on the topic of women's history. Those interested in helping out with the project can find articles in need of attention there, or, alternatively, add articles to the list. Those interested in collaborating on articles on women's history are also welcome to use the WikiCup talk page to find others willing to lend a helping hand. Another collaboration currently running is an an effort from WikiCup participants to coordinate a number of Easter-themed did you know articles. Contributions are welcome!

A few final administrative issues. From now on, submission pages will need only a link to the article and a link to the nomination page, or, in the case of good article reviews, a link to the review only. See your submissions' page for details. This will hopefully make updating submission pages a little less tedious. 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. 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) J Milburn (talk) 11:56, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Invitation to a Wicnic in Gainesville on Saturday, June 22nd
Greetings!

Seeing that you're a member of WikiProject Florida, on the off chance you're in our neck of the woods, I'm inviting you to the North Central Florida 2013 Great American Wiknic that will be on Saturday June 22, 2013, commencing at 1:00 pm, ten blocks north of UF campus in Gainesville.

If you're able and inclined to come, please RSVP at at this URL.

Type to you later, Vincent J. Lipsio (talk) 13:00, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
 Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved.
 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia&.
 * To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [ Articles for creation help desk], or on the [ . Please remember to link to the submission!
 * You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.
 * Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! APerson241 (talk) 17:11, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Jiangenxutang Studio for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jiangenxutang Studio is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Jiangenxutang Studio until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. SL93 (talk) 18:56, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Julie Mayer concern
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Julie Mayer, a page you created has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace. If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements. If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13. Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 14:28, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Your article submission Julie Mayer


Hello Oakley77. It has been over six months since you last edited your article submission, entitled Julie Mayer.

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply and remove the  or  code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code:, paste it in the edit box at this link , click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 15:02, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/List of cities in Comoros by population concern
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/List of cities in Comoros by population, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 02:01, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

South Sudan
As you are listed on the wikiproject page for South Sudan as a member, I was thus wondering if you are interested in collaborating on a page together? There is more info on the Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_South_Sudan?Lihaas (talk) 07:16, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Your draft article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/List of cities in Comoros by population


Hello Oakley77. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "List of cities in Comoros by population".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply and remove the  or  code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code:, paste it in the edit box at this link , click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 00:03, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of 135 Airways


A tag has been placed on 135 Airways requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. HuffTheWeevil / talk / contribs 01:12, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Hugo Guichard


The article Hugo Guichard has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Article about a footballer who fails WP:GNG and who has not played in a fully pro league.

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Sir Sputnik (talk) 22:44, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Xinxiang Hygiene School
Hello - I was reading your article on Xinxiang Hygiene School. I cannot find any evidence that this school exists, or what its significance might be. Could you please provide some clarification or edit the article a bit more substantively and cite some sources? As far as I can tell this school does not even have a website. A Chinese search for "新乡卫生学院" yields results which seem to show that this school is some sort of medical assistant training institution (not a "sanitation college" as is currently written in the article). Without more citations I cannot see a reason why this article should be kept. Colipon+ (Talk) 19:51, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Raymond Kamara


The article Raymond Kamara has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * non-notable politician - Standard searches do not reveal enough significant coverage in independent, reliable sources

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- 1Wiki8 ........................... (talk) 09:15, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Contests
User:Dr. Blofeld has created WikiProject Africa/Contests. The idea is to run a series of contests/editathons focusing on each region of Africa. He has spoken to Wikimedia about it and $1000-1500 is possible for prize money. As someone who has previously expressed interest in African topics, would you be interested in contributing to one or assisting draw up core article/missing article lists? He says he's thinking of North Africa for an inaugural one in October. If interested please sign up in the participants section of the Contest page, thanks.♦ -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 01:34, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Allegra Passugger for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Allegra Passugger is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Allegra Passugger until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:54, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Asian 10,000 Challenge invite
Hi. The WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland The 10,000 Challenge and WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like South East Asia, Japan/China or India etc, much like The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. At some stage we hope to run some contests to benefit Asian content, a destubathon perhaps, aimed at reducing the stub count would be a good place to start, based on the current WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon which has produced near 200 articles in just three days. If you would like to see this happening for Asia, and see potential in this attracting more interest and editors for the country/countries you work on please sign up and being contributing to the challenge! This is a way we can target every country of Asia, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant! Thank you. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 11:26, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Latin American 10,000 Challenge invite
Hi. The WikiProject Latin America/The 10,000 Challenge ‎ has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland The 10,000 Challenge and WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Brazil, Mexico, Peru and Argentina etc, much like The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. At some stage we hope to run some contests to benefit Latin American content, a destubathon perhaps, aimed at reducing the stub count would be a good place to start, based on the current WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon. If you would like to see this happening for Latin America, and see potential in this attracting more interest and editors for the country/countries you work on please sign up and being contributing to the challenge! This is a way we can target every country of Latin America, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant!♦ -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 00:45, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Europe 10,000 Challenge invite
Hi. The WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:09, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject United States/The 50,000 Challenge
--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:38, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

New Challenge for Oceania and Australia
Hi, WikiProject Oceania/The 10,000 Challenge and WikiProject Australia/The 5000 Challenge are up and running based on The 10,000 Challenge which has currently produced over 2300 article improvements and creations. The Australia challenge would feed into the wider region one and potentially New Zealand could have a smaller challenge too. The main goal is content improvement, tackling stale old stubs and important content and improving sourcing/making more consistent but new articles are also welcome if sourced. I understand that this is a big goal for regular editors, especially being summertime where you are, but if you'd like to see large scale quality improvements happening for Oceania and Australia like The Africa Destubathon, which has produced over 1700 articles in 5 weeks, sign up on the page. The idea will be an ongoing national editathon/challenge for the region but fuelled by a series of contests to really get articles on every province and subject mass improved. The Africa contest scaled worldwide would naturally provide great benefits to Oceania countries, particularly Australia and attract new editors. I would like some support from existing editors here to get the Challenges off to a start with some articles to make doing a Destubathon worthwhile and potentially bring about hundreds of improvements in a few weeks through a contest! Cheers.♦ --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:12, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of KailasRange


The article KailasRange has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern:
 * This page refers to the Mount Kailash of Kailash Range. Both Mount Kailash and Kailash Range articles are created in Wikipedia.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Che12PM 15:43, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Valuxai


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Valuxai requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. IEsuredI (talk) 01:12, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Women in Red World Contest
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

Join the Months of African Cinema Global Contest!
Ýou can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

The Months of African Cinema Contest Continues in November!
You can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

Welcome to the Months of African Cinema Global Contest!
Ýou can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

The Months of African Cinema Contest Continues in November!
You can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

Nomination of Daniel Lee (swimmer) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Daniel Lee (swimmer) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Daniel Lee (swimmer) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. – LordPickleII ( talk ) 20:24, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Zevon Archibald for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Zevon Archibald is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Zevon Archibald until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 14:53, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Cogo Township


The article Cogo Township has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Doesn't seem to meet WP:GNG or WP:NGEO."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. TWOrantula TM (enter the web) 17:48, 21 February 2024 (UTC)