User talk:Purplebackpack89/Archive 12

Soliciting comment...
Hi! Would you care to review my FA nomination for the article Of Human Feelings? The article is about a jazz album by Ornette Coleman, and the criteria for FA articles is at WP:FACR. If not, feel free to ignore this message. Cheers! Dan56 (talk) 00:31, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 12
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Open Championship, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page U.S. Amateur Championship. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:02, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Mail call
I didn't seem to receive it. Could you resend it? p b  p  01:04, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 1
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Anthony of Padua, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page El Camino Real. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:48, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Hey
I nominated another two "rivalry" games for deletion:


 * 1. Articles for deletion/Missouri–South Carolina football rivalry; and


 * 2. Articles for deletion/Mississippi State - Vanderbilt football rivalry.

This could be the beginning of several. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 21:14, 12 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Coo coo. I voted delete on both of them.  p  b  p  21:24, 12 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Watch list the WP:CFB talk page; I'll post more updates there for the whole crew. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 21:32, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 16
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dick Mehen, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Center. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:31, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 16 August
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
 * On the Jule Rivlin page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=621531697 your edit] caused an unnamed parameter error (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F621531697%7CJule Rivlin%5D%5D Ask for help])

Discussion at Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2014 August 16#File:Hearts XP.png
You are invited to join the discussion at. Thanks. Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 12:28, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Next round of proposed CFB "rivalry" articles for AfD review
Head's up: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football. Your input is requested. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:36, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 August newsletter
The final of the 2014 WikiCup begins in a few short minutes! Our eight finalists are listed below, along with their placement in Round 4:


 * , a WikiCup newcomer, finished top of Pool A and was the round's highest scorer. Godot is a featured picture specialist, claiming large numbers of points due to high-quality scans of historical documents, especially banknotes.
 * 1) is a WikiCup veteran, having been a finalist every year since 2010. In the semi-final, he was Pool B's highest scorer. Cas's points primarily come from articles on the natural sciences.
 * 2) was Pool A's runner-up. Czar's points come mostly from content related to independent video games, including both articles and topics.
 * 3) was Pool B's runner-up. Another featured picture specialist, many of Adam's points come from the restoration of historical media. He has been a WikiCup finalist twice before.
 * 4) won the WikiCup in 2012 and 2013, and enters this final as the first wildcard. She focuses on biology-related articles, and has worked on several high-importance articles.
 * 5) is the second wildcard. George's points come primarily from meteorology-related articles. This year and last year, George was the first person in the competition to score.
 * , the third wildcard, was the 2010 champion and a finalist last year. His writes mostly on military history, especially naval history.
 * , the fourth and final wildcard, has participated in previous WikiCups, but not reached any finals. Bloom's points are mostly thanks to did you knows, featured lists and good articles related to sport and national symbols.

We say goodbye to this year's semi-finalists. ,, , , , and  have all performed well to reach this stage of the competition, and we hope they will all be joining us again next year.

There are two upcoming competitions unrelated to the WikiCup which may be of interest to those who receive this newsletter. The Stub Contest will run through September, and revolves around expanding stub articles, especially high-importance or old stubs. In addition, a proposal has been made for a new competition, the GA Cup, which the organisers plan to run next year. This competition is based on the WikiCup and aims to reduce the good article review backlog.

There is now a thread for brainstorming on how next year's WikiCup competition should work. Please come along and share your thoughts- What works? What doesn't work? What needs changing? Signups for next year's competition will be open soon; we will be in touch. If, at this stage of the competition, you are keen to help the with the WikiCup, please do what you can to participate in review processes. Our finalists will find things much easier if the backlogs at good article candidates, featured article candidates, featured picture candidates and the rest are kept at a minimum. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. and 22:09, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

2014 FIBA Basketball World Cup
Ukraine is eliminated by the rules, it is explained on the talk page but now it is official so please fix it.18abruce (talk) 21:08, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 23
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Time 100: The Most Important People of the Century, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Estée Lauder. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Vital articles
I'm an old wikipedian, but new to the vital articles stuff. Realized that the horse articles on the list (other than horse, which is obvious) are a mess. Stuff that I believe (JMO, IMHO, of course) to be vital isn't there, and some stuff that is NOT vital is. I made a few random suggestions for some easy changes, but I'd actually like to have a more thorough discussion of the issue, i.e. how many of the 10,000 vital articles could be horse-related, and then from there, show you folks that do the vital article work where our best overview/flagship articles are and discuss their suitability. Interested? Montanabw (talk) 03:50, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
 * , The problem with horses is that they transcend biology, sport, transportation and warfare. I think you could easily have 10-15 horse articles.  I was somewhat surprised dressage got removed (I think I may have put it there in the first place).  Equestrianism at the Olympics is a non-starter not because we don't want to have every ...at the Olympics.  Horse racing and rodeo are guaranteed to stay on the list.  In addition to cavalry, we can probably get another article involving horses in war.  Saddle and stirrup will be on there somewhere: my preference is in transportation because horses were used primarily for transportation and labor until only a few generations ago.  Out of curiousity, which omissions or inclusions irk you the most?  p  b  p  04:30, 25 September 2014 (UTC)


 * I agree that the problem is that there are multiple sites. I didn't know dressage was removed until it was removed... that was one that irked me -- so I asked that it be restored, but there is no discussion so far. The commenters clearly don't understand the topic terribly well, which is understandable - I know squat about, for example, cricket or soccer.  I didn't know rodeo WAS on the list -- how can I figure out what articles with a WPEQ interest are on the 10,000 list?  Just looking for articles manually made my eyes cross. Note where I posted at the VA page for requesting additions or removals for the easy ones I saw right away.  I'd suggest adding horse collar to saddle and stirrup, as that was the third (and really, final) major piece of horse technology that changed the human world. (The collar allowed the horse to use its full strength, essentially pushing instead of pulling - making for larger fields because horses could go faster than oxen, allowing heavier carriages for transport, etc...) As far as warfare, we have Horses in warfare, which is GA-class and a decent enough overview with links to the various other types. Not sure if you think we should add evolution of the horse, given that there is an evolution section in horse, but maybe consider domestication of the horse.  Just thoughts for starters.  Montanabw (talk)  04:58, 25 September 2014 (UTC)


 * If you are wondering if a particular article is on the VA/E list, go to the talk page of that article and see if it has a "Vital articles" tag, which should point you to the correct section. You can also do that by looking in the "What links here" thingy on the side of the page, then setting it to Wikipedia-space and the total articles to return to 500, then checking if Wikipedia:Vital articles or a subpage is on that list.  As for keeping pace with current add and removal discussions, the only real way to track it is vigilant page-watching.   p  b  p  05:31, 25 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Um there are 3000 articles tagged fro WPEQ (Oh, and I have edited here 8 years, though I don't know every trick on the wiki). I'm basically trying to figure out if there is any way to do a "what articles are tagged for BOTH WPEQ (or WP Horse racing) and VA?  It's literally 3000 one way and 10000 the other.  :-P    Montanabw (talk)  16:17, 25 September 2014 (UTC)


 * I'm at the limits of my know-how as well. You may want to drop a line to a help desk page to see if there's a way to find out if a Wikipedia Talk Page has links to two different Project Pages.  p  b  p  16:23, 25 September 2014 (UTC)


 * You should be able to find all the vital articles under a certain project with the tool Catscan v2; unfortunately, it seems to be down at the moment (this tool does go down fairly often, but is usually up again with in a few hours). Search for Talk pages with Category:All Wikipedia vital articles and with Template WikiProject Equine. Plantdrew (talk) 16:54, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 30
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * List of United States Presidential firsts
 * added links pointing to West Coast and Speaker of the House of Representatives


 * Vice President of the United States
 * added a link pointing to Doctrine of Nullification

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:22, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 September newsletter
In one month's time, we will know our WikiCup 2014 champion. Newcomer has taken a strong lead with a featured list (historical coats of arms of the U.S. states from 1876) and a raft of featured pictures. Reigning champion is in second place with a number of high-importance biology articles, including new FA Isopoda and new GA least weasel. , who is in his fifth WikiCup final, is in third, with featured articles Pictor and Epacris impressa.

Signups for the 2015 WikiCup are open. All Wikipedians, new and experienced, are warmly invited to sign up for the competition. Wikipedians interested in friendly competition may also like to sign up for the GA Cup, a new WikiCup-inspired competition which revolves around completing good article reviews. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. and 22:11, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014: The results
The 2014 WikiCup champion is, who flew the flag of the Smithsonian Institution. This was Godot13's first WikiCup competition and, over the 10 months of the competition, he has produced (among other contributions) two featured lists and an incredible 292 featured pictures, including architectural photographs and scans of historical documents. , 2012 and 2013 WikiCup champion, came in second, having written a large number of biology-related articles. , WikiCup finalist every year since 2010, finished in third.

A full list of our prize-winners follows:


 * wins the prize for first place and the FP prize for 181 featured pictures in the final round.
 * wins the prize for second place and the DYK prize for 65 did you knows in the final round.
 * wins the prize for third place and the FA prize for four featured articles in the final round.
 * wins the prize for fourth place
 * wins a final 8 prize.
 * wins a final 8 prize.
 * wins a final 8 prize.
 * wins the GA prize for 27 good articles in round 2 and the review prize for 28 good article reviews in round 1.
 * wins the FL prize for three featured lists in round 2.
 * wins the FPo prize his work on featured portals.
 * wins the topic prize for a nine-article featured topic in round 3.
 * wins the news prize for 28 in the news articles in round 3.

Congratulations to everyone who has been successful in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and a particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have participated this year. We warmly invite all of you to sign up for next year's competition. Discussions and polls concerning potential rules changes are also open, and all are welcome to participate. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2014 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. and 22:52, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Stop your hypocracy
Your whole campaign of describing Mormon sources as "unreliable" is the extreme of incivility. It is the ultimate in irony that a hateful person like you whole hounds others has the audacity to call other people uncivil.107.0.124.70 (talk) 18:51, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't think you or Stokes understand or care what a reliable independent source is. It's not acceptable to source an article about a person with information ripped from his employer's website.  This applies to church officials, businessmen, or anybody else.  Also, you need to understand what a personal attack is.  It is acceptable in Wikipedia policy to criticize a source, but unacceptable to attack another editor.  It is especially unacceptable to do what you have been doing, which is using loaded words like "hateful" and "bigoted".  p  b  p  20:15, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Anon IP, I was just driving by here, and must stop to say that your comment here is very much a personal attack on PBP. Do go read WP:AGF and WP:NPA.   Montanabw (talk)  05:47, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Hey PBP, ping me if you ever need a neutral third opinion on stuff like whatever set off this IP here. I've been dabbling a bit in some controversies in the Tibetan Buddhim articles (and I'm not a Buddhist) and am pretty comfortable with discussions of RS and such. (I also have worked on a lot of FACs...) Just FYI. Montanabw (talk) 05:47, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you, MontanaBW. I may do that at some point.  p  b  p  13:52, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Copyright checks when performing AfC reviews
Hello. This message is part of a mass mailing to people who appear active in reviewing articles for creation submissions. First of all, thank you for taking part in this important work! I'm sorry this message is a form letter – it really was the only way I could think of to covey the issue economically. Of course, this also means that I have not looked to see whether the matter is applicable to you in particular. The issue is in rather large numbers of copyright violations ("copyvios") making their way through AfC reviews without being detected (even when easy to check, and even when hallmarks of copyvios in the text that should have invited a check, were glaring). A second issue is the correct method of dealing with them when discovered. If you don't do so already, I'd like to ask for your to help with this problem by taking on the practice of performing a copyvio check as the first step in any AfC review. The most basic method is to simply copy a unique but small portion of text from the draft body and run it through a search engine in quotation marks. Trying this from two different paragraphs is recommended. (If you have any question about whether the text was copied from the draft, rather than the other way around (a "backwards copyvio"), the Wayback Machine is very useful for sussing that out.) If you do find a copyright violation, please do not decline the draft on that basis. Copyright violations need to be dealt with immediately as they may harm those whose content is being used and expose Wikipedia to potential legal liability. If the draft is substantially a copyvio, and there's no non-infringing version to revert to, please mark the page for speedy deletion right away using. If there is an assertion of permission, please replace the draft article's content with. Some of the more obvious indicia of a copyvio are use of the first person ("we/our/us..."), phrases like "this site", or apparent artifacts of content written for somewhere else ("top", "go to top", "next page", "click here", use of smartquotes, etc.); inappropriate tone of voice, such as an overly informal tone or a very slanted marketing voice with weasel words; including intellectual property symbols (™,®); and blocks of text being added all at once in a finished form with no misspellings or other errors. I hope this message finds you well and thanks again you for your efforts in this area. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC). Sent via--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015 is just around the corner...
Hello everyone, and may we wish you all a happy holiday season. As you will probably already know, the 2015 WikiCup begins in the new year; there is still time to sign up. We have a few important announcements concerning the future of the WikiCup.


 * We would like to announce that Josh (J Milburn) and Ed (The ed17), who have been WikiCup judges since 2009 and 2010 respectively, are stepping down. This decision has been made for a number of reasons, but the main one is time. Both Josh and Ed have found that, over the previous year, they have been unable to devote the time necessary to the WikiCup, and it is not likely that they will be able to do this in the near future. Furthermore, new people at the helm can only help to invigorate the WikiCup and keep it dynamic. Josh and Ed will still be around, and will likely be participating in the Cup this following year as competitors, which is where both started out.
 * In a similar vein, we hope you will all join us in welcoming Jason (Sturmvogel 66) and Christine (Figureskatingfan), who are joining Brian (Miyagawa) to form the 2015 WikiCup judging team. Jason is a WikiCup veteran, having won in 2010 and finishing in fifth this year. Christine has participated in two WikiCups, reaching the semi-finals in both, and is responsible for the GA Cup, which she now co-runs.
 * The discussions/polls concerning the next competition's rules will be closed soon, and rules changes will be made clear on WikiCup/Scoring and talk pages. While it may be impossible to please everyone, the judges will make every effort to ensure that the new rules are both fair and in the best interests of the competition, which is, first and foremost, about improving Wikipedia.

If you have any questions or concerns, the judges can be reached on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, on their talk pages, or by email. We hope you will all join us in trying to make the 2015 WikiCup the most productive and enjoyable yet. You are receiving this message because you are listed on WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk), The ed17 (talk), Miyagawa (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Figureskatingfan (talk) 18:54, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Roots (band)


The article Roots (band) has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * I couldn't establish that they meet WP:NBAND or WP:GNG

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. Boleyn (talk) 10:31, 24 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks, but I didn't create this article. I created a redirect, and  created this article.  You might want to notify him as well.  p  b  p  17:30, 24 December 2014 (UTC)