User talk:Reaper Eternal/Archive 33

Deletion of my ArbCom appeal
You deleted my page which was prepared for ArbCom. Obviously, since ArbCom has bigger fish to fry at the moment I was waiting to open the case when they are less busy (after the Canada case, the Poland case & FramGate). The page contained evidence and direct quotes from the person who will be defending themselves at ArbCom, once the docket clears up a bit.

Please modify the deletion log to mention that you deleted it on the grounds of "not a webhost". Claiming it was an attack page is (AGF) a mistake, so the deletion log will need correction. Could you also use the "email user" function to send me the original per WP:REFUND. Thank you. 🌿  SashiRolls t ·  c 15:06, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
 * This page consisted solely of a collection of diffs (largely against Tryptofish) that had been sitting unused for over a month. That is pretty much textbook WP:POLEMIC material. Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:19, 30 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Do what you want with your tools. ^^ You have removed evidence from the following AE case:  Kingofaces43 v. SashiRolls, the basic contention of which (a 1RR violation) was rejected.  I am of course not permitted to talk about the user you mention so I won't do so here.  However, I will say that user was one of the primary authors of the content in it, because they were quoted at length and fairly.  It's an odd coincidence that you figured out where that page was immediately after my comment on JimboTalk that we are all "at-will" volunteers.  This was to the best of my knowledge our first interaction.  How did you find that page?


 * I will once again request that you send me the content by email that I spent hours assembling and which was an integral part of my AE defense and pending appeal. This is obviously the least "drama"-heavy solution.  Refusing such a simple request to have my content back for use on my computer does seem rather politically motivated (given that obviously ArbCom is far too busy right now to take on another case, regardless how egregious the current no fault two-way IBAN being unilaterally enforced would be.) 🌿   SashiRolls t ·  c 16:22, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Restoring SPI
Hello, I noticed that you deleted Sockpuppet investigations/Vif12vf. Unless the report was made in bad faith and has no basis, we generally do not delete SPIs even if they have no evidence. This is useful in future cases to note if there was some connection (or in this case, no connection) made, so we can weed out possibilities. Could you restore the page? It will be archived by a clerk normally in a while. -- qedk ( t  桜  c ) 06:35, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
 * There's no reason to keep around SPI pages where the filer provides exactly no evidence of sock puppetry. Accusing someone of socking with no evidence is basically just a personal attack. Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:21, 30 June 2019 (UTC)


 * So, block/warn the filer. I saw intersection on two pages in two months, while that's sparse, it is not a 100% possibility that they are not related. In fact, it was only enough for me to not pursue an investigation and CU. You're misconstruing two completely separate things as the same. As a regular clerk, I can tell you for sure that a lot of cases don't have diffs (and we dig into them anyway), leaving a case as-is lets other participants to present evidence (then and later) as well, since everyone is not an administrator and cannot see deleted contributions. Furthermore, if an editor does not present evidence, you should not automatically assume bad faith and say it's a PA right? I mean for sure it could be malicious but until you can say that for sure, treat the report as filed in good faith. -- qedk ( t  桜  c ) 17:50, 30 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Reaper Eternal's deletion was reasonable. You should let it go.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:54, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
 * As you suggest. -- qedk ( t  桜  c ) 17:58, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, I wouldn't call it "pointless drivel" (smile) but thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:06, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

The June 2019 Signpost is out!
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:53, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

WikiCup 2019 July newsletter
The third round of the 2019 WikiCup has now come to an end. The 16 users who made it to the fourth round needed to score at least 68 points, which is substantially lower than last year's 227 points. Our top scorers in round 3 were:


 * 🇳🇫 Cas Liber, our winner in 2016, with 500 points derived mainly from a featured article and two GAs on natural history topics
 * Adam Cuerden, with 480 points, a tally built on 16 featured pictures, the result of meticulous restoration work
 * SounderBruce, a finalist in the last two years, with 306 points from a variety of submissions, mostly related to sport or the State of Washington
 * 🇺🇸 Usernameunique, with 305 points derived from a featured article and two GAs on archaeology and related topics

Contestants managed 4 (5) featured articles, 4 featured lists, 18 featured pictures, 29 good articles, 50 DYK entries, 9 ITN entries, and 39 good article reviews. As we enter the fourth round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them, and it is imperative to claim them in the correct round; one FA claim had to be rejected because it was incorrectly submitted (claimed in Round 3 when it qualified for Round 2), so be warned! When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). 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 your name from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:12, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Deleted AFC draft
Hi. I have noticed that you have deleted Draft: Advitya (film). However I believe it was not to be deleted. I have more links for the deleted page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Im955 (talk • contribs) 03:37, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Hello! The draft was deleted since it was abandoned for a long time (6+ months). Another admin has already restored it per your request, so you should be good to continue editing the draft. Enjoy! Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:13, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

MrKoww Sockpuppet investigation.
I received a notification that you mentioned me in a comment, but I have no earthly idea how to reply to it. None of those account mentioned are sock accounts. We’re all combat infantrymen that learned of the erroneous Wikipedia articles at approximately the same time. You may not be able to check user my account on account of me using iOS, and iPadOS exclusively for all my computing needs. I’m in Virginia if you need to know, and I’m either coming off of an AT&T server, or an Xfinity server. You can visit my social media accounts and contact me. All my social media accounts are linked on my website. www.JonnyTravieso.com

The accusations of Sockpuppet accounts are completely unwarranted. Dirty11Bravo (talk) 03:26, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Hello! Someone believed you / MrKoww / Szpiegowac were the same person and asked me to look at the IP addresses over here. As I mentioned there, you're pretty definitely not the same as the other two accounts, who may or may not be the same person. Cheers! Reaper Eternal (talk) 21:04, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 July 2019
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:18, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Removing rights
Hi, I write this to recommend you to remove my reviewer rights. As you gave them to me in good faith, seems just to let you know when I don't plan to use them in good faith anymore. My opposition to Wikipedia should have me indef blocked soon enough, though, so proceed as you wish. --Urbanoc (talk) 14:42, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Sunrise Beyond
Hi R.E. - it appears we need a round robin or something because the redirect you did for Sunrise Beyond to Xebec (studio) was removed by the article creator, but the TP still redirects to Xebec, which is now defunct. If anything, Sunrise Beyond should probably redirect to Bandai Namco Holdings, which I noted on the Xebec TP since Sunrise Beyond doesn't have its own TP. Oooh, my head hurts just thinking about a round robin. Atsme Talk 📧 03:40, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Backlog Banzai
In the month of September, Wikiproject Military history is running a project-wide edit-a-thon, Backlog Banzai. There are heaps of different areas you can work on, for which you claim points, and at the end of the month all sorts of whiz-bang awards will be handed out. Every player wins a prize! There is even a bit of friendly competition built in for those that like that sort of thing. Sign up now at WikiProject Military history/September 2019 Backlog Banzai to take part. For the coordinators, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:18, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Rover.com COI
Hi Reaper, I had just finished the following comment on the article Talk page [] when I noticed your revert. This is the first time I have requested an article for deletion since 2008. Could you please advise me on the procedure or delete the article.

'It is my belief that the article DogVacay and Rover.com, the company which acquired DogVacay in 2017, were created and primarily written by individuals either associated with or possibly contracted by the company that is the subject of the article; e.g. a PR firm. This article is textbook WP:COI, has no encyclopedic value and serves only to advertise and promote the company. This article should be deleted immediately.' Thanks IP75 (talk) 21:53, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi. While I agree that the article is unnecessarily promotional, it is not pure spam. In order to speedily delete an article, it must meet the narrowly-defined criteria for speedy deletion (one of which is pure spam). If you believe the article should be deleted, please see articles for deletion. Cheers! Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:54, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 August 2019
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:42, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

María Sefidari
Hi Reaper Eternal. I created a stub article on the Chair of the WMF Board of Trustees, María Sefidari. She already has articles in 3 languages, so it seemed reasonable to start one here. I was away for a couple of days and when I went to work on it, I saw that you had deleted it because it had "no credible indication of importance". Can you restore the article so that I can continue working on it? Thanks. Bitter Oil (talk) 04:09, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Restored here. Reaper Eternal (talk) 03:20, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Bitter Oil (talk) 20:31, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

I've added a bunch of stuff. Can you take a look and see if it meets notability criteria now? Thanks. Bitter Oil (talk) 19:15, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations open
Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:38, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

WikiCup 2019 September newsletter
The fourth round of the competition has finished in a flurry of last minute activity, with 454 points being required to qualify for the final round. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants with over 400 points being eliminated, and all but two of the finalists having achieved an FA during the round. Casliber, our 2016 winner, was the highest point-scorer, followed by Enwebb and Lee Vilenski, who are both new to the competition. In fourth place was SounderBruce, a finalist last year. But all those points are swept away as we start afresh for the final round.

Round 4 saw the achievement of 11 featured articles. In addition, Adam Cuerden scored with 18 FPs, Lee Vilenski led the GA score with 8 GAs while Kosack performed 15 GA reviews. There were around 40 DYKs, 40 GARs and 31 GAs overall during round 4. Even though contestants performed more GARs than they achieved GAs, there was still some frustration at the length of time taken to get articles reviewed.

As we start round 5, we say goodbye to the eight competitors who didn't quite make it; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia, and we hope you will join us again next year. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them (some people have fallen foul of this rule and the points have been removed).

If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66, Vanamonde and Cwmhiraeth MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:44, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Milhist coordinator election voting has commenced
G'day everyone, voting for the 2019 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:37, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election half-way mark
G'day everyone, the voting for the XIX Coordinator Tranche is at the halfway mark. The candidates have answered various questions, and you can check them out to see why they are running and decide whether you support them. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:37, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

September 2019 GOCE Newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:58, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 September 2019
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:07, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Copies of deleted articles
Hi there Reaper Eternal. I got your name from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_administrators_willing_to_provide_copies_of_deleted_articles and hope you might be able/willing to help me.

I wrote a series of articles many years ago which were seemingly appreciated for a while, but eventually were listed for deletion and deleted. I would like to get hold of the raw Wikipedia data from these if possible. The articles concerned are: Bridget Mary Nolan

Sarah Jayne Vercoe

Karen Louise Ellis

Heidi Choat

Cindy Leanne Howell

The first article was listed for deletion at Articles_for_deletion/Bridget_Mary_Nolan and the decision at that stage was 'keep'; however, some months later, a whole swathe of articles werre listed together at Articles_for_deletion/Bridget_Mary_Nolan_(2nd_nomination) and the decision was 'delete'.

I would appreciate your help in salvaging the work I did at that time. If you are willing, what would be the best way? To post the articles on my own Talk page perhaps?

Many thanks! SilverWings (talk) 13:12, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I'd simply undelete them and move them into your userspace for further work. Reaper Eternal (talk) 14:55, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
 * That would be fantastic, thank you! SilverWings (talk) 15:18, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi again! I realized I didn't actually have a sandbox page for you to put my data into, when you find time for it;  so I started a sandbox now.  Hope that helps.  Thank you again  :)   SilverWings (talk) 09:33, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I've moved them all into your userspace (see User:SilverWings/Bridget Mary Nolan for example) because the attribution history needs to be supplied&mdash;I can't just copy-paste the content. I do have a few warnings, though. Firstly, please be aware of WP:BLP, especially WP:BLPCRIME, since sourcing requirements have changed since 2007 to 2008. All contentious material must be cited to reliable sources using inline citations. You will need to add sources and content to demonstrate why these people surpass WP:BLP1E, then, once you are ready, file a request at deletion review to get the AFD overturned. Thanks. Reaper Eternal (talk) 13:19, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Ah, hmmmm... thank you, but...  at this stage all I have at each is a notation that the page has been blanked as a courtesy  :)   Maybe some permission needs changing for me to see stuff? SilverWings (talk) 15:46, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Check the page history. I blanked them temporarily because the citations were not inline and they contained negative material about living people. You can edit the old revisions to add appropriate citations and restore the material. Reaper Eternal (talk) 17:08, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh of course! I see it now, hee hee... and I understand your reasoning, and I have already had a look at WP:BLP so I will be extra careful about observing those requirements. All of the women involved were actually convicted, which does make it easier, and I recall that my articles at the time of the AfD were at least complimented for the neutral tone in which they were written. But they will need to be thoroughly looked at.  As much as anything, even if I cannot get the AfD overturned, I privately have access to the work I did - because believe it or not, I never took a copy of the work before it was deleted. Thank you again for ALL your help and advice! SilverWings (talk) 22:26, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Question about protection at Zoe Quinn
Thank you for for this. Could you clarify how long "indefinite" protection normally lasts? I'm not sure about the rest of the vandalism, but the small part that I saw dealt with Quinn's pronouns. If that's the main issue, is it possible to have pending changes protection on the page when the semi-protection expires? I ask because I follow a number of BLPs for non-binary and trans people, and that kind of vandalism is extremely persistent. Nblund talk 18:35, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
 * It lasts permanently. In this case, the subject of the article has been subject to extreme harassment (see GamerGate nonsense), which has resulted in the article being protected indefinitely in the past. In fact, the only reason it became unprotected was JzG upped the protection to extended-confirmed protection, which then expired, leaving the article unprotected. The vandalism and BLP violations resumed immediately, so I restored the previous indefinite protection. Cheers! Reaper Eternal (talk) 18:54, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you, that makes sense! Nblund talk 19:04, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Good work. Guy (help!) 22:17, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Recent file deletions
Good morning. I noticed that you recently deleted File:Harassment evidence part 1.jpg and File:Harassment evidence part 2.jpg, citing WP:F7. Which sub-criterion of F7 did these images violate? --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 16:08, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Multiple reasons, but especially (7). Reaper Eternal (talk) 18:17, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
 * F7 does not apply to NFCC 7, it only applies to NFCC 1, 2, and 10. NFCC7 is enforced with WP:F5, which requires a 7-day wait between tagging and deletion unless the image was only used on a page that has been deleted. Furthermore, I understand that these images were screenshots of Sigma's editorinteract.py, a freely-licensed software project. The layout of the results page is defined by the code and is either subject to the GPL license or is not protected by copyright. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 04:45, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
 * WP:IAR is a policy. These images were not (and could not be) used in any article, had highly non-neutral titles, and gave no benefit to Wikipedia's mission. Reaper Eternal (talk) 06:12, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

3 days block?
Until now I have seen that blocks for sock puppetry on socks and master accounts are indefinite unless the master account is too important to be reduced to 2 weeks - 1 month block. But Suneye1 isn't one of them. This account is used only for POV pushing and copyvio on a controversial subject and his current unblock request shows he fails to understand how he violated multiple accounts. With such WP:CIR I think the account is better off with indef block. Aman.kumar.goel (talk) 08:10, 26 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Looks like Yamla agree with extending the block to indef period. Aman.kumar.goel (talk) 11:11, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * First-time sockpuppetry blocks are almost never indefinite unless the sockpuppetry was egregious. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:21, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Deletion review for User:SashiRolls/SWAPP
User:Wumbolo has asked for a deletion review of User:SashiRolls/SWAPP. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. —Cryptic 16:11, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 October 2019
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:12, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

WikiCup 2019 November newsletter
The WikiCup is over for another year! Our Champion this year is, who over the course of the competition has amassed 91 featured pictures, including 32 in the final round. Our finalists this year were:


 * 1) with 964 points
 * 2) with 899 points
 * 3) with 817 points
 * 4) with 691 points
 * 5) with 388 points
 * 6) with 146 points
 * 7) with 145 points
 * 8) with 74 points

All those who reached the final will win awards. The following special awards will be made based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, these prizes are awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round, or in the event of a tie, to the overall leader in this field. Awards will be handed out in the coming weeks. Please be patient!


 * wins the featured article prize, for a total of 7 FAs during the course of the competition.
 * wins the good article prize, for 14 GAs in round 5.
 * wins the featured list prize, for 4 FLs overall.
 * wins the featured picture prize, for 91 FPs overall.
 * wins the topic prize, for 7 articles in good topics in round 2.
 * wins the DYK prize, for 14 did you know articles in round 5.
 * wins the ITN prize, for 7 in the news articles in round 1.
 * wins the reviewer prize, for 56 good article reviews in round 1.

Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have achieved much this year. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition, not forgetting User:Jarry1250, who runs the scoring bot.

We have opened a scoring discussion on whether the rules and scoring need adjustment. Please have your say. Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2020 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. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66, Vanamonde and Cwmhiraeth 14:18, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

Accts linked to my Ip
I'm not sure if you can do this, or if I'm even in the right place, but I went to edit something under my username ErinBrown396, and it says I am blocked from editing for a month, but when I looked at my one silly contribution it was still there. Can you tell me if there are other accounts linked to my IP address, and if so what they are? If not I understand, just kind of confused as to what happened. Also, if I'm in the wrong place, sorry to bother you. ErinBrown396 (talk) 15:40, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Erin! You aren't blocked (and if you were, you wouldn't be able to post here). If you encounter a block message again, follow the directions and post it on your user talk page. You may be running into an IP block not meant for you. (Administrators will sometimes block IP addresses to stop vandalism or spam.) If you have any other questions, feel free to ask me. Cheers! Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:25, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

your work
I like your layout on the ACE2019 page. I'd like to copy parts of it if you have no objection. (I understand our Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License, but my upbringing and manners insist on one remaining word: please) — Ched (talk) 09:53, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * No problem! (Something something imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.) Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:25, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!
Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 November 2019
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:24, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

GOCE December 2019 Newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:05, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Missing
Thank you for what you did for the Clara Schumann article! It's open for peer review, and FAC for Jauchzet, frohlocket!, DYK? We miss Brian who would have helped. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:59, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 December 2019
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:38, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy New Year Reaper Eternal!
Happy New Year! Hello Reaper Eternal: Thanks for all of your contributions to improve the encyclopedia for Wikipedia's readers, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, Donner60 (talk) 23:57, 27 December 2019 (UTC) Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks (static)}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

GOCE December 2019 Newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:05, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Missing
Thank you for what you did for the Clara Schumann article! It's open for peer review, and FAC for Jauchzet, frohlocket!, DYK? We miss Brian who would have helped. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:59, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! I was initially confused by the "missing Brian" comment since that's my name. I might take a look at the FAC in a day or two, but I don't want to "double-dip" by both passing a GAN and voting to pass a FAC, so I'll probably just leave some comments. Cheers! Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:33, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Sorry about the confusion, Brian. - I thought everyone knew already when I posted that, but it looks like some condolences came because of it. Peter Schreier died, and now Harry Kupfer, - thank goodness we had just imroved his article in 2019, can you believe it. Missing too many. Comments for the cantata would still be nice, - Schumann is less controversial, and I will probably close the PR soon to have room for the next one. Looking forward to 2020, - just managed my usual calendar images a few minutes ago. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:41, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:01, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Reaper Eternal (talk) 17:29, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2020 WikiCup!
Happy New Year, Happy New Decade and Happy New WikiCup! The competition begins today and all article creators, expanders and improvers are welcome to take part. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. We are relaxing the rule that only content on which you have completed significant work during 2020 will count; now to be eligible for points in the competition, you must have completed significant work on the content at some time! Any questions on the rules or on anything else connected to the Cup should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. Good luck! The judges for the WikiCup are, , and Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:43, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of DJDan18


A tag has been placed on Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of DJDan18 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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 deleted 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. UnitedStatesian (talk) 05:37, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

I'm partially blocked
Hi, Grim Reaper. I noticed you testing partial blocks, and was inspired to try for myself, so I blocked Bishzilla (with some trepidation) from editing User:Bishzilla/Self-requested pocketings for three hours. So.. I checked it was working, and then thought I'd better unblock her before she destroys Tokyo or something. But it turns out I can't; I get "Unauthorized: You cannot block or unblock other users because you are yourself blocked." Oops. An IP block, no doubt. But is it supposed to work like that — if an admin is partially blocked, just from one page, they can't block or unblock others? (I did try some others, and no, I can't block anybody.) But you unblocked yourself after you were done testing, didn't you..? Anyway, would you be kind enough to unblock Bishzilla? Little admin stalkers, if Reaper is not around, perhaps somebody else might oblige? Bishonen &#124; talk 17:21, 13 January 2020 (UTC).
 * ✅. It's a known bug, apparently. Cheers! Reaper Eternal (talk) 17:30, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Best disable the autoblock next time... ~ Amory  (u • t • c) 17:31, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I realized that a little belatedly; I kind of missed that the usual options were still there. Poor Zilla. Thank you, Reaper. Are you/Phabricator saying that if an admin sock is partially blocked, the admin can't block people? Unfortunate to say the least, especially with the behaviour of some of my socks. Bishonen &#124; talk 17:51, 13 January 2020 (UTC).

I know I know
Re: Institute of National Remembrance.

WP:WRONGVERSION and all that, but is it REALLY necessary to enable and encourage sock accounts by protecting articles to THEIR version? All you have to do here is semi-protect it here.

Why do we get this wrong over and over and over and over and over again??? It just seems like common sense to NOT "protect the sock puppet's version". Wikipedia. Always finding new ways to be ridiculous.  Volunteer Marek  00:22, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Well, for starters, I wasn't aware that one side was socking in the dispute, so it looked like multiple editors engaged in a content dispute. Reaper Eternal (talk) 02:20, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Two sides. François Robere (talk) 14:43, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Sure, that account should also be looked into and possibly banned, like all the strange brand new accounts that have been popping up for the past few months (many of which you've been going out of your way to enable and support). Or better yet, just put in all articles under extended protection.  Volunteer Marek   16:42, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh, for crying out loud.... ✅ to a bunch of other accounts. I've put the article on semiprotection for a bit to reduce the excessive socking. I don't have the time to fully deal with this right now since I'm heading to bed and have a work meeting tomorrow, so could a friendly talk page stalker with checkuser access please help check if there are any other accounts? :) Thanks! Reaper Eternal (talk) 07:19, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 January 2020
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:09, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

You've got mail!
—— SN  54129  16:27, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
 * See User:Serial Number 54129/South Derry Independent Republican Unit. Cheers! Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:51, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much, I can see why it was deleted :)  it ties in with something else I'm doing, that's all. No dispute with that close. Cheers!  ——  SN  54129  17:15, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for your help in my case, my brother and I are forever grateful, we will continue to bond over Wikipedia and I'll watch over his progress for now on. Thank you for the help, it means so much to us -- Toby Mitches (talk) 04:00, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

March Madness 2020
G'day all, March Madness 2020 is about to get underway, and there is bling aplenty for those who want to get stuck into the backlog by way of tagging, assessing, updating, adding or improving resources and creating articles. If you haven't already signed up to participate, why not? The more the merrier! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:19, 29 February 2020 (UTC) for the coord team

WikiCup 2020 March newsletter
And so ends the first round of the competition. Everyone with a positive score moves on to Round 2, with 57 contestants qualifying. We have abolished the groups this year, so to qualify for Round 3 you will need to finish Round 2 among the top thirty-two contestants.

Our top scorers in Round 1 were:


 * Epicgenius, a WikiCup newcomer, led the field with a featured article, five good articles and an assortment of other submissions, specialising on buildings and locations in New York, for a total of 895 points.
 * Royal Standard of England (1406-1603).svg Gog the Mild came next with 464 points, from a featured article, two good articles and a number of reviews, the main theme being naval warfare.
 * 🇺🇸 Raymie was in third place with 419 points, garnered from one good article and an impressive 34 DYKs on radio and TV stations in the United States.
 * Harrias came next at 414, with a featured article and three good articles, an English civil war battle specialist.
 * Pirate Flag.svg CaptainEek was in fifth place with 405 points, mostly garnered from bringing Cactus wren to featured article status.
 * The top ten contestants at the end of Round 1 all scored over 200 points; they also included 🇺🇸 L293D, 🇻🇪 Kingsif, 🇦🇶 Enwebb, 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Lee Vilenski and 🇳🇵 CAPTAIN MEDUSA. Seven of the top ten contestants in Round 1 are new to the WikiCup.

These contestants, like all the others, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. In Round 1 there were four featured articles, one featured list and two featured pictures, as well as around two hundred DYKs and twenty-seven ITNs. Between them, contestants completed 127 good article reviews, nearly a hundred more than the 43 good articles they claimed for, thus making a substantial dent in the review backlog. Contestants also claimed for 40 featured article / featured list reviews, and most even remembered to mention their WikiCup participation in their reviews (a requirement).

Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Some contestants made claims before the new submissions pages were set up, and they will need to resubmit them. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews.

If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:47, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 March 2020
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:45, 1 March 2020 (UTC)