User talk:Sock/Archive 9

This archive covers all talk page posts in 2018.

Proposed deletion of Cut Up


The article Cut Up has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Fails notability, either WP:GNG or WP:MUSICBIO"

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. Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:32, 6 January 2018 (UTC)


 * I'm actually not the person to inform about this. I created that as a redirect for Suicide Season, and haven't touched it since. The user who made the current iteration of the article is . Sock   ( tock talk)  16:49, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Cut Up for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Cut Up 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/Cut Up 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. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:59, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Copying within Wikipedia requires proper attribution
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from List of iZombie characters into iZombie (TV series). While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g.,. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted copied template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was moved, attribution is not required. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:42, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for this heads up! I'm almost certain I've never done this otherwise unless I was duplicating my own work on other articles. I'm not sure how this has managed to slip by me considering my tenure editing here, but it goes to show there's always gonna be stuff I don't know. Thanks again! Sock   ( tock talk)  15:58, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the template. But the template says it all, and sometimes there's not much point in re-inventing the wheel :) — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 16:00, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Nah, not an issue! I don't take offense to templates when they're that in-depth. Would've been a waste of time for you to try and paraphrase it. Sock   ( tock talk)  16:02, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Hello again!
Glad to see you actively editing again! :) Hope all has been well with you. Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 15:26, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks pal! It's definitely been a minute, but it's been nice going back to this. Last year was actually pretty rough for me and I definitely needed a breather for a bit, but I've gotten myself back on track which has been great. Hope you're doing well too! Sock   ( tock talk)  15:58, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Robert Downey Jr in Iron Man 2.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Robert Downey Jr in Iron Man 2.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:36, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

IMDb and tone
Hey, would you mind polishing your tone regarding your comments about IMDb? I'm worried that we're scaring off the editor. Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 00:56, 25 January 2018 (UTC)


 * I understand the concern, but did you see the editor's comments on Lugnuts' page? I never really know how to deal with stubbornness at that level, because they're basically ignoring everything presented to them and latching on to the word "tertiary". The argument had gotten circular, and once it gets to that point, I tend to drop the fluff and cut through the shit. I agree I could've been a bit nicer in my first paragraph, and I'll definitely be conscious of that in the future, but that's a reposting of a comment I made on Lugnuts' page. I stick by the thought that the argument is pointless and the fact that the user misread the sources he used, and I don't really see a reason to beat around the bush further. Sock   ( tock talk)  13:13, 25 January 2018 (UTC)


 * I would say if the editor persists in looking for a different answer, then I would bring up WP:CONSENSUS and then minimize responses thereafter. No idea if this editor could be a potential contributor or not, but some current contributors probably have bad starts on Wikipedia and later get the hang of it. You never know. It seems like he feels more attacked than getting an answer, hence my request. Even if they have attitude, focus on content. Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 13:18, 25 January 2018 (UTC)


 * You're right. I've started adapting the tone I end up having to take at work on here, and I don't think those two things quite line up. A big part of the reason I stepped back from editing here was because I'd grown impatient, and it seems that's still a bit of an issue. Thanks for calling me on it, genuinely. Sock   ( tock talk)  14:13, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Forgot this. Sock   ( tock talk)  18:35, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
 * No worries! I have to do that myself too. It's easy to speak from experience but harder to convey the "why" based on that. We may deal with the same problem over and over, but for each new person, it would be their first problem. So maybe for IMDb, we need to get the wording across a little better (especially the "tertiary" bit). Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 18:45, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Quentin Tarantino
Hi, in regards to the edits about supporting Roman Polanski on the Tarantino page, this source (https://jezebel.com/heres-audio-of-quentin-tarantino-defending-roman-polans-1822745916) includes this:

“He didn’t rape a 13-year-old. It was statutory rape...he had sex with a minor. That’s not rape. To me, when you use the word rape, you’re talking about violent, throwing them down—it’s like one of the most violent crimes in the world. You can’t throw the word rape around. It’s like throwing the word ‘racist’ around. It doesn’t apply to everything people use it for.”

Reminded by Robin Quivers that Polanski’s victim—who had been plied with quaaludes and alcohol before her assault—did not want to have sex with Polanski, Tarantino became riled up.

Tarantino: No, that was not the case AT ALL. She wanted to have it and dated the guy and—"

If I used this source, would I be able to point out that he falsely recounted the case, or does it also not count because the article doesn't directly state that he presented false information?

Thanks. Abbyjjjj96 (talk) 15:41, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

D'oh!
Thanks for the catch on BP! - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:14, 8 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Haha, no problem. It made for a good chuckle. Sock   ( tock talk)  20:25, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks
Just wanted to say: Thank you for the kind words. I try hard to help improve Wikipedia, and it means a lot to me that good editors like yourself take notice. Your words are much appreciated.--Tenebrae (talk) 21:13, 10 February 2018 (UTC)


 * No problem at all. I've seen you here for as long as I've actively participated in conversation for film articles, and I've seen all the hard work you do. I wouldn't have stood for someone saying that about an editor I'd never seen before, but I certainly wasn't going to fume silently when it was someone I respect as much as you. Not that I have any doubt that you won't, but keep it up. It is very much appreciated. Sock   ( tock talk)  14:36, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Inquiry from The Washington Post
Hi there,

My name is Sonia, and I write for The Washington Post. I'm interested in pursuing a story about Wikipedia users who update/edit pages detailing specific histories of the Academy Awards (e.g. "List of black Academy Award winners and nominees"). I believe you might have edited a similar page in the past, perhaps around when the nominations were announced. People who are simply curious often end up on these informative pages, and I believe our readers might find it interesting to hear the story behind the quick edits — are there some Wikipedia users who wait for the nominations to be announced and then update the pages immediately? How do you keep track of all the history? And so on.

If you'd be interested in chatting with me, please let me know. I can be reached at sonia.rao@washpost.com.

Thanks! Sonia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soniarao (talk • contribs) 15:24, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

WikiCup 2018 March newsletter
And so ends the first round of the competition, with 4 points required to qualify for round 2. With 53 contestants qualifying, the groups for round 2 are slightly smaller than usual, with the two leaders from each group due to qualify for round 3 as well as the top sixteen remaining users.

Our top scorers in round 1 were:


 * 🇺🇸 Aoba47 led the field with a featured article, 8 good articles and 42 GARs, giving a total of 666 points.
 * 🇩🇪 FrB.TG, a WikiCup newcomer, came next with 600 points, gained from a featured article and masses of bonus points.
 * 🇮🇳 Ssven2, another WikiCup newcomer, was in third place with 403 points, garnered from a featured article, a featured list, a good article and twelve GARs.
 * 🇺🇸 Ceranthor, 🇮🇳 Numerounovedant, Carbrera, 🇳🇱 Farang Rak Tham and 🇷🇴 Cartoon network freak all had over 200 points, but like all the other contestants, now have to start again from scratch. A good achievement was the 193 GARs performed by WikiCup contestants, comparing very favourably with the 54 GAs they achieved.

Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 1 but before the start of round 2 can be claimed in round 2. 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 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. 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), Cwmhiraeth (talk) and Vanamonde (talk) 15:27, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

♪♫♬ Ba-ba, ba-ba-barilla ♪♫♬
Hey Sock. Not sure if you have been busy or not and no pressure or anything but do you think you will be able to get back to the Barbarella review soon? :) I know you have been busy and you can take all the time you need. Just figured I'd check in to see what the situation is. Hope all is well. Andrzejbanas (talk) 15:16, 31 January 2018 (UTC)


 * I think I'm living in some revisionist history because I would've sworn I already finished that review. I even remember typing it out, so maybe I didn't save it or maybe I dreamt it, who knows. Sorry about that! I've actually marked it on my calendar to do tonight and tomorrow (in case tonight doesn't work out). Thanks for being patient! Sock   ( tock talk)  15:19, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
 * No worries. Take your time! Glad we cleared it up. :) Andrzejbanas (talk) 15:23, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Hey sock, I went through most of the article and believe I've fixed up about 75% of it at least. The rest I'm not sure what to make-of. My main issues are for the release information, is that getting detailed (let alone accurate) information on non-American genre films and their release is a pretty tricky subject. I've narrowed it down to a month which more than most sources can state, but if I can confirm a French release date being before or after the New York premiere, I'll add it. As for the remake information, most remakes are announced to great hub-ub then usually filter away. The Rodriguez one got closest to being made it seems which explains the extra info, but the others are relatively obscure and never seem to get much information outside of an announcement made. It's pretty much all I could find. See my Black Sabbath article for similar issues. It also had an announcement of a remake!...in 2004. Then nothing! Andrzejbanas (talk) 02:43, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello again Sock! I think I covered most of what you wanted for the Barbarella article and had some questions as well. Would you be able to take a look at the GA-review page this week? :) Andrzejbanas (talk) 04:56, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Gonna be checking this over tonight, fear not. Not gonna make you wait a month this time. Sock   ( tock talk)  21:52, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I think I've followed-up with everything. Happy to tackle other things, or fix up anything I may have missed out on. Andrzejbanas (talk) 03:45, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Hey sock! Any chance on taking a look at the Barbarella article again|? I think I've covered everything. :) Andrzejbanas (talk) 02:06, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Gonna get this done during my lunch today. At a cursory glance, it's looking like we'll finally be promoting this bad boy. Again, I can't apologize enough for how scattered my availability has been. I make a good 90% of my edits on my phone at this point, so I don't even see the talk page messages. Sock  ( tock talk)  18:02, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Ah no worries! And great news! Hope all is well. Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:26, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

User:Sock/Okra (song)
It wasn't deleted because regular editors can only swap two existing pages, not move one and delete the other. Might be more fitting to use db-u1. --  Alex TW 10:06, 22 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Ah, gotcha. I didn't mean to imply I thought you'd made a mistake, I thought it just bugged honestly. Thanks for the info! Sock   ( tock talk)  10:07, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
 * No problems. If the redirect hadn't existed, then yes, we could have moved it while suppressing the redirect. Good work on the article! --  Alex TW 10:09, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks! It was a bitch, but oddly enjoyable. Thanks for the help! Sock   ( tock talk)  10:13, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Odd Future
I don't think the article should announce that they have split until there's official confirmation. Aitch &#38; Aitch Aitch (talk) 15:28, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

WikiCup 2018 May newsletter
The second round of the 2018 WikiCup has now finished. Most contestants who advanced to the next round scored upwards of 100 points, but two with just 10 points managed to scrape through into round 3. Our top scorers in the last round were:


 * 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 Cas Liber, our winner in 2016, with three featured articles
 * Iazyges, with nine good articles and lots of bonus points
 * 🇮🇳 Yashthepunisher, a first time contestant, with two featured lists
 * SounderBruce, a finalist last year, with seventeen good topic articles
 * 🇺🇸 Usernameunique, a first time contestant, with fourteen DYKs
 * Muboshgu, a seasoned competitor, with three ITNs and
 * Courcelles, another first time contestant, with twenty-seven GARs

So far contestants have achieved twelve featured articles between them and a splendid 124 good articles. Commendably, 326 GARs have been completed during the course of the 2018 WikiCup, so the backlog of articles awaiting GA review has been reduced as a result of contestants' activities. As we enter the third round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met; most of the GARs are fine, but a few have been a bit skimpy.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere 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) 06:10, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Beats of Rage (film)
— Maile (talk) 01:41, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Template:Db-short listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Template:Db-short. Since you had some involvement with the Template:Db-short redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so.  DGG ( talk ) 01:05, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Harry R. Truman
Your edits here removed information that was supported by the sources within the paragraph. Please be sure to check before removing information from an article, particularly when it's on the main page. Thanks,  ceran  thor 23:23, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I usually am, I only removed information that was marked as "citation needed" that honestly came off as borderline slanderous if unsourced. That's my mistake for not double checking the source there, apologies for that. Sock   ( tock talk)  05:05, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Cache GAC
Will you be returning here? Ribbet32 (talk) 16:35, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I blame mobile Wikipedia for not pinging me, as I've barely been editing from the site lately. Looking now! Sock   ( tock talk)  15:06, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

About your revert of my edit on the Kids See Ghost article
Hey, I hope this isn't the wrong place to ask this, but I'm wondering why you reverted it. Craiko
 * No problem at all! Fantano is not considered a reliable review source per WP:ALBUMAVOID, based on several previous discussions. If you can find third party coverage of his review's relevance, it can certainly be added. Thanks for contacting! Sock   ( tock talk)  16:14, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Vaxxed
Hi Sock. I note that you are a member of the Documentary films task force of WikiProject Film. There is currently a discussion on Talk:Vaxxed spawned from my edit request that attempted to add the genre label "documentary" to the opening sentence of the article, as the Manual of Style requests.

Unfortunately for some reason editors seem to neither believe the film is a documentary, nor will they consider removing it from Category:Pseudoscience documentary films. In my view this makes the article contradict itself. I was hoping as a member of the Documentary films task force you would be best placed to provide a justification for whether a film is indeed a documentary or not, and thus what categories and genre labels are appropriate for this article. Thanks. --85.211.212.153 (talk) 20:19, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Barry logo.svg
Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 17:14, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 23
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Unsane (film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vanity Fair ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Unsane_%28film%29 check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Unsane_%28film%29?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 09:30, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Ari Aster
Hello, Sock. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Ari Aster, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. Bot0612 (talk) 12:14, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

About your revert of my edits on Template:Kanye West songs
First of all, remixes are classified as 'songs' too. Secondly, you erased more than remixes from the songs template anyway, so please don't erase either of these in the future.


 * First of all, I didn't revert your edit. Your edit was reverted to the previous version edited by me by user . Please discuss with that user about the revert.
 * Secondly, simply saying "this is right because I say so" is not an argument. You don't own that template. And I agree with the removal; I think the remixes make the template bloated. Again though, not my revert.
 * And finally, sign your posts with four tildes ( ~ ) so users can easily see who they're speaking to. Sock   ( tock talk)  14:55, 5 August 2018 (UTC)


 * I never used the "this is right because I say so" argument nor did I claim ownership of anything. Unless you can prove me wrong, then remixes are songs as well.

Kyle Peake (talk) 06:58, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
 * You ignored the key part, which is that I didn't revert your edit. I'm not going to revert it further. Please discuss with Binksternet. Sock   ( tock talk)  07:15, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Category:American films
Please note that per the category's description, all American films should be added to this category regardless of whether they are also in subcategories. Thanks! DonIago (talk) 15:50, 6 August 2018 (UTC)


 * I even checked the main page to see if I was missing something but apparently I couldn't read last night. Sorry about that! Sock   ( tock talk)  16:11, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
 * No worries! Happens to the best of us. :) DonIago (talk) 16:29, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Mara film poster.jpg
Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 17:16, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Ari Aster


Hello, Sock. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Ari Aster".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the, , or  code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Hhkohh (talk) 08:45, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:15, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

WikiCup 2018 September newsletter
The fourth round of the 2018 WikiCup has now come to an end. The eight users who made it to the final round had to score a minimum of 422 points to qualify, with the top score in the round being 4869 points. The leaders in round 4 were:


 * Courcelles scored a magnificent 4869 points, with 92 good articles on Olympics-related themes. Courcelles' bonus points alone exceeded the total score of any of the other contestants!
 * Kees08 was second with 1155 points, including a high-scoring featured article for Neil Armstrong, two good topics and some Olympics-related good articles.
 * 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 Cas Liber, with 1066 points, was in third place this round, with two featured articles and a good article, all on natural history topics.
 * Other contestants who qualified for the final round were 🇲🇭 Nova Crystallis, Iazyges,  SounderBruce,  🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿 Kosack and 🇺🇸 Ceranthor.

During round four, 6 featured articles and 164 good articles were promoted by WikiCup contestants, 13 articles were included in good topics and 143 good article reviews were performed. There were also 10 "in the news" contributions on the main page and 53 "did you knows". Congratulations to all who participated! It was a generally high-scoring and productive round and I think we can expect a highly competitive finish to the competition.

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 10 days of "earning" them. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. 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, and let the best editor win! 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) 18:31, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:AJR The Click.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:AJR The Click.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:22, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Cast and characters
Hey, I remember sometime back that you and I were editing the cast and characters section of a television series article and you pointed out that it was redundant to list a character twice when someone played a younger version of that character in a guest appearance or a recurring role. That sounded like a pretty logical argument to me and I've been following it on other television articles that I have edited since. I've been running into a bit of trouble over on the article for Manifest where one editor keeps moving a younger appearance of a character to the guest section and out of the paragraph for the character that already exists in the main section. I was hoping you'd take a look at it if you have the time. Sincerely, BoogerD (talk) 20:30, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Heads up, I just went ahead and made the change again. Hopefully it sticks. – BoogerD (talk) 20:41, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Friday the 13th collection.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Friday the 13th collection.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:36, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 27
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Halloween III: Season of the Witch, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Santa Mira ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Halloween_III:_Season_of_the_Witch check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Halloween_III:_Season_of_the_Witch?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:22, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Blue Iguana.jpg
Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 18:10, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of At the Throne of Judgment for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article At the Throne of Judgment 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/At the Throne of Judgment& 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. noq (talk) 13:52, 19 November 2018 (UTC)