User talk:Spencer/Archive 19

The Signpost: 17 December 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 01:03, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

New messages
—  C M B J  10:43, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 December 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 08:12, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 starting soon
Hi there; you're receiving this message because you have previously shown interest in the WikiCup. This is just to remind you that the 2013 WikiCup will be starting on 1 January, and that signups will remain open throughout January. Old and new Wikipedians and WikiCup participants are warmly invited to take part in this year's competition. (Though, as a note to the more experienced participants, there have been a few small rules changes in the last few months.) If you have already signed up, let this be a reminder; you will receive a message with your submissions' page soon. Please direct any questions to the WikiCup talk page. Thanks! J Milburn 19:15, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

RD
Hi Spencer, what's the rule for the number of recent death postings: A maximum of 3, nothing older than 7 days (or is it 3 days), or nothing older than the last ITN entry? I can't find where the discussion arrived at a consensus. --Stephen 00:24, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing me to all the right places. --Stephen 00:42, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Nominating PRODed articles for deletion
Hey, just giving you a heads up that the articles you nominated about Raymond Ayala and his company Planet Random Creative are both up for AfD. Ayala removed the PROD for his article, so I nominated it for deletion and figured that I'd just lump the two together since he'd probably end up removing the PROD for that article as well. It's up at Articles for deletion/Raymond Ayala if you want to weigh in.Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   17:54, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2013 WikiCup!
Hello Spencer, and welcome to the 2013 WikiCup! Your submissions' page is here. The competition begins at midnight UTC. The first round will last until the end of February, at which point the top 64 scorers will advance to the second round. We will be in touch at the end of every month, and signups are going to remain open until the end of January; if you know of anyone else who may like to take part, please let them know! A few reminders: *The rules can be found here. There have been a few changes from last year, which are listed on that page. *Anything you submit must have been nominated and promoted in 2013, and you need to have completed significant work upon it in 2013. (The articles you review at good article reviews does not need to have been nominated in 2013, but you do need to have started the review in 2013.) We will be checking. *If you feel that another competitor is breaking the rules or abusing the competition in some way, please let a judge know. Please do not remove entries from the submissions' pages of others yourself. *Don't worry about calculating precisely how many points everything is worth. The bot will do that. The bot may occasionally get something wrong- let a judge know, or post on the WikiCup talk page if that happens. *Please try to be prompt in updating submissions' pages so that they can be double-checked. Overall, however, don't worry, and have fun. It doesn't matter if you make the odd mistake; these things happen. Questions can be asked on the WikiCup talk page. Good luck! J Milburn and The ed17 18:13, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2013 WikiCup
Hello, Spencer, and welcome to the 2013 WikiCup! Your submissions' page is here. The first round will last until the end of February, at which point the top 64 scorers will advance to the second round. We will be in touch at the end of every month, and signups are going to remain open until the end of January; if you know of anyone else who may like to take part, please let them know! A few reminders:
 * The rules can be found here. There have been a few changes from last year, which are listed on that page.
 * Anything you submit must have been nominated and promoted in 2013, and you need to have completed significant work upon it in 2013. (The articles you review at good article reviews does not need to have been nominated in 2013, but you do need to have started and completed the review in 2013.) We will be checking.
 * If you feel that another competitor is breaking the rules or abusing the competition in some way, please let a judge know. Please do not remove entries from the submissions' pages of others yourself.
 * Don't worry about calculating precisely how many points everything is worth. The bot will do that. The bot may occasionally get something wrong- let a judge know, or post on the WikiCup talk page if that happens.
 * Please try to be prompt in updating submissions' pages so that they can be double-checked.

Overall, however, don't worry, and have fun. It doesn't matter if you make the odd mistake; these things happen. Questions can be asked on the WikiCup talk page. Good luck! J Milburn and The ed17 12:58, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

User:Tigerpawnch and User:DracoPawnch
Hi, Spencer, You just blocked, please take a look at vandalising at Edd Gould et al. too. - 220  of  Borg 06:00, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
220  of  Borg 06:42, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 December 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 07:33, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 07 January 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 14:23, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Getting more involved
Hi Spencer. You helped me not too long ago in warning someone about removing content from an article. Not sure if you remember? It doesn't really matter though. Unlike some of the other experienced editors and admins around, you seemed somewhat more approachable, so I was wondering if you could advise me on how to become more involved in Wikipedia? I'm fairly new to this and besides reading articles, talk pages, following discussions of a contentious nature and the occasional grammar correction, I was wondering how to go about making a more constructive contribution? I've noticed some new and younger editors get "adopted", which at 37 seems a bit silly, but would be happy to go that route if it meant opening up doors for me. Do you have any thoughts that could assist? Thanks! Robvanvee (talk) 08:18, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks Spencer! I don't need to do the adoption thing(seems awfully formal), just want someone approachable I can bounce things off of. I'm very passionate about Wikipedia, I just lack the experience to make acceptable contributions. That incident I reminded you about, regarding a user removing content, actually backfired on me due to my inexperience. Turns out material that is not sourced can be removed and I was warning him by doing so, his actions constituted vandalism. So I learned something in the process. I have contributed to some articles that are probably more stubs than articles, which I will ask you to look at, at a later stage. In the meantime I am going to go through the reading material you have provided so as to brush up on the basics. Thanks again. Robvanvee (talk) 07:31, 10 January 2013

Hi again Spencer. I have been reading through some of the stuff you sent and wanted to ask 2 questions. First, while looking at articles for deletion, I considered this article(which since I last looked has changed completely). Perhaps in its current form it doesn't justifiably deserve to be deleted? But there are improvements needed! Another thing is the lack of reliable sources. Which brings me to my next question. I'm struggling to get a reference added to an article. Is there some page that explains that process? Thanks Robvanvee (talk) 13:33, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey Spencer. Thanks for that last info re references. Got it! I've been having fun putting references in where they were needed. The next thing I would like to ask you about is creating an article from scratch. I've started with something in my sandbox, and still a way to go. But when I'm ready, how does one go about submitting the article? Thanks in advance. Robvanvee (talk) 14:19, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Robvanvee (talk) 16:19, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

ITN question
Hi Spencer, nice to meet you. I have a few ITN-related questions and you seem to be a good person to ask. Who gets credit for an ITN item, the nominator and/or the person who improve the article? Also, how does that relate to the WikiCup scoring (what I mean is, would you get points only for a nomination)? Automatic Strikeout ( T  •  C ) 00:54, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Filipinos in Kuwait
 Harrias  talk 16:02, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Re: Daddy Yankee
Oh! I thought I was reverting his edit. I am sorry, got confused there for a second. Thanks for letting me know. — DivaKnockouts (talk) 04:09, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Filipinos in Oman
( X! ·  talk )  · @224  · 08:02, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Filipinos in Norway
— Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:02, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 January 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 15:52, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

My contributions for your consideration
Hi Spencer. Thanks to your guidance I have written one new article and rewritten another. I would be really grateful if you could look at them and give me some constructive criticism. Much appreciated! Robvanvee (talk) 09:09, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Point taken. will get on that asap. Robvanvee (talk) 15:56, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

RE: Request
Ah, seems like I was on the move. Sorry, will be more sepcific. Its the OCD sometimes ;) Lihaas (talk) 09:11, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 January 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 00:25, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Discussion on the AFT5 Request for Comment
Hey - this is to notify you that there is a discussion starting on the Article Feedback RfC talkpage that has ramifications for the RfC itself. Your input is much appreciated :). Thanks! and apologies if I've missed anyone Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 16:48, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Filipinos in Bahrain
Hello! Your submission of Filipinos in Bahrain at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 04:21, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 January 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 18:57, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Filipinos in Bahrain
Lord Roem ~ (talk) 16:02, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

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

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

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


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

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

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 00:26, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 February 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 03:07, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Shaker Heights High School and Kid Cudi
WikiProject Schools/Article guidelines states:


 * Who should be included?
 * Per Bio, alumni to be included must meet Wikipedia notability criteria. All alumni meeting these criteria are to be included on an alumni list, regardless of how much time they have spent on a school roll, from one day to several years, and whether or not they graduated.

In my experience, this correctly reflects general practice for alumni lists in school articles: notable people who have attended are listed whether or not they actually graduated. Best, --Arxiloxos (talk) 06:29, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
– 2001:db8:: (rfc &#124; diff) 05:59, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

ITN images
Hello! Thank you for uploading a local copy of the image (which admins sometimes neglect to do). FYI, when uploading the exact Commons file without modification, there's no need to change the name. Such uploads should be tagged uploaded from Commons to enable easy tracking/deletion. A different file name is required only when an image is modified (cropped, resized, etc.) for ITN. Such uploads should be tagged m-cropped. Thanks again! —David Levy 08:38, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

RfA: thank you for your support
Spencer, I wanted to thank you for your support during my RfA. It did not end as hoped, but I am determined to treat it as a learning experience for my future editing. Warm regards, Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:38, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 February 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 09:21, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Proposal to implement TAFI that affects ITN
Discussion is ongoing about how to implement Today's articles for improvement on the Main Page. A proposal is being worked on with general community support, where TAFI is put it on the left hand side, below the DYK content. In order to balance the Main Page, part of this proposal involves increasing the ITN content by one item per day. Since you are an editor involved in the process, I would ask if you could comment on the proposal. -- Nick Penguin ( contribs ) 17:29, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 February 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 19:44, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 February 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 06:20, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Vironus/99.237.169.58 ?=? Biderman, what next
At AIV you wrote that the IP edits appeared to be in good faith but I must disagree. The IP appears to be the same editor as Vironus, since the IP blanked User talk:Vironus here and here, the 2nd time adding "This is my talk page", which Vironus clarified one minute later here. Interestingly, they both appear to be Jonathan Biderman, without declaring that they are. So, from all this, I think the IP and Vironus are Jonathan Biderman, interested in simultaneously disassociating himself from the site and bragging about his doctorate. What's the best next step about this, given that Vironus just blanks their Talk page? --Lexein (talk) 11:37, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Edits to Talk:Stile Project which I think were all improper
 * Feb 22 IP deletes "Jonathan" (Biderman's multiply reliably sourced first name) here with false edit summary "(typo correction)", and altering other editors' comments
 * Feb 26 IP replaces "Biderman" w/ "Harchick" here again altering others' comments
 * Feb 26 Vironus changes photo request to "Stileproject" here with a false edit summary
 * Feb 27 Vironus deletes all reliable sources and discussion mentioning "Jonathan Biderman" here, again altering others' comments
 * Feb 28 IP changes "Biderman" to "Berman" here, again altering others' comments
 * Edits to Stile Project which I think were mostly improper
 * Jan 28 IP changes "Jonathan Biderman" to "Philip Widerman" here. ("Jonathan Biderman" is multiply reliably sourced)
 * Feb 22 IP removes "Jonathan" everywhere here
 * Feb 26 Vironus removes much cited content here and adds a primary-sourced claim about the 1999 faked suicide. Also replaces one "Biderman" with "Stile", and one "Jay Stile" (reliably sourced) with "Stile"
 * Feb 28 IP again replaces "Jonathan Biderman" with "Stile" here
 * Feb 28 Vironus adds unsourced details Biderman would know here. Text: "from the BBC documentary "Culture Shock". Interestingly, not claimed by Biderman/Stile on stileproject.com/wired.html, archived here or stileproject.com/kitty.html archived here. Totally unsourced, therefore.
 * Feb 28 Vironus adds info about Biderman/Stile's Ph.D. here sourced from the Stile blog entry posted Feb 27 (yesterday).

Heads up
IPs like (China) are to be blocked on sight. Filter 271 targets general spambots, whereas filter 523 (perhaps redundant) was set up specifically for this LTA spambot. Materialscientist (talk) 05:50, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
 * No. There is a list of filters, but while some are hot, many are stale and inactive. Some are set merely for monitoring purposes. User:Mr.Z-bot/filters.js contains a list of filters that will be reported by Mr.Z-bot on WP:AIV, but even for those the threshold varies, from one attempt to several. Materialscientist (talk) 06:00, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

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

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

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

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

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

A few final administrative issues. From now on, submission pages will need only a link to the article and a link to the nomination page, or, in the case of good article reviews, a link to the review only. See your submissions' page for details. This will hopefully make updating submission pages a little less tedious. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) J Milburn (talk) 17:25, 1 March 2013 (UTC)