User talk:The Wordsmith/Amazing Race Wikipedia

Signup

 * Can I sign up? Den dodge T\C 21:32, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * You're probably going to need a partner. I would suggest someone you know well or someone you've worked with before. :-) Meetare Shappy  Cunkelfratz! 21:33, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I know I need a partner—I'm working on it. Den dodge T\C 21:37, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

iMatthew and Scorpion0422
Appearing as iScorp, inc. iMatthew : Chat  22:09, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Assuming it's OK with Scorpion himself, ✅ I'm adding you to the table. :-) Meetare Shappy  Cunkelfratz! 22:10, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Of course, we talked over IRC. iMatthew : Chat  22:11, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah. :-) Meetare Shappy Cunkelfratz! 22:13, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Nevermind, withdrawing us. iMatthew : Chat  00:09, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Sounds like fun!
Thanks for the invitation Shappy! I'd love to participate. I'll be gone for most of July so I don't know if I can do the first round, but I'll try to do what I can. Anyone can be my partner, though there may be a few people I'll ask. Reywas92 Talk 03:11, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmmm. It depends how fast you can find a partner.  We could delay the start to the middle of July, but I don't know if it can work. :-/ Meetare Shappy  Cunkelfratz! 12:08, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Spot
I'm in the matter of trying to find a partner, but if the hosts do not mind, I would like to join the competition? Once I find out if the person I asked would like to join aswell, that is.-- Will C  04:54, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Sure, once you find a partner we can officially sign you guys up. :-) Meetare Shappy Cunkelfratz! 12:08, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I have found a partner. Collectively known as for know, Team Xtreme. We are NiciVampireHeart and, myself, Wrestlinglover.-- Will C  19:47, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅ Meetare Shappy Cunkelfratz! 22:55, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you!-- Will C  20:56, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Proposing new idea.
Shappy didn't like it too much, but I'd like other opinions.

On the actual Amazing Race, they give the contestants Detours and Roadblocks. To put it simply, what does everyone think about changing the format to this, where Detours will be the task, and will change each round. Detours would vary from "Write 3 DYKs" or "Write 1 GA" to "Write 5 GAs" or "Write 1 FA." Teams pick the detour they'd like to do, and would only have to do that one for the leg.

The roadblock would be for one team member to perform, where that member would have to do something like "Expand a stub to start-class" or "Review a GAN".

Thoughts? iMatthew : Chat  13:28, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The reason I didn't like this too much is that it would put pressure on me and Ironholds to create new tasks for every leg. He's busy throughout June, so I don't know if that can work.  I can talk to the article judges though. Meetare Shappy  Cunkelfratz! 13:40, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I like it. It's different from doing the same thing each leg. I don't think it should be very difficult to come up with these, and you can always reuse some. Reywas92 Talk  15:19, 31 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Is it going to be only FAs? What about Featured pictures, Featured sounds, etc? Shoemaker&#39;s Holiday (talk) 16:55, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * It will primarily focus on DYKs and GAs. There will be occasional focus on FA and FL.  Since you need extra tools (for example) PhotoShop to do FP or FS, I don't think there will be too many of those. Meetare Shappy  Cunkelfratz! 17:32, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * True, but I think we should have at least one or 2 rounds where a criterion is "piece of featured content"—that way we cater for everybody. Den dodge T\C 17:37, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, the options can vary. Meetare Shappy Cunkelfratz! 17:43, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * No way should a piece of featured content include pictures, sound, or articles. You could put together 20 FP's with the right tools, by the time one could get a single FA. iMatthew : Chat  18:26, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * D'ya really think so? Durova maybe could, but she's not human =P. They do take quite a while (or maybe that's just me—I can't do pictures to save my life!). Maybe we should have a round where everyone downloads GIMP and goes for an FP, or where everyone downloads Audacity and goes for an FS? Den dodge T\C 18:36, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm imagining FPs and FSs as possible Detour choices. They should be available as options, but by no means mandatory. Meetare Shappy  Cunkelfratz! 18:37, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah—we could have detours like "1 GA or 1 FP", or similar. Den dodge T\C 18:39, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, I can tell you the secret of my success at FP: Spending hundreds of pounds on old books. Having lots of really cool stuff you personally own helps. Though it does make you rather poor. Alms? Charity? Books you don't want? =P Shoemaker&#39;s Holiday (talk) 18:44, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Looks like a fun idea
Unfortunately this isn't really up my alley, but I'm going to enjoy watching this unfold. I'm glad I stumbled across this page. Useight (talk) 14:48, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Sign me up
I wanna play :) Matthewedwards : Chat  15:10, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * You can just add yourself along with a partner, I think? Gary King  ( talk ) 16:37, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't believe Matthewedwards has a partner, just letting us know he's interested. ;) Meetare Shappy Cunkelfratz! 20:17, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Wellllll I just added myself and per this; is that alright? —  Ed   (Talk  •  Contribs)  21:06, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Sure, fine. :-) Meetare Shappy Cunkelfratz! 01:23, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll sign up with ME if he has no partner ;)  weburiedoursecretsinthe garden  14:16, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't, and I'm completely agreeable to playing with you. Matthewedwards : Chat  15:27, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

I'll sign up...
...BUT I have no partner. Anyone free? I've got a lot of time on my hands at the moment, so hopefully I'll get back to the writing I haven't managed over the last couple of months. J Milburn (talk) 12:45, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll be sure to ask around on IRC. :-) Meetare Shappy Cunkelfratz! 19:15, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

You could start a section for people in a similar situation. A lobby of sorts to find a partner. Maybe people want to get to know the other person better than that though. Recognizance (talk) 18:34, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * People are welcome to interview ;) Seriously though, I'm sure plenty of people will have bumped into me- I at least vaguely know most of the people who have currently signed up. J Milburn (talk) 19:47, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I was thinking more of the general concept than you specifically. I suppose the competition isn't really big/widespread enough for a lobby - people can just post here if they want to be in the proverbial queue. Recognizance (talk) 20:13, 11 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I'll join you, Milburn. Just a note: I'm not very experienced. Thanks,  gENIUS 101  17:00, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, you've got a couple of DYKs, and you seem like a nice enough guy! I'd be happy to join you. J Milburn (talk) 18:44, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, what the hell
I've got a bit more time than I thought (whoever thinks 9 to 5 is difficult has issues, srsly) So me and Recognizance will be partnering up. Ironholds (talk) 03:38, 11 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't recall consenting to that. Did you ask me before you posted here? Recognizance (talk) 04:27, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * ..you told me you wanted to be my partner and ordered me to join? Ironholds (talk) 04:34, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, you talked me into it. Recognizance (talk) 04:42, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅ :P Meetare Shappy Cunkelfratz! 11:06, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Is anyone willing to be partners with me?
I want to join, but I am partnerless. Is anyone here want to be partners with me? Leave Message ,Yellow Evan home, Sandbox
 * I'll be your partner. -- ThinkBlue   (Hit   BLUE)  23:16, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅ Meetare Shappy Cunkelfratz! 23:19, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Is this still going ahead?
Shappy is taking some time out of Wikipedia because of some unpleasantness from elsewhere, so is this competition still going ahead? Are the other judges/organisers happy to run on without him? J Milburn (talk) 18:45, 14 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I will run it if necessary.Mitch/HC32 18:50, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm poking my head in here, not to fear. I'm just taking a break from all of the wikipolitics. Meetare Shappy  Cunkelfratz! 18:53, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, that's good. Could you sign up me and Genius101? See a few threads up. J Milburn (talk) 18:59, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅ Meetare Shappy Cunkelfratz! 19:03, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Clarification?
You can't work on an article until the leg starts? And if you are caught working on an article before it starts _______ happens.

The article judges are going to be reviewing our content? – ( iMatthew   •   talk  ) at 17:30, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Where are you getting that from? J Milburn (talk) 17:32, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * That's what I got out of the rules. – ( iMatthew   •   talk  ) at 17:34, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's correct. We don't want people having unfair advantage over the others. And the article judges are there to make sure an article doesn't sit at GAN for months. Meetare Shappy  Cunkelfratz! 19:05, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * But that's a bit unfair. What that really means is that I can't edit my area of choice properly until the competition starts in two weeks time. If I do, I automatically invalidate them. Surely a more general rule would be that articles worked on in userspace now can't be used in the competition? Excluding work done before say, now (since I started work on a rewrite in March, and it is currently languishing in my sandbox unloved). Ironholds (talk) 19:09, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, the article needs to be worked on during the period. You're not allowed to reach and pull back an already-done GA or DYK. Meetare Shappy  Cunkelfratz! 19:10, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Right, I got that, but example: Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 would ideally be a GA. Am I not allowed to edit it until the competition starts? Ironholds (talk) 19:13, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * If indeed there is a GA challenge soon, it cannot be placed at GAN until the competition starts. Meetare Shappy Cunkelfratz! 19:22, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, so it only covers sending things to GAC/whatever, not editing them? Ironholds (talk) 19:24, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * By all means, feel free. But remember, you will need to do some work during the competition. Meetare Shappy  Cunkelfratz! 19:25, 18 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Outdent: Of course. But you might want to clarify the rules, then, because iMatthew is of the impression that edit = death of article. Ironholds (talk) 19:26, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not under that impression. However I just asked Shappy on IRC "So we shouldn't edit articles because it hasn't started yet?" and he said "Yes." – ( iMatthew   •   talk  ) at 19:52, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * At least not articles you intend to improve during the race. Meetare Shappy Cunkelfratz!
 * So we shouldn't edit articles we intend to improve during the race? Ironholds (talk) 19:58, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Not until it starts. Meetare Shappy Cunkelfratz! 20:04, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Right, sorry, I may have misunderstood this whole thing a little- will myself and Genius101 be expected to work on articles together? Or will we be working on our "own thing"? Only, we don't know one another, and, as far as I'm aware, we edit completely different areas (at the moment, I do fungi and Britain's Got Talent, while Genius101 does sport and wrestling). I assumed we would just be combining our achievements, rather than actually working together... J Milburn (talk) 20:26, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * On Detours, you have to work together, as the teams on the real Amazing Race do. Meetare Shappy Cunkelfratz! 20:29, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * And detours will be something like "work together to get an article to GA status"? J Milburn (talk) 20:31, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * As I stated in the message on your talk, a Detour is a choice between two tasks. A Roadblock is a task only 1 team member is allowed to do. Meetare Shappy  Cunkelfratz! 20:34, 18 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Going back; so as iMatthew says, I can't edit articles now I want to get to GA/FA/Whatever in the competition? Ironholds (talk) 02:17, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Quick questions: I keep alot of articles in subpages so that I can work on them from time to time, and I am currently holding A.J. Styles in a subpage which I placed in there about a week ago. Nici and I decided that Styles would be a back up plan or possibly the primary plan of ours if Bryan Danielson is too hard to get to FA. Would AJ no longer count though I've had it in a subpage for a week already and we just decided to do AJ yesterday for the competition since we've been planing to do it for months but have yet to get around to it? Also, no editing of the articles: would that include or exclude reverts of unsourced material and vandalism, plus small fixes like broken links, etc?-- Will C  13:22, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Minor stuff is fine, but I think any major additions can wait until the competition starts. And FYI, FAs will not be a consistent part of the gameplay. Meetare Shappy  Cunkelfratz! 19:54, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, but still nice to have articles in mind for anything. I've been planing to take Styles to FA since last year.-- Will C  20:04, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

2 eliminations per leg?
I personally think that if we do single eliminations, and even throw non-eliminations in there, the competition will take months. I think if we did 2 eliminations per leg, we would have 5 legs in total, and it would shorten the length of the competition. I think it's good this is in the summer, as it's when most people have time to edit more. For me, I have shorter hours at work in the summer. School is also out, so minors in the competition should have more time to edit as well. Basically, if this lasted from July 1 to August 31, I think it would be more convenient for many. It would help to keep this within two months if we had 2 eliminations per leg. Thoughts? – ( iMatthew  • talk ) at 00:36, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not too hot on this; the real race has no time limit, and teams can easily complete a leg in less than a week. We pretty much are looking at 11 legs=July through August.  I think that having only 5 legs in total makes it too short of a competition.  Plus, I think we've fluctuated a little much on the rules. ;)  Meetare Shappy  Cunkelfratz! 00:44, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Well no offense, but some of the rules you made weren't too well-thought out. This is the first time it's run, so I'd think that discussion of the rules would be necessary, but if you don't want to change any rules, it's your contest. I don't see us fitting in 11 legs in 2 months, and I don't see why a short competition is necessarily bad. I just don't want to let my partner down if I don't have time because this runs later than expected. – ( iMatthew  • talk ) at 00:53, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I can understand what you're saying. However, I can assure you that we are confident that the Race will be able to carry on as expected. :-) Meetare Shappy  Cunkelfratz! 01:00, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I think two eliminations per round would work fine. Remember all, that this is a first run - we can use this as an opportunity to check how things work in practice. If a short competition turns out to be unsatisfying, we can change it next time around - ditto with any rules people don't like. Ironholds (talk) 01:01, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree. That's how we got the 3rd year of the WikiCup running. It took two pretty crappy runs to get a good idea of what does and doesn't work. This will eventually work, too. – ( iMatthew  • talk ) at 01:03, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * While I agree with your suggestion on eliminations, there seems to be an undertone of "it's shit at the moment and badly run" in your comments. We don't yet know how it will work, and for precisely that reason we should hold off commenting. If you have problems with specific rules, say so. Ironholds (talk) 01:08, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, I've mentioned a bunch to Shappy. However he believes the competition is perfect the way he planned it out, so he's really blown off 95% of my suggestions. But it's his competition, like he said, so he can run it how he wants to. – ( iMatthew  • talk ) at 01:14, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree with Ironholds. I'd just like some stability; the rules have been several times in the past months.  Remember, me and Firestorm still have some Race to plan, and we did say there would be twists in the gameplay. We will definitely consider this idea. ;) Meetare Shappy  Cunkelfratz! 01:12, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't think my ideas are perfect, and I am definitely thinking of adding your idea (perhaps not in the capacity you may expect). I'm extremely sorry if my hubris got out of hand. Meetare Shappy  Cunkelfratz! 01:16, 23 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Outdent: The race starts soon anyway - my suggestion would be to have a little "what went right, what went wrong" after it ends and stop discussing it until then. Ironholds (talk) 06:55, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

So ...
Are we going with this idea? Also, do we have some kind of page to submit our work to, where the article judges will immediately review it (say GAN or DYK). If it's about coming in first, then the judges should be reviewing it immediately, right? – ( iMatthew  • talk ) at 02:08, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd support both ideas. Ironholds (talk) 11:30, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, regarding the submissions page, I got a message from Shappy, see User talk:NiciVampireHeart about the submission page and where I could find mine and Will's. I would suspect (s)he sent it to everyone. ♥ Nici ♥ Vampire ♥ Heart ♥ 13:23, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I guess I didn't get one because I recently joined to replace someone? But will this be used for judges to watchlist and review immediately? – ( iMatthew  • talk ) at 13:56, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, the subpage will be viewed by the judges. And we cannot talk about the possible twists to the race ;) Meetare Shappy  Cunkelfratz! 14:30, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I wasn't talking about a possible twist. But aren't the subpages where we list our completed and reviewed work? Maybe we should open another page where the judges watch and review articles/lists/hooks/whatever in the order that they were added. For example:


 * 1) Article 1 - User:A and User:B.
 * 2) [DYK hook 1 link] - User:X and User:Y.
 * The judges review these in the order they were added, that way nobody gets eliminated unfairly. The subpages, I'd think, are to just list the work after they pass. – ( iMatthew  • talk ) at 14:43, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's what the subpages are for. However, the judges are mainly on hand for actually reviewing the articles.  Firestorm and I are the ones who pass contestants on, i.e. approving the task.  So, the judges deal with reviewing the articles, we deal with moving the contestants on. Meetare Shappy  Cunkelfratz! 15:32, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
 * What about the idea I just gave? – ( iMatthew  • talk ) at 15:47, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The judges are watchlisting each page, and have been explicitly instructed to review things in the order they were posted. Meetare Shappy Cunkelfratz! 16:06, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Which pages? – ( iMatthew  • talk ) at 16:09, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

(unindent) The judges have been told to watchlist the submissions page of each contestant. Meetare Shappy Cunkelfratz! 16:13, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
 * But I thought that's where we add the content AFTER it's been reviewed and passed. Not before? – ( iMatthew  • talk ) at 16:19, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
 * No. You place what you want to be reviewed by judges/hosts on the submissions page. Meetare Shappy  Cunkelfratz! 16:23, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Just making sure before this starts...
We'll never have the option of doing, say, a "GA or FL" or "FA or FL" or even "DYK or FL," right? If it's a race, a GAN can be reviewed in a day, while an FLC is open for 10.  iMatthew  talk  at  17:07, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * No, I don't forsee that happening. Meetare Shappy Cunkelfratz! 19:43, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok thanks! It starts 0:00 UTC, right?  iMatthew  talk  at  20:37, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Amazing Race Wikipedia has begun
Shappy and myself apologise for the slight delay; we both had IRL commitments. The race has now begun; teams should check their team submission pages for details on the first task. We wish good luck to all participants. Firestorm Talk 01:48, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi - for the benefit of spectators like myself, can you provide links to the submission pages please? Thanks. —  Tivedshambo   (t/c) 07:18, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Round 1
Interesting suggestion - I particularly like the idea of making sure it is a five fold DYK, not a new'un. I like the idea of cleaning up and expanding stuff we already have rather than necessarily writing new articles :). Me and Recog are done if any of the reviewers are around? Ironholds (talk) 09:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * If you're done, Me and Julian don't stand a chance in winning. I went to bed when he posted the task, and just woke up. :(  iMatthew  talk  at  11:42, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Wow, that was fast, heh, JR and I have barely started. :S Cyclonebiskit (talk) 12:37, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * If it makes you feel any better, the "me and Recog" is all "me" and no "Recog". I'm in the same boat as iMatthew. Recognizance (talk) 13:52, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Do keep in mind that you do need to work together. ;) Meetare Shappy Cunkelfratz! 14:09, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Imatthew, I told you you didn't stand a chance :P. If it makes you feel any better I actually woke up at about 3am-ish and hacked one of them out, so you couldn't be expected to compete. Ironholds (talk) 14:15, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Shappy, does this mean we both have to work on a page for it to be allowed, or if we agree, can only one of us take the DYKs? Matthewedwards : Chat  16:31, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Since I haven't been following this: how do I locate the stuff we're supposed to review? -- Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 14:23, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Each contestant has a submissions page, located at Special:Prefixindex/User:Shappy/Amazing Race Wikipedia. Judges should watchlist all pages to see which to review. Meetare Shappy  Cunkelfratz! 14:28, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * So is it going to be two eliminations per round, then? Ironholds (talk) 14:29, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Maybe, maybe not. We're not going to reveal the racecourse right here :P Meetare Shappy  Cunkelfratz! 14:35, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

A reminder
I ask that for transparency's sake that whenever contestants submit articles for FAC or FLC, they make a note of their participation in Amazing Race, to prevent conflicts of interest from popping up. Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 14:26, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Sure thing. As most contestants are (or should be) watching this page, your message should be out. Meetare Shappy  Cunkelfratz! 14:28, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'm alerting the FA directors and FL directors about it too. This looks like an interesting contest. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:30, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Indeedy. I particularly like that the entries (so far) have been getting current content up to a better level rather than creating entirely new articles - cementing the work we've already done, as it were. A word in the ear of the runners - perhaps have rounds with G/FAs that can't be new articles or something. Ironholds (talk) 14:33, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, we like how it's going so far. About your point; it would take a large amount of time to take a brand-new article to GA, so to keep things running smoothly, there probably won't be any "new article to GA" tasks. :-) Meetare Shappy  Cunkelfratz! 14:35, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Five quid says I could get a new article up to GA standard within a day :P. Ironholds (talk) 14:36, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, that's just because you're Ironholds. :P
 * Dabomb, I'd say that most of the FL directors already know. Scorpion0422 intended to compete before withdrawring, Matthewedwards is a contestant, and TRM is a judge. Meetare Shappy  Cunkelfratz! 14:38, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I saw that. I just alerted them to this thread. Also, I don't think Karanacs and SandyGeorgia (FA directors) were aware of Amazing Race Wikipedia, so I left notes at their pages. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:45, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * That works as well. ;) Meetare Shappy Cunkelfratz! 14:39, 1 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Outdent: well, yes. If we have a GA round I'm going to do it with a new article just to prove a point. Ironholds (talk) 14:42, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I still believe I've set a record for least amount of time spent on an article before getting it to FAC. Sure, it wasn't a new article, but I submitted Myst to FAC within 22 hours of first editing it :) -- Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 14:49, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * And how many of those 22 hours were spent editing it? ;) Meetare Shappy Cunkelfratz! 14:50, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Diff. Count for yourself :P -- Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 15:04, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * If you count FLs, I think I beat you. I put the Timeline of the 1983 Atlantic hurricane season at FLC within three hours of creating it :P Cyclonebiskit (talk) 15:16, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * There are some interesting statistics about this kind of thing (as well as a chance for a pretty picture on your userpage) at the Four Award page, if anyone's insterested. J Milburn (talk) 16:00, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Already got mine for Raptor Red :) @Cyclone, everyone knows tropical storms and/or FLs don't count :P -- Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 16:18, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * My bad, I forgot tropical cyclones don't exist ;) Cyclonebiskit (talk) 17:37, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

For all judges watching this page...
...in the case of this leg's FL task, when they submit it, your job will be to assess it and determine whether it has a good chance of passing FLC. This is because the FLC process takes a pretty long time. We're lucky to have the official delegate on our judging squad, so hopefully he can help with that. Best, Meetare Shappy Cunkelfratz! 23:01, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Should we split up the judges? Maybe it would be best to have one judge assigned to each area. (TRM at FL, DF at FAC, Mitch at GA, and Mifter at DYK).  iMatthew  talk  at  00:17, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
 * No, judges should feel free to work anywhere they want to. That way, we're not relying on one judge to do everything in a certain area. Meetare Shappy  Cunkelfratz! 00:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Can the judges please get to reviewing these? :/  iMatthew  talk  at  17:48, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
 * How exactly are we supposed to be reviewing these? For DYK, do we note on each team's page whether we certify their expansion? I understand we're supposed to quick-review the FLC, but does that go on at the candidate page or elsewhere? Are we allowed to suggest/make improvements or are we just supposed to review it straight? -- Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 18:04, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
 * FLC reviewed. As for DYKs, well we probably have to wait to see if they make it onto the mainpage?  The Rambling Man (talk) 18:05, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
 * TRM, would you say their FL would have a good chance of passing? If so, I'll go ahead and move them on.
 * DYKs, I figure once they are approved with . Meetare Shappy  Cunkelfratz! 18:52, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
 * But, should they make a note at the submission page?  iMatthew  talk  at  18:55, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Definitely. That's the purpose of the submissions page. Meetare Shappy  Cunkelfratz! 18:55, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, it's got a very good chance of meeting WP:WIAFL. But it'll need other reviewers to agree to that. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:59, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, since we don't have time for a full 10-day FLC to decide whether they move on, Firestorm and I have asked that it just be based on a single judge's review for the competition.  The actual FLC won't have much affect.  If nobody minds, I'm moving on iMatthew and Julian. Meetare Shappy  Cunkelfratz! 19:02, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Very well, but please don't abuse the FLC process for the sake of the race. FLC noms are serious matters, and should be treated as such.  Just because I've reviewed it and said it stands a chance of passing, that should not be the final edit to the process.  The Rambling Man (talk) 19:09, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not abusing it for the sake. From now, the actual candidacy has nothing to do with the race.  Getting it there and hearing the judge's opinion is basically the task.  Meetare Shappy  Cunkelfratz! 19:10, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, all I'm saying is that the FLC should be completed properly - it's not like DYK where if it's rejected, "so what?". FLC takes a lot of people a lot of time and energy to provide comprehensive reviews.  I understand the concept of this race means we can't wait around for a list to be promoted but just getting a conditional pass and then leaving the list to fester should be strongly strongly discouraged.  Perhaps we should look at making it part of the rule system... The Rambling Man (talk) 19:14, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
 * The list isn't being left to fester. I don't think anyone's going to abandon an FLC. Raising one up is an accomplishment, and the FLC will stay open regardless of where the team is in the Race. Meetare Shappy  Cunkelfratz! 19:20, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Well that's what I'm getting at. Whether the team is in the race or not is irrelevant to FLC.  Starting an FLC commits its nominators to finishing the deal.  If people can "qualify" by nominating and getting a simple "yeah, it's gonna be alright given enough effort" from one judge, there's no obligation for them to continue to finish the nomination correctly.  All I'm saying is there should be a penalty or some kind of actual obligation (rather than just a moral one) to get on and finish FLCs to the point of promotion or ultimate failure (in which case, perhaps the Race results need to be modified).  DYKs are easy and can be resolved in days, FLCs can take weeks.  The Rambling Man (talk) 19:27, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

New Judge
To help out, I'd like to welcome back back into the competition, but as a judge. Welcome to the job, SH! :-) Meetare Shappy Cunkelfratz! 19:20, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Gameplay
Are we going to do what they do on the real race and let the 1st team done start 1st on the next leg? Thanks,  gENIUS  101  19:30, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I believe that's how we'll work it. Meetare Shappy Cunkelfratz! 19:33, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

team changes
I've decided to pull out of this since I'm not really up for a competition so that now leaves Jason Rees and Juliancolton without partners. I've talked to both of them and they've agreed to be a team so the two of them are still in the race. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 23:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Being bold
I've added links to our various submissions pages into the table on the main TARW page. Hopefully this will make it easier for people watching the race to access the various pages rather than blindly searching with SpecialPrefix and AJAX. Ironholds (talk) 09:05, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Good idea. I know I'd struggle to find my own page if I hadn't already put it on my userpage... J Milburn (talk) 18:01, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I think the original intent was to keep them "secret" - quotes because nothing is truly secret on a wiki - from the other teams, but as demonstrated in the case of people discovering the GA task ahead of time, that won't work. I had suggested somewhere that the results be posted on a single page next time to make it easier to keep track of. Having off-wiki communication for things not meant for all to see is inevitable. Recognizance (talk) 18:18, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * It was all meant to be secret? This competition is just weird. Instruction creep seems to be killing this. J Milburn (talk) 19:37, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Indeed. A problem I've seen so far is that everything was very vague at the beginning, and lots of rules are popping up now. "you can wear any hat! As long as it is made of velvet. As long as it is silk velvet, not cotton velvet. Ottoman silk velvet. Made between 1340 and 1450. In the Adana or Ankara vilayets. By a man named Bernard Sebastion Hornswoggle-Manning the fifth". Exaggeration, but... Ironholds (talk) 05:21, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, I'll admit that I didn't know about this competition until a few hours before it actually started. If I were in it as a competitor, I would probably feel the same thing about the "instruction creep". Since the competition has started, we've seen what needs some adjusting, and that's why things had to be tweaked a little. If you guys have any suggestions that you think would make this run smoother, feel free to share them. Remember, this is supposed to be a fun and light-hearted competition, while improving the encyclopedia. I thought about making a (completely optional) IRC room where people could come in and ask questions, or meet up with their partners, etc. Would that be at all beneficial? I got the idea from the WikiCup, they do something like that, iirc. I could post a link to the channel using java.freenode.net for those who don't normally use IRC, for quick, instant access. I mentioned it to Firestorm once, and he seemed to like the idea. Killiondude (talk) 07:05, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Competition changes
Due to other issues, Shappy is now on a wikibreak. Killiondude has agreed to step up and be my co-host. Per Shappy's suggestion, I will be moving the competition to my own userspace, so please update your bookmarks accordingly. Additionally, all questions/comments/suggestions should now be addressed to myself or Killiondude. So, there will be a few small changes made:


 * To avoid the logistics nightmare that the Detour choice has created, starting with Leg 2 there will not be a choice. The Detour will be one task that both users will have to work collaboratively on. Everybody will do, for example, an FL, and they will all take roughly the same time to go through the process. This also takes a load off the hosts and judges, who would have to worry about balancing everything.


 * Roadblocks and new legs will now be kept secret. All teams should provide off-wiki contact information, be it IRC, IM or Email. When a team has completed their main task, as certified by our judges, they will be given their Roadblock task in private. This ensures more fairness and less of a possibility of cheating.


 * The team who finishes first will be given a small head start on completing their main task for the next leg. The second place team will also receive a smaller time bonus. These tasks will be sent via the off-wiki contact information I receive, before the task is posted to all submission pages.


 * Minor clarification: Teams will be given credit for finishing in the order that their task is submitted in. If Team X submits their article to GAN before Team Y, but Team Y's article is reviewed first, and they both pass, Team X gets credit for finishing first.

It is my hope that these changes will make the competition more streamlined and easier to run and participate in. Any questions? Please provide off-wiki contact information as quickly as possible; I need one method of contact for each team. They can be posted on my Talk page, where I can courtesy blank upon request to protect privacy. Thank you, and good luck! Firestorm Talk 18:44, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm still having trouble understanding the basic rules of the game (and, for what it's worth, I've been roleplaying and wargaming for years- I've mastered some pretty tricky games...). Is the first round over? Who won? When will the next round start? When do we get our detour? Instruction creep is really killing this, and all the comings and goings are insane. J Milburn (talk) 19:38, 4 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Okay, i'll clarify that too. The first round ends when every team submits their tasks. Each round consists of a main task (previously called a Detour), and a Roadblock. The main task is something that both members of a team have to contribute to collaboratively, and is given out at the start of each round. Once a team finishes their task, as certified by the Judges, either Killiondude or myself will contact them off-wiki with the details of their Roadblock. The roadblock is something only one team member can perform, and teams have to decide which of them will do it.
 * So, in short, each leg consists of two tasks. Teams must complete the first before finding out what the second is. The first must be done collaboratively, and the second can only be done by one member. The teams who finish first and second will have a small time advantage in the next round; they will be informed of the main tasks off-wiki before it is public. Is this an adequate explanation? Firestorm  Talk 20:28, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Have me and my partner finished our first task yet? J Milburn (talk) 21:21, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * The first half of the leg, yes. The instructions for the second half are being sent out in a few minutes, to the teams who, like in your position, have completed what they've been given so far. Killiondude (talk) 22:29, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Just to clarify, they're being emailed per the new "instructions are given off-wiki" guideline for the competition :-) Killiondude (talk) 22:30, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Withdrawing
Gary King and I would like to withdraw. Thanks,  The leftorium  09:28, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry to do this, but I have to as well. RL work is occupying me to the point where I can't really complete the tasks. Ironholds (talk) 16:27, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Question
Recently, Nici and I finished our task. Now I've never seen the Amazing Race, I don't like reality shows since they aren't really reality, so I'm not sure what comes next. Could someone fill me in, because I've got no e-mail or anything of that nature that says what to do next?-- Will C  23:06, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I have sent an email to you through Special:EmailUser. Please discuss the task secretly with your partner and decide which one of you will complete it. Firestorm  Talk 23:14, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Acctully i havent heard anything back about task 1 yet.Jason Rees (talk) 23:21, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Right. Could an article judge check out the FLC he submitted? Thanks. Killiondude (talk) 05:24, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Shappy is back
Shappy has returned from WikiBreak early, and wishes to return as a co-host. I don't foresee any objections to this, so i'm adding him back as a third co-host. Firestorm Talk 17:52, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Withdrawing
Due to me becoming Buiser in RL im withdrawing from this compertion Jason Rees (talk) 22:10, 17 August 2009 (UTC)