User talk:Vaticidalprophet

Your GA nomination of Paul Needham (librarian)
The article Paul Needham (librarian) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Paul Needham (librarian) for comments about the article, and Talk:Paul Needham (librarian)/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Premeditated Chaos -- Premeditated Chaos (talk) 18:42, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Promotion of Archaeology, Anthropology, and Interstellar Communication

 * Congrats, ! Great to have it official! &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 14:09, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Archaeology, Anthropology, and Interstellar Communication scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 10 August 2023. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Today's featured article/August 10, 2023, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/August 2023. I suggest that you watchlist Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:40, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Marie Sophie Hingst
RoySmith (talk) 12:03, 17 July 2023 (UTC) Thank you for this GA, and others, and FA, and further FA plans! - She is also featured on Portal:Germany. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:55, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you also for the promotion to prep of Ernst-Ludwig Petrowsky, my fastest in recent history, nominated yesterday, in prep today. About the wording: I am not sure if "record" is better than "recording" (which seems more general), and if "with" is better than "of", because just in case he's the only one from the East, that made it wrong. No time to check, busy with another Recent death article but - for a nice change - unlike the last three including Petrowsky not on the very last possible day ;) For those three, I went to bed without knowing if they'd make it. Would you like reviewing at WP:ITNN? It's a simple sup or opp on simple requirements: substantial enough, and everything sourced? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:24, 20 July 2023 (UTC)


 * I wasn't entirely sure about the record/recording -- will probably sleep on it. I've looked at ITN in the past; compared to other main-page processes it's always the one I've been least inclined to. I had some firsthand experience nominating an RD once, and it almost got archived too before I asked to see if it would ever be posted. Vaticidalprophet 12:32, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
 * RD improved insofar as they now add every entry at the beginning, not - as before - in the sequence of day of death which was unfair to those who got treatment late. All I asked was if you could just review from time to time? Usually you can tell at a glance if an article has chances or not. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:37, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I'll add it to the main-page-processes I look at and see if there's anything needing reviews when I check :) Vaticidalprophet 22:06, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Triple Crown


Congratulations! You may be interested in a userbox I created:

— Bilorv ( talk ) 18:10, 18 July 2023 (UTC)


 * (Placing multiple replies here, because I forgot to reply to things on any sort of sane schedule...)
 * thank you! It's good to be back. I don't think this will be the last for a while.
 * fantastic to see you again, and yes, planning FA. Dark Archives feels like it would be a fitting Halloween TFA if it gets through GAN quickly enough, which is emphatically not a guarantee, these days. I'm indecisive, at the moment, between nominating Hingst now and hoping that FAC doesn't take too long, or waiting for someone to pick up Dark Archives and hoping the GAN doesn't take too long. I did see the portal feature, and the view count -- having joined in the "post-portal-controversy" era, it surprised me a little to see just how high the view counts on the country portals are, compared to a stereotype I had formed of relatively low views.
 * thank you so much for the barnstar! I'll start copyediting Etika soonish (apologies for delay). Good to see the DYK will run soon. I hope to see you around a lot in the future -- you're making some fantastic contributions.
 * indeed it is :) Vaticidalprophet 00:59, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Dark Archives
—Kusma (talk) 12:03, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

VPP
Hello, Vaticidalprophet. When you said unilaterally superior, did you mean "universally"? Cheers, gnu 57 02:25, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

the hidden text does fuck up pshaw
specifically, anything next the empty credits. If you want to use PSHAW, make sure you take care of that first :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 15:51, 24 July 2023 (UTC)


 * My browser froze, twice before I managed to get it done, because the intersection of PSHAW and hidden text turned out to be "just lock your computer, lol". I am trying not to say things before bed I'll want to take back in the morning, but I'm in a pretty bad mood about that. Vaticidalprophet 15:52, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
 * yeah, I was never great about putting failsafes in... lemme see what I can do about that. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 16:27, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I've made a few changes that should decrease the extent to which it decides that crashing a browser is the solution. More to come, possibly :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 23:32, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Coords for GAN drive
It looks like we have another 1-2 volunteers, I have no objections to adding both of them. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  19:39, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

Darker Dreams (talk) 22:58, 25 July 2023 (UTC)


 * I am so glad this is about the witch thing and not the suicide thing <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 03:34, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Suggestion for the old articles table
I made the template Old good article table entry, which will automatically apply bolding and italics when a page passes the relevant time thresholds :) Example here:

Can implement if you want, let me know :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 04:44, 26 July 2023 (UTC)


 * That'd be great -- thank you! <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 04:46, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Ovarian agenesis vs. dysgenesis?
Is agenesis a subset of dysgenesis? I added information about bilateral ovarian agenesis to XX gonadal dysgenesis since it would meet the condition stated in the first sentence ("no functional ovaries are present"), but it seems like "dysgenesis" would imply a nonfunctional rather than absent organ. Alternately it could be merged with the new article Unilateral ovarian agenesis, even though the consequences of bilateral vs unilateral agenesis are very different. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  17:43, 27 July 2023 (UTC)


 * So what the 'gonadal dysgenesis' articles deal with is a syndrome that results in "streak gonads" -- undifferentiated gonads that aren't ovaries or testicles and don't produce sex hormones or gametes. There are other ways for "gonads in general" to be "dysgenetic", like testicular dysgenesis syndrome, which we cover separately to anorchia interesting hatnote . I haven't heard much prior about ovarian agenesis without streak gonads before, but looking through the study cited in the XXGD article, it seems most of the cases they're aware of had "absent ovaries for some other reason" rather than "failure to develop, with no other gonads". Congenital absence of even streak gonads is exceptionally rare -- I'm looking through the case studies that one cites to see if there's any more detail about those. The gonadal dysgenesis article is plausibly a "least bad place", but it might make more sense to have some central Agonadia that bilateral ovarian agenesis and anorchia redirect to. Will update. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 18:01, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Addendums, sort of stream of consciousness reading-while-typing:
 * The first two cites in this study both lean heavily towards a generalized gonadal-agenesis article being the best way to cover this, because they both heavily emphasize how this was mostly reported with 46,XY karyotypes and variable phenotypes rather than 46,XX karyotypes and female phenotypes. Obviously both those sources are old, though this is a common problem for these kinds of conditions (the rare ones you tend to get the choice between "old source" and "no source"), but the corollary is that they make such a big deal about being the first known XX cases of a pretty well-known XY condition.
 * The third seems to talk about someone with gonadal dysgenesis and not agenesis? Very undetailed.
 * This source (sixth cited) is definitely talking about a generalized agonadism syndrome. (Kennerknecht syndrome/Kennerknecht-Vogel syndrome seems redlinked.) The eighth is too, even just from the abstract (and confirmed looking at it in full).
 * Hope this helps, -- so the overview seems to be, yes, you'd want to classify this separately, and probably alongside the bilateral-gonadal-agenesis we already have an article on. It does seem the sources don't all perfectly distinguish agonadism and gonadal dysgenesis, such that it took me a bit of digging to figure this out, but if nothing else we have a fairly clear impression (that I suspected might be the case going in) that the line between "bilateral ovarian agenesis" and "bilateral testicular agenesis" is fairly thin in terms of phenotypes/development. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 18:20, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Addenda further: the Kennerknecht syndrome described in #6 is also Kennerknecht-Sorgo-Oberhoffer syndrome or PAGOD syndrome, all redlinked on enwiki...but PAGOD-Syndrom does exist. PAGOD seems the least-uncommon name (though as someone who has ever linked velocardiofacial syndrome in articles, I can assure that optimal naming for genetic syndromes is a mess). May look into dewiki's sources and work on it. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 18:31, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Isn't the difference between ovarian and testicular agenesis the karyotype? If it's XX then the docs expect ovaries to develop, XY then testes. Otherwise you're right: how do they tell the difference? Yet the sources do talk about "bilateral ovarian agenesis/absence". I don't have any objection to covering both in the same article, though "gonadal agenesis" seems to be more common than agonadia. (And if we do that would it make sense to merge XX gonadal dysgenesis and XY gonadal dysgenesis on the grounds that the phenotype is the same?) (t &#183; c)  buidhe  00:58, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Optimal coverage for rare disorders is tricky. Any described syndrome (that is actually a described syndrome, not the Impossible syndrome affair) can have an article, but NOPAGE applies. Total gonadal agenesis seems to fall below the NOPAGE line.
 * I'm thinking about the comparison of Ring chromosome, where we technically have a pile of redlinks that all 'could be' blue, but everything too rare to have a Unique guide is unlikely to be worth making one for. In particular, most comparably: ring chromosome X is on that list, but we cover it in Turner syndrome (I should go make that redirect once I've sent this) because making articles for different genotypes causing slightly-variant Turner phenotypes splits the information somewhat more than ideal. This follows we should merge 45,X/46,XY mosaicism back into Turner's, which I intend to do as soon as I finish the Turner's rewrite I abandoned halfway through, which should be done sometime this century.
 * I think there's a reasonably clear case that the three major X0/XX/XY gonadal dysgeneses rise above NOPAGE individually and rarer phenomena like full agenesis or other karyotypes are better covered centrally, though 'centrally' will depend on the article, e.g. partial and mosaic forms of Turner's should be covered in the parent article. (Ironically, the thing that disrupted my rewrite was someone adding huge amounts of information about a variant Turner's karyotype.) <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 06:46, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Absence of gonads isn't a genetic or chromosonal condition, so it's not going to have a unique entry. Are you saying that the agenesis should be merged into dysgenesis articles by karyotype? I can agree with that for XX, but gonadal agenesis in XY individuals is 1/20,000, so significantly more common than XX dysgenesis and agenesis combined, and the phenotype is not similar to XY gonadal dysgenesis. I'm also not sure about your proposal to merge X0/XY into Turner syndrome. There are plenty of sources, it was one of the first intersex conditions to be discovered, and the phenotype and management are very different from Turner syndrome. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  02:32, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Your DYK nomination
Hello! Your submission of In the Land of Invented Languages 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) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Sionk (talk) 22:57, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Dark Archives
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Dark Archives you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Premeditated Chaos -- Premeditated Chaos (talk) 14:41, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

My first GA nomination.
Hello @Vaticidalprophet.

This is my first time doing a GA nomination and I am thinking of nominating the article Turkish Airlines Flight 452. I haven't contributed a lot to the article but I did fix some words within while reading the article. How can I begin the process? 🛧 Layah50♪ 🛪 ( 話す? 一緒に飛ぼう！  ) 15:46, 1 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi, thanks for your interest in GAN. I see that article was written by , who has recently retired but is still responding to their current GANs. I'd recommend asking them about the article first and if they'd be interested in someone else nominating it -- usually nominators are the person who wrote most of the article. They might, for instance, have wanted to add more information before nominating it, so it'd be good to find out first if there's anything missing from the article or anything they planned to do with it, or if they don't think it should be a GA for whatever reason. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 15:55, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Ok! I'll ask Styyx and see what he thinks. Thanks! 🛧 Layah50♪ 🛪 ( 話す? 一緒に飛ぼう！  ) 16:00, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Vacation
Hey, Vaticidalprophet and. I just wanted to let you know that I'll be on vacation for the next 7-8 days and won't be active on Wikipedia, except for responding to open GA reviews. This means I won't be able to help with the Backlog drive for now. — Golden  call me maybe? 21:26, 3 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Have a good holiday, -- thanks so much for all you've done, and I look forward to seeing you again soon. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 00:13, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Selected anniversaries
Hi. I just wanted to say thanks for your hard work at Selected anniversaries, I've been away for a week or so and without your help the OTD section would not have been rotated each day. I should be able to look at OTD a bit more now but it would be a great help if you could pop in now and then. Many thanks - Dumelow (talk) 09:40, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of In the Land of Invented Languages
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article In the Land of Invented Languages you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Fritzmann2002 -- Fritzmann2002 (talk) 02:41, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of In the Land of Invented Languages
The article In the Land of Invented Languages you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:In the Land of Invented Languages and Talk:In the Land of Invented Languages/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Fritzmann2002 -- Fritzmann2002 (talk) 14:41, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Dark Archives
The article Dark Archives you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Dark Archives for comments about the article, and Talk:Dark Archives/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Premeditated Chaos -- Premeditated Chaos (talk) 22:03, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Edward V. Boursaud
Hi Vaticidalprophet, I wanted to let you know that I have decided to promote Edward V. Boursaud to GA status after some modifications were made. I do believe I've done everything right but would definitely appreciate another set of eyes on it in case there is something I missed! M4V3R1CK32 (talk) 01:41, 8 August 2023 (UTC)


 * It looks excellent, -- thank you for your work! I'm especially heartened to see the attention you paid to image licensing; it's an obtuse topic and one many reviewers engage little with (including myself, simply on the basis that many calls are hard to make). I do think you were a little stricter than ideal on interpreting 'focused' regarding his family history -- as Ergo Sum noted, these are frequent practice in biographies when sufficient information exists on it -- but reviews are a tricky balance to get a feel for, and many newer reviewers waver somewhat between strictness and leniency before determining the right place to go. Certainly you have significant potential in this area, and I look forward to seeing how you evolve as a reviewer. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 01:47, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I appreciate that! The balance is definitely tricky. I wonder if the points I raised about the upbringing would be better suited for an FA review; maybe I'm just getting too in the weeds.
 * I have a smidge of experience with image rights stuff in my off-Wiki life, so I feel a bit more comfortable with that, but certainly do not claim to be an expert. Thanks for looking it over! M4V3R1CK32 (talk) 02:10, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

archaeology, anthropology, and interstellar communication
Vaticidalprophet, i had two quick questions regarding this blurb for this article. what do you think about presenting the sentence in this format? admittedly, such explicit numbering isn't generally done in tfa blurbs, though i suspect that this is because sentences in tfa blurbs tend to not be unusually long. the construction has been used before at tfa, as seen here. by the way, i don't know if the pdf file is in the public domain, but if it is, it might be useful to upload it to commons. dying (talk) 09:12, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
 * should "human-alien communication" be "human–alien communication", to conform with mos:enbetween?
 * i admittedly had trouble parsing the second sentence in this blurb. the sentence is longer than usual, and contains a four-element list, with the third element containing the word "and".  i could not think of a good way to significantly reword this without sounding overly repetitive, but had wondered if it would clarify things by explicitly numbering the elements of the list."Its four sections explore (1) the history of SETI as a field; (2) archaeological comparisons for human-alien communication, such as the difficulties of translating ancient languages; (3) the inferential gap between humans and aliens, and the consequences this would have for communication and trade; and (4) the potential nature of alien intelligences."


 * I'm happy with that second phrasing -- it's unorthodox, but works very well here :) I...try not to get too bogged down in MOS dashes, so do what thou wilt. The PDF is already on Commons. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 09:22, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
 * oh, you are right! silly me, i had forgotten that searches on commons no longer provide pdf results by default.  thanks for correcting me.  anyway, i've  the blurb.  thanks for addressing these points!  dying (talk) 11:15, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

DYK for In the Land of Invented Languages
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:45, 6 August 2023 (UTC) 00:02, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for an interesting one! And also for your work on OTD, - today's - with the triumph of music over military - is uplifting! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:51, 9 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Thanks so much to you as well, Gerda! :) I've really been enjoying OTD, and plan to get back into it soon. I hoped you'd like that one. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 22:25, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I reviewed it for FAC years ago, and was happy to see it again. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:36, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Singing your praises further for the TFA today, your first I understand, Archaeology, Anthropology, and Interstellar Communication, introduced: "This is kind of a 'curiosity FAC', looking to see how it goes. It's gone through GAN and pre-FAC PR during my last period of heavy activity, which was...some time ago ... - Archaeology, Anthropology, and Interstellar Communication is a 2014 essay collection on an unusual little topic -- the sociological and anthropological consequences of human-alien interactions. It's interesting reading, and freely available as a NASA publication. It's also a fascinating microcosm of its own subject (the perils of communication across long inferential distances); much of its claim to notability comes from news reports misinterpreting it as an 'ancient aliens'-type claim of prehistoric monuments being made by aliens. In an era where large language models have reignited the question of how to interact with non-human intelligences, it feels particularly resonant."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:30, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Today, my focus is on Renata Scotto, after days of updating. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:33, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Today is Debussy's birthday. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:40, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
 * This too shall pass. - Ten years ago on 28 August, I heard a symphony, with a heavy heart because of the pending decision in WP:ARBINFOBOX, and not worried about my future here but Andy's. - It passed, and I could write the DYK about calling to dance, not battle, and Andy could write the DYK mentioning about peace and reconciliation, - look. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:55, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

DYK for The Wicked Prince
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Blockchain Chicken Farm
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Blockchain Chicken Farm you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Kusma -- Kusma (talk) 10:41, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Occult America
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Occult America you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Golden -- Golden (talk) 14:22, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

Projects tracking
I've created a subpage to make it easier for my colleagues and I to keep track of our projects that require reviews and comments. Feel free to add there anything that you would like reviewed or commented on, and it will appear on my user page. — Golden  talk 14:56, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

Sandringham railway line
Hi @Vaticidalprophet. One article that was being review, Sandringham railway line, was recently quick-failed by a user. Is this a valid quick-fail? They never allowed me time to fix the mistakes (which I was willing to do) and never allowed discussion before quick-failing it. Just wanted to double check with you. Thanks HoHo3143 (talk) 09:47, 14 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Deciding the borderlands of "valid quickfail that could've been full-reviewed" and "should've been full-reviewed" is tricky -- virtually any quickfail could have been full-reviewed, especially given how low some people's readings of GACR are, but there's a difference between "theoretically possible" and "practically possible". I didn't necessarily anticipate a quickfail for that article, but I'm not sure it's outside the realms of reason, especially given the undercited sections (I have the sense you do a lot of "write from the sources, then misplace or mix up the sources when citing them", given how many reviews have mentioned things being uncited or failing spotchecking when those things are easily verifiable with subject matter knowledge).
 * More broadly, these articles are tricky to review, because they require a decent knowledge of Melbourne public transit to assess the sourcing of in the first place given how common SPSes and other odd-looking sources are in the subject area, and to know what undercited content is verifiable. That's part of the reason they've all sat so long, and part of why the reviews for them are all over the place. Ultimately I agree that quickfail was in discretion -- it's a good idea to have all the citations in the right place before you nominate, for one. I don't think it's far from a place where it can be renominated and pass, though, once it's copyedited and those issues are fixed. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 10:53, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
 * @Vaticidalprophet thank you for this. I'll add this to my to do list for later this week before renominating it. I'll make sure to review the sourcing, beef up the history section, give it a quick copyedit, and review the feedback. Thanks for providing some good guidance. HoHo3143 (talk) 11:12, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
 * @Vaticidalprophet also I'm guessing that its lost its place in the articles that are over 90 days old table? HoHo3143 (talk) 11:14, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
 * It will, but the list is getting short enough now that many more articles off it are being reviewed, so don't get disheartened! I also hope to run another drive before the end of the year, so even if it gets missed here there should be plenty of opportunities for it to be reviewed in the future. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 11:17, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
 * @Vaticidalprophet hopefully we do have another drive- they are great especially as I pump a lot of articles out and they don't get reviewed for a while (and admittedly I don't review enough other articles). Thank you for running the drive and all the effort you've put in. HoHo3143 (talk) 07:06, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Occult America
The article Occult America you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Occult America for comments about the article, and Talk:Occult America/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Golden -- Golden (talk) 15:42, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

OTD Birth/deaths
Hi Vaticidalprophet: on two dates, Aug 31 and Sept 1, you deleted the people listed in born/died on that date in 2022 instead of returning thhem to the eligible birth/death list. For example, Robert Bacher, was listed as born on August 31, 2022, but was removed in this edit. Is there a reason why 2022 entries are deleted instead of put back into eligible? I know in previous years there were articles reused in OTD; has consensus for this changed? Z1720 (talk) 19:47, 15 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Consensus hasn't changed. Any flatly-removed entries can be restored to eligible, I'm just still getting in the hang of it and it's logistically trickier to copy entries than override them so I don't remember it all the time. (Also, I barely use the eligibility section except when the Wikidata queries don't work -- which the events one has been sketchy lately, but I don't think I've ever used it for the b/ds -- so it doesn't stand out to me the way e.g. the images do, so I don't remember it.) <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 23:59, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
 * The Wikidata queries sounds interesting, and a great way to find more names to feature on OTD. How do you do the queries? I'll go back into the OTD archives and ensure the eligible names are restored for future years. I like using this list for when I swap names when one is ineligible due to cn tags or no citation for the birth/death day. I am also going through the FA and GA lists and adding names to the eligible lists to build up the roster of names for OTD that better reflects geographic and notability diversity. If you find any interesting names to add to OTD from the Wikidata queries, please add them to the lists so that they might be added in future years. Thanks! Z1720 (talk) 14:48, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of In the Land of Invented Languages
The article In the Land of Invented Languages you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:In the Land of Invented Languages for comments about the article, and Talk:In the Land of Invented Languages/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Fritzmann2002 -- Fritzmann2002 (talk) 20:23, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

You've got mail!
Vanamonde (Talk) 16:30, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Request for a pointer
Hi, I'm and I'm participating in the August GAN backlog drive. I'm currently reviewing Harold Kushner (review) and have a general sense that this might end up being a quick fail. I plan on rounding out my initial review, but having completed a review of the sourcing, I've found a number of not-quite-revdel copyright matters and more than a handful of coverage deficiencies. Would you mind providing me with your perspective on whether this is in valid QF territory or if I should leave it open with the hope of broad-spectrum revisions occurring in the next ten days? Thank you! ~ Pbritti (talk) 19:16, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

FAR
Hey, wondering if you meant to say "Hog Farm's comments" rather than "SandyGeorgia's comments" at Featured article review/Voluntary Human Extinction Movement/archive1? All I said was "Yikes", which is about all I can say there ... for reasons best left to history but known to many. Sandy Georgia (Talk)  21:27, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination
Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Paul Needham (librarian) at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in step III of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with db-g7, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 09:36, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Blockchain Chicken Farm
The article Blockchain Chicken Farm you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Blockchain Chicken Farm and Talk:Blockchain Chicken Farm/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Kusma -- Kusma (talk) 08:41, 19 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Getting to it very soon, ! :) I noticed the part about the spotcheck, btw -- I'll prioritize quoting that source before getting to the rest of the prose tweaks, but yeah, it's in there. I still have this on my radar, just alongside everything else atm. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 09:00, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I guess running the backlog drive is quite a bit of work (thanks for doing that! From my not very informed perspective, it looks like it is going well). I will be away for a few days from middle of next week and don't know how responsive I can be, so I'm currently trying to push my open reviews towards the finish line if possible. —Kusma (talk) 09:18, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Blockchain Chicken Farm
The article Blockchain Chicken Farm you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Blockchain Chicken Farm for comments about the article, and Talk:Blockchain Chicken Farm/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Kusma -- Kusma (talk) 15:41, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

CMC Ludhiana
Was that really a quick fail? After the last GAN, I have re written the entire article extensively and expanded the article over 3 fold. Rather than making it a quick fail, you could've just kept it on hold since I spent last 1.5 months on that article. Page history will say that. All those abbreviations are bluelinked to the respective articles too. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 14:38, 24 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately, it was a QF (TPWs: if someone looks at Christian Medical College, Ludhiana and strongly disagrees with my take, I'm happy to reopen it, but I think the prose and breadth (both 3a and 3b) land pretty clearly QF). There are articles that have been quickfailed after over nine months in the queue; sometimes, unfortunately, significant work on an article still hasn't gotten it to GAN. I really recommend looking at other higher education GAs as I suggested. I have experience with writing GAs on technical subjects, and I've had it hammered into me a few times there myself that acronyms generally need defining in text as well. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 14:41, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Troika
Just to let you know, I fixed a lot of the issues you brought up in your Troika GA review. Paleface Jack (talk) 17:06, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you so much! I'm proud of what we've done, and it couldn't have been done without everyone's effort. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 01:28, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar gift

 * Thanks, Di! It's an interesting subject :) I have some more to work on in the topic area (John Stockton Hough being a redlink is a hilarious exhibit of recency bias), then I...have to get to the main article, I guess. That'll be a hell of a job. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 22:32, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

1978 smallpox outbreak in the United Kingdom
I'm curious about your edit summary here. I've never seen "died by suicide" described as ableist before and am interested what the thinking is. DeCausa (talk) 07:49, 4 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Certainly -- I've had the unfortunate opportunity to end up on this subject onwiki a few times recently.
 * There's a type of language which is heavily championed by people who are not themselves disabled or neurodivergent, but are some steps removed from those who are. Most commonly it's associated with relatives, particularly relatives who are strongly activist for their cause (that is, the cause of caregivers). Person-first language is a major example, and like 'died by suicide' is used by many external publications and style guides, though they're sort of on opposite trajectories (the former is declining while the latter is increasing). The premise of person-first language in the intentional, going-out-of-your-way context specifically -- I'm making that distinction because many conditions have it as the obvious and natural phrasing (you wouldn't say 'cerebral palsics') -- is that a disability or neurodivergence is an excisable concept, that someone is not 'autistic' or 'schizophrenic/schizotypal' but 'having autism' or 'having schizophrenia/schizotypal personality disorder' as a clearly differentiatable idea from the 'real person' beneath. Examples chosen because in neither case is this generally agreed with by either the people so affected or the highest-quality research literature, but one has significant self-advocate pushback against person-first language and the other doesn't; this is one of my areas of offwiki scholarship, so No Further Comment. This is a tempting thing to believe for caregivers and other associates, but its relationship with some underlying Truth is...complex.
 * "Died by suicide" is similarly associate-language rather than direct-language, and bears the unfortunate corollary that there's no possible way it couldn't be, as we can't ask dead people their opinion. The problem with it becomes apparent when you consider its close associate "died from suicide" (and even more blatant variants, such as "died from depression", "died from schizophrenia", etc). This language inherently conceptualizes suicide as a complication or a consequence, something that "just happens" in the process of a defined disease state, divorced from the intentional act. This is problematic for suicidology and, most seriously, suicide prevention. Suicide is closer to the opposite of that -- it is in most cases preventable and impulsive, frequently with clear environmental and contextual triggers. A language that absolves the environmental triggers of suicide and reduces it to a "cause of death" or "part of a process" is an understandable one for grieving and coming to terms with a death, and I don't begrudge people anything they do grieving. (Today, while working on Duolingo, I remembered a conversation on Discord with Nosebagbear about the language I'm working on and just stared at the wall for a bit.) But it's an exceptionally bad language for considering why suicides happen, or for preventing them, or for discussing them in a broad psychological and sociological context.
 * The intersection of these language choices, which are often made by the same people, show up the problem. The concept that is presented is of some clearly external 'force', unrelated to either the individual or their surroundings, that causes a clear 'disease process' culminating in a death like any terminal illness. This is not a useful way to discuss these concepts, nor is it an accurate one. It is also one that absolves environmental contributions, which is understandable in the context it originates but not helpful to...pretty much anything else.
 * A lot of these choices come out of a prevalent misunderstanding of stigma. There's a fairly common idea that disability- and neurodivergence-related stigma are based in an etiological misunderstanding, i.e. if one presents things as "caused by a specific disease" rather than just being "crazy" or "weird" for no reason, this will decrease stigma. Evidence is sparse, but suggests this doesn't actually help, and may make things worse (most studies relating to it are fairly small-sample primary studies that go "huh, the biomedical group did worse" and look into it no further). These understandings are again popular amongst caregivers and associates, because they permit a very external-locus understanding of mental distress and incapacitation that is understandably appealing to people in that situation, so they're championed by many groups and societies that have significantly more power to affect discourse than self-advocacy groups do.
 * Another complex issue, related to the external-locus/othering one, is that these phrasings are unnatural -- that is, people do not use them in regular speech. (I remember venting to a non-editor friend about a "committed/died by suicide" dispute, where she said "died by suicide" was probably the better term...then, shortly after, used "committed suicide" in natural conversation.) Person-first language has very few non-stigmatized-characteristic parallels ("person with marriedness"), and in the contexts where natural language allows for both constructs they're generally used interchangeably ("person with green eyes" vs "green-eyed person"). When people are requested to exclusively use person-first language regardless of the sentence structure, they need to intentionally go out of their way to do so, increasing the degree to which disabled and neurodivergent people must be treated as separate 'othered' categories. "Died by suicide" is similarly a highly unusual term that contradicts most people's intuitions of how to refer to a cause of death (EEng made the "murder by death" parallel, which is about how I feel too), so going out of your way to mentally find-replace "committed/died by" requires intentionally understanding people who commit suicide as a special Other group unlike "normal people". This sort of euphemism that actually marginalizes the relevant group is widespread throughout disability issues, because disability is one of very few groups where people not directly affected have inherently more power to comment and advocate than people directly affected; self-advocacy for such groups is really hard, way harder than it is for just about anything else, and things that "seem" good but actually perpetuate the idea of such people as Wrong/Other are way more memetically powerful.
 * Finally, in the context of how we discuss suicide on Wikipedia in particular, there's another issue of appropriateness. "Died by suicide" bears the specific -- problematic -- implication of "progress of a state". I've already given my thoughts on this. But Wikipedia is an unusual place, a living document discussing people who commit suicide for a far wider range of reasons than e.g. a specific suicide charity will, and attempts to implement "died by suicide" terminology run headfirst into this. I had the dispute recently on an article I worked on where people wanted to use "died by" language to refer to a suicide that was (without making too many sweeping and unfalsifiable comments) most directly related to negative media coverage of the subject. It's really inappropriate to use such an implication in such a case, bringing with it the idea that "killing yourself after being castigated by the national media" is a progression of an existing state. This is also an issue in the article here; he killed himself because of a specific incident.
 * This is a subject on which people have a lot of opinions (sorry for the wall of text!), and it's really, imo, the kind that can never and will never be resolved by "editing articles with a long-existing use to go the other way". My ideal MOS outcome for it would be a PRESERVE-type "do what you want when writing, let existing articles stand" -- suicide terminology of all things is the absolute last thing you want people getting into arguments about, because anyone who has an opinion on it has so for such reasons that it can't help but blow up into emotional firestorms. The current MOS is...written in a way I do not believe is particularly useful for preventing emotional firestorms. (I've seen it cause at least one.) As it stands, there are a lot of people going around replacing all uses of "committed" to "died by" -- good-faith replacements, motivated by the sincere and understandable belief it's "the right term" -- and a whole lot more pushback if you change it back. I could tell from both the edit history and from having read through that fascinating article before that the change was very recent from a longstanding use of "committed suicide", so I went for a phrasing that didn't use either to try avoid yet-another-firestorm. But there's a lot going on in this subject, directly related to both my 'real' research interests and some of my editing areas, and it's one that's been playing out across the project a few times lately. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 08:38, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I can't say I really understand your objection - but I will say that, in my opinion, "committed" shouldn't be used as it's just a hangover from - and is more appropriate to - when it was a criminal offence. Anyway, thanks for answering. DeCausa (talk) 10:19, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Just one other point specifically on that article. "Death by suicide" is a legal cause of death in the UK and that was what was declared by the coroner in that case. That trumps MOS and other considerations. I won't revert you but others may, on the basis that the legal position is no longer reflected. DeCausa (talk) 12:32, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

WikiCup 2023 September newsletter
The fourth round of the competition has finished, with anyone scoring less than 673 points being eliminated. It was a high scoring round with all but one of the contestants who progressed to the final having achieved an FA during the round. The highest scorers were


 * Epicgenius, with 2173 points topping the scores, gained mainly from a featured article, 38 good articles and 9 DYKs. He was followed by
 * Sammi Brie, with 1575 points, gained mainly from a featured article, 28 good articles and 50 good article reviews. Close behind was
 * Thebiguglyalien, with 1535 points mainly gained from a featured article, 15 good articles, 26 good article reviews and lots of bonus points.

Between them during round 4, contestants achieved 12 featured articles, 3 featured lists, 3 featured pictures, 126 good articles, 46 DYK entries, 14 ITN entries, 67 featured article candidate reviews and 147 good article reviews. Congratulations to our eight finalists and 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 and within 24 hours of the end of the final. 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. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.

I will be standing down as a judge after the end of the contest. I think the Cup encourages productive editors to improve their contributions to Wikipedia and I hope that someone else will step up to take over the running of the Cup. Sturmvogel 66 (talk), and Cwmhiraeth (talk)

DYK for Blockchain Chicken Farm
RoySmith (talk) 00:03, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for participating in the August 2023 GAN backlog drive
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:10, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Oh wow -- thanks so much! I'll certainly take 'first and only' :) Looks like it was designed for...Latvian Wikipedia? That's one I've not interacted with much before. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 04:07, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

A delicious salad for you
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">

has given you a fresh salad! Salads promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day a little better. Spread the goodness of salads by sending one to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Bon Appétit! This is a salad for your hard work across the project and because salads are supposed to be good for you! Spread the goodness of salad by adding {{subst:Givesalad}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Bruxton (talk) 23:19, 9 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Thanks, ! Very appreciated :) <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 04:13, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Sims 2: University
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Sims 2: University you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Vrxces -- Vrxces (talk) 12:42, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Sims 2: Nightlife
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Sims 2: Nightlife you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Premeditated Chaos -- Premeditated Chaos (talk) 21:22, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Sims 2: Open for Business
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Sims 2: Open for Business you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Epicgenius -- Epicgenius (talk) 00:21, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Barry Windsor-Smith
Hi. Please do not add material that is not supported by the sources you cite, as with this edit to Barry Windsor-Smith. Since you've accumulated a considerable edit count since 2016, I assume you know by now that Wikipedia requires material to be supported by the sources cited for it, and The Guardian article you cited makes no mention of Monsters being an auteur project, nor that Windsor-Smith wrote, drew, inked, and lettered each page, nor that this is unusual in the industry. Thank you. Nightscream (talk) 18:06, 14 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Sorry, -- wrong Guardian article! I'll swap it out for the one that actually cites that. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 18:07, 14 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Okay. Cool beans. No worries. :-) Nightscream (talk) 18:08, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Occult America
—Kusma (talk) 12:14, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Sims 2: Nightlife
The article The Sims 2: Nightlife you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Sims 2: Nightlife for comments about the article, and Talk:The Sims 2: Nightlife/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Premeditated Chaos -- Premeditated Chaos (talk) 23:02, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

DYK for List of books bound in human skin
—Kusma (talk) 12:02, 16 September 2023 (UTC) GalliumBot (talk • contribs) (he/it) 03:29, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Merging articles to list, test case: bus incidents
We recently discussed the process of merging stand-alone articles into more complete lists or otherwise covering several topics in one page. For a while I've been trying to clean up the backlog of short WP:NOTNEWS pages into something more organized, and I've compiled a list of bus incidents at my sandbox (sorted by size) which I think would be better suited as a List of bus incidents, with each one reduced down to 1–6 sentences. They're all essentially the same article, just with different levels of (excessive) detail and different time/place/casualties. I was wondering if you had any thoughts on this, particularly in regard to mass mergers and process. Thebiguglyalien ( talk ) 16:09, 18 September 2023 (UTC)


 * I've been aware to some degree of the NOTNEWS, uh...debate. The stubs (i.e. actual stubs, not start-classes) can reasonably be merged from just a coverage POV. The reasonably developed articles (I do not know that you and I define "excess detail" synonymously) I'd consider merges a negative, at least at this juncture. I'm currently involved in the opposite situation -- uncovering a bunch of unilateral merges for topics that can clearly have well-developed individual articles where the merges weren't even good (just going straight down in order, so the original poor articles have been combined into a single 6000-word Frankenstein's-monster article, several times over), so my general skepticism of merges of developed articles is even higher right now. Assuming the sorted-by-size cutoffs in that list are roughly accurate, everything from 2007 Bukit Gantang bus crash up seems better covered collectively, but I'd need a stronger argument below.
 * I want to make a distinction that gets lost a lot in discussions that invoke PRIMARYNEWS, which WAID has talked a fair bit about (seriously, ask her about this, not me -- the fact every discussion about this I've seen is the two of you disagreeing is exactly why you should), which is that the "secondary" clause in GNG was 1. added and 2. defended against all comers by an editor who considered all news sources secondary and defended this against all comers just as much. I'm not sold that combining literalist GNG with a what-the-term-actually-means understanding of primary sourcing is the correct outcome. (I'm even less sold about this for independent sourcing, but we're better at admitting that "independence" is a lie-to-children in that sense.)
 * This is different to the other element we've talked about where you shouldn't be using PRIMARYNEWS for anything good -- I am fairly hardline on the "no, many or even most subjects that can have standalone articles can't have quality-assessed articles" position, because the alternative is that articles like this get passed. An article like that is a valuable addition to a reference work, but it's not a 99.3rd percentile article. (Many articles that are 99.3rd percentile articles don't pass GAN, but that's because, imo, people underrecognize that the main reason GACR-as-written is relatively flexible is to admit very high-quality articles that don't jot-and-tittle do everything right. The alternative is, as Carrite puts it, "a lightweight process of homogenization by Manual of Style-obsessed copyeditors on the make".) I think there's a point somewhere down that list where I'm willing to say, well, I'm not sure a list is actually the best way to handle that, and I don't think it's written like a newspaper article, has original reporting, or focuses on celebrity gossip, and even though it's too narrow and primary-sourced to be a high-quality article it makes a legitimate claim to being an addition to a reference work that should be covered in this way rather than a different way.
 * But you certainly have mergeable things there, and those ones can/should be merged, and the list should be encouraged towards people looking to cover those subjects if the articles would reasonably turn out that way. The person you want to talk to about it most isn't me -- it's the people who've been persistently disagreeing with you that this is a problem that you need to solve. I try mostly to watch rather than participate in these discussions, but I've certainly watched them. There is one pattern across every tense discussion on every part of the project between all possible participants, including every time I've seen something not happen when it clearly should've, and it's the part where the same person keeps trying the same thing. There are...other elements of the GEOLAND discussion I could point that out in, not to put too fine a point on it. If you want this to actually happen, you need to work it out with the people who you haven't convinced it's a workable idea, and see their objections, and see what compromises either of you can make for the encyclopedia. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 17:09, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the thought-out reply. I'll chew on this for a bit. Thebiguglyalien  ( talk ) 19:08, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Tropical cyclones in OTD
Thanks for your creditable work in refreshing the OTD subpages with newer articles! One thing I would remark on is the use of articles about tropical cyclones (hurricanes, typhoons, etc.): I've noticed that they've recently been scheduled by date of dissipation. While it's not incorrect to do so, dissipation is really just a meteorological curiosity and quite insignificant for a historical anniversary. I'd argue that an article on a cyclone should instead feature on the date that the cyclone made its most significant landfall, which is almost always the most noteworthy event associated with it. (An exception might be made for very intense cyclones: the date of their peak intensity could also qualify.) This respects rule 1 of WP:OTDRULES, which states that the event should be the most, or one of the most, important events associated with that article. — <span style="font-family:'Linux Libertine','Georgia','Times',serif"> RAVEN PVFF   · talk  · 17:06, 18 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Interesting timing, I just got this message while typing out another :) Yes -- I've been thinking about the hurricanes a lot. They've been by date-of-dissipation lately mostly because that's what the Wikidata queries grab (they also grab start dates, but those are usually relevant to July/August, not September/October). My bigger qualm with the hurricanes is that they get essentially negligible views -- in many cases worse than the births/deaths. I've been trying to schedule as few of them as possible accordingly, but...well, if you look at the queries, options are limited. It's markedly harder to sort them by landfall dates, but there might be a specific query that does that. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 17:11, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I see, yes – I wasn't sure how you were compiling events, but that makes sense if you've been using Wikidata. I feel that the easiest way to schedule cyclone articles by significant landfall is by skimming the article for the right date, since Wikidata probably doesn't contain that sort of information. To the other point: I think keeping cyclone articles would be worthwhile even if they don't gather many page views, as it's a nice way of broadening the scope of events included.
 * But, now that I think of it, some of the work has already been done: Portal:Tropical cyclones/Anniversaries and its subpages list a few events for every calendar date. I believe these sets were put together many years ago (and are definitely missing recent cyclones), and I'm not sure whether any quality control was exercised in selecting the articles to be featured, but they could prove to be useful sources for OTD blurbs. — <span style="font-family:'Linux Libertine','Georgia','Times',serif"> RAVEN PVFF   · talk  · 07:35, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Your JA nomination of Tetrasomy X
The Tetrasomy X article has been imported to WikiJournal Preprints/Tetrasomy X (per WP:JAN). Whenever you're ready to proceed:


 * 1) Fill in the  https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/WikiJournal_Preprints/Tetrasomy X?veaction=edit  at the top (often easiest in VisualEditor)
 * 2) Fill in the authorship declaration form to submit as ready for external peer review to be organised.

Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments. T.Shafee(Evo &#38; Evo)talk 12:12, 19 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Additionally, apologies for the delay from me missing this and thank you to @OhanaUnited for pinging me to remind me.

T.Shafee(Evo &#38; Evo)talk 12:12, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

DYK for The Sims 2: University
—Kusma (talk) 12:03, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Barbara Bush FAC
I'm sorry to bother you about this, but I took your advice and nominated the Barbara Bush article for FAC, and it's having trouble finding reviewers. Since you're already somewhat familiar with the article, I was wondering if you had any further thoughts on it or interest in commenting on it. Thebiguglyalien ( talk ) 01:49, 22 September 2023 (UTC)


 * I was just thinking about that one when I saw it there! I wasn't sure if you were interested in me taking another look or not at first, but I'll put up a header. I saw the article expanded a fair bit between GAN and FAC, so I'll look through it again. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 01:51, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I owe you one! And yeah, I found a very recent, very detailed biography of her, and it was a game changer for the article. Thebiguglyalien  ( talk ) 02:04, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Hey, I wanted to check in on this FAC. I'm sorry for badgering about it, but it's time sensitive at FAC, especially since I'm hoping to get another one through before the end of the WP:WIKICUP. To make up for it I can go ahead and do a quick (but fair, of course) review of your FAC or FLC if either needs one. Thebiguglyalien  ( talk ) 18:04, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Fair enough -- I'll be busy for a few days, so I was hoping to get a good chunk written up today anyway, because I could see it dropping down the list. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 03:17, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you, and sorry again; I hate pestering like this, but it's taken longer to find reviewers than I had hoped. Thebiguglyalien  ( talk ) 03:24, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Paul Needham (librarian)
Z1720 (talk) 00:02, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

DYK for The Sims 2: Nightlife
RoySmith (talk) 00:04, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Promotion of Dark Archives

 * Great achievement, Vaticidalprophet. Congratulations.--Ipigott (talk) 05:49, 28 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Happy to see this. Congratulations! —  Golden  talk 06:21, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much to the both of you! I have a couple more things to nominate soon, hopefully -- deciding which might be best to nom first. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 06:22, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of XXXYY syndrome
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article XXXYY syndrome you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of RoySmith -- RoySmith (talk) 23:40, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Dark Archives scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 4 November 2023. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Today's featured article/November 4, 2023, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/November 2023. I suggest that you watchlist Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:21, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

The promoter of the month award for you! (September)
Feel free to pass this onto the next person, or, I'm happy to do it myself :) theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 08:13, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

DYK for The Sims 2: Open for Business
—Kusma (talk) 00:02, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Elisabeth Geleerd, 1934.png
Thanks for uploading File:Elisabeth Geleerd, 1934.png. 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) 02:12, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Lightburst (talk) 04:49, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Sims 2: Open for Business
The article The Sims 2: Open for Business you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Sims 2: Open for Business for comments about the article, and Talk:The Sims 2: Open for Business/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Epicgenius -- Epicgenius (talk) 15:02, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

DYK
Thanks for your enquiry about the Neilson article. I didn’t withdraw it to get it moving; that’s like stamping your feet and holding your breath to get what you want, and I don’t think DYK should respond to that sort of tactic. It’s withdrawn.

Rather, the episode with the section 54 article confirmed my impression that DYK is generally interested in US articles. Got an article about a US radio or tv station? On DYK. Skyscrapers in New York? Ditto. Theatre in New York? Ditto. US politicians? US sports figures? Ditto, ditto. Article about the role of the monarch in Canada? Boooring. Only Canadians would be interested in that. Thank heavens there was an article about a US day-care to make it to the front page of Wikipedia this week. That’s the kind of US trivia favoured by DYK.

Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 15:32, 5 October 2023 (UTC)


 * As a non-American myself, I understand the perception (NLH is also non-American and writes about the US markedly less than I do, if that changes your opinion any). I'm sorry to see you go; DYK direly needs more everything, and especially more non-American articles. I'd like to talk it out with you if you're willing, but I'm insanely busy the next few days, and I understand if you aren't. I tend to think we need a wider discussion on the very-recent practice of threatening to fail articles for interestingness when they've already been approved, which I seriously doubt has any sort of DYK-wide consensus. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 21:02, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi Vaticicalprophet, sorry for the long delay in responding. I'd like to thank you for your encouraging words.
 * Unfortunately, I was so disheartened by the Section 54 episode that I WP:DISENGAGED from DYK entirely. Today was the first day that I went back and looked at it and the John Neilson article.  Still very dissatisfied by the outcome.  I predicted to myself that if John Neilson ever passed the unmentioned, purely subjective, "interesting" test, it would be for the paper sales. Only Canadians would be interested in a leading Canadian political figure from the formative period of our parliamentary system, and his role in the political evolution of the two linguistic communities, so that wouldn't make the front page of Wikipedia.
 * I continue to work on articles dealing with Canadian politics and politicians of the mid-19th century, but have not submitted them to DYK, because of the undefined "interesting" test. Here's a few of them, if you're interested (there's that word again).
 * Denis-Benjamin Viger
 * Étienne Parent
 * John Simpson (Lower Canada politician)
 * André Jobin (work in progress)
 * Double Shuffle (Canadian political episode)
 * The four bios are upgrades of existing articles, but would have met the 5x expansion for DYK. Personally, I think there's a lot in each of them, but if accepted by DYK, would likely be for some trivial point.
 * The Double Shuffle is all my own work. I mentioned it to Schwede and he encouraged me to submit it to DYK, but I told him I had no intention to do so.
 * By the way, I really enjoyed Dark Archives! Well-done!
 * Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 14:43, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
 * PS - I don't have a cite, but several months ago, I saw an article about a mathematical formula rejected in the DYK process, because it wasn't "interesting" except to mathematicians. I guess DYK doesn't want to appeal to mathematicians who read Wikipedia, or encourage mathematicians to write articles for Wikipedia.  Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 15:05, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

DYK for XXXYY syndrome
theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 00:02, 9 October 2023 (UTC) GalliumBot (talk • contribs) (he/it) 03:27, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

DYK for The Sims 2: Pets
Z1720 (talk) 01:58, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Congratulations to another fine DYK, and a featured list, and a well-deserved DYK award! - I came, however, to find out why happened, which looks to me as promotion of a hook that was not in the nomination, so had no approval, with no trace of that change on the nomination's talk, for a user's first DYK ever? I don't want to raise attention at ERRORS or on DYK, but would like to know what I missed, perhaps. - I find her pin-ball playing not interesting at all, but why I ask here is the process rather than an individual hook. - I contemplate taking Reiner Goldberg to GA for a DYK, but am afraid a hook palatable for our broad readership will say that his voice was discovered at a birthday party. So perhaps better not ... - I'll make today's story about him now. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:10, 12 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Good to see you again, Gerda. I'm very unwell today (influenza or covid), so I'm having a little trouble thinking through a fever; I'll try to see what happened here. It looks to me that the hook was in the nomination? Template:Did you know nominations/Juana Summers shows it as the first one, which is also the only one Therapyisgood (who seems to have retired as of recently) reviewed according to his comments (For the original hook (didn't review any of the alts)) so the only promotable one. I don't recall making any edits to that hook, so it should be directly the same one, though it's possible someone else edited it later. I might be missing something myself, though -- like I said, I'm a little unclear at the moment. I hope you're well, or more well than myself :) <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 07:29, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry about your fever, and best wishes for recovery! Sorry also about my blindness. I looked only at the ALTs, - don't know why. Before coffee ... - bad excuse while true. I should have known better after all these years, but it tells me that keeping a distance to DYK has worked somehow ;) - Listen to music, perhaps, for recovery. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:11, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry about your fever, and best wishes for recovery! Sorry also about my blindness. I looked only at the ALTs, - don't know why. Before coffee ... - bad excuse while true. I should have known better after all these years, but it tells me that keeping a distance to DYK has worked somehow ;) - Listen to music, perhaps, for recovery. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:11, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Some more pics, and today's story is on a birthday, and the real DYK was already on that birthday --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:47, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Today, it's a place that inspired me, musings if you have time. My corner for memory and music has today a juxtaposition of what our local church choirs offer. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:33, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Towards the end of the month, I thought of Brian Bouldton, and his ways to compromise, - with musings about peace there, - feel free to join. Hevenu shalom aleichem. Today is Reformation Day, and I believe that reformation is a work in progress. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:13, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

DYK for The Sims 2: Bon Voyage
RoySmith (talk) 00:03, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

Four Award for Dark Archives
Thank you today for the article, introduced: "What do you think about, when you think about books bound in human skin? Some people think of the French Revolution, the rumoured revolutionary tanneries spreading in propaganda; others think of Nazi Germany, the same grotesque mass dehumanization as the supposed lampshades made from human skin; yet others think of serial killers, individual evil, one-off aberrations of a society that knows better. They're all wrong. The nineteenth-century fad of anthropodermic bibliopegy (I assure you that's what the author calls it) was a practice of respected doctors, high-profile and high-status men acting with the approval of their peers and doing things they never doubted the virtue of for a moment. Medical ethics is a recent creation, a historical aberration; even in the middle of the previous century it wasn't a given that medical school cadavers gave their consent beforehand. Earlier? Do what thou wilt."! -

I proudly remember having sung in an oratorio premiere seven years ago OTD. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:51, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

DYK for The Sims 2: Seasons
theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 00:02, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Neanderthals Rediscovered
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Neanderthals Rediscovered you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:00, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Neanderthals Rediscovered
The article The Neanderthals Rediscovered you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Neanderthals Rediscovered for comments about the article, and Talk:The Neanderthals Rediscovered/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:22, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Prep 5
Hi. With this edit, you knocked Template:Did you know nominations/Feel It (MJ Cole song) out of Prep 5. Was this deliberate? <u style="color:#00F">Laun <u style="color:#00F">chba <u style="color:#00F">ller 11:43, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Never mind, just saw it was readded to Prep 6. Sorry to bother you.-- <u style="color:#00F">Laun <u style="color:#00F">chba <u style="color:#00F">ller 11:45, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
 * No worries :) It seems to have been an edit conflict with both and myself pshaw-promoting at the same time (exact same second, maybe)? I moved it to p6 so it wouldn't fall in the void, and because I wasn't sure if PM was planning to promote more in other slots. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 12:00, 20 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Thanks so much, (and for your previous award, too!). I hope to get back into doing the same with OTD soon :) Thanks a ton for your work on it as well, by the way. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 17:58, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Wiccan Web
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Wiccan Web you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Epicgenius -- Epicgenius (talk) 01:02, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Sims 2: University
The article The Sims 2: University you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:The Sims 2: University for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Vrxces -- Vrxces (talk) 03:03, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

DYK nomination of No Easy Answers
Hello! Your submission of No Easy Answers 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) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Editør (talk) 13:12, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/Featured content
Think you said you were interested in writing some poems. I've set up the framework now. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.5% of all FPs. 09:09, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of No Easy Answers
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article No Easy Answers you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of UndercoverClassicist -- UndercoverClassicist (talk) 20:43, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Wiccan Web
The article The Wiccan Web you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Wiccan Web for comments about the article, and Talk:The Wiccan Web/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Epicgenius -- Epicgenius (talk) 18:23, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of No Easy Answers
The article No Easy Answers you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:No Easy Answers and Talk:No Easy Answers/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of UndercoverClassicist -- UndercoverClassicist (talk) 21:02, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Halloween award

 * Thanks, ! Couldn't have done it without your and everyone else's help. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 22:13, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

October 2023
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions appeared to be constructive and have been appreciated. Please take some time to nominate yourself for adminship. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. <b style="font-family: monospace; color:#E35BD8"> jp × g 🗯️</b> 19:44, 30 October 2023 (UTC)


 * I read the header and icon and got worried. Then I read the text and was even more worried :) Which is not "no". <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 00:22, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I second JPxG here - I think that you should probably consider RfA sometime soon; I think you'd do some pretty good work at WP:ERRORS and WP:DYK, IMHO. Btw nice work on the Halloween main page :) <span style="font-family:monospace,Courier;color:#414245">#prodraxis connect 17:33, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

DYK for .monster
RoySmith (talk) 00:02, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

DYK for The Wiccan Web
RoySmith (talk) 00:03, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Reply notification
I just wanted to let you know that I replied to you on Talk:XXXYY syndrome. I was the one who left a nonconstructive comment earlier, which you mentioned but did not directly reply to; I apologize for that comment. Wehpudicabok (talk) 01:55, 31 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I saw your comment (have the GAN page watchlisted). It deserves a very long reply that I may or may not write on any sane timeframe, but I'll do my best. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 01:59, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

DYK for The Sims 2: Apartment Life
theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 00:04, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

November 2023
Please continue making constructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute improvement and have been appreciated. If you would like to be nominated, please ask. Repeated helpfulness may result in the gain of administrative privileges. Thank you. <b style="font-family: monospace; color:#E35BD8"> jp × g 🗯️</b> 07:16, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

DYK for The Sims 2: FreeTime
theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 00:02, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

WikiCup 2023 November newsletter
The WikiCup is a marathon rather than a sprint and all those reaching the final round have been involved in the competition for the last ten months, improving Wikipedia vastly during the process. After all this hard work, BeanieFan11 has emerged as the 2023 winner and the WikiCup Champion. The finalists this year were:-


 * BeanieFan11 with 2582 points
 * Thebiguglyalien with 1615 points
 * Epicgenius with 1518 points
 * MyCatIsAChonk with 1012 points
 * BennyOnTheLoose with 974 points
 * AirshipJungleman29 with 673 points
 * Sammi Brie with 520 points
 * Unlimitedlead with 5 points

Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether they made it to the final round or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the competition, some of whom did very well. Wikipedia has benefitted greatly from the quality creations, expansions and improvements made, and the numerous reviews performed. All those who reached the final round will win awards. The following special awards will be made based on high performance in particular areas of content creation and review. Awards will be handed out in the next few days.


 * Unlimitedlead wins the featured article prize, for 7 FAs in total including 3 in round 2.
 * MyCatIsAChonk wins the featured list prize, for 5 FLs in total.
 * 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Lee Vilenski wins the featured topic prize, for a 6-article featured topic in round 4.
 * MyCatIsAChonk wins the featured picture prize, for 6 FPs in total.
 * BeanieFan11 wins the good article prize, for 75 GAs in total, including 61 in the final round.
 * Epicgenius wins the good topic prize, for a 41-article good topic in the final round.
 * LunaEatsTuna wins the GA reviewer prize, for 70 GA reviews in round 1.
 * MyCatIsAChonk wins the FA reviewer prize, for 66 FA reviews in the final round.
 * Epicgenius wins the DYK prize, for 49 did you know articles in total.
 * 🇺🇦 Muboshgu wins the ITN prize, for 46 in the news articles in total.

The WikiCup has run every year since 2007. With the 2023 contest now concluded, I will be standing down as a judge due to real life commitments, so I hope that another editor will take over running the competition. Please get in touch if you are interested. Next year's competition will hopefully begin on 1 January 2024. You are invited to sign up to participate in the contest; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors. It only remains to congratulate our worthy winners once again and thank all participants for their involvement! (If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.) Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:52, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

OTD
I saw your message on ERRORS, but thought that it would be better to bring the conversation here. Since you have several weeks already built, can you post the next couple of sets to Wikipedia as soon as possible? This allows other editors to do a second round of checks and ensure that the hooks meet Wikipedia's various MOS. I try to stay two weeks ahead of time, which was recommended by other OTD editors. Thanks! Z1720 (talk) 13:55, 6 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Zed, I've just built Nov 10-12. Much of what I have is piecemeal/notes, but I have piecemeal/notes surprisingly far out (I try to keep track of articles as I happen across them). I spent a lot of October either very busy or very sick, so fell behind. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 14:54, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * When I find a possible article for OTD, I add it to the eligible list on the date it would run. Then, if someone swaps the hooks before you, these entries can still be considered; more eligible options on an OTD date makes swapping hooks much quicker for me. Z1720 (talk) 15:03, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of No Easy Answers
The article No Easy Answers you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:No Easy Answers for comments about the article, and Talk:No Easy Answers/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of UndercoverClassicist -- UndercoverClassicist (talk) 19:22, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

No Easy Answers
Have gone ahead and promoted; everything left is either a matter of opinion or so trivial that it should be no bar to getting over the GA line. It's a really good article and does an excellent job with some tricky material; thank you for your forbearance and unfailingly patient, reasonable and intelligent responses throughout the review. Have put under North American history; I must admit to not knowing the GA categories so well (there are rather a lot of them!), so do let me know if there's a better one to which it can/should be moved.

PS: congratulations also on Marie Sophie Hingst; I was hugely impressed by your work there, and the article is a real credit to what Wikipedia can achieve. <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 19:23, 10 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the review and the praise! :) I plan to FAC that one in the short-medium term, but will look it back over and painstackingly title-case everything first. I'll check the GA categories -- nonfiction books are hard to categorize well at the best of times. Thanks as well for being patient with the time it takes for me to get reviews done. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 19:41, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Lady Six Monkey DYK
Hi, thank you for promoting the Lady Six Monkey DYK nomination to a preparation area! I just wanted to check in about the choice of hook. The reviewer and I had both been leaning toward the original suggested hook (the "Iliad of the Mixtec people" one), but it looks like the current version in the preparation area uses ALT1 (about the sacrifices). I'm happy to go with the ALT1 hook if you feel that it better meets the needs of DYK, but I just wanted to double-check and make sure that was an intentional choice. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 16:29, 13 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the query! It was -- I have a fair amount of experience with hook-promoting and have watched patterns in what hooks perform well. To lay out the thoughts here:
 * ALT0 is fairly difficult to parse for readers not already familiar with the context. Hooks that rely on pre-knowledge about history prior to the 20th (sometimes 19th) century unfortunately don't always do very well -- it'd be nice if they did, but reader bias is unfortunately a tricky factor to work around at DYK. There are some exceptions to this rule, but they tend to be about particularly major events. Hooks that list multiple names or have multiple 'moving parts' also tend to be weaker with audiences.
 * ALT1 is an extremely strong hook. My in-progress typology of DYK hooks uses the term "visionary" here -- hooks that have a strong, sharp, and inherently interesting idea.
 * I pay a lot of attention to nominator and reviewer comments when promoting. Generally I go with the preference that develops from the conversation, but some minority of the time will query this decision (if a previous hook was rejected) or pick another (if a minority-support hook was nonetheless not rejected), if strong DYK precedent implies it's the better choice. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 16:35, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
 * That makes sense, thank you for the explanation! ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 17:00, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

DYK for No Easy Answers
theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 00:02, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

AfD
Sorry if I jumped the gun with the Fan article nomination. I saw significant support for deletion at BLP/N and thought it was best to proceed rather than risking an appearance on the main page. Thank you for your scrutiny of the article and I hope your exams go well! Fences &amp;  Windows  00:40, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

DYK for The Neanderthals Rediscovered
theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 00:02, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of XXXYY syndrome
The article XXXYY syndrome you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:XXXYY syndrome for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of RoySmith -- RoySmith (talk) 02:58, 20 November 2023 (UTC)


 * I saw the fail,, and also that the way it was failed didn't generate a notif. While I don't agree with either the 2O reason (the sources use "male" and are what we should follow here, not editor opinion) or the separate fail reason, GAN as a process means interacting with people whose opinions on an article aren't one's own, and sometimes that means reviews don't pass. It's a good thing to get used to, if nothing else. I'll renom the article at some point, but I'm very burned out on it. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 03:07, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Huh, checking, the unusual way it was failed isn't why it didn't generate a notif -- the bot just wasn't working. I assumed the odd method that'd been used to fail it hadn't generated a notification and that you added it manually. Sorry for the ping. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 03:09, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * It's also interesting that the fail message came from me. It was really  who failed it, but I guess to the bot it looked like I still owned the review.  I see this is also under discussion at WT:GAN.  As I mentioned, all I was really looking for in my 2O request was clarity about whether using the word "male" was appropriate, but unfortunately I didn't make that clear in my request.  I'm sorry this spun out of control. RoySmith (talk) 15:52, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I initially put the article's status on hold for discussion, expecting the nominating editor to either write the missing sections or provide justification for their absence. However, upon reading your disagreement, I decided it would be best to fail the nomination so that you can proceed in your preferred manner. Although I still believe there are essential sections missing in the article, there is a possibility that if the nominating editor re-nominates, they may find a different reviewer who considers it suitable for Good Article (GA) status.
 * To find a subject matter expert more effectively, it would be better to personally contact individuals who have contributed to related articles rather than simply asking for a second opinion and waiting indefinitely.
 * I had similar experience: despite my efforts in reaching out through Wikiproject Medicine and relevant anatomy discussions as well as using an expert opinion request template, I faced difficulties finding an expert in cardiology; eventually, I found success when personally approaching a Wikipedia user who identified himself as a cardiologist during a discussion on his user page.
 * @Vaticidalprophet, I propose one of the two approaches:
 * Find a subject matter expert first before submitting for GA.
 * Submit for GA without initial expert evaluation and then seek one after passing review.
 * We will likely choose to use the Wikipedia option to seek second opinions later when we have enough available experts willing to review. Additionally, I have come to realize that Wikipedia can be unfriendly towards new users. This may partly explain why experts attempt involvement but eventually leave and why we don't have enough expert to be able to leave second opinions. Maxim Masiutin (talk) 16:18, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Submit for GA without initial expert evaluation and then seek one after passing review.
 * We will likely choose to use the Wikipedia option to seek second opinions later when we have enough available experts willing to review. Additionally, I have come to realize that Wikipedia can be unfriendly towards new users. This may partly explain why experts attempt involvement but eventually leave and why we don't have enough expert to be able to leave second opinions. Maxim Masiutin (talk) 16:18, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * We will likely choose to use the Wikipedia option to seek second opinions later when we have enough available experts willing to review. Additionally, I have come to realize that Wikipedia can be unfriendly towards new users. This may partly explain why experts attempt involvement but eventually leave and why we don't have enough expert to be able to leave second opinions. Maxim Masiutin (talk) 16:18, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Vampire killing kit image
Might be worth using using the tighter crop (File:Vampire killing kit, Royal Armouries (cropped).jpg) not found in the article instead. more kit less stand.©Geni (talk) 16:14, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Do you wish me to try to write a section on screening?
Do you wish me to try to write a section about screening? Or we should better now refrain from editing, submit to GA and after it passes GA try to write such a section? Maxim Masiutin (talk) 20:20, 21 November 2023 (UTC)


 * I don't think further discussion on this is productive at the moment. I'm willing for you to post what you think a section on screening should look like on the talk. The article already has a lot that is about SCAs and not XXXYY -- this is one reason why I'm kind of bewildered by the discussion that's been had, because I already feel like the amount of "not directly about XXXYY" information in the article is somewhere around the ceiling of what I can "get away with", and expected that to be a problem at GAN. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 21:49, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
 * OK, thank you! I will try on the talk page. Maxim Masiutin (talk) 21:56, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Bizarre
The GAN: Bizarre. The discussion about it: Baffling. The discussion that followed: I'm running out of b words.

I'm sorry to see XXXYY syndrome redirected (I watchlist your userpage). I might even revert you over it ;) Hope it isn't too upsetting. My last (only) failed GAN (failed for irrelevant gripes) upset me for a while, and still does. I watched the whole fiasco with curiosity and a bit of sadness because I had too many obligations to intervene. Still do, but if you want to try again, well, I'm a bit freer for the next week, and you know where to find me. I understand if you're not interested in sinking in more time. Keep in touch, OK? Urve (talk) 01:51, 22 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Urve. I don't know. It's not an article that's worth its presence if it's got that much dispute over it. I wouldn't object to a revert, but I need to step away from it. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 01:53, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Please note that even if you think that the article on XXXYY syndrome is not worth the presence, you cannot remove the content without proper reasoning in the edit summary. There was no edit summary in your deletion, and "Not worth the presence" is not a valid reason. Please remember that you do not own the text; it belongs to the whole universe; by submitting the text to Wikipedia, you relinquish the ownership. Therefore, if you wish to delete the text, you would have better initiate a discussion on the Talk page. In my opinion, the page is very good, and I see no reason for deleting it.
 * You did a good job. Thank you very much for your contributions to that article, and with the other articles, I understand that receiving constructive criticism can be discouraging. Still, it is important to remember that Wikipedia relies on collaboration and the contributions of many individuals. Your article may not have been perfect in its initial form, but with continued effort and revisions, it has the potential to become an extremely valuable addition to Wikipedia. Even in its current form, it is very valuable. Furthermore, deleting your own work without seeking feedback from others robs other editors of the opportunity to offer suggestions or help improve the article. It also goes against our verifiability policies and neutral point of view - by deleting your work, you are removing information from public access. I urge you to reconsider your decision. If you decide to distance yourself from the article, so be it, and we respect your decision. Many experienced editors would be happy to improve the article sooner or later. Remember that every contribution, no matter how invaluable or imperfect it may seem at first, helps build a better encyclopedia for everyone. Thank you for understanding. Maxim Masiutin (talk) 02:15, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of XXXYY syndrome
The article XXXYY syndrome you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:XXXYY syndrome for comments about the article, and Talk:XXXYY syndrome/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. CMD (talk) 02:06, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Henry Winkler
Henry Winkler has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. * Pppery * <sub style="color:#800000">it has begun... 05:26, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #AAA; background-color: ivory; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; "> Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:47, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

You've got mail!
Vanamonde (Talk) 16:05, 30 November 2023 (UTC)


 * checked that email a couple days ago. I'm very occupied offwiki at the moment, but I've seen it and will fully digest as I get the time. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 03:44, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
 * No problem, I did see after leaving this message that you haven't been very active. Please take your time. Vanamonde (Talk) 16:15, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Sims 2: Bon Voyage
The article The Sims 2: Bon Voyage you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Sims 2: Bon Voyage for comments about the article, and Talk:The Sims 2: Bon Voyage/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Generalissima -- Generalissima (talk) 17:21, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Editor experience invitation
Hi Vaticidalprophet :) I'm looking to interview people here. Feel free to pass if you're not interested. Clovermoss 🍀  (talk) 13:04, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Asking for advice
Hey @Vaticidalprophet, could you weigh in on whether I should make an article on Billy Caldwell based on WP:AVOIDVICTIM? You might remember me (or not) as the guy who started the Fan Xiaoqin page, where you participated in a deletion discussion. The subject of the article has autism and is also a teenager, but we also don't have the language barrier issue. You seem like you have experience. Thanks,  Bremps  ...  16:13, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

DYK review
Hi, I'm running into a really weird situation where the DYK reviewer, in Template:Did you know nominations/Great Divine Temple, stated that my article needs a copyedit, but when I ask him/her to explain more detail which part/section needs a copyedit and how should it be improved, the answer I got is no less general: "It's a bit hard to explain, but the grammar and writing style isn't exactly the best", which gave me no clue on where I should start rewritting. I'm not sure if there has been any previous similar cases, and if yes would you mind point them out so I can see how those editors approach them. Đại Việt quốc (talk) 07:50, 14 December 2023 (UTC)


 * @Đại Việt quốc, Vati is on a bit of a wikibreak right now (see some posts above) but I happened to come across this as a talk page stalker. I did a general copyedit of most of the article, with the exception of some of the last paragraph. I think it needs reworked but I'm hesitant since I don't know much about Caodai tradition. Here are my thoughts:
 * "In Caodaist tradition, this is the place of Duc Chi Ton (Jade Emperor), Gods, Saints, Buddha, and Fairies." - It's ambiguous if this sentence means that every Caodaist temple has a Bat Quai Dai and this is where gods and saints etc live in every temple, or of this temple is the only one with a Bat Qual Dai, and gods and saints etc live here because this particular temple is extra special. Also, gods saints and fairies shouldn't be capitalized as they aren't proper nouns.
 * "It is considered the soul of the temple." Again, ambiguous as to whether this applies to all Bat Quai Dais in every temple, or just this one in this temple. Also, what does "soul of the temple" mean? It needs more explanation, as it is, it's not a very encyclopedic statement.
 * "The eight sides of Bat Quai Dai correspond to a part of Bagua, including Qian, Dui, Li, Zhen, Xun, Kan, Gen, Kun." This sentence doesn't convey much useful information if you don't know what Bagua is. (Consider if you didn't know a compass was labelled with the directions north, west, east and south and someone told you "The four sides of this room represent the north, west, east and south of the compass - you'd be lost, right? Same thing.) I would suggest rephrasing to something like "The eight sides of the room correspond to the eight sides of the Bagua, a traditional Chinese representation of the cosmos."
 * &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 08:41, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your valuable feedbacks. To address your concerns:
 * Yes, the Bat Quai Dai is an structure of every Caodaist temples, and every of them symbolize the same thing.
 * Perhaps, "central religious structure" may be a better phrase for "soul of the temple". What do you think?
 * Totally agree, will fix that.
 * Đại Việt quốc (talk) 22:25, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
 * For the first, I would suggest making it clear that it's a universal feature, however you want to do that. For the rest, I would make those tweaks as suggested and I think that should be sufficient. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 00:18, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

 * I'll second this Merry Christmas! with additional wishes that you get new clothes so the Yule cat doesn't eat you or your food. And yes, our conversation on Discord did eventually inspire me to write the article. Thanks for that :).
 * On a more serious note- I don't know why you're on a wikibreak, but I want to let you know that you are appreciated- and consequently missed- here on Wikipedia, and I hope you are doing better. Happy editing, SilverTiger12 (talk) 21:13, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
 * ,, , , -- thanks so much to all of you, and my apologies I couldn't return the wishes in time :) My best wishes for the new year for everyone. I finally have a little more opportunity to edit, so I'm hoping to finally resolve the DYKs soon and restart work on the FAC-to-be. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 16:41, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">

BOZ (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding to their talk page with a friendly message.

I'm wishing you a Merry Christmas, because that is what I celebrate. Feel free to take a "Happy Holidays" or "Season's Greetings" if you prefer. :) BOZ (talk) 00:23, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Happy holidays!
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:red; background-color:#fff; border-width:2px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">

— m w  (talk) (contribs) is wishing you Happy Holidays! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user Happy Holidays, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Happy holidays}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Welcome to the 2024 WikiCup!
Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2024 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page ready for you to take part. Any questions on the scoring, rules or anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close on 31 January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are:, , and. 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. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Gareth Knight
Hello! Your submission of Gareth Knight 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) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 01:04, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

DYK for Rima Nakhle
 Schwede 66  00:12, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

DYK for A Field Guide to Otherkin
Aoidh (talk) 00:02, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Bandit
Bandit (drag queen) is an unillustrated biography about a Thai drag performer who died recently. Since you were able to add an image to Cherry Valentine, I wonder if you might be able to help illustrate Bandit's entry, too. Either way, happy editing! --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 18:01, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

DYK for Gareth Knight
theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 03:18, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of A Field Guide to Otherkin
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article A Field Guide to Otherkin you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of AryKun -- AryKun (talk) 20:01, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

WikiCup 2024 February newsletter
The 2024 WikiCup is off to a flying start, with 135 participants. This is the largest number of participants we have seen since 2017.

Our current leader is newcomer, who has one FA on John Littlejohn (preacher) and 10 GAs and 12 DYKs mostly on New Zealand coinage and Inuit figures. Here are some more noteworthy scorers:


 * , with one FA on Hö'elün, two GAs on Mongolia-related articles, and two DYKs;
 * , with one FA on Doom (2016 video game), one GA on Boundary Fire (2017), and 11 reviews;
 * , with one FA on Holidays (Meghan Trainor song), a nine-article FT on 30 (album), and two DYKs;
 * , with one FA on OneShot and one DYK;
 * , with five GAs and five DYKs on television and radio stations;
 * and, both with one FA and one DYK each.

As a reminder, competitors may submit work for the first round until 23:59 (UTC) on 27 February, and the second round starts 1 March. Remember that only the top 64 scoring competitors will make it through to the second round; currently, competitors need at least 15 points to progress. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAN, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges (,, and ) are reachable on their talk pages. 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. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:58, 11 February 2024 (UTC)


 * I was so happy when I saw this. Sent me down a rabbit hole about the Duchy of Wuerttemberg, whose flag he chose as his own. Why did it have to end like this? Why? Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI ( talk to me!/my edits ) 11:40, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:38, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Today's TFA, Felix M. Warburg House, was written by Vami_IV and Epicgenius, introduced: "This article is about another of the great houses that once lined Fifth Avenue in New York. Specifically, this is the mansion of Felix M. Warburg, a Jewish financier who ignored fears of anti-Semitic reprisal to his decided to build himself a big Gothic manor in the middle of New York City. Although the Warburgs no longer remain, their legacy does: the museum is now the home of the Jewish Museum (Manhattan) and the building largely survives as they left it. It's a beautiful building and I hope you will all enjoy it."! - in memory --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:17, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Today's story mentions a concert I loved to hear and a piece I loved to sing in choir, 150 years old OTD. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:49, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

WikiCup 2024 March newsletter
The first round of the 2024 WikiCup ended at 23:59 (UTC) on 27 February. Everyone with at least 30 points moved on to Round 2, the highest number of points required to advance to the second round since 2014. Due to a six-way tie for the 64th-place spot, 67 contestants have qualified for Round 2.

The following scorers in Round 1 all scored more than 300 points:


 * , who has 916 points mostly from one FA on John Littlejohn (preacher), 15 GAs, and 16 DYKs on a variety of topics including New Zealand coinage and Inuit figures, in addition to seven reviews
 * , who has 790 points from two FAs on Felix M. Warburg House and Doom (2016 video game), two GAs, one DYK, and 11 reviews
 * , who has 580 points from one FA on Hö'elün, two GAs on Mongolia-related articles, two DYKs, and five reviews
 * , who has 420 points mostly from nine GAs and seven DYKs on television and radio stations
 * , who has 351 points from one FA on Holidays (Meghan Trainor song), a nine-article FT on 30 (album), and three DYKs
 * , who has 345 points from one FA on OneShot, one DYK and two reviews

In this newsletter, the judges would like to pay a special tribute to, who unfortunately passed away this February. At the time of his death, he was the second-highest-scoring competitor. Outside the WikiCup, he had eight other featured articles, five A-class articles, eight other good articles, and two Four Awards. Vami also wrote an essay on completionism, a philosophy in which he deeply believed. If you can, please join us in honoring his memory by improving one of the articles on his to-do list.

Remember that any content promoted after 27 February 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 Needed. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, feel free to review one of the nominations listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. 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. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:41, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

TFL notification
Hi, Vaticidalprophet. I'm just posting to let you know that List of books bound in human skin – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list for April 1. The TFL blurb can be seen here. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008  ( Talk ) 01:41, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Edit history pcr.png


The file File:Edit history pcr.png has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "unused Wikipedia screenshot, future use unlikely"

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 file's talk page.

Please consider addressing 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 files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --TheImaCow (talk) 21:11, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Good Article Drive March 2024
Could you please review whether I logged my reviews correctly on the Good Article Drive March 2024 page? Maxim Masiutin (talk) 16:00, 8 March 2024 (UTC)


 * . Already answered at WT:GAN :). —Femke 🐦 (talk) 21:03, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Sims 2: University
The article The Sims 2: University you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Sims 2: University for comments about the article, and Talk:The Sims 2: University/GA2 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Premeditated Chaos -- Premeditated Chaos (talk) 07:44, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of A Field Guide to Otherkin
The article A Field Guide to Otherkin you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:A Field Guide to Otherkin for comments about the article, and Talk:A Field Guide to Otherkin/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of AryKun -- AryKun (talk) 08:41, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

"Clinistrip" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Clinistrip&redirect=no Clinistrip] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 11:48, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Signups open for The Core Contest 2024
The Core Contest—Wikipedia's most exciting contest—returns again this year from April 15 to May 31. The goal: to improve vital or other core articles, with a focus on those in the worst state of disrepair. Editing can be done individually, but in the past groups have also successfully competed. There is GB£300 of prize money divided among editors who provide the "best additive encyclopedic value". Signups are open now. Cheers from the judges, Femke, Casliber, Aza24. –  Aza24  (talk)   02:20, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

If you wish to start or stop receiving news about The Core Contest, please add or remove yourself from the delivery list.

"Wikipedia:Users for deletion" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Users_for_deletion&redirect=no Wikipedia:Users for deletion] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Utopes (talk / cont) 17:55, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Pan Am Flight 214
Hello, Vaticidalprophet. I've just nominated Pan Am Flight 214 as a Featured Article candidate. Since you were so helpful with your featured article nominations of Paradise Airlines Flight 901A last year, would you have any interest in taking a look at this one? Any feedback you could provide would be greatly appreciated. RecycledPixels (talk) 20:20, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

WikiCup 2024 April newsletter
We are approaching the end of the 2024 WikiCup's second round, with a little over two weeks remaining. Currently, contestants must score at least 105 points to progress to the third round.

Our current top scorers are as follows:


 * with 642 points, mostly from 11 GAs about radio and television;
 * with 530 points, mostly from two FAs (Well he would, wouldn't he? and Cora Agnes Benneson) and three GAs;
 * with 523 points, mostly from 11 GAs about coinage and history;
 * with 497 points, mostly from a FA about the 2020 season of the soccer club Seattle Sounders FC and two GAs;
 * with 410 points, mostly from a FA about the drink Capri-Sun and three GAs;
 * with 330 points, mostly from a FA about the English botanist Anna Blackburne and a GA.

Competitors may submit work for the second round until the end of 28 April, and the third round starts 1 May. Remember that only competitors with the top 32 scores will make it through to the third round. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. Please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAN, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs. As a reminder, competitors are strictly prohibited from gaming Wikipedia policies or processes to receive more points.

If you would like to learn more about rules and scoring for the 2024 WikiCup, please read WikiCup/Scoring. Further questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges (,, and ) are reachable on their talk pages. 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. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:06, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

WikiCup 2024 May newsletter
The second round of the 2024 WikiCup ended on 28 April. This round was particularly competitive: each of the 32 contestants who advanced to Round 3 scored at least 141 points. This is the highest number of points required to advance to Round 3 since 2014.

The following scorers in Round 2 all scored more than 500 points:
 * with 707 points, mostly from 45 good article nomination reviews and 12 good articless about radio and television;
 * with 600 points, mostly from 12 good articles and 12 did you know nominations about coinage and history;
 * with 552 points, mostly from a featured article about the 2020 Seattle Sounders FC season, three featured lists, and two good articles;
 * with 548 points, mostly from a featured article about the snooker player John Pulman, two featured lists, and one good article;
 * with 530 points, mostly from two featured articles (Well he would, wouldn't he? and Cora Agnes Benneson) and three good articles.

The full scores for Round 2 can be seen here. So far this year, competitors have gotten 18 featured articles, 22 featured lists, and 186 good articles, 76 in the news credits and at least 200 did you know credits. They have conducted 165 featured article reviews, as well as 399 good article reviews and peer reviews, and have added 21 articles to featured topics and good topics.

Remember that any content promoted after 28 April but before the start of Round 3 can be claimed during Round 3, which starts on 1 May at 00:00 (UTC). 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 Needed.

If you would like to learn more about rules and scoring for the 2024 WikiCup, please see this page. Further questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges (,, and ) are reachable on their talk pages. 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. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:38, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C
<section begin="announcement-content" />
 * You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. 

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,<section end="announcement-content" />

RamzyM (WMF) 23:10, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Maia arson crimew
Maia arson crimew has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. RhymeWrens (talk) 19:47, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

WikiCup 2024 July newsletter
The third round of the 2024 WikiCup ended on 28 June. As with Round 2, this round was competitive: each of the 16 contestants who advanced to Round 4 scored at least 256 points.

The following editors all scored more than 400 points in Round 3:


 * with 1,059 points, mostly from 1 featured article on DeLancey W. Gill, 11 good articles, 18 did you know nominations, and dozens of reviews;
 * with 673 points, mostly from 2 featured articles on Worlds (Porter Robinson album) and I'm God, 5 good articles, and 2 did you know nominations;
 * with 557 points, mostly from 1 featured article on KNXV-TV, 5 good articles, and 8 did you know nominations; and
 * with 415 points, mostly from 1 featured article on Great cuckoo-dove, with a high number of bonus points from that article.

The full scores for round 3 can be seen here. So far this year, competitors have gotten 28 featured articles, 38 featured lists, 240 good articles, 92 in the news credits, and at least 285 did you know credits. They have conducted 279 featured article reviews, as well as 492 good article reviews and peer reviews, and have added 22 articles to featured topics and good topics.

Remember that any content promoted after 28 June but before the start of Round 4 can be claimed during Round 4, which starts on 1 July at 00:00 (UTC). 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 for a good article, featured content, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews Needed.

If you would like to learn more about rules and scoring for the 2024 WikiCup, please see this page. Further questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges (,, and ) are reachable on their talk pages. 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. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:30, 29 June 2024 (UTC)