User talk:Voorts/Archive 23

DYK for Cora Agnes Benneson
theleekycauldron (talk • she/her),  Schwede 66 , and Kusma (talk) 00:02, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Women in Red March 2024
--Lajmmoore (talk 20:24, 25 February 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Your GA nomination of Well he would, wouldn't he?
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Well he would, wouldn't he? 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) 16:22, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Well he would, wouldn't he?
The article Well he would, wouldn't he? you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Well he would, wouldn't he? for comments about the article, and Talk:Well he would, wouldn't he?/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 Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:23, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

That’s my grandpa😣
I’m not even joking I literally edited my grandpas I can call him. 2601:1C2:4C00:4690:60CD:78EB:CBD0:3068 (talk) 01:18, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure who you're referring to, but you cannot edit the pages of your family members as that is a conflict of interest. voorts (talk/contributions) 01:20, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Rollback granted
Hi Voorts. After reviewing your request, I have enabled rollback on your account. Please keep the following things in mind while using rollback: If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into trouble or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! —Femke 🐦 (talk) 17:06, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Being granted rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle or Ultraviolet. It just adds a [Rollback] button next to a page's latest live revision - that's all. It does not grant you any additional "status" on Wikipedia, nor does it change how Wikipedia policies apply to you.
 * Rollback should be used to revert clear and unambiguous cases of vandalism only . Never use rollback to revert good faith edits.
 * Rollback should never be used to edit war, and it should never be used in a content-related dispute to restore the page to your preferred revision. If rollback is abused or used for this purpose or any other inappropriate purpose, the rights will be revoked.
 * Use common sense. If you're not sure about something, ask!

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)

MRDA GAN
Afternoon. Sorry I nabbed your review: was mindful of the time in the US being much further behind the UK and went for it assuming you had more important things to deal with in the morning. Hope I didn't steal any of your fun, if you enjoy that sort of thing. Saw that the brunt of the comments, like the OCLC for Irving 1964, was to do with me and was my duty to fix: the rest were simple queries or minor style issues that I could complete in a few minutes. Hope that's OK with you, and apologies if you were looking forward to dealing with the GAN yourself. Cheers, Tim O&#39;Doherty (talk) 23:53, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
 * It was a co-nom, and you did half the work, so I was happy to have you deal with it. Looks like the article's in pretty good shape. I want to see if Chiswick has any comments for us before we nominate for FA, if that's okay. voorts (talk/contributions) 00:08, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
 * @Tim O'Doherty: Well we could nominate for FA, couldn't we? voorts (talk/contributions) 22:58, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Is suppose we could, if we're OK with the background sections and the info on Ward. Tim O&#39;Doherty (talk) 23:05, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Do you think more needs to be added? Happy to hold off if you want to expand those sections. No rush. voorts (talk/contributions) 23:07, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Not in particular. Can always be fleshed out if FAC says so. Tim O&#39;Doherty (talk) 23:12, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Cool, then I will nominate it. voorts (talk/contributions) 23:13, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
 * One thing is that we call Ward the scapegoat in the lead, but that needs to be substantiated in the background section. voorts (talk/contributions) 23:46, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
 * What about:








 * ? Tim O&#39;Doherty (talk) 00:24, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Looks great. I think we'll also need to change the lead to attribute "scapegoat", unless we can find a bunch more really good RSes from people with less bias in the matter who call it that. voorts (talk/contributions) 00:27, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Tim O&#39;Doherty (talk) 00:28, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
 * One other thing that might come up is the relatively short "Legacy" section; do we have anything more we want to add? Should it be turned into a subsection of Analysis? Stay as is? Tim O&#39;Doherty (talk) 16:27, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
 * @Tim O'Doherty I think it's okay for now; if there's dislike of it, I think it could be folded into the politics section voorts (talk/contributions) 16:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)