User talk:Yellow Evan/Archive 26

Precious two years!
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:49, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Three years now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:06, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 14
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Typhoon Ruby (1988), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Almagro. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:58, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 21
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Tropical Storm Tess (1988)
 * added links pointing to Pateros and Laguna Lake


 * Tropical Storm Mamie (1982)
 * added a link pointing to Agusan

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:18, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Edit revert: List of Pacific hurricanes
Hello, I would like to inquire about an edit of mine that you reverted. The section "Strongest by category" was removed due to WP:OR. Despite this however, there are numerous other categories that also contain OR, including pretty much every sub-section under "Intensity records." I don't see why it is more acceptable to remove this section than it is to remove any other section. --Undescribed (talk) 19:19, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

May 2017 WikiCup newsletter
The second round of the competition has now closed, with just under 100 points being required to qualify for round 3. YellowEvan just scraped into the next round with 98 points but we have to say goodbye to the thirty or so competitors who didn't achieve this threshold; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia. Our top scorers in round 2 were:


 * 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 Cas Liber, led the field with five featured articles, four on birds and one on astronomy, and a total score of 2049, half of which came from bonus points.
 * 🇯🇵 1989 was in second place with 826 points, 466 of which were bonus points. 1989 has claimed points mostly relating to anime and Japanese-related articles.
 * Peacemaker67 took third place with two FAs, one GA and seven GARs, mostly on naval vessels or military personnel, scoring 543 points.
 * Other contestants who scored over 400 points were Freikorp, Carbrera, and Czar. Of course all these points are now wiped out and the 32 remaining contestants start again from zero in round 3.

Vivvt submitted the largest number of DYKs (30), and MBlaze Lightning achieved 13 articles at ITN. Carbrera claimed for 11 GAs and Argento Surfer performed the most GARs, having reviewed 11. So far we have achieved 38 featured articles and a splendid 132 good articles. Commendably, 279 GARs have been achieved so far, more than double the number of GAs.

So, on to the third round. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them. 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 equally.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 13:16, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 2
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Typhoon Irma (1985), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ponape. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:49, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Marriage (Wales) Act 2010
Please see note on your DYK review. Yoninah (talk) 23:45, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Typhoon Dinah (1987)
Hello! Your submission of Typhoon Dinah (1987) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 23:46, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Category:Typhoons
This edit summary made no sense, the category you described in it is very specific and a child category. The category you re-added is a parent category - the article already has two child categories of that so the top-level Typhoons category is completely unnecessary. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:51, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The problem is that we have a number of categories that we assign a system to based on the system's intensity. As a result while you may quite legitmately view the Typhoon's category as a parent category we have to use it as a child category and it is added to the article of any system, that the Japan Meterological Agency thinks is a typhoon which is offically their highest intnesity raiting.Jason Rees (talk) 07:02, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
 * No, I think you're both missing the point. I removed the parent category of "Typhoon" from an article which had more refined "Typhoons in..." categories. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:34, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
 * As we said we categorise by both intensity and impacts, so both categories are valid even though one is a parent category of the other. Sometimes there has to be exceptions to rules and i strongly suspect that this is one of those times.Jason Rees (talk) 07:42, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Category:Typhoons is neither about intensity or impact. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:44, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The more defined "Typhoons in X" should not be part of "Typhoons" though for the reasons provided by JR above, because the former includes tropical storms as well, clarifying that Category:Typhoon is about intensity. YE Pacific Hurricane  07:45, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Typhoons in X most certainly SHOULD be a sub-cat of Typhoons. That's obvious. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:51, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Maybe create a separate category called "Typhoons (intensity)" then? YE Pacific Hurricane  07:55, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Well Category:Typhoons by intensity should exist. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:24, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I strongly disagree since that category would end up having Tropical Depressions, Tropical Storms and Severe Tropical Storms added to it. I also feel that it is obvious that a category called Typhoons, should have any systems offically rated as typhoons in and not be shoved off to a side category like Typhoons by Intensity. As a result I feel that the category should remain as it is.Jason Rees (talk) 10:01, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Category:Typhoons ideally should be empty, like stub, it should a be parking category which is used until one or more refined categories can be applied to it, such as where it was, how intense it was etc. Looks like a confused mess if you're assuming the Cat:Typhoons to actually mean Typhoons by intensity.  The Rambling Man (talk) 11:53, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
 * You should then have Category:Category 1 typhoons, Category:Category 2 typhoons etc. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:02, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Technically that'd be incorrect, since storms in the Western Paific aren't assigned to categories. Hence why I think there should be Typhoons (intensity) YE Pacific Hurricane  14:09, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm not saying it should necessarily apply to this particular typhoon, but many of the others come under that categorisation, so we should place them in the respective categories for intensity, that would actually be a very useful categorisation. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:45, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
 * And that category is typhoon, tropical storm, and tropical depression in this basin. Hence why I think there should be Category:Typhoon (intensity) in addition to Category:Western Pacific tropical storms and Category:Western Pacific tropical depressions. YE Pacific Hurricane  18:56, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Well now we're maybe getting somewhere. The point is that that "typhoons" shouldn't be listed in a category called "typhoons" if we have more specific info (MOS' "special characteristic" does not extend to "where it happened" for instance, that's not "special" in any way), so the sooner we get on to removing the super-category from all these pages the better.  I'm happy to help with that.  The Rambling Man (talk) 19:52, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Brought it up on the project talk page. YE Pacific Hurricane  07:23, 26 May 2017 (UTC)


 * As YE said the SSHWS is not offically used in this basin and thus i would suggest that you see my post below and act on that.Jason Rees (talk) 16:37, 25 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Infact from a quick browse of the governing rules of categories, id argue that Typhoons in say Taiwan is a "special characteristic" of Typhoons and as a result typhoons should be considered a Non-diffusion category which means that they should be placed in both categories. It's like the actors who have won the best actor award, but are still included in Movie Actors. FYI TRM im currently away on my travels and am thus unsure of when i will be able to respond further bar when i get back on Monday.Jason Rees (talk) 10:32, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
 * No, the analogy is false, that's like saying that male film actors who have won prizes should be also be categorised under "men". The Rambling Man (talk) 18:46, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Typhoon Vera (1986)
Hello! Your submission of Typhoon Vera (1986) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 19:05, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Typhoon Dinah (1987)
Hello! Your submission of Typhoon Dinah (1987) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 19:38, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Typhoon Kelly (1987)
Hello! Your submission of Typhoon Kelly (1987) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 19:39, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Typhoon Gerald
Mifter (talk) 00:02, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Binbin0111 talk
Why did you delete your 2017-18 El Nino page? Binbin0111 talk 07:00 May 30, 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Binbin0111 (talk • contribs)

DYK
Hello! Your submission of Tropical Storm Warren (1984) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! North America1000 11:24, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Typhoon Vera (1986)
Mifter (talk) 00:17, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Typhoon June (1984)
Hello! Your submission of Typhoon June (1984) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! 78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 20:55, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Typhoon Cary (1987)
Hello! Your submission of Typhoon Cary (1987) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! IronGargoyle (talk) 22:07, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Typhoon Dinah (1987)
Mifter (talk) 00:02, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Tropical Storm Warren (1984)
Mifter (talk) 00:04, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 9 June 2017
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:18, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Typhoon Kelly (1987)
Mifter 00:02, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Typhoon Cary (1987)
Mifter (talk) 00:03, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK nom for Typhoon Abby
Hello! Your submission of Typhoon Abby (1986) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! - I basically just need to know which hook you'd like to see. --M ASEM (t) 21:50, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 June 2017
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:31, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Typhoon Abby (1986)
IronGargoyle (talk) 00:03, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Typhoon June (1984)
IronGargoyle (talk) 00:02, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Request GA hold
Thank you for yesterday's GA review of Political positions of Paul Ryan and your thorough read and notes. Please place the review on hold. Thank you again. 13.54.152.171 (talk) 15:02, 29 June 2017 (UTC) Respectfully request reconsideration of your decision to fail this good article nomination with no hold. Thank you. 13.54.152.171 (talk) 16:53, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Congratulations on your progress in the Cup! Thank you for your attention to this good article nomination, since I know you are very busy with the competition. I have not seen this before, a GAR fail with no hold on the basis of recent inactivity of the nominator. I notice you awarded yourself points for failing this good article review with no hold, as you did with at least one other GA review in round 3. A quick fail, no hold, no follow-up required from the reviewer, maximizes time to devote to the Cup, and scores points immediately, as opposed to possibly in the next round. As I understand it, while a gamification, the Cup is a means to an end, which is improving the encyclopedia, which is nominally all of our's goal. As I understand it, there are no deadlines on Wikipedia, is the Cup an exception? Thank you again. 13.54.152.171 (talk) 18:31, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for explaining that time was important to you when you failed this GAR without a hold, and that you were mistaken in assuming the nomination was orphaned. I understand you are within policy to fail without a hold, however, I am concerned that the rules of the Cup may not be aligned the best interests of the encyclopedia. I waited 11 weeks for a review; from my point of view, failing the GAN without a hold benefited one editor in helping make the cut to round 4, and the notes were very helpful, thanks again, but the fail without hold did not necessarily help the encyclopedia. May I ask, did you look for a GAN that might be failed quickly without fuss? If you had it to do over? 13.54.152.171 (talk) 21:45, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. Although not strictly required, as with many many things on Wikipedia, in my experience a hold of about a week is customary and an expression of respect by the reviewer for the effort of the nominator and an expression of our community's commitment to collaboration. I note the Cup is offering cash this year. In the Cup GAR category, why might a Cup participant offer a one week hold with less than one week in a round? Do I understand from your reply, that late in a round, yes, you might scan WP:GAN looking for quick fails or passes? Do you think there may be an unintended consequence in the Cup rules, that a Cup GAR favors a quick fail or pass over a hold late in the round? 13.54.152.171 (talk) 00:25, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

WikiCup 2017 July newsletter
The third round of the competition has finished in a flurry of last minute activity, with 288 points being required to qualify for round 4. It was a hotly competitive round with all but four of the contestants exceeding the 106 points that was necessary to proceed to round 4 last year. Coemgenus and Freikorp tied on 288, and both have been allowed to proceed, so round 4 now has one pool of eight competitors and one of nine.

Round 3 saw the achievement of a 26-topic Featured topic by MPJ-DK as well as 5 featured lists and 13 featured articles. PanagiotisZois and SounderBruce achieved their first ever featured articles. Carbrera led the GA score with 10, Tachs achieved 17 DYKs and MBlaze Lightning 10 In the news items. There were 167 DYKs, 93 GARs and 82 GAs overall, this last figure being higher than the number of GAs in round 2, when twice as many people were taking part. Even though contestants performed more GARs than they achieved GAs, there was still some frustration at the length of time taken to get articles reviewed.

As we start round 4, we say goodbye to the fifteen or so competitors who didn't quite make it; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them (some people have fallen foul of this rule and the points have been removed).

If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 05:38, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Typhoon Agnes (1984)
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Typhoon Zola (1990)
Hello! Your submission of Typhoon Zola (1990) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Doug Coldwell (talk) 11:38, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK
Hello! Your submission of Typhoon Zola (1990) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! North America1000 14:29, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for review
Thank you for reviewing my DYK, Template:Did you know nominations/Margaret Amoakohene. Changes have been made. Please go through it again and offer your opinion. God bless. Thanks. Cross Temple  Jay  16:05, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Typhoon Joe (1980)
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Typhoon Kim (1980)
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 July 2017
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:48, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Typhoon Betty (1980)
IronGargoyle (talk) 12:02, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Typhoon Phyllis (1975)
Hello! Your submission of Typhoon Phyllis (1975) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! M h hossein  talk 06:36, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Tropical Storm Winona (1990)
IronGargoyle (talk) 12:02, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Typhoon Zola (1990)
Alex ShihTalk 12:02, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK(Karimul Haque)
I have adressed your concerns.Please check again RADICAL  SODA(FORCE)  05:29, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Typhoon Phyllis (1975)
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Typhoon Rita (1975)
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Typhoon Page (1990)
Hello! Your submission of Typhoon Page (1990) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! — Calvin999 16:19, 4 August 2017 (UTC)