User talk:J Milburn

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive

Archives edit header

Archive 38
Archive 39
Archive 40
Archive 41

READ THIS:

Please create new sections at the bottom of the page. Do not assume I know which article, image or page you are talking about, please provide a link so I do know, even it has been deleted. Also, please sign your messages, so I know who you are. I will reply on your talk page, unless you tell me otherwise.

I will probably remove bot and template messages after reading them, but they are still appreciated. Most other messages will be archived. Remember that a lot of people could read this- for confidential communication, email me, though for the vast majority of messages, here is the appropriate place. Thanks!

WikiProject Good articles Future GAN Backlog Drive[edit]

Hello everyone! Hope you've all been having a great summer!

TheQ Editor recently proposed the idea of having another Backlog Drive in either September/October or November/December of this year. For those of you who have participated in the past two drives you know I was the one who organized them, however, come September, this will be my most important year in school so I will not be able to coordinate this drive (if it happens). TheQ Editor has volunteered to be a coordinator for the drive. If any of you would like to co-coordinator, please notify TheQ Editor on his talk page.

If you would be interested in participating in a Backlog Drive sometime before the end of this year, please notify TheQ Editor. Also, make sure to specify what month(s) work best for you.

At the time this message was sent out, the backlog was at 520 nominations. Since May, the backlog has been steadily increasing and we are currently near an all time high. Even though the backlog will not disappear over one drive, this drive can lead to several others which will (hopefully) lead to the day where there is no longer a backlog.

As always, the more participants, the better, and everyone is encouraged to participate!

Sent by Dom497--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:52, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Stroma FAC[edit]

Thanks very much for your review of Stroma, Scotland. I've now nominated it for FAC - please see Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Stroma, Scotland/archive1. Feel free to comment or offer any suggestions there! Prioryman (talk) 18:49, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 August 2014[edit]

ORCID[edit]

I see you're reading for a PhD. May I encourage you to register for an ORCID identifier (if you haven't already) and to then display it on your user page, using {{Authority control}}, as described at WP:ORCID? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:29, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing: Thank you- this is definitely something I should do. I will look into it in the coming days. J Milburn (talk) 11:09, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Marton, Cumbria[edit]

I started an article on Marton, Cumbria, but it's just a stub (with an infobox). You may want to expand it. Eastmain (talkcontribs) 19:46, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

@Eastmain: Thanks for the note. I've had a play around, but there's not too much information online- I'd need to delve into some local history books or local newspaper archives to find more, but I don't live in the area any more, so I don't have access to that kind of thing. J Milburn (talk) 21:01, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Claiming Cup points a month after promotion?[edit]

Is this considered acceptable? I was fine with what ThaddeusB did earlier, because his editing patterns were consistent in terms of editing his content log in blocks. But in this instance, this strikes me as gaming the system, given that this user edited his submissions page individually in the previous rounds and was active throughout the entire summer to make any updates needed. —Bloom6132 (talk) 06:17, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Pinging The ed17 and Miyagawa. —Bloom6132 (talk) 07:47, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the note, I'll look into this later today or tomorrow. Pinging Czar. J Milburn (talk) 09:59, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
I'm out of town and then moving, so forgive me if I may be slow to respond to reply. I waited to update because I had enough notifs coming in that it became a chore to track—thought it wouldn't be a problem to just do it at once so I didn't miss anything. I wouldn't have done it that way had I thought it would bother anyone. czar  11:44, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Are you telling me you were "storing" these submissions in secret all along before deciding to release one big deluge just a week before the round ends? The last WikiCup newsletter reminded everyone in the comp to "update submission pages promptly". And for someone who has always added submissions individually (according to your revision history), this strains the bounds of credulity to the breaking point. —Bloom6132 (talk) 12:08, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
I'm a bit put off by your presumption of bad faith, to be honest. I didn't compile the list until I posted it and I'm afraid I must have skimmed that part of the newsletter, which would be my own fault (though I receive a lot of notifications). I really didn't think it was going to be a problem. Anyway, looks like this is out of my hands at this point, unless I would need to withdraw. czar  12:38, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
I'm a bit put off by how someone can go from dead last with no points to third place overall with just one edit a week before the tournament ends, to be honest. As things stand, I don't see the point of having a scoreboard if it doesn't reflect the true progress of each competitor. It just comes to show that being open and transparent (i.e. acting in good faith) in this comp only means you lose out. And it's not just me – all but two competitors have dropped a place because of this. If this action is deemed acceptable, then I might as well adopt this strategy of late updates myself. —Bloom6132 (talk) 13:34, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Bloom, this does all come across as a bit witch-hunt-y- this isn't a cross-examination! What Czar did certainly isn't exactly ideal practice, and I understand why you're frustrated. That said, it doesn't stretch credulity to believe that it was done in good faith- if it was done in a few days time, perhaps not; if Czar had a history of gaming the system, perhaps not. I don't mind admitting that I'm not quite sure how best to deal with this. Miyagawa, have you any views? Feel free to email me. J Milburn (talk) 16:19, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Of course this is "a bit witch-hunt-y" – that's what happens when I want a fair, transparent and honest competition. And I hope the judges and everyone else in the comp want the same thing too. Sure, the Cup is meant to "make editing on Wikipedia more fun", but it ruins the fun for all of us when one or two people act in this manner. Of course, one can argue that no written rule was broken per se, but someone acts in a way that makes the tournament less fair, less transparent and less honest, are we going to continue saying that nothing wrong was done. —Bloom6132 (talk) 17:13, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

for pointing out those dab links on So. The David Rhodes links now lead to his band Random Hold, of which I believe he is most prominently associated with. Do you think that's suitable? —JennKR | 18:10, 22 August 2014 (UTC)