User talk:Titoxd

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

Welcome to my Talk Page!


Communication



Unified login: Titoxd is the unique login of this user for all public Wikimedia projects.

Please post new messages to the bottom of my talk page. Please use headlines when starting new talk topics. Also, if you come to attack other user, read this first. Thank you.
My time zone is GMT -7:00. Please have that in mind if leaving time-sensitive comments.


Vista-file-manager.png Archived every 50 sub-headings:
Archive 1 (July 7, 2005 to October 8, 2005)
Archive 2 (October 9, 2005 to October 22, 2005)
Archive 3 (October 23, 2005 to November 5, 2005)
Archive 4 (November 6, 2005 to November 19, 2005)
Archive 5 (November 20, 2005 to December 7, 2005)
Archive 6 (December 8, 2005 to December 18, 2005)
Archive 7 (December 19, 2005 to December 29, 2005)
Archive 8 (December 29, 2005 to January 8, 2006)
Archive 9 (January 8, 2006 to January 29, 2006)
Archive 10 (January 29, 2006 to February 11, 2006)
Archive 11 (February 11, 2006 to March 3, 2006)
Archive 12 (March 4, 2006 to April 2, 2006)
Archive 13 (April 2, 2006 to April 22, 2006)
Archive 14 (April 23, 2006 to May 11, 2006)
Archive 15 (May 12, 2006 to June 10, 2006)
Archive 16 (June 10, 2006 to July 4, 2006)
Archive 17 (July 4, 2006 to July 31, 2006)
Archive 18 (July 31, 2006 to September 14, 2006)
Archive 19 (September 15, 2006 to November 11, 2006)
Archive 20 (November 11, 2006 to December 23, 2006)
Archive 21 (December 24, 2006 to February 24, 2007)
Archive 22 (February 24, 2007 to April 12, 2007)
Archive 23 (April 12, 2007 to July 10, 2007)
Archive 24 (July 11, 2007 to November 12, 2007)
Archive 25 (November 13, 2007 to March 3, 2008)
Archive 26 (March 9, 2008 to June 21, 2008)
Archive 27 (June 28, 2008 to September 30, 2008)
Archive 28 (October 1, 2008 to June 23, 2009)
Archive 29 (June 27, 2009 to July 2, 2010)

Contents



Hurricane Dennis FAR[edit]

...has now gone to FARC. Delist votes will start to pile-up soon if nobody is working to address concerns brought up during FAR. --mav (reviews needed) 14:03, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Can't work on it today, but it's on my short list. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 21:12, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for Welcome[edit]

Thanks for the welcome, been contributing to TCs on here for years and I just realized I never joined the project. -Marcusmax(speak) 20:47, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_Nadu_Newsprint_and_Papers[edit]

Request to our Wikipedians,
I'm very happy that my First Article has achieved B-Class on the very first day. After our fellow wikipedians comments, i have worked a lot to Improve my article. I have added a Lot to the article - Images,logos,Geographical Co-ordinates,Charts, Block Diagrams, Tables, National Stock Exchange Details, Criticism for Neutrality of the Article, Many Government web sources for proven references, etc. I have put all my effort to make it achieve Good Article Status. Now, I kindly request you to review My Article & provide your valuable feedback.
Raj6644 (talk) 13:43, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_Nadu_Newsprint_and_Papers[edit]

Request to our Wikipedians,
I'm very happy that my First Article has achieved B-Class on the very first day. After our fellow wikipedians comments, i have worked a lot to Improve my article. I have added a Lot to the article - Images,logos,Geographical Co-ordinates,Charts, Block Diagrams, Tables, National Stock Exchange Details, Criticism for Neutrality of the Article, Many Government web sources for proven references, etc. I have put all my effort to make it achieve Good Article Status. Now, I kindly request you to review My Article & provide your valuable feedback.
Raj6644 (talk) 13:43, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Hurricane Patsy (1959) track update[edit]

I've put together a HURDAT version of a track update for Hurricane Patsy (1959). Could you update the file with this version when you get a chance? Thanks

03210 09/06/1959 M= 5 11 SNBR=  98 PATSY       XING=0      (CP)                     
03215 09/06*  0   0   0    0*2001810  75    0*2081795 120    0*2221785 150    0*
03220 09/07*2351781 120    0*2491782 120    0*2621791 120    0*2691803 120    0*
03225 09/08*2731813 100    0*2771818 100    0*2791820 100    0*2811821 120    0*
03230 09/09*2841820  90    0*2921813  90    0*3021807  80    0*3121800  80    0*
03235 09/10*3211795  60    0*3301791  45    0*3401789  45    0*3511789  45    0*
03275 09/11E3751802  45    0*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*
03240 HR  

Cyclonebiskit (talk) 18:11, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Conson[edit]

See here

     06/05/2010 M= 3  0 SNBR=0000 PHET        XING=0
     06/05*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*3003590  40  993*
     06/06*2502880  40  993*2002160  35  996*1501440  30 1000*100 720  30 1000*
     06/07* 50   0  30 1000*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*
     TS

Hi, I was referred to you by other editors in the tropical cyclone project. I would like to know if it possible for you to make an image of the tracks of all recorded Atlantic major hurricanes? Thank you, Bobby122 Contact Me (C) 19:20, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

I have chucked all the data for the 2010 PTS so far in here so if you get chance could you please update the tracking maps for Conson and the season and create maps for 04W and the other TD. Many Thanks.Jason Rees (talk) 22:59, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Copyedit request[edit]

Hi, I was wondering if you could use your copyedit powers on the article. Thanks :) d'oh! talk 06:25, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia Online Ambassadors program[edit]

Hi Titoxd! I wanted to invite you to apply for the Wikipedia Online Ambassadors program, since you're a great Wikipedian and because you're a member of Wikipedia:WikiProject Classroom coordination. The Online Ambassadors program is part of a project the Wikimedia Foundation is doing to get professors and students more involved with editing, and Online Ambassadors will be helping coordinate assignments and help students who are assigned to edit. Cheers! --Sage Ross - Online Faciliator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 20:37, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Track maps...[edit]

I would be glad to help. What kind of help do you need?

--Yueof theNorth 00:06, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

re: Track map stuff[edit]

I added that page to my watchlist. Reub2000 (talk) 05:10, 29 July 2010 (UTC)


Nomination for deletion of Template:Class parameter

Ambox warning pn.svgTemplate:Class parameter has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)TCM☯ 02:01, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Track Generator[edit]

I need a little help as the track generator isn't recognizing the name function for only Atlantic 2010 storms. I can get it to make the season map, but I cannot get the names working. Could this be something to do with the syntax of how the name must be written or something near it interfering?Syntheticalconnections (talk)(my contribs) 19:20, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Nevermind, I got it fixed. Syntheticalconnections (talk)(my contribs) 19:48, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

J.D. Short[edit]

I note that you speedily deleted a page under this name on 14 September 2006 (CSD:A8). Can I assume it is permissible for me to create an article for this noteworthy Delta blues musician (as here - [1]). Thanks,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 11:04, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

The WikiProject Tropical Cyclones Newsletter #31[edit]

Number 31, September 10, 2010

The Hurricane Herald

This is the monthly newsletter of WikiProject Tropical Cyclones. The Hurricane Herald aims to give a summary, both of the activities of the WikiProject and global tropical cyclone activity. If you wish to change how you receive this newsletter, or no longer wish to receive it, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list. This newsletter covers all of August 2010.

Please visit this page and bookmark any suggestions of interest to you. This will help improve monitoring of the WikiProject's articles.

Storm of the month
Hurricane Frank is the storm of the Month.

Hurricane Frank

Tropical Depression Nine-E formed on August 21 south of the Gulf of Tehuantepec. It developed into a tropical storm the following morning. On August 23, Frank continued to intensify, but later faced shear and entered a period of weakening. However, on August 24, as shear decreased, it began to reorganize and strengthen again, becoming a hurricane on August 25. Two days later, Frank weakened into a tropical storm. Rapidly weakening overnight, NHC issued that it have been degraded into an remnant low. The area of low pressure associated with Frank was absorbed with another area of disturbed weather which later developed into Tropical Depression Ten-E.

Throughout Central America, Hurricane Frank produced torrential rain that resulted in at least 30 fatalities, most of which took place in Nicaragua and Honduras. In Guatemala alone, damage from the system was estimated to be up to $500 million. In Mexico, six deaths were reported. A total 30 homes were destroyed with 26 others damaged. Two major roads were damaged with another road blocked due to a landslides. Several rivers overflowed their banks as well. Losses from the storms totaled millions of dollars. Water Currents form a nearby volcano were damaged as well.


Other tropical cyclone activity

  • Atlantic Ocean– In the Atlantic Ocean, around three storms and one depression formed. Tropical Depression Four early on August 2. Early the next day, the depression strengthened further into a tropical storm and was named "Colin". Tropical Storm Colin was downgraded to a tropical depression late morning on August 8. Tropical Depression 5 formed on August 10, with no improvement, it dissipated within 24 hours. Tropical Depression Six developed near the Cape Verde Islands on August 21, the first of the series of Cape Verde-type storms. On August 22 the system attained tropical storm status, thus earning the name "Danielle" The next day it attained hurricane status, becoming the second of the season and strengthened further to a Category 2 hurricane. On August 27, Hurricane Danielle strengthened to a Category 3 hurricane, becoming the first major hurricane of the season, and further strengthened to a Category 4 hurricane shortly after.Danielle later weakened to a Category 3, then Category 2 hurricane, and later became a Category 1 Hurricane due to an eyewall replacement cycle, while avoiding land areas. It became extratropical early on August 31 southeast of Newfoundland without having directly impacted land. It was fully absorbed by a larger extratropical low on September 4 over Greenland. On August 25, Tropical Depression 7 formed east of Hurricane Danielle. Later that day it was upgraded to Tropical Storm Earl. On August 29, 2010 Earl strengthened to become the season's third hurricane. Earl then quickly intensified to become the season's second major hurricane on August 30. The hurricane weakened to a Category 3 hurricane after an eyewall replacement cycle before becoming a Category 4 again. Earl made landfall in the Canadian Maritime Provinces, twice in Nova Scotia and once in Prince Edward Island (PEI) at hurricane intensity. On August 30, when gale-force winds and better organization resulted in the development of Tropical Storm Fiona, skipping tropical depression status. It struggled to develop further, however, as it was hindered by high wind shear from the outflow of the much larger and stronger Earl.
  • Eastern Pacific Ocean– Three depressions formed in the Month of August. A tropical depression formed on August 5. slowly intensified, reaching tropical storm status on August 6. On August 9, it was downgraded into a tropical depression. On August 10th Estelle dissipated. Tropical Depression Eight-E formed on August 20. However, the depression weakened slightly overnight. The depression continued to weaken and the National Hurricane Center issued its final advisory on August 22. Tropical Depression Nine-E formed on August 21 south of the Gulf of Tehuantepec. It developed into a tropical storm the following morning. On August 25 it became a hurricane. Two days later, Frank weakened into a tropical storm. Rapidly weakening overnight, NHC issued that it have been degraded into an remnant low. Throughout Central America, Hurricane Frank produced torrential rain that resulted in at least 30 fatalities, most of which took place in Nicaragua and Honduras. In Guatemala alone, damage from the system was estimated to be up to $500 million. In Mexico, six deaths were reported. A total 30 homes were destroyed with 26 others damaged. Two major roads were damaged with another road blocked due to a landslides. Several rivers overflowed their banks as well. Losses from the storms totaled millions of dollars. Water Currents form a nearby volcano were damaged as well.
  • Western Pacific Ocean– Eight depression formed in the Month of August. Early on August 4, After Domeng, had merged with the low pressure area PAGASA reported that Domeng had intensified into a tropical storm and reached its 10-minute peak sustained windspeeds of 65 km/h (40 mph). In Luzon, heavy rain produced by the storm led to a few landslides, prompting road closures. Offshore, three people drowned after their boat capsized amidst rough seas produced by Domeng. Later that day PAGASA reported that Domeng had weakened into a tropical depression, before reporting early the next day that after it had passed through the Babuyan Islands, Domeng had weakened into an area of low pressure. Early on August 6, the JTWC reported that a tropical disturbance formed within the monsoon gyre about 800 km (500 mi) southeast of Taipei, Taiwan. During that day the JMA started to monitor the depression before the JTWC designated it as Tropical Depression 05W. The depression was then upgraded into a tropical storm by the JMA and named "Dianmu". After moving northward for several days, it turned northeastward and struck southern South Korea. Dianmu weakened as it crossed the Korean peninsula and emerged into the Sea of Japan. Heavy rains produced by the storm resulted in one fatality after a cargo ship sank amidst rough seas produced by the storm. This marked the first time in nine years that a rain-related fatality took place in the capital city of Seoul. More than 3,000 homes were destroyed in eastern China after heavy rains from the outer bands of Dianmu struck the region. The storm made landfall on Japan; exiting the country within five hours. Heavy rains were reported through out the islands. Nearly a week after the two ships sank off the coast of the Philippines, 31 crew members remain missing and are presumed dead after numerous coast guard rescue attempts. Damage from the storm on Jeju Island amounted to 5 billion won ($4.2 million USD). Early on August 17, an area of low pressure formed about 415 km (260 mi), northeast of Tuguegarao City, Cagayan. On the evening of August 18, as it crossed Babuyan Islands, the disturbance's low level center (LLC) weakened due to land interaction and high vertical wind shear. It regenerated on August 20 when it was located about 280 km (175 miles), to the west of Dagupan City, Pangasinan. Early on the next day, the LLCC of the disturbance became partially exposed due to a Tropical Upper Tropospheric Trough (TUTT) that was developing off Luzon at that time. On the afternoon of that day, Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA) upgraded the system into a tropical depression. The next day, they further upgraded the depression into a tropical storm and named it "Mindulle". At the same time, the JTWC reported that Tropical Depression 06W has intensified into a tropical storm. Thousands of fishermen were urged to return to port. According to Vietnamese officials, contact was lost with 10 vessels on August 24 and the 137 fishermen on the ships were listed as missing. Rainfall, peaking at 297 mm (11.7 in),[59] led to significant flooding and agricultural losses. A Tropical depression formed on August 26, it survived for three days with no change in strength. it rapidly traveled northwest and dissipated on August 29. On August 28, the JMA upgraded the system to a Tropical Storm and was named "Lionrock". Early of september 1, Lionrock made a Fujiwhara effect with Namtheun, whilst Lionrock maintained it's strength while Namtheun was absorbed. Lionrock made landfall on the east coast of Guangdong Province, China, just north of the city of Shantou. It then started to dissipate and weaken into a tropical storm and moved over Guangzhou, Guangdong's capital. Lionrock soon lost it's intensity as it went over Guangdong. Midday of August 29, the Joint Typhoon Warning Centre (JTWC) issued a Tropical Cyclone Formation Alert (TCFA) on the system as a Low Level Circulation Centre had become organized. On the morning of that same day, the JTWC announced that the system had quickly developed into a tropical storm and assigned the designation "08W". Intensification continued, then by midday of August 30, the JMA reported that the depression had intensified into a tropical storm and assigned it the international designation "Kompasu". In addition, PAGASA also announced that the low pressure in the northeast of Batanes had formed and assigned it a local name, "Glenda". At the same time, the JTWC also upgraded Kompasu into a category 1 typhoon. On the next day, Kompasu crossed the island of Kadena and rapidly intensified into a category 2 typhoon equivalent. On September 1, Kompasu was upgraded by JTWC as a category 3 typhoon equivalent, becoming the strongest typhoon of the season. The storm later weakened to a category one typhoon in the Yellow Sea, before veering northeast and making landfall on Ganghwa Island, northwest of Incheon and Seoul, killing at least four people.[61] Kompasu was the strongest tropical storm to hit the Seoul metropolitan area in 15 years. On August 27, an extensive cloud formed in the waters east of Taiwan. On August 28, it developed into a low pressure. At 18:00, near Yaeyama Islands, the Japan Meteorological Agency upgraded the low pressure into a tropical depression. There were two tropical cyclones developing on both sides of 09W (namely Lionrock and Kompasu), and Typhoon Kompasu had a relatively stronger intensity, causing 09W moved southwest to Taiwan Strait. On August 30, it caused heavy rain in northern Taiwan. Taiwan's Central Weather Bureau could only issue a tropical depression warning since it had not strengthened to a tropical storm. At 20:00, 09W suddenly intensified into a tropical storm, and was named Namtheun. However, due to the development of another stronger tropical storm Lionrock at South China Sea, the increase of intensity of Namtheun was difficult. In the evening hours of August 31, Namtheun weakened into a tropical depression north of Taiwan Strait. Whilst Lionrock maintained it's strength while Namtheun was absorbed. Late on August 28, the Central Pacific Hurricane Center reported that an area of low pressure system associated with a tropical disturbance had developed about 1,000 mi (1,600 km) to the southwest of Honolulu in Hawaii. Isolated thunderstorms were developing in association with the small low-level circulation. During the next day the disturbance moved towards the west and moved into the western Pacific where the JMA immediately designated it as a tropical depression. The depression was expected to bring inclement weather to Majauro and nearby atolls, although the system significantly weakened before reaching the area.

Member of the month

Cyclone barnstar

The October member of the month is CrazyC83. Since joining the project near its inception, CrazyC83 has been involved in bringing twenty two articles to Good Article status and one article to Featured Article Status. Not only this, he is been working with the [[2010 Atlantic hurricane season 24/7. Our Favorite member Jason Rees looks like he has gone on a short break with the west, but he still continues with the east.


Storm Basics

  • A tropical cyclone is a storm system characterized by a large low-pressure center and numerous thunderstorms that produce strong winds and heavy rain.
  • While tropical cyclones can produce extremely powerful winds and torrential rain, they are also able to produce high waves and damaging storm surge as well as spawning tornadoes.
  • The term "tropical" refers to both the geographic origin of these systems, which form almost exclusively in tropical regions of the globe, and their formation in maritime tropical air masses.
  • Many tropical cyclones develop when the atmospheric conditions around a weak disturbance in the atmosphere are favorable. The background environment is modulated by climatological cycles and patterns such as the Madden-Julian oscillation, El Niño-Southern Oscillation, and the Atlantic multidecadal oscillation.

Storm article statistics




Project News
The Newsletter has been properly restarted by Anirudh Emani.

Editorial Member Award
This month the editorial member award has been disputed to CrazyC83 & Jason Rees. CrazyC83 has been working mainly with the 2010 Atlantic hurricane season while Jason Rees is working with the 2010 Pacific typhoon season. Jason has also created sandboxes for western Pacific Typhoons and North Indian ocean cyclones, Rashmi and Dianmu are a few good examples of this work. Anirudh Emani (talk) 08:35, 10 September 2010 (UTC)


Anirudh Emani (talk) 11:06, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Category 3 Examples Under "Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale" Article[edit]

I am challenging your reversion of my addition of Hurricane Katrina (2005) as an example of a Category 3 hurricane.

Does your individual opinion trump the aggregate opinions expressed in the Hurricane Katrina article? This article unequivocally describes Hurricane Katrina as follows: "The storm weakened before making its second landfall as a Category 3 storm on the morning of Monday, August 29 in southeast Louisiana."

Please reverse your reversion of my edit today. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikithinker2 (talkcontribs) 20:35, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Katrina is a bad example. It was a Cat. 5, and the article says "Storms of this intensity include...", and when it made landfall, it made landfall as a Cat 3 with a cat 5 storm surge. Darren23Edits|Mail 20:42, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Dvorak chart[edit]

Very nice! Looks much prettier and more professional. Also very informational and great use of color to help the reader navigate what is kind of a long chart. TimL (talk) 21:32, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Help regarding Copy Editing...[edit]

Hello, i want your help regarding the copy editing, general fixes and grammatical mistakes in the following articles related to Meteorology.

Waiting for your reply. Regards...


Nabil rais2008 (talk) 15:17, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

ITN for 2010 Ecuador crisis[edit]

--BorgQueen (talk) 00:03, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Template:Highest ACE Atlantic hurricane seasons navbox[edit]

About the template you made Template:Highest ACE Atlantic hurricane seasons navbox, I recently created a table for the ACE totals on the 1998 season page and discovered the totals were extremely close to those in 1887. So I consulted with the Talk:Accumulated cyclone energy/Atlantic by year page and added up all of the numbers of ACE for both 1887 and 1998. With all of the numbers added up, 1887 had a total of about 181.565 (it was rounded to 182 on the 1887 page) and 1998 was at 181.77; which means that the 1887 Atlantic hurricane season is incorrectly listed as 10th highest on that template, but it should actually be 1998. --12george1 (talk) 16:26, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

The WikiProject Tropical Cyclones Newsletter#32B[edit]

{{Wikipedia:WikiProject Tropical cyclones/Newsletter/Archive 32B}} --Anirudh Emani (talk) 10:11, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Incomplete etymology of typhoon[edit]

Hi, I hope you won't mind my saying this, but the paragraph you inserted on the etymology of the word "typhoon" seems a little high-handed, incomplete and poorly referenced. You mention only an Asian etymology (itself somewhat questionable: why Mandarin, not Cantonese, or Japanese?), without mention of the well-documented Greek/Arabic/Portuguese/etc. etymologies. And your reference, a Chinese popularizing site, hardly seems authoritative. See for example the discussion in the Typhoon talk page or Tropical_cyclone#Origin_of_storm_terms. Would you mind if I updated your paragraph to include more information and references on this? --Kai Carver (talk) 06:06, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

SandyGeorgia[edit]

Thank you. I seem to have wound her up a huge amount, I never intended to. She seems to have responded much more positively to you. Theresa Knott | Sort that Knee! 20:07, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

I always respond positively to decent folk like Tito. YMMV. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:37, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Aged 60[edit]

Your edit has been questioned at WP:ERRORS#Errors in In the news. Art LaPella (talk) 15:52, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

SophiaBLiu's Research Request[edit]

My name is Sophia and I am a PhD student at University of Colorado in Boulder researching the use of social media for historically significant crises like Hurricane Katrina. I am interested in what kind of values and practices are emerging from these disasters especially with the use of ubiquitous technologies like blogs and social media sites like Wikipedia. I am contacting you because I noticed you are one of the top contributors of the Hurricane Katrina Wikipedia article. I was wondering if you would be open to answering some questions for my dissertation research on this topic. One example of a question I have is: You provided a considerable amount of edits to the Hurricane Katrina Wikipedia article. What kind of edits did you make? What story was being told before you edited the article and how does that differ from what is in Wikipedia now? Feel free to email me at Sophia.Liu@colorado.edu if you have any questions. Thanks for your time, Sophia --Sophiabliu (talk) 05:47, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

NWP[edit]

I've asked Feline Hymnic (hope I spelled that right) to look over the NWP article. They had some input a couple years back, and just made an edit. Hopefully, they'll be able to provide some of the input we've been lacking from others. Thegreatdr (talk) 18:29, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. To clarify. I have no meteorological training at all, although I do have a science background (my previous day-job for many years was systems admin. of UNIX computers in a major science-research university in the UK). So my comments are highlighting the questions that arise as I read the article, and that perhaps need expansion for a non-met audience. (Where the answer is reasonably obvious to me, I'm editing the article, but where there is doubt in my mind, I'm leaving a comment on the talk page.) Hope that helps. Feline Hymnic (talk) 19:27, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
The version of the book I found online did not pass page 45. Do you have a link to the figure they're talking about? The second reviewer's comments are why other science folk on wikipedia tend not to take the GAN/FAC process seriously (all referencing issues, no content issues). If they're not going to delve into the referencing to look for issues with the text of the article, how do they know it is FAC worthy? Thegreatdr (talk) 20:42, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
I've pinged Short_Brigade_Harvester_Boris, who has been critical of met articles after the FAC/GAN process has ended. He could provide some good feedback. Thegreatdr (talk) 20:54, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
The flow chart may be simplistic, but it might help the lay reader understand what's going on. BTW...do we discuss MOS in this article? =O If not, we should. Thegreatdr (talk) 21:38, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
There is now a section on MOS. That was an interesting oversight. Thegreatdr (talk) 21:59, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
I'll be back to the NWP article on Tuesday, when I have a few days off to work on issues. I'm nearing the end of my workweek. Thegreatdr (talk) 23:42, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
  • I've moved relevant content from this article to atmospheric model, and have begun adding a paramaterization section to the Atmospheric model article. Since no one has brought it up (yet?) within the NWP article, I'm keeping this content out of it for the time being. A parameterization section within the NWP article could become extremely involved, as it would have to talk about ocean modeling, tropical cyclone modeling, and AQ modeling as well. Just know that it is being added to the Atmospheric model and parametrization (climate) articles, in case the issue comes up. It looks like you've taken care of the issues that have arisen over the past 2-3 days within the NWP FAC. Thegreatdr (talk) 13:30, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
  • History of numerical weather prediction article has been created as a subarticle, which allows us to get around the previous information duplication noted by the latest FAC commenter. A WikiBot has flagged it, since the NWP article was mirrored on another website, and it thinks I copied it off the internet. Oy. Thegreatdr (talk) 15:30, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
    • That's probably fine. I don't think that info is duplicated elsewhere in the article. It did solve the problem of talking about types of models multiple times, which I think was our reviewer's concern. Won't know until they provide feedback though. Back to copyediting 1953 AHS.... Thegreatdr (talk) 22:23, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Made changes to the history and climate sections per FAC comments. So far, their suggestions have been specific enough that the issues have been fixable. I'm back on shifts (nights), so my wikipedia time is limited for the next several days, but I'll do what I can when I can. Thegreatdr (talk) 18:40, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
    • I'm back editing for another four days (days off). We seem to be getting one support per week in the FAC review. I'm trying to get more info from the second to last commentor about what is still missing here. I don't think this article is the place for all the math...several of the subarticles accomplish this task. I trying to fill out more info within the calc section per their comments though, where possible. Thegreatdr (talk) 16:30, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Added a new section on wildfires, which actually had a decent article already prepared on wikipedia. It originally used a rather non-wiki style, which I attempted to fix. Hopefully, this does not add much more work for us during FAC, which hasn't had a comment in many hours as it is. Thegreatdr (talk) 01:59, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
    • I spoke too soon. Now the refs are reformatted. Thegreatdr (talk) 02:21, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
      • I made some changes to the last section, per the most recent FAC comments. I don't think wikipedia standards allow us to write a final summary...this isn't a high school/college essay. When you proposed this as a group project back in December, is this what you envisioned? We've now spent almost 3 months on the improvement of this article. The sea surface temperature, weather buoy, and History of numerical weather prediction articles have successfully navigated GAN. Tropical cyclone forecast model is currently on GAN, and weather ship and spaghetti plot upgraded. You never know how a prospective FA is going to lead to broad changes within its supporting articles, and the met/TC projects as a whole. Thegreatdr (talk) 17:05, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:Test-de[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Mhiji 02:02, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Benfjensen image?[edit]

I understand your concern about fair use, but it is already on the page of the Congressman. However, why is it in the wrong column? It appears in the correct column of the table.Naraht (talk) 20:52, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

I accidently added my response to my own talk page, oh well. Anyway, I agree with what you said. However I did a little digging in regard to the photo. If you go to File:Benfjensen.jpg, it says it came from Benton Franklin "Ben" Jensen (1892 - 1970) - Find A Grave Memorial. However, if you click on the photo there, it goes to Benton Franklin "Ben" Jensen (1892 - 1970) - Find A Grave Photos, which says that the photo comes from "1959's "Pocket Congressional Directory of the Eighty-Sixth Congress."" and if you look at Congressional Pictorial Directory, it is clear that the Pocket Congressional Directories (which is what the Congressional Pictoral Directories used to be called) were US Government published works. Therefore, as best as I can tell, this picture is in the public domain. Is this good enough?Naraht (talk) 21:22, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
The image is definitely public domain. MatthewVanitas, the user who uploaded it, mistakenly thought it was a fair use image. I have since changed the licensing information on the file page. Also, Titoxd you really need to archive your talk page, it's way too long and took a while to load. Cheers. – Zntrip 22:28, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
That should work. Yeah, I need to do that soon. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 22:48, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

gavel[edit]

US Senate new gavel.jpg To show appreciation of your many additions to the currently labeled List of members of the United States Congress killed or wounded in office‎, I present you with the Senate gavel... just don't tell the senate I gave it to you.

Now get back in there and make it even better!

--Found5dollar (talk) 15:02, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Satellite temperature measurements[edit]

I'm still trying to figure out how editing numerical weather prediction got me over into an article which had previously been within the realm of the global warming set of articles. Anyway, could you look over the general appearance of this article, and let me know if I've made much of an improvement there over the past several days? It's a dicey proposition to edit any of the climate change-related articles, but in this case, like urban heat island a couple years back, it begged for wikification. Thegreatdr (talk) 22:51, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Tips on newpage and edit patrol?[edit]

Ello Titoxd, I've been noticing that I've been making a lot of reversions to pages that you've either recently reverted, or that I go to revert something and you've already beat me to the punch. I did a fair bit of newpage patrolling and vandalism watching last year, but really haven't done so in a long time (and was never that knowledgeable on it in the first place--though I did manage to get rollback, and how I did that is beyond me).

Any chance you can reference a decent tutorial or article, sort of a "newcomers guide to patrolling"? I know some of the basics, but occasionally I make an incorrect reversion or incorrectly tag an article for speedy deletion, and people tend to get cranky about it (understandably). I've skimmed through some of the articles like Wikipedia:Speedy_deletions and similar ones, but maybe you know of some tailored specifically to what I'm doing? (feel free to see my recent revisions, or a related complaint on my talk page). I use Huggle to keep an eye on the edit feed, and I use Twinkle for newpage patrol and for ease of adding warnings sometimes.

Any help would be appreciated. :-) Warbirdadmiral (talk) 09:07, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

[edit]

Any chance you can upload the anniversary jigsaw piece logo to the wiki as a separate file so we can include it in its full 135x155px glory in Wikipedia:Wikipedia logos? Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 09:42, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello! I uploaded here, cropped to 135x139px (because the top padding no longer is needed). (-: —David Levy 12:03, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Dakar Rally[edit]

Hello! You've asked to poke you when Dakar is concluded. The time has come I think. Also I hope you may be so kind as to post Chagin's record, even despite there are 50% to 50% pro and contra votes in the discussion. The ITN/R sports news are boring without winners. GreyHood Talk 16:25, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

I am not talking about untranscluding[edit]

Please see Wikipedia_talk:Good_article_nominations#Clarify_my_argument.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 09:12, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

What happened to User:Freakofnurture?[edit]

I guess you were close to that rogue admin. Any idea why he suddenly stopped editing one day? --129.130.32.204 (talk) 18:12, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

To be honest, I have no idea. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 20:33, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Citation removal in TC genesis article?[edit]

Why the removal of the citation dealing with coriolis? Was the proof not within the citation, or was the citation not considered primary? Thegreatdr (talk) 21:38, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm confused. I added a citation... Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 21:41, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
I'm clearly tired. Carry on. =) Thegreatdr (talk) 22:06, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Stale[edit]

Hi there. In this edit you removed my report as "stale". Can you please help me understand what a stale report is? The last edit made by the IP (which I had to revert) was at 05:00, 11 February 2011. My report was at 09:21, 11 February 2011. You removed the report at 10:49, 11 February 2011. --Muhandes (talk) 16:18, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

I removed that report since the IP had not made any edits in the last five hours, so for our purposes he/she stopped vandalizing. If the IP resumes making those sorts of edits, he can be re-reported without any problems. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 19:56, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the answer, but he most probably just went to sleep. This is not a rotating IP - this is an editor with a long history, this being the third offense on the same articles. Every time he decides to vandalize I spend two hours undoing it, which I really don't like, so understand why I care when my report goes ignored. Of course, I can report it next time, but that will still cause two hours lost of my time. But if these are the rules, though they are not smart, I guess there is nothing I can do. --Muhandes (talk) 20:08, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
If this has been going on for a while, you can report it at WP:AN/I and everyone will take a look at it, and determine whether longer-term blocks are necessary. AIV's purpose is to deal with problems that are occurring as we speak, and thus reports that are several hours old probably won't get acted on there. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 20:14, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for the clarification. --Muhandes (talk) 21:16, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Re:fake hurricane season articles[edit]

Okay. Thanks! I did not know that you could do that. And the fake hurricane season articles are just practice so I can do better in future articles and edits. The only reason I do not delete the pages is because I want to try editing those, for even more practice. Another reason is because I like to read over them, and see how good I have done. Again, I edit those pages, for practice so I can be better at editing real articles. Thanks again for the helpful information, I will get on that.--Ryder 02:46, 14 February 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryder Busby (talkcontribs)

sandbox[edit]

  • feel free to edit my sandbox, if it seems worth the trouble. I hope it is helpful. Good night. – Peacock.Lane 12:21, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
    Will do when I wake up. It's an ungodly hour here as well and I should be sleeping instead. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 12:25, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

MfD close template[edit]

The MfD close template should go above the header; see my edit here. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:47, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

weather numbers[edit]

  • Please read my comment at FAC first, then see my sandbox. Tks. – Peacock.Lane 01:49, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Hurricane Karl (2010)‎[edit]

Firstly let me state that I am aware of WP:WRONGVERSION, however I stil think you have protected this in the wrong place as I don't think that as a general rule wrong version should apply to pages where an ongoing move discussion is taken place - it should be protected at the stable version. There's a simple reason for this - it screw's up the requested move discussion. I've seen them closed as already moved (not least because the tag effectively says this), people vote the wrong way because they get confused and all sorts of other silliness go on when a page is moved in the middle of the discussion and for this reason such moves are normally reverted. Protecting the page is the "non-stable" location will only make the discussion harder. Therefore I ask that you apply some common sense and move it back. That said I realise that I'm involved in the discussion (although that's not my reason for asking for it to be moved back) and that wrong version is generally accepted so I'd understand if you don't. I would start an RfC on whether wrongversion should apply in cases like this but it would probably get so little participation as to be worthless. Dpmuk (talk) 01:03, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Thought that may be your response. As I say i think the protection policy is wrong in this instance and I'd have hoped you'd have ignored all rules although I can fully understand your reluctance to do so. I've seen this issue a few times (as I generally help out as much as a non-admin can at WP:RM) and do think it's an issue. I will start an RfC at some point as if it's in the protection policy that it should be protected at the name that was in use when the RM started then it's a clear cut policy and admins would be able to point to it as their reasoning and still have the same level of "neutrality". Dpmuk (talk) 11:17, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Unprotection of the MOS[edit]

Hi Titoxd. A few editors are asking about the protection of WP:MOS and want to know what is needed for it to be unprotected; since you are the protecting admin, I thought it would be best for you to comment. See Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#Deal with the issue that led to this protection. Regards, Dabomb87 (talk) 22:44, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost interview[edit]

For helping out with GAN, when I suddenly became snowed under...[edit]

Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar.png


The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
I hereby award thee the Random Acts of Kindness barnstar for helping out with the Tropical Cyclone Forecast Model GAN when two other GAN nominations suddenly became active. Thegreatdr (talk) 00:30, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

For your work on the TC project[edit]

WikiprojectBarnstar.png The WikiProject Barnstar
You are the only person in the TC project who can get this barnstar, since you are its founder. Even after 5.5 years, you continue to try to improve the project through efforts such as collaboration of the fortnight. It is appreciated. Thegreatdr (talk) 14:16, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

ITN update[edit]

Hi! Can you please take a look at this proposed blurb expansion - Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates#.5BUpdate_proposal.5D_Judgement_of_Ante_Gotovina. Thanks.--Avala (talk) 20:53, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

It seems there are no objections.--Avala (talk) 11:43, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

MoS protection[edit]

Hiya Titoxd,

It's been a while since I've worked on the MoS at all, but I figured that I'd go and add a simple little "see also" link that should be non-controversial (which, I know, it being the MoS, I'm probably being overly optimistic, but still) only to find that the page has been full protected for more than 2 months now.

So, I go to the talk page to see what's up, only to find... nothing. Luckily, I'm experienced enough to know that I need to look at the archive. Sure enough, I see that the issue is the (ongoing?) dash war. *sigh*

Anyway, I was about to start another discussion on the MoS talk page, but I figured that I'd come to you first as just ask for un-protection. Granted, Tony, PMA, Noetica, etc... are probably watching your talk page, so my hope that a quiet un-protection will allow things to proceed smoothly is likely just wishful thinking. Still, I wanted to at least ask, and see what happened. "Nothing ventured...", and all. Regards,
— V = IR (Talk • Contribs) 02:15, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Phoenix Wiknic[edit]

Phoenix Wiknic is ready to go (pending a few minor tweaks) --Jax 0677 (talk) 23:41, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Temporada de huracanes en el Pacífico de 2011[edit]

Hi there Titoxd! Just a line to say a huge THANK YOU for taking care of the article. It gets a bit lonely there sometimes! Greetings! --Sol de Mayo-Bandera de Uruguay.svgIzmir2 (Speak you mind) —Preceding undated comment added 01:43, 9 June 2011 (UTC).

RE: Note about Inciweb[edit]

I had no idea Inciweb had a page for each individual incident.... Thanks for the heads up! Dusty777 (talk) 21:40, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Image shrunk[edit]

I shrunk the image on Cirrus cloud. Does it look good on your screen now, or should I shrink it to 350px? Thanks! Reaper Eternal (talk) 01:24, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

In The News for 2011 Egyptian revolution[edit]

I think it's ready to be posted. What do you think? -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 07:46, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

oh darn[edit]

Oh darn, I just wrote out an unblock message, which I now won't get to use. J/k, but maybe I will post my thoughts to the editor.--SPhilbrickT 20:49, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Hey there[edit]

Mind updating the file File:2011 Atlantic hurricane season summary map.png to have Cindy, and extend Bret's track? Thanks! Hurricanefan25 tropical cyclone 21:14, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

thanks, unsung hero[edit]

Thanks for unblocking me. An editor since 10.28.2010. 23:37, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Good Article promotion[edit]

Anemoscopi.JPG Congratulations!
Thanks for all the work you did in making Hurricane Alex (2010) a certified "Good Article"! Your work is much appreciated.

In the spirit of celebration, you may wish to review one of the Good Article nominees that someone else nominated, as there is currently a backlog, and any help is appreciated. All the best, – Quadell (talk)

Suggestion for WikiProject United States to support WikiProject Arizona[edit]

It was recently suggested that WikiProject Arizona, to which you are a member, may be inactive or semiactive and it might be beneficial to include it in the list of projects supported by WikiProject United States. After reviewing the project it appears that there haven't been much active discussion on the talk page in some time and the only content updates appear to be simple maintenance so being supported by a larger project might be beneficial. I have begun a discussion on the projects talk page to see how the members of the project feel about this suggestion. Another user has added the project to the WPUS template and I added it to the list of supported projects in the WPUS main project page but before I take any further action I wanted to contact each of the active members for their input. --Kumioko (talk) 22:54, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Main page appearance[edit]

Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on August 10, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/August 10, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article directors Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tbhotch. Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 03:59, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry[edit]

I honestly meant no "dig" at you at all Titoxd. Was just explaining why I posted after I said I'd shut up. I'm very sorry if it came across that way. — Ched :  ?  06:54, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi Titoxd. I replied both on my talk to you directly, and on the crat page in general. I honestly do thank you for helping me realize that my post(s) could have come across so poorly. Cheers and best. — Ched :  ?  07:33, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Arizona USAD medals.JPG[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Arizona USAD medals.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Monty845 03:31, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Hurricane tracks[edit]

I can't figure out how to download the tropical cyclone track software. I have Cairo. Can you please help? Thanks! HurricaneFan25 17:07, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Interested in talking to you about Hurricane Irene revisions[edit]

Hi, I'm Lauren Orsini, a reporter at the Daily Dot (dailydot.com). I'm contacting you and a few other top editor to the Hurricane Irene page to do a story about how Wikipedia pages are built around events as they are still occurring. If you're interested, please contact me on Wikipedia or at lauren@dailydot.com, the sooner the better (I might lose power in this storm). And pardon any mistakes -- I'm brand new. Laureninspace (talk) 19:48, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

September 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States[edit]

WikiProject United States logo.svg

The September 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 02:40, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Hurricane barnstar[edit]

Do you have a larger version of this file: Cyclone barnstar.png by any chance? Inks.LWC (talk) 06:59, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Sadly, no. The file was based from File:Original Barnstar.png, which has the same resolution issues. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 07:17, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
No problem - it looks like the image is just big enough anyway. Inks.LWC (talk) 07:22, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Indeed[edit]

Clearly the work I did during the first four months of the year on the various numerical weather prediction articles has rendered incapable of significant edits ever since. =) Thanks for the correction. Thegreatdr (talk) 03:32, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Good for you. Differential equations destroyed the grad path for me. Maybe someday I'll go for an MS,. Thegreatdr (talk) 04:38, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

December 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States[edit]

WikiProject United States logo.svg

The December 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 04:00, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2012 WikiCup[edit]

Hello, and welcome to the 2012 WikiCup! The competition officially begins at the start of 2012 (UTC) after which time you may begin to claim points. Your submission page, where you must note any content for which you wish to claim points, can be found here, and formatting instructions can be found in hidden comments on the page. A bot will then update the main table, which can be seen on the WikiCup page. The full rules for what will and will not be awarded points can be found at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring. There's also a section on that page listing the changes that have been made to the rules this year, so that experienced participants can get up-to-date in a few seconds. One point of which we must remind everyone; you may only claim points for content upon which you have done significant work, and which you have nominated, in 2012. For instance, articles written or good article reviews started in 2011 are not eligible for points.

This round will last until late February, and signups will remain open until the middle of February. If you know of anyone who may like to take part, please let them know about the comeptition; the more the merrier! At the end of this round, the top 64 scorers will progress to the next round, where their scores will reset, and they will be split into pools. Note that, by default, you have been added to our newsletter list; we will be in contact at the end of every month with news. You're welcome to remove yourself from this list if you do not wish to hear from us. Conversely, those interested in following the competition are more than welcome to add themselves to the list. Please direct any questions towards the judges, or on the WikiCup talk page. Good luck! J Milburn (talk) and The ed17 (talk) 17:56, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Hurricane Gilbert, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Barahona (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:53, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

High Five Interchange review[edit]

Hi,

Thanks for the review! I have replied to your comments. Please tell me if there is more I can do to fix the article.

Best wishes,

MathewTownsend (talk) 16:37, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I think I'm all done! Ref 3 was a Press release so I stuck that in for author. Not sure the McGraw Hill book is the same edition as linked to, and I don't know page number. Hope it's all ok! MathewTownsend (talk) 21:24, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
Thank you so much! MathewTownsend (talk) 22:15, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

in the works where[edit]

January 2012 Newsletter for WikiProject United States and supported projects[edit]

WikiProject United States logo.svg

The January 2012 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumi-Taskbot (talk) 19:50, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Barnstar[edit]

Original Barnstar.png The Original Barnstar
This barnstar is awarded to everyone who - whatever their opinion - contributed to the discussion about Wikipedia and SOPA. Thank you for being a part of the discussion. Presented by the Wikimedia Foundation.

WP Tropical Cyclones in the Signpost[edit]

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Tropical Cyclones for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 06:10, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 January newsletter[edit]

Trophy.png

WikiCup 2012 is off to a flying start. At the time of writing, we have 112 contestants; comparable to last year, but slightly fewer than 2010. Signups will remain open for another week, after which time they will be closed for this year. Our currrent far-away leader is Conradh na Gaeilge Grapple X (submissions), due mostly to his work on a slew of good articles about The X-Files; there remain many such articles waiting to be reviewed at good article candidates. Second place is currently held by Minnesota Ruby2010 (submissions), whose points come mostly from good articles about television episodes, although good article reviews, did you knows and an article about a baroness round out the score. In third place is Mauritius Jivesh boodhun (submissions), who has scored 200 points for his work on a single featured article, as well as points for work on others, mostly in the area of pop music. In all, nine users have 100 or more points. However, at the other end of the scale, there are still dozens of participants who are yet to score. Please remember to update your submission pages promptly!

The 64 highest scoring participants will advance to round 2 in a month's time. There, they will be split into eight random groups of eight. The score needed to reach the next round is not at all clear; last year, 8 points guaranteed a place. The year before, 20.

A few participants and their work warrant a mention for achieving "firsts" in this competition.

  • Florida 12george1 (submissions) was the first to score, with his good article review of Illinois v. McArthur.
  • Florida 12george1 (submissions) was also the first to score points for an article, thanks to his work on Hurricane Debby (1982)- now a good article. Tropical storms have featured heavily in the Cup, and good articles currently have a relatively fast turnaround time for reviews.
  • Russia Sp33dyphil (submissions) was the first to score points for a did you know, with Russian submarine K-114 Tula. Military history is another subject which has seen a lot of Cup activity.
  • Russia Sp33dyphil (submissions) is also the first person to successfully claim bonus points. Terminator 2: Judgment Day is now a good article, and was eligible for bonus points because the subject was covered on more than 20 other Wikipedias at the start of the competition. It is fantastic to see bonus points being claimed so early!
  • Byzantine Empire Speciate (submissions) was the first to score points for an In the News entry, with Paedophryne amauensis. The lead image from the article was also used on the main page for a time, and it's certainly eye-catching!
  • Mauritius Jivesh boodhun (submissions) was the first to score points for a featured article, and is, at the moment, the only competitor to claim for one. The article, "Halo" (Beyoncé Knowles song), was also worth double points because of its wide coverage. While this is an article that Jivesh and others have worked on for some time, it is undeniable that he has put considerable work into it this year, pushing it over the edge.

We are yet to see any featured lists, featured topics or good topics, but this is unsurprising; firstly, the nomination processes with each of these can take some time, and, secondly, it can take a considerable amount of time to work content to this level. In a similar vein, we have seen only one featured article. The requirement that content must have been worked on this year to be eligible means that we did not expect to see these at the start of the competition. No points have been claimed for featured portals or pictures, but these are not content types which are often claimed; the former has never made a big impact on the WikiCup, while the latter has not done so since 2009's competition.

A quick rules clarification before the regular notices: If you are concerned that another user is claiming points inappropriately, please contact a judge to take a look at the article. Competitors policing one another can create a bad atmosphere, and may lead to inconsistencies and mistakes. Rest assured that we, the judges, are making an effort to check submissions, but it is possible that we will miss something. On a loosely related note: If you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, 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 are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 00:20, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment at Movement for the Intellectually Disabled of Singapore's ongoing peer review![edit]

Since you have listed yourself as a peer review volunteer interested in copyediting, would you like to support the quest to counter systemic bias on Wikipedia by giving a thorough review of the article Movement for the Intellectually Disabled of Singapore? MINDS turns 50 this year and getting their article to GA status would be a great way to appreciate their support of intellectually disabled Singaporeans. Thanks! 谢谢!Terima kasih! நன்றி! --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 09:43, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

MSU Interview[edit]

Dear Titoxd,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and

Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's

Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we

teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community,

and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what

you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community

[[Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)/Archive_82#Learn_to_be_a_Wikipedia_Administrator_-

_New_class_at_MSU|HERE]], where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my

students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training,

motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one

of our students.


So a few things about the interviews:

  • Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
  • Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of

communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)

  • All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will

never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.

  • All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an

interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.

  • The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics

review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have

been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.


Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak

with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I

will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your

name HERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be

more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 07:26, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Young June Sah --Yjune.sah (talk) 21:50, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Transitional Fossil peer-review[edit]

It is a very important subject, and I wish to take it to GA/FA status in the future. Your expert input would be highly valued. --Harizotoh9 (talk) 00:15, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 February newsletter[edit]

Trophy.png

Round 1 is already over! The 64 highest scorers have progressed to round 2. Our highest scorer was Conradh na Gaeilge Grapple X (submissions), again thanks mostly to a swathe of good articles on The X-Files. In second place was United Kingdom Tigerboy1966 (submissions), thanks an impressive list of did you knows about racehorses. Both scored over 400 points. Following behind with over 300 points were Minnesota Ruby2010 (submissions), Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions), Wisconsin Miyagawa (submissions) and Scotland Casliber (submissions). February also saw the competition's first featured list: List of colleges and universities in North Dakota, from Minnesota Ruby2010 (submissions). At the other end of the scale, 11 points was enough to secure a place in this round, and some contestants with 10 points made it into the round on a tiebreaker. This is higher than the 8 points that were needed last year, but lower than the 20 points required the year before. The number of points required to progress to round 3 will be significantly higher.

The remaining contestants have been split into 8 pools of 8, named A through H. Round two will finish in two months time on 28 April, when the two highest scorers in each pool, as well as the next 16 highest scorers, will progress to round 3. The pools were entirely random, so while some pools may end up being more competitive than others, this is by chance rather than design.

The judges would like to point out two quick rules reminders. First, any content promoted during the interim period (that is, on or after 27 February) is eligible for points in round 2. Second, any content worked on significantly this year is eligible for points if promoted in this round. On a related note, if you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which would otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, 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 receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talkemail) and The ed17 (talkemail) 00:10, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Last year was the peak, it seems[edit]

Our involvement in the article of the fortnight last year for numerical weather prediction was probably the best experience I've had so far in wikipedia, and the best since the extratropical cyclone and tropical cyclone FA experiences, despite its three month duration. I wish the TC and met projects always worked like that. You may have noticed that, outside the past month, what little editing I've done has been relegated to wikilinks, spelling problems, and other minutia. I think after over six years, with minimal help within the meteorology articles, that this whole experience has become less "one team working together" and more "what article am I going to have to edit now which has been abandoned for years". I see the same problems within the TC project that were recently touched upon in the recent signpost article. It's funny....I used to make the same mistakes in 2006/2007 myself. Since the Chacor issues 5 years ago, I've been trying to be more supportive of new reviewers, but this only seems to be upsetting the established editors within the TC and met projects. I'm not resigning from wikipedia per se, but I'm likely going to stay much more in the background of the met and TC projects as a lurker rather than as an editor. I just don't see much of a point in editing within this environment anymore. It lost its fun. Thegreatdr (talk) 03:21, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

You could always try out WP:SEVERE event articles...that WikiProject seems to have had some dire issues getting content to GA/FA status, and I'd be willing to pitch in and help out on some of the more recent articles (2011 outbreaks and on) as much as I could. I've never really been a big content editor; I seem to start working on an article and then forget about it relatively quickly (articles like 2011 Joplin tornado), not to mention I don't know really know the subtleties of references, prose, etc that make an article featured quality. All in all, I'd love to have some help and guidance brushing up the tornado outbreak articles from someone knowledgeable about GA/FA writing, and the editing environment seems less hectic, busy, and pressured than I've gotten the impression the tropical cyclone project has. Food for thought, at least. Ks0stm (TCGE) 04:15, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 March newsletter[edit]

Trophy.png

We are over half way through the second round of this year's WikiCup and things are going well! Conradh na Gaeilge Grapple X (submissions), of Pool B, is our highest overall scorer thanks to his prolific writings on television and film. In second place is Pool H's Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions), thanks primarily to work on biological articles, especially in marine biology and herpetology. Third place goes to Pool E's Scotland Casliber (submissions), who also writes primarily on biology (including ornithology and botany) and has already submitted two featured articles this round. Of the 63 contestants remaining, 15 (just under a quarter) have over 100 points this round. However, 25 are yet to score. Please remember to update your submission pages promptly. 32 contestants, the top two from each pool and the 16 next-highest scorers, will advance to round 3.

Congratulations to Vanuatu Matthewedwards (submissions), whose impressive File:Wacht am Rhein map (Opaque).svg became the competition's first featured picture. Also, congratulations to Florida 12george1 (submissions), who claimed good topic points, our first contestant this year to do so, for his work on Wikipedia:Featured topics/1982 Atlantic hurricane season. This leaves featured topics and featured portals as the only sources of points not yet utilised. However, as recent statistics from Wisconsin Miyagawa (submissions) show, no source has yet been utilised this competition to the same extent it has been previously!

It has been observed that the backlogs at good article candidates are building up again. While the points for good article reviews will be remaining constant, any help that can be offered keeping the backlog down would be appreciated. On a related note, if you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. As ever, 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 receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talkemail) and The ed17 (talkemail) 23:30, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day[edit]

Edit day.svg Happy First Edit Day, Titoxd, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 00:28, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 April newsletter[edit]

Round 2 of this year's WikiCup is over, and so we are down to our final 32, in what could be called our quarter-finals. The two highest scorers from each pool, as well as the next 16 highest scorers overall, have entered round 3, while 30 participants have been eliminated. Pool B's Conradh na Gaeilge Grapple X (submissions) remains our top scorer with over 700 points; he continues to gain high numbers of points for his good articles on The X-Files, but also Millennium and other subjects. He has also gained points for a good topic, a featured list, multiple good article reviews and several did you knows. Pool E's Scotland Casliber (submissions) was second, thanks primarily to his biology articles, with Pool H's New York City Muboshgu (submissions) coming in third, with an impressive 46 did you knows, mostly on the subject of baseball. Casliber and Cwmhiraeth both scored over 600 points. Pools E and H proved our most successful, with each seeing 5 members qualify for round 3, while Pools C and D were the least, with each seeing only 3 reach round 3. However, it was Pool G which saw the lowest scoring, with a little under 400 points combined; Pool H, the highest scoring group, saw over triple that score.

65 points was the lowest qualifying score for round 3; significantly higher than the 11 required to enter round 2, and also higher than the 41 required to reach round 3 last year. However, in 2010, 100 points were needed to secure a place in round 3. 16 will progress to round 4. In round 3, 150 points was the 16th highest score, though, statistically, people tend to up their game a little in later rounds. Last year, 76 points secured a place, while in 2010, a massive 250 points were needed. Guessing how many points will be required is not easy. We still have not seen any featured portals or topics this year, but, on the subject of less common content types, a small correction needs to be made to the previous newsletter: File:Wacht am Rhein map (Opaque).svg, our first featured picture, was the work of both Vanuatu Matthewedwards (submissions) and United Kingdom Grandiose (submissions), the latter of whom has also gone on to score with File:Map of the Battle of Guam, 1944.svg. Bonus points also continue to roll in; this round, England Ealdgyth (submissions) earned triple points for her good articles on William the Conqueror and the Middle Ages, Casliber and Cwmhiraeth both earned triple points for their work on Western Jackdaw, now a good article, Michigan Dana Boomer (submissions) earned triple points for her work on lettuce and work by Bavaria Stone (submissions) to ready antimony for good article status earned him triple points. United Kingdom Jarry1250 (submissions) managed to expand Vitus Bering far enough for a did you know, which was also worth triple points. All of these highly important topics featured on 50 or more Wikipedias at the start of the year.

An article on the WikiCup in the Wikimedia Blog, "Improving Wikipedia with friendly competition", was posted at the end of April. This may be of interest to those who are signed up to this newsletter, as well as serving as another way to draw attention to our project. Also, we would again like to thank United Kingdom Jarry1250 (submissions) and Bavaria Stone (submissions), for continued help behind the scenes. As ever, if you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. 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 receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talkemail) and The ed17 (talkemail) 23:23, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Great American Wiknic for Phoenix in June[edit]

Wiknic logo.svg

Hi Titox. I would like to invite you and Phoenix to again join the Great American Wiknic this June (Wikipedia:Meetup/Phoenix 3 ?) :) Also, please confirm any preliminary details at Wikipedia:Wiknic#2012 Wiknic.--Pharos (talk) 20:01, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Geronimo Jackson listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Geronimo Jackson. Since you had some involvement with the Geronimo Jackson redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). —Justin (koavf)TCM 09:21, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 May newsletter[edit]

Trophy.png

We're halfway through round 3 (or the quarter finals, if you prefer) and things are running smoothly. We're seeing very high scoring; as of the time of writing, the top 16 all have over 90 points. This has already proved to be more competative than this time last year- in 2011, 76 points secured a place, while in 2010, a massive 250 was the lowest qualifying score. People have also upped their game slightly from last round, which is to be expected as we approach the end of the competition. Leading Pool A is Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions), whose points have mostly come from a large number of did you knows on marine biology. Pool B's leader, Conradh na Gaeilge Grapple X (submissions), is for the first time not our highest scorer at the time of newsletter publication, but his good articles on The X-Files and Millenium keep him in second place overall. Wisconsin Miyagawa (submissions) leads Pool C, our quietest pool, with content in a variety of areas on a variety of topics. Pool D is led by Scotland Casliber (submissions), our current overall leader. Nearly half of Casliber's points come from his triple-scored Western Jackdaw, which is now a featured article.

This round has seen an unusually high number of featured lists, with nearly one in five remaining participants claiming one, and one user, New York City Muboshgu (submissions), claiming two. Miyagawa's featured list, 1936 Summer Olympics medal table, was even awarded double points. By comparison, good article reviews seem to be playing a smaller part, and featured topics portals remain two content-types still unutilised in this competition. Other than that, there isn't much to say! Things are coming along smoothly. As ever, 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 Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. 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 Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talkemail) and The ed17 (talkemail) 23:47, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 June newsletter[edit]

Trophy.png

Apologies for the lateness of this letter; our usual bot wasn't working. We are now entering round 4, our semi-finals, and have our final 16. A score of 243 was required to reach this round; significantly more than 2011's 76 points, and only a little behind 2010's 250 points. By comparison, last year, 150 points in round 4 secured a place in the final; in 2010, 430 were needed. Commiserations to Pool A's Minas Gerais igordebraga (submissions), who scored 242 points, missing out on a place in the round by a whisker. However, congratulations to Pool B's Conradh na Gaeilge Grapple X (submissions), whose television articles have brought him another round victory. Pool A's Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions) came second overall, with an impressive list of biological did you knows, good articles and featured articles. Third overall was Pool D's New York City Muboshgu (submissions), with a long list of contibutions, mostly relating to baseball. Of course, with the points resetting every round, the playing field has been levelled. The most successful Pool was Pool D, which saw seven into the final round. Pool B saw four, C saw three and Pool A saw only the two round leaders.

A quick note about other competitions taking place on Wikipedia which may be of interest. There are 13 days remaining in the June-July GAN backlog elimination drive, but it is not too late to take part. August will also see the return of The Core Contest- a one month long competition first run in 2007. While the WikiCup awards points for audited content on any subject, The Core Contest about is raw article improvement, focussing heavily on the most important articles on Wikipedia. As ever, 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 Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. 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 Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talkemail) and The ed17 (talkemail) 11:13, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Please comment at Ya Kun Kaya Toast's ongoing peer review![edit]

Since you have listed yourself as a peer review volunteer interested in copyediting articles, would you like to support the quest to counter systemic bias on Wikipedia by giving a thorough review of the short, but interesting, article about Ya Kun Kaya Toast, a multinational kaya toast chain and Singaporean cultural icon? Thanks! 谢谢!Terima kasih! நன்றி! --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 10:04, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

You get signal![edit]

Hi, I was wondering if I could interest you with Curiosity rover which will land on Mars on 5 August. We will get loads of new info onward which I hope to transition to Wikipedia. :) -- A Certain White Cat chi? 03:36, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Wikitest[edit]

I was reading your userpage! The Wikitst– Holy cow link is not working. BTW, you and I are the only two Wikipedians named "Tito" who are in in Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits Best--Tito Dutta 19:06, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 July newsletter[edit]

Trophy.png

We're approaching the beginning of 2012's final round. Pool A sees Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions) as the leader, with 300 points being awarded for the featured article Bivalvia, and Pool B sees Conradh na Gaeilge Grapple X (submissions) in the lead, with 10 good articles, and over 35 articles eligible for good topic points. Pool A sees New York City Muboshgu (submissions) in second place with a number of articles relating to baseball, while Pool B's Minnesota Ruby2010 (submissions) follows Grapple X, with a variety of contributions including the high-scoring, high-importance featured article on the 2010 film Pride & Prejudice. Ruby2010, like Grapple X, also claimed a number of good topic points; despite this, not a single point has been claimed for featured topics in the contest so far. The same is true for featured portals.

Currently, the eighth-place competitor (and so the lowest scorer who would reach the final round right now) has scored 332, more than double the 150 needed to reach the final round last year. In 2010, however, 430 was the lowest qualifying score. In this competition, we have generally seen scores closer to those in 2010 than those in 2011. Let's see what kind of benchmark we can set for future competitions! As ever, 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 Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. 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 Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talkemail) and The ed17 (talkemail) 22:35, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

your assistance please[edit]

You closed an {{afd}} on Ralph Kohlmann back in 2006. The nominator did not follow the advice of our deletion policy, and did not leave a courtesy heads-up on my talk page. I certainly would have weighed in, if he or she had done so.

I noted on Talk:Ralph Kohlmann#Afd "Our decisions are supposed to be reached through fair-minded discussion, until a consensus is arrived at. Afd is not truly a venue for fair-minded discussions when nominators choose to disclude those who are likely to disagree with them."

Could you please merge the revision histories of the original article and its talk page to the current article and talk page? Geo Swan (talk) 11:33, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 August newsletter[edit]

Trophy.png

The final is upon us! We are down to our final 8. A massive 573 was our lowest qualifying score; this is higher than the 150 points needed last year and the 430 needed in 2010. Even in 2009, when points were acquired for mainspace edit count in addition to audited content, 417 points secured a place. That leaves this year's WikiCup, by one measure at least, our most competitive ever. Our finalists, ordered by round 4 score, are:

  1. Conradh na Gaeilge Grapple X (submissions) once again finishes the round in first place, leading Pool B. Grapple X writes articles about television, and especially The X-Files and Millenium, with good articles making up the bulk of the score.
  2. Wisconsin Miyagawa (submissions) led Pool A this round. Fourth-place finalist last year, Miyagawa writes on a variety of topics, and has reached the final primarily off the back of his massive number of did you knows.
  3. Minnesota Ruby2010 (submissions) was second in Pool B. Ruby2010 writes primarily on television and film, and scores primarily from good articles.
  4. Scotland Casliber (submissions) finished third in Pool B. Casliber is something of a WikiCup veteran, having finished sixth in 2011 and fourth in 2010. Casliber writes on the natural sciences, including ornithology, botany and astronomy. Over half of Casliber's points this round were bonus points from the high-importance articles he has worked on.
  5. Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions) came second in Pool A. Also writing on biology, especially marine biology, Cwmhiraeth received 390 points for one featured article (Bivalvia) and one good article (pelican), topping up with a large number of did you knows.
  6. New York City Muboshgu (submissions) was third in Pool A. Muboshgu writes primarily on baseball, and this round saw Muboshgu's first featured article, Derek Jeter, promoted on its fourth attempt at FAC.
  7. Michigan Dana Boomer (submissions) was fourth in Pool A. She writes on a variety of topics, including horses, but this round also saw the high-importance lettuce reach featured article status.
  8. Canada Sasata (submissions) is another WikiCup veteran, having been a finalist in 2009 and 2010. He writes mostly on mycology.

However, we must also say goodbye to the eight who did not make the final, having fallen at the last hurdle: Russia GreatOrangePumpkin (submissions), England Ealdgyth (submissions), England Calvin999 (submissions), Poland Piotrus (submissions), North Carolina Toa Nidhiki05 (submissions), Florida 12george1 (submissions), Cherokee Nation The Bushranger (submissions) and Republic of Macedonia 1111tomica (submissions). We hope to see you all next year.

On the subject of next year, a discussion has been opened here. Come and have your say about the competition, and how you'd like it to run in the future. This brainstorming will go on for some time before more focused discussions/polls are opened. As ever, 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 Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. 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 Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talkemail) and The ed17 (talkemail) 00:26, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 September newsletter[edit]

Trophy.png

We're over half way through the final, and so it is less than a month until we know for certain our 2012 WikiCup champion. Conradh na Gaeilge Grapple X (submissions) currently leads, followed by Canada Sasata (submissions), Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions) and Scotland Casliber (submissions). However, we have no one resembling a breakaway leader, and so the competition is a long way from over. Next month's newsletter will feature a list of our winners (who are not necessarily only the finalists) and keep your eyes open for an article on the WikiCup in a future edition of The Signpost. The leaders are already on a par with last year's winners, but a long way from the huge scores seen in 2010. That said, a repeat of the competition from 2010 seems unlikely.

It is good to see that three-quarters of our finalists have already scored bonus points this round. This shows that, contrary to criticism that the WikiCup has received in the past, the competition does not merely incentivise the writing of trivial articles; instead, our top competitors are still spending their time contributing to high-importance articles, and bringing them to a high standard. This does a great service to the encyclopedia and its readers. Thank you, and good work!

The planning for next year's WikiCup is ongoing. Some straw polls have been opened concerning the scoring, and you can now sign up for next year's competition. As ever, 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 Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. 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 Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talkemail) and The ed17 (talkemail) J Milburn (talk) 20:05, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Help wanted[edit]

Hello, there is a new article called 2012-13 United States winter storm season that is providing information about the new naming system that The Weather Channel is giving major winter storms. I would much appreciate help from you there. I understand that you might be only based around tropical cyclones, but the way that the page should look is expected to be similar to most hurricane articles. Stop by and comment on the talk page if you would like to help, thanks! STO12 (talk) 22:41, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

The Lone Ranger (2013 film)[edit]

Hi. This redirect is causing a bit of a problem. We can't move Lone Ranger (2013 film) yet as the redirect is disallowing it. Could you delete that redirect? It would be most helpful. RAP (talk) 16:05 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Redirect is gone, page moved. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 16:30, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Titoxd. You have new messages at Template talk:Infobox hurricane current.
Message added 22:19, 5 October 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Anonymouse321 (talk) 22:19, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Talkback-1[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Titoxd. You have new messages at Template talk:Infobox hurricane current.
Message added 23:00, 5 October 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Anonymouse321 (talk) 23:00, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 October newsletter[edit]

Trophy.png

The 2012 WikiCup has come to a close; congratulations to Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions), our 2012 champion! Cwmhiraeth joins our exclusive club of previous winners: Dreamafter (2007), jj137 (2008), Durova (2009), Sturmvogel 66 (2010) and Hurricanehink (2011). Our final standings were as follows:

  1. Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions)
  2. Canada Sasata (submissions)
  3. Conradh na Gaeilge Grapple X (submissions)
  4. Scotland Casliber (submissions)
  5. New York City Muboshgu (submissions)
  6. Wisconsin Miyagawa (submissions)
  7. Minnesota Ruby2010 (submissions)
  8. Michigan Dana Boomer (submissions)

Prizes for first, second, third and fourth will be awarded, as will prizes for all those who reached the final eight. Every participant who scored in the competition will receive a ribbon of participation. In addition to the prizes based on placement, the following special prizes will be awarded based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, the prize is awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round.

Awards will be handed out in the coming days; please bear with us! This year's competition also saw fantastic contributions in all rounds, from newer Wikipedians contributing their first good or featured articles, right up to highly experienced Wikipedians chasing high scores and contributing to topics outside of their usual comfort zones. It would be impossible to name all of the participants who have achieved things to be proud of, but well done to all of you, and thanks! Wikipedia has certainly benefited from the work of this year's WikiCup participants.

Next year's WikiCup will begin in January. Currently, discussions and polls are open, and all contributions are welcome. You can also sign up for next year's competition. There will be no further newsletters this year, although brief notes may be sent out in December to remind everyone about the upcoming competition. It's been a pleasure to work with you all, and we hope to see you all in January! J Milburn (talkemail) and The ed17 (talkemail) 00:47, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia Loves Libraries Seattle[edit]

Decemmber 8 - Wikipedia Loves Libraries Seattle - You're invited
Seattle Public Library
  • Date Saturday, December 8, 2012
  • Time 10 a.m. – 3 p.m.
  • Location Seattle Public Library Meeting Room 1 on Level 4, Central Library, 1000 4th Avenue, Seattle WA, 98104
  • Event An editathon on Seattle-related Wikipedia articles with Wikipedia tutorials and Librarian assistance on hand.
  • Hashtag #wikiloveslib or #glamwiki.
  • Registration http://wll-seattle.eventbrite.com or use on-wiki regsistration.

Yours, Maximilianklein (talk) 04:10, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 starting soon[edit]

Hi there; you're receiving this message because you have previously shown interest in the WikiCup. This is just to remind you that the 2013 WikiCup will be starting on 1 January, and that signups will remain open throughout January. Old and new Wikipedians and WikiCup participants are warmly invited to take part in this year's competition. (Though, as a note to the more experienced participants, there have been a few small rules changes in the last few months.) If you have already signed up, let this be a reminder; you will receive a message with your submissions' page soon. Please direct any questions to the WikiCup talk page. Thanks! J Milburn 19:41, 30 December 2012 (UTC)


Science collaboration of the month[edit]

Hello: I've noticed your contributions to science-related articles, so if you're interested, check out:

From: Northamerica1000(talk) 07:13, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Happy New Year![edit]

The Winter Walk at Anglesey Abbey - geograph.org.uk - 862583.jpg Best wishes for the New Year!
Wishing you and yours a joyous, healthful, and productive 2013!

Please accept a belated thank you for the well wishes upon my retirement as FAC delegate, and apologies for the false alarm of my first—and hopefully last—retirement; the well wishes extended me were most kind, but I decided to return, re-committed, when another blocked sock was revealed as one of the factors aggravating the FA pages this year.

Maintaining standards in featured content requires vigilance, dedication and knowledge of people like you, who are needed; reviews are always welcome at FAC, FAR and TFA requests. Somehow, somehow we never ever seem to do nothin' completely nice and easy, but here's hoping that 2013 will see a peaceful road ahead and a return to the quality and comaraderie that defines the FA process, with the help of many dedicated Wikipedians!

SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:31, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 January newsletter[edit]

Trophy.png

Signups are now closed; we have our final 127 contestants for this year's competition. 64 contestants will make it to the next round at the end of February, but we're already seeing strong scoring compared to previous years. Colorado Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) currently leads, with 358 points. At this stage in 2012, the leader (Irish Citizen Army Grapple X (submissions)) had 342 points, while in 2011, the leader had 228 points. We also have a large number of scorers when compared with this stage in previous years. Florida 12george1 (submissions) was the first competitor to score this year, as he was last year, with a detailed good article review. Some other firsts:

Featured articles, portals and topics, as well as good topics, are yet to feature in the competition.

This year, the bonus points system has been reworked, with bonus points on offer for old articles prepared for did you know, and "multiplier" points reworked to become more linear. For details, please see Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring. There have been some teething problems as the bot has worked its way around the new system, but issues should mostly be ironed out- please report any problems to the WikiCup talk page. Here are some participants worthy of note with regards to the bonus points:

  • United States Ed! (submissions) was the first to score bonus points, with Portland-class cruiser, a good article.
  • Australia Hawkeye7 (submissions) has the highest overall bonus points, as well as the highest scoring article, thanks to his work on Enrico Fermi, now a good article. The biography of such a significant figure to the history of science warrants nearly five times the normal score.
  • Chicago HueSatLum (submissions) claimed bonus points for René Vautier and Nicolas de Fer, articles that did not exist on the English Wikipedia at the start of the year; a first for the WikiCup. The articles were eligible for bonus points because of fact they were both covered on a number of other Wikipedias.

Also, a quick mention of British Empire The C of E (submissions), who may well have already written the oddest article of the WikiCup this year: did you know that the Fucking mayor objected to Fucking Hell on the grounds that there was no Fucking brewery? The gauntlet has been thrown down; can anyone beat it?

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 Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. 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 Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talkemail) and The ed17 (talkemail) 00:59, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Winter storm naming[edit]

I just wanted to make you aware of this discussion I started at Winter storm naming. I have no intentions of making any changes to the article myself, but was just hoping to get input from editors previously involved in the article (or recently-closed AfD) in an effort to improve the article and clarify its purpose. I will leave any changes to the consensus of other editors who decide what's best. Your participation would be welcome, regardless of your views on the issue. Thank you. 76.189.111.199 (talk) 22:25, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 February newsletter[edit]

Round 1 is now over. The top 64 scorers have progressed to round 2, where they have been randomly split into eight pools of eight. At the end of April, the top two from each pool, as well as the 16 highest scorers from those remaining, will progress to round 3. Commiserations to those eliminated; if you're interested in still being involved in the WikiCup, able and willing reviewers will always be needed, and if you're interested in getting involved with other collaborative projects, take a look at the WikiWomen's Month discussed below.

Round 1 saw 21 competitors with over 100 points, which is fantastic; that suggests that this year's competition is going to be highly competative. Our lower scores indicate this, too: A score of 19 was required to reach round 2, which was significantly higher than the 11 points required in 2012 and 8 points required in 2011. The score needed to reach round 3 will be higher, and may depend on pool groupings. In 2011, 41 points secured a round 3 place, while in 2012, 65 was needed. Our top three scorers in round 1 were:

  1. Colorado Sturmvogel_66 (submissions), primarily for an array of warship GAs.
  2. London Miyagawa (submissions), primarily for an array of did you knows and good articles, some of which were awarded bonus points.
  3. New South Wales Casliber (submissions), due in no small part to Canis Minor, a featured article awarded a total of 340 points. A joint submission with Alaska Keilana (submissions), this is the highest scoring single article yet submitted in this year's competition.

Other contributors of note include:

Featured topics have still played no part in this year's competition, but once again, a curious contribution has been offered by British Empire The C of E (submissions): did you know that there is a Shit Brook in Shropshire? With April Fools' Day during the next round, there will probably be a good chance of more unusual articles...

March sees the WikiWomen's History Month, a series of collaborative efforts to aid the women's history WikiProject to coincide with Women's History Month and International Women's Day. A number of WikiCup participants have already started to take part. The project has a to-do list of articles needing work on the topic of women's history. Those interested in helping out with the project can find articles in need of attention there, or, alternatively, add articles to the list. Those interested in collaborating on articles on women's history are also welcome to use the WikiCup talk page to find others willing to lend a helping hand. Another collaboration currently running is an an effort from WikiCup participants to coordinate a number of Easter-themed did you know articles. Contributions are welcome!

A few final administrative issues. From now on, submission pages will need only a link to the article and a link to the nomination page, or, in the case of good article reviews, a link to the review only. See your submissions' page for details. This will hopefully make updating submission pages a little less tedious. 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 Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. 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 Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talkemail) and The ed17 (talkemail) J Milburn (talk) 11:57, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Lightning page revisions[edit]

Hello, I see you had interest in this page recently, so I wanted to invite you to take part in the major overhaul I have been working on. Thanks for your interest. Borealdreams (talk) 00:17, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 March newsletter[edit]

We are halfway through round two. Pool A sees the strongest competition, with five out of eight of its competitors scoring over 100, and Pool H is lagging, with half of its competitors yet to score. WikiCup veterans lead overall; Pool A's Colorado Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) (2010's winner) leads overall, with poolmate London Miyagawa (submissions) (a finalist in 2011 and 2012) not far behind. Pool F's New South Wales Casliber (submissions) (a finalist in 2010, 2011 and 2012) is in third. The top two scorers in each pool, as well as the next highest 16 scorers overall, will progress to round three at the end of April.

Today has seen a number of Easter-themed did you knows from WikiCup participants, and March has seen collaboration from contestants with WikiWomen's History Month. It's great to see the WikiCup being used as a locus of collaboration; if you know of any collaborative efforts going on, or want to start anything up, please feel free to use the WikiCup talk page to help find interested editors. As well as fostering collaboration, we're also seeing the Cup encouraging the improvement of high-importance articles through the bonus point system. Highlights from the last month include GAs on physicist Niels Bohr (Australia Hawkeye7 (submissions)), on the European hare (Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions)), on the constellation Circinus (Alaska Keilana (submissions) and New South Wales Casliber (submissions)) and on the Third Epistle of John (Indiana Cerebellum (submissions)). All of these subjects were covered on at least 50 Wikipedias at the beginning of the year and, subsequently, each contribution was awarded at least three times as many points as normal.

Wikipedians who enjoy friendly competition may be interested in participating in April's wikification drive. While wikifying an article is typically not considered "significant work" such that it can be claimed for WikiCup points, such gnomish work is often invaluable in keeping articles in shape, and is typically very helpful for new writers who may not be familiar with formatting norms.

A quick reminder: now, submission pages will need only a link to the article and a link to the nomination page, or, in the case of good article reviews, a link to the review only. See your submissions' page for details. This will hopefully make updating submission pages a little less tedious. 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 Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. 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 Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talkemail) and The ed17 (talkemail) J Milburn (talk) 22:54, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 April newsletter[edit]

We are a week into Round 3, but it is off to a flying start, with Republic of Rose Island Sven Manguard (submissions) claiming for the high-importance Portal:Sports and Portal:Geography (which are the first portals ever awarded bonus points in the WikiCup) and Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions) claiming for a did you know of sea, the highest scoring individual did you know article ever submitted for the WikiCup. Round 2 saw very impressive scores at close; first place New South Wales Casliber (submissions) and second place Colorado Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) both scored over 1000 points; a feat not seen in Round 2 since 2010. This, in part, has been made possible by the change in the bonus points rules, but is also testament to the quality of the competition this year. Pool C and Pool G were most competitive, with three quarters of participants making it to Round 3, while Pool D was the least, with only the top two scorers making it through. The lowest qualifying score was 123, significantly higher than last year's 65, 2011's 41 or even 2010's 100.

The next issue of The Signpost is due to include a brief update on the current WikiCup, comparing it to previous years' competitions. This may be of interest to current WikiCup followers, and may help bring some more new faces into the community. We would also like to note that this round includes an extra competitor to the 32 advertised, who has been added to a random pool. This extra inclusion seems to have been the fairest way to deal with a small mistake made before the beginning of this round, but should not affect the competition in a large way. If you have any questions or concerns about this, please feel free to contact one of the judges.

A rules clarification: content promoted between rounds can be claimed in the round after the break, but not the round before. The case in point is content promoted on 29/30 April, which may be claimed in this round. 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 Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. 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 Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talkemail) and The ed17 (talkemail) 16:18, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

You're invited: Spacefest Edit-a-thon Honoring Sally Ride - Tucson, AZ[edit]

Hope you can make our meetup in a couple of weeks :) Girona7 (talk) 18:40, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Women in Astronomy and Space Sciences Edit-a-thon - Tucson, AZ - You are invited!
Ride on the Middeck - GPN-2000-001081.jpg
Sally Ride was the first American woman in space and a champion of girls and women everywhere. Ride would have turned 62 on May 26th had the world not lost her to pancreatic cancer last July. To honor her enduring legacy, Arizonans and all attendees of SpaceFest are invited to gather on her birthday to edit and create Wikipedia entries on notable women in astronomy and the space sciences. Register to attend or sign up to participate remotely - visit this page to do either.
Girona7 (talk) 18:40, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Template:Hurricane season bar/button[edit]

What exactly is the purpose of the type parameter in Template:Hurricane season bar/button? It seems to me that we could just accomplish everything through the use of having more specific parameter entry into the intensity parameter. For the most part, everything is already in place to remove the type parameter; the only thing I'd have to do to make this fully ready to do is go through and replace where the templates use type=storm (to type=TS, for instance). Inks.LWC (talk) 22:38, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

A kitten for you![edit]

Kitten in a helmet.jpg

I can haz wikiz?

Hurricanehink (talk) 04:11, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 4[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tropical cyclone, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cirrus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 13:57, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 5[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tropical cyclone, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cirrus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:41, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 6[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tropical cyclone, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cirrus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 12:07, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

I award you this special barnstar[edit]

Tornadoes are like miniature hurricanes so I guess it's fitting The Perfect Storm Barnstar
Thank you very much for helping me in solving my program issues and for your improvement of the project track program. I made this way back when and I had almost forgotten about it, but I think you deserve the honor of this barnstar. Supportstorm (talk) 21:00, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 June newsletter[edit]

We are down to our final 16: the 2013 semi-finals are upon us. A score of 321 was required to survive round 3, further cementing this as the most competitive WikiCup yet; round 3 was survived in 2012 with 243 points, in 2011 with 76 points and in 2010 with 250 points. The change may in part be to do with the fact that more articles are now awarded bonus points, in addition to more competitive play. Reaching the final has, in the past, required 573 points (2012, a 135% increase on the score needed to reach round 4), 150 points (2011, a 97% increase) and 417 points (2010, a 72% increase). This round has seen over a third of participants claiming points for featured articles (with seven users claiming for multiple featured articles) and most users have also gained bonus points. However, the majority of points continue to come from good articles, followed by did you know articles. In this round, every content type was utilised by at least one user, proving that the WikiCup brings together content contributors from all corners of the project.

Round 3 saw a number of contributions of note. Idaho Figureskatingfan (submissions) claimed the first featured topic points in this year's competition for her excellent work on topics related to Maya Angelou, the noted American author and poet. We have also continued to see high-importance articles improved as part of the competition: Wyoming Ealdgyth (submissions) was awarded a thoroughly well-earned 560 points for her featured article Middle Ages and 102 points for her good article Battle of Hastings. Good articles James Chadwick and Stanislaw Ulam netted Australia Hawkeye7 (submissions) 102 and 72 points respectively, while 72 points were awarded to Poland Piotrus (submissions) for each of Władysław Sikorski and Emilia Plater, both recently promoted to good article status. Collaborative efforts between WikiCup participants have continued, with, for example, New South Wales Casliber (submissions) and Canada Sasata (submissions) being awarded 180 points each for their featured article on Boletus luridus.

A rules reminder: content promoted between rounds can be claimed in the round after the break, but not the round before. The case in point is content promoted on the 29/30 June, which may be claimed in this round. 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 Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. We are currently seeing concern about the amount of time people have to wait for reviews, especially at GAC- if you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce 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 Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talkemail) and The ed17 (talkemail) 10:28, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

WPTC assessment graphs[edit]

Hi Titoxd, I was wondering how you created the WPTC assessment graphs (File:WPTC assessment summary.png and related images). Is there any automated tool to do this? Would be interested to generate some for the medicine wikiproject. --WS (talk) 12:18, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 July newsletter[edit]

We're halfway through this year's penultimate round, and the competition is moving along well. Pool A's Canada Sasata (submissions) currently leads overall, while Pool B's Colorado Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) is second. Both leaders are WikiCup veterans, and both have already scored over 600 points this month. If the round were to end today, London Miyagawa (submissions), with 274 points, would be the lowest-scoring participant to make it through. This indicates that participants will need a score comparable to last year's (573, the highest ever) to qualify for the final. The high scores this year are a testament both to the quality of participants and to the increased focus on significant content (eligible for bonus points) in this year's competition. So far this round, both Sasata and Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions) have made up over half of their score through bonus points, with, for example, high importance FA koala earning Sasata a total of 440 points (from a multiplier of 4.4) and high-importance GA sea earning Cwmhiraeth a total of 216 points (from a multiplier of 7.2). Other articles on important topics submitted this round include a featured article on the Norman conquest of England by Wyoming Ealdgyth (submissions), and good articles on Nobel laureate in literature Henryk Sienkiewicz, Nobel laureate in physics Hans Bethe, and the noted Japanese aircraft carrier Hiryū. These articles are by Poland Piotrus (submissions), Australia Hawkeye7 (submissions) and Sturmvogel_66 respectively.

Other than that, there is not much to report! 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 Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce 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 Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talkemail) and The ed17 (talkemail) 23:56, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 August newsletter[edit]

This year's final is upon us. Our final eight, in order of last round's score, are:

  1. Australia Hawkeye7 (submissions), a WikiCup newcomer who has contributed on topics of military history and physics, including a number of high-importance topics. Good articles have made up the bulk of his points, but he has also scored a great deal of bonus points. He has the second highest score overall so far, with more than 3000 points accumulated.
  2. New South Wales Casliber (submissions), another WikiCup veteran who reached the finals in 2012, 2011 and 2010. He writes on a variety of topics including botany, mycology and astronomy, and has claimed the highest or joint highest number of featured articles every round so far this year. He has the third highest score overall, with just under 3000 points accumulated.
  3. Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions), 2012 WikiCup champion, who writes mostly on marine biology. She has also contributed to high-importance topics, seeing huge numbers of bonus points for high-importance featured and good articles. Previous rounds have seen her scoring the most bonus points, with scoring spread across did you knows, good articles and featured articles.
  4. Canada Sasata (submissions), a WikiCup veteran who finished in second place in 2012, and competed as early as 2009. He writes articles on biology, especially mycology, and has scored highly for a number of collaborations at featured article candidates.
  5. Colorado Sturmvogel_66 (submissions), the winner of the 2010 competition. His contributions mostly concern Naval history, and he has scored a very large number of points for good articles and good article reviews in every round. He is the highest scorer overall this year, with over 3500 points in total.
  6. Wyoming Ealdgyth (submissions), who is competing in the WikiCup for the second time, though this will be her first time in the final. A regular at FAC, she is mostly interested in British medieval history, and has scored very highly for some top-importance featured articles on the topic.
  7. London Miyagawa (submissions), a finalist in 2012 and 2011. He writes on a broad variety of topics, with many of this year's points coming from good articles about Star Trek. Good articles make up the bulk of his points, and he had the most good articles back in round 2; he was also the highest scorer for DYK in rounds 1 and 2.
  8. Scotland Adam Cuerden (submissions) has previously been involved with the WikiCup, but hasn't participated for a number of years. He scores mostly from restoration work leading to featured picture credits, but has also done some article writing and reviewing.

We say goodbye to eight great participants who did not qualify for the final: Poland Piotrus (submissions), Idaho Figureskatingfan (submissions), Ohio ThaddeusB (submissions), Michigan Dana boomer (submissions), Prince Edward Island Status (submissions), United States Ed! (submissions), Florida 12george1 (submissions), England Calvin999 (submissions). Having made it to this stage is still an excellent achievement, and you can leave with your heads held high. We hope to see you all again next year. Signups are now open for the 2014 WikiCup, which will begin on 1 January. All Wikipedians, whatever their interest or level of experience, are warmly invited to participate in next year's competition.

This last month has seen some incredible contributions; for instance, Cwmhiraeth's Starfish and Ealdgyth's Battle of Hastings—two highly important, highly viewed pages—made it to featured article status. It would be all too easy to focus solely on these stunning achievements at the expense of those participants working in lower-scoring areas, when in fact all WikiCup participants are doing excellent work. A mention of everything done is impossible, but here are a few: Last round saw the completion of several good topics (on the 1958, 1959 and 1962 Atlantic hurricane seasons) to which 12george1 had contributed. Calvin999 saw "S&M" (song), on which he has been working for several years, through to featured article status on its tenth try. Figureskatingfan continued towards her goal of a broad featured/good topic on Maya Angelou, with two featured and four good articles. ThaddeusB contributed significantly to over 20 articles which appeared on the main page's "in the news" section. Adam Cuerden continued to restore a large number of historical images, resulting in over a dozen FP credits this round alone. The WikiCup is not just about top-importance featured articles, and the work of all of these users is worthy of commendation.

Finally, the usual notices: 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 Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce 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 Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talkemail) and The ed17 (talkemail) 06:11, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Article Feedback Tool update[edit]

Hey Titoxd. I'm contacting you because you're involved in the Article Feedback Tool in some way, either as a previous newsletter recipient or as an active user of the system. As you might have heard, a user recently anonymously disabled the feedback tool on 2,000 pages. We were unable to track or prevent this due to the lack of logging feature in AFT5. We're deeply sorry for this, as we know that quite a few users found the software very useful, and were using it on their articles.

We've now re-released the software, with the addition of a logging feature and restrictions on the ability to disable. Obviously, we're not going to automatically re-enable it on each article—we don't want to create a situation where it was enabled by users who have now moved on, and feedback would sit there unattended—but if you're interested in enabling it for your articles, it's pretty simple to do. Just go to the article you want to enable it on, click the "request feedback" link in the toolbox in the sidebar, and AFT5 will be enabled for that article.

Again, we're very sorry about this issue; hopefully it'll be smooth sailing after this :). If you have any questions, just drop them at the talkpage. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) 21:30, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 September newsletter[edit]

In 30 days, we will know the identity of our 2013 WikiCup champion. Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions) currently leads; if that lead is held, she will become the first person to have won the WikiCup twice. Canada Sasata (submissions), Australia Hawkeye7 (submissions)—who has never participated in the competition before—and New South Wales Casliber (submissions) follow. The majority of points in this round have come from a mix of good articles and bonus points. This final round is seeing contributions to a number of highly important topics; recent submissions include Phoenix (constellation) (FA by Casliber), Ernest Lawrence (GA by Hawkeye7), Pinniped, and red fox (both GAs by Sasata).

The did you know (DYK) eligibility criteria have recently changed, meaning that newly passed good articles are accepted as "new" for did you know purposes. However, in the interests of not changing the WikiCup rules mid-competition, please note that only articles eligible for DYK under the old system (that is, newly created articles or 5x expansions) will be eligible for points in this year's WikiCup. We do, however, have time to discuss how this new system will work for next year's competition; a discussion will be opened in due course. On that note, thoughts are welcome on changes you'd like to see for next year. What worked? What didn't work? What would you like to see more of? What would you like to see less of? All Wikipedians, new or old, are also warmly invited to sign up for the 2014 WikiCup.

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 Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce 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 Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talkemail) and The ed17 (talkemail) 23:32, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 October newsletter[edit]

The WikiCup is over for another year! Our champion, for the second year running, is Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions). Our final nine were as follows:

  1. Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions)
  2. Australia Hawkeye7 (submissions)
  3. Canada Sasata (submissions)
  4. Colorado Sturmvogel_66 (submissions)
  5. New South Wales Casliber (submissions)
  6. Scotland Adam Cuerden (submissions)
  7. London Miyagawa (submissions)
  8. Poland Piotrus (submissions)
  9. Wyoming Ealdgyth (submissions)

All those who reached the final win prizes, and prizes will also be going to the following participants:

  • New South Wales Casliber (submissions) wins the FA prize, for four featured articles in round 4, worth 400 points.
  • Colorado Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) wins the GA prize, for 20 good articles in round 3, worth 600 points.
  • Portland, Oregon Another Believer (submissions) wins the FL prize, for four featured lists in round 2, worth 180 points.
  • Scotland Adam Cuerden (submissions) wins the FP prize, for 23 featured pictures in round 5, worth 805 point.
  • Republic of Rose Island Sven Manguard (submissions) wins the FPo prize, for 2 featured portals in round 3, worth 70 points.
  • Australia Hawkeye7 (submissions) wins the topic prize, for a 23-article featured topic in round 5, worth 230 points.
  • Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions) wins the DYK prize, for 79 did you know articles in round 5, worth 570 points.
  • Ohio ThaddeusB (submissions) wins the ITN prize, for 23 in the news articles in round 4, worth 270 points.
  • United States Ed! (submissions) wins the GAR prize, for 24 good article reviews in round 1, worth 96 points.
  • The judges are awarding the Oddball Barnstar to British Empire The C of E (submissions), for some curious contributions in earlier rounds.
  • Finally, the judges are awarding Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions) the Geography Barnstar for her work on sea, now a featured article. This top-importance article was the highest-scoring this year; when it was promoted to FA status, Cwmhiraeth could claim 720 points.

Prizes will be handed out in the coming weeks. Please be patient!

Congratulations to everyone who has been successful in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and a particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have achieved this year. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition. While it has been an excellent year, errors have opened up the judges' eyes to the need for a third judge, and it is with pleasure that we announce that experienced WikiCup participant Miyagawa will be acting as a judge from now on. We hope you will all join us in welcoming him to the team.

Next year's competition begins on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; it is open to all Wikipedians, new and old. Brainstorming and discussion remains open for how next year's competition will work, and straw polls will be opened by the judges soon. Those interested in friendly competition may also like to keep an eye on the stub contest, being organised by Casliber. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2014 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talkemail) and The ed17 (talkemail) 01:15, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 October newsletter[edit]

The WikiCup is over for another year! Our champion, for the second year running, is Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions). Our final nine were as follows:

  1. Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions)
  2. Australia Hawkeye7 (submissions)
  3. Canada Sasata (submissions)
  4. Colorado Sturmvogel_66 (submissions)
  5. New South Wales Casliber (submissions)
  6. Scotland Adam Cuerden (submissions)
  7. London Miyagawa (submissions)
  8. Poland Piotrus (submissions)
  9. Wyoming Ealdgyth (submissions)

All those who reached the final win prizes, and prizes will also be going to the following participants:

  • New South Wales Casliber (submissions) wins the FA prize, for four featured articles in round 4, worth 400 points.
  • Colorado Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) wins the GA prize, for 20 good articles in round 3, worth 600 points.
  • Portland, Oregon Another Believer (submissions) wins the FL prize, for four featured lists in round 2, worth 180 points.
  • Scotland Adam Cuerden (submissions) wins the FP prize, for 23 featured pictures in round 5, worth 805 point.
  • Republic of Rose Island Sven Manguard (submissions) wins the FPo prize, for 2 featured portals in round 3, worth 70 points.
  • Australia Hawkeye7 (submissions) wins the topic prize, for a 23-article featured topic in round 5, worth 230 points.
  • Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions) wins the DYK prize, for 79 did you know articles in round 5, worth 570 points.
  • Ohio ThaddeusB (submissions) wins the ITN prize, for 23 in the news articles in round 4, worth 270 points.
  • United States Ed! (submissions) wins the GAR prize, for 24 good article reviews in round 1, worth 96 points.
  • The judges are awarding the Oddball Barnstar to British Empire The C of E (submissions), for some curious contributions in earlier rounds.
  • Finally, the judges are awarding Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions) the Geography Barnstar for her work on sea, now a featured article. This top-importance article was the highest-scoring this year; when it was promoted to FA status, Cwmhiraeth could claim 720 points.

Prizes will be handed out in the coming weeks. Please be patient!

Congratulations to everyone who has been successful in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and a particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have achieved this year. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition. While it has been an excellent year, errors have opened up the judges' eyes to the need for a third judge, and it is with pleasure that we announce that experienced WikiCup participant Miyagawa will be acting as a judge from now on. We hope you will all join us in welcoming him to the team.

Next year's competition begins on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; it is open to all Wikipedians, new and old. Brainstorming and discussion remains open for how next year's competition will work, and straw polls will be opened by the judges soon. Those interested in friendly competition may also like to keep an eye on the stub contest, being organised by Casliber. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2014 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talkemail) and The ed17 (talkemail) 01:17, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 January newsletter[edit]

The 2014 WikiCup is off to a flying start, with, at time of writing, 138 participants. The is the largest number of participants we have seen since 2010. If you are yet to join the competition, don't worry- the judges have agreed to keep the signups open for a few more days. By a wide margin, our current leader is newcomer Smithsonian Institution Godot13 (submissions), whose set of 14 featured pictures, the first FPs of the competition, was worth 490 points. Here are some more noteworthy scorers:

Featured articles, featured lists, featured topics and featured portals are yet to play a part in the competition. The judges have removed a number of submissions which were deemed ineligible. Typically, we aim to see work on a project, followed by a nomination, followed by promotion, this year. We apologise for any disappointment caused by our strict enforcement this year; we're aiming to keep the competition as fair as possible.

Wikipedians interested in friendly competition may be interested to take part in The Core Contest; unlike the WikiCup, The Core Contest is not about audited content, but, like the WikiCup, it is about article improvement; specifically, The Core Contest is about contribution to some of Wikipedia's most important article. Of course, any work done for The Core Contest, if it leads to a DYK, GA or FA, can earn WikiCup 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 Wikipedia: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 Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talkemail), The ed17 (talkemail) and Miyagawa (talkemail) 19:54, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 February newsletter[edit]

And so ends the most competitive first round we have ever seen, with 38 points required to qualify for round 2. Last year, 19 points secured a place; before that, 11 (2012) or 8 (2011) were enough. This is both a blessing and a curse. While it shows the vigourous good health of the competition, it also means that we have already lost many worthy competitors. Our top three scorers were:

  1. Smithsonian Institution Godot13 (submissions), a WikiCup newcomer whose high-quality scans of rare banknotes represent an unusual, interesting and valuable contribution to Wikipedia. Most of Godot's points this round have come from a large set of pictures used in Treasury Note (1890–91).
  2. Oh, better far to live and die / Under the brave black flag I fly... Adam Cuerden (submissions), a WikiCup veteran and a finalist last year, Adam is also a featured picture specialist, focusing on the restoration of historical images. This month's promotions have included a carefully restored set of artist William Russell Flint's work.
  3. United States WikiRedactor (submissions), another WikiCup newcomer. WikiRedactor has claimed points for good article reviews and good articles relating to pop music, many of which were awarded bonus points. Articles include Sky Ferreira, Hannah Montana 2: Meet Miley Cyrus and "Wrecking Ball" (Miley Cyrus song).

Other competitors of note include:

After such a competitive first round, expect the second round to also be fiercely fought. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 1 but before the start of round 2 can be claimed in round 2, but please do not update your submission page until March (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 equally.

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 Wikipedia: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 Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talkemail), The ed17 (talkemail) and Miyagawa (talkemail) 00:01, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 March newsletter[edit]

A quick update as we are half way through round two of this year's competition. WikiCup newcomer Smithsonian Institution Godot13 (submissions) (Pool E) leads, having produced a massive set of featured pictures for Silver certificate (United States), an article also brought to featured list status. Former finalist Oh, better far to live and die / Under the brave black flag I fly... Adam Cuerden (submissions) (Pool G) is in second, which he owes mostly to his work with historical images, including a number of images from Urania's Mirror, an article also brought to good status. 2010 champion (Pool C) is third overall, thanks to contributions relating to naval history, including the newly featured Japanese battleship Nagato. Rhodesia Cliftonian (submissions), who currently leads Pool A and is sixth overall, takes the title for the highest scoring individual article of the competition so far, with the top importance featured article Ian Smith.

With 26 people having already scored over 100 points, it is likely that well over 100 points will be needed to secure a place in round 3. Recent years have required 123 (2013), 65 (2012), 41 (2011) and 100 (2010). Remember that only 64 will progress to round 3 at the end of April. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page; 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 candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia: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 Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talkemail), The ed17 (talkemail) and Miyagawa (talkemail) 22:55, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 April newsletter[edit]

Round 3 of the 2014 WikiCup has just begun; 32 competitors remain. Pool G's Oh, better far to live and die / Under the brave black flag I fly... Adam Cuerden (submissions) was Round 2's highest scorer, with a large number of featured picture credits. In March/April, he restored star charts from Urania's Mirror, lithographs of various warships (such as SMS Gefion) and assorted other historical media. Second overall was Pool E's Smithsonian Institution Godot13 (submissions), whose featured list Silver certificate (United States) contains dozens of scans of banknotes recently promoted to featured picture status. Third was Pool G's United States ChrisGualtieri (submissions) who has produced a large number of good articles, many, including Falkner Island, on Connecticut-related topics. Other successful participants included Rhodesia Cliftonian (submissions), who saw three articles (including the top-importance Ian Smith) through featured article candidacies, and Washington, D.C. Caponer (submissions), who saw three lists (including the beautifully-illustrated list of plantations in West Virginia) through featured list candidacies. High-importance good articles promoted this round include narwhal from Canada Reid,iain james (submissions), tiger from Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions) and The Lion King from Minas Gerais Igordebraga (submissions). We also saw our first featured topic points of the competition, awarded to Nepal Czar (submissions) and Indiana Red Phoenix (submissions) for their work on the Sega Genesis topic. No points have been claimed so far for good topics or featured portals.

192 was our lowest qualifying score, again showing that this WikiCup is the most competitive ever. In previous years, 123 (2013), 65 (2012), 41 (2011) or 100 (2010) secured a place in Round 3. Pool H was the strongest performer, with all but one of its members advancing, while only the two highest scorers in Pools G and F advanced. At the end of June, 16 users will advance into the semi-finals. 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 Wikipedia: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 Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talkemail), The ed17 (talkemail) and Miyagawa (talkemail) 17:57, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Request for comment[edit]

Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:47, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Userfication request that does not seem automatic[edit]

You are listed at Category:Wikipedia administrators willing to provide copies of deleted articles and since I don't want to inundate the people whose names start with the letter a, I have jumped to the Ts (given my username). I have made a request at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive262#Userfication of deleted and salted content. The article has been deleted through AFD twice and the first time was upheld at DRV. The first version was 49KB readable prose, while the second version was 33KB readable prose. Although many have argued the second was a recreation of the first, two separate admins reversed their own WP:G4 deletions upon further review. It seems that a third admin speedily declined another G4 although I am unable to see the history right now and did not notice this during the second AFD. I have a long history at successful recreations (12 articles now at WP:GA are formerly deleted articles that I have recreated, including "Cat Daddy" which was deleted 4 previous times). The second AFD seems to be an indictment against any future recreation of the article, which is befuddling to me. I would like to learn something from this seemingly odd result. I have requested a userfication that includes history and talk page so that I can investigate policy/guidelines. So far the best userfication offer was by Floquenbeam to restore it for a fixed 2 week expiry. I have stated that 2 months would be more appropriate than 2 weeks because no policy discussion can be guaranteed to conclude within 2 weeks and I have several that I would like to pursue. Floquenbeam, has stated his hesitance is based on assumptions of bad faith regarding my intentions and that I have made a phantom "refusal to agree not to bug people about tagging or edits they made to the article prior to deletion" which I never made (I was actually concerned about the 2 week expiry and forgot to assent to the request). I am unable to discuss things with Floquenbeam who has not edited in 3 days (since 20:43, 28 May 2014). As a frequent recreator of content, I would like a chance to become a better editor by examining the various policies related to this outcome with the content available for illustration and instruction.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:22, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Just so you know, Tony has forum-shopped this request at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2014_May_6 and then Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Userfication_of_deleted_and_salted_content where he received answers he disliked. He has since requested on 9 different admin talk pages, including: User_talk:TParis, User_talk:Thingg, User_talk:Titoxd, User_talk:Thespian, User talk:Tawker, User talk:The Placebo Effect, User talk:Thehelpfulone, User_talk:Toon05, & finally User_talk:ThaddeusB who restored the article on request to User:TonyTheTiger/Jabari Parker's high school career. I apologize for spamming this message, but since Tony has failed to let you know that he has forum-shopped to successfully get the outcome he wanted, I felt you all deserved to know that you do not need to respond to his request. Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 16:44, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 June newsletter[edit]

After an extremely close race, Round 3 is over. 244 points secured a place in Round 4, which is comparable to previous years- 321 was required in 2013, while 243 points were needed in 2012. Pool C's Smithsonian Institution Godot13 (submissions) was the round's highest scorer, mostly due to a 32 featured pictures, including both scans and photographs. Also from Pool C, Scotland Casliber (submissions) finished second overall, claiming three featured articles, including the high-importance Grus (constellation). Third place was Pool B's , whose contributions included featured articles Russian battleship Poltava (1894) and Russian battleship Peresvet. Pool C saw the highest number of participants advance, with six out of eight making it to the next round.

The round saw this year's first featured portal, with Republic of Rose Island Sven Manguard (submissions) taking Portal:Literature to featured status. The round also saw the first good topic points, thanks to Florida 12george1 (submissions) and the 2013 Atlantic hurricane season. This means that all content types have been claimed this year. Other contributions of note this round include a featured topic on Maya Angelou's autobiographies from Idaho Figureskatingfan (submissions), a good article on the noted Czech footballer Tomáš Rosický from Bartošovice v Orlických horách Cloudz679 (submissions) and a now-featured video game screenshot, freely released due to the efforts of Republic of Rose Island Sven Manguard (submissions).

The judges would like to remind participants to update submission pages promptly. This means that content can be checked, and allows those following the competition (including those participating) to keep track of scores effectively. This round has seen discussion about various aspects of the WikiCup's rules and procedures. Those interested in the competition can be assured that formal discussions about how next year's competition will work will be opened shortly, and all are welcome to voice their views then. 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 Wikipedia: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 Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk · contribs) The ed17 (talk · contribs) and Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 18:48, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Reply from USM[edit]

I at first thought that he had just put that on there with no discussion. I waited ten minutes, and when there was still no discussion, I reverted. It just took him a while to write it up. Thanks for putting it back. United States Man (talk) 02:15, 22 July 2014 (UTC)