Jump to content

User talk:Casualdejekyll: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→‎RFC close: new section
→‎RFC close: copy edit
Line 441: Line 441:


==RFC close==
==RFC close==
Hello. Closing the RFC that pertains to depreciating NOTDIR, may be a little too soon. The discussion has only been open from September 1st and it appears you closed the discussion on September 4th [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:What_Wikipedia_is_not&diff=prev&oldid=1173842247]. That is only three or four days. I know it seems that there is a strong consensus and I agree that consensus is going the way you said. But this is very early in the discussion and there will probably be other editors who wish to weigh in. I don't know if consensus will change but other editors may have other suggestions that they would like to add. So, I recommend reverting yourself or simply re-opening the RFC. Regards, ----[[User:Steve Quinn|Steve Quinn]] ([[User talk:Steve Quinn|talk]]) 03:56, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
Hello. Although your efforts are appreciated, I think closing the RFC that pertains to depreciating NOTDIR may be a little too soon. The discussion has only been open from September 1st and it appears you closed the discussion on September 4th [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:What_Wikipedia_is_not&diff=prev&oldid=1173842247]. That is only three or four days. I know it seems that there is a strong consensus and I agree that consensus is going the way you said. But this is very early in the discussion and there will probably be other editors who wish to weigh in. I don't know if consensus will change but other editors may have other suggestions that they would like to add. So, I recommend reverting yourself or simply re-opening the RFC. Regards, ----[[User:Steve Quinn|Steve Quinn]] ([[User talk:Steve Quinn|talk]]) 03:56, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Revision as of 04:05, 5 September 2023









User talk page that is also just a user page. I'm not really sure how often anyone reads this, but I think it's more often than they would if the two were separate.

Userboxen!
3102 pending submissionsThis user is a participant in WikiProject Articles for creation. You can help!
BLOCKThis user is not blocked from editing Wikipedia, but would like to be some day.
enThis user is a native speaker of the English language.
tok-4jan ni li sona pi pona mute e toki pona.
es-1Este usuario puede contribuir con un nivel básico de español.
nl-0Deze gebruiker begrijpt geen Nederlands.
This user thinks you are pretty awesome. Keep being you.
Quotable quotes:
Thoughts
Old thoughts. No guarantees

I've recently found myself with a strange obsession with Good/Featured topics. So if you see me have any weird subpages that are random lists of articles, that's probably why. I also feel committed to finishing my Synapturanus project at some point, though I haven't had time for proper article writing or source searching as of recent. Massive thanks to anybody who edits any of the articles I wrote - they're not very good in the state I left them in. 22:50, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

A discussion closing as "no consensus" almost always results in one of the options (keep, status quo) effectively being enacted anyway. That kind of makes it a shitty deal for anyone who supports the other options - they're effectively told "we don't know what we want to do, but we're doing the other one anyway". There is no way to avoid this that I'm currently aware of. casualdejekyll 20:52, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I should probably introduce myself on this page. I'm casualdejekyll. Or Casual DeJekyll, if you really want to have a first and last name. "Casual" is acceptable but might cause confusion. My signature was originally the color hex #FF69B4, and I seem to recall it being the color used as an example in some sort of tutorial, but I can't find it now and I've changed it to #E6007A for accessibility reasons. 15:16, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

I think BLPs (currently governed by WP:Notability (people)) should be held to a way higher inclusion standard than GNG. I don't think a proposal for such would find consensus. casualdejekyll 02:25, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't like G13, because deletion isn't actually real, anyway, so all it does is prevent people from seeing old drafts which may be promising - and requiring two additional clicks from an admin (one to delete the page, another to undelete it) - just think how much time has been wasted on that? I'm sure it's added up at this point. The purpose of G13 is to clean up draftspace crud, but I would argue that any draft space page not falling under the GX speedy criteria isn't actually crud, since any editor can come by and improve it. Additionally, if G13 deletions were removed, mass draftification proposals would become much more viable - and we could more easily remove crud from mainspace, where it actually matters. I have many ideas for alternatives to G13, but most of them have been proposed by other people already in some form. If anyone has a good explanation of the benefit of deleting old drafts, please let me know. casualdejekyll 20:25, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To add to the above: of course, in Mainspace "crud" is more important. I would support expanding {{BLPPROD}} to all articles. casualdejekyll 20:25, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pages
Articles I helped out on
Class Article Notes
 C Synapturanus danta DYK
 Stub Synapturanus ajuricaba Wow, I am not proud of this one
 Stub Dengke mas na niura Please, someone who speaks Indonesian, help out this article. I'm begging you. This is an absolute bare minimum stub on a topic that probably has enough coverage to get way more.

User pages:

User talk pages:

Your draft article, Draft:Mikaela Davis

Hello, Casualdejekyll. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Mikaela Davis".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 18:24, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This Month in GLAM: May 2023



Headlines
Read this edition in full • Single-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Administrators' newsletter – July 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2023).

Administrator changes

added Novem Linguae
removed

Bureaucrat changes

removed MBisanz

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

  • Two arbitration cases are currently open. Proposed decisions are expected 5 July 2023 for the Scottywong case and 9 July 2023 for the AlisonW case.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:57, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2023 July newsletter

The third round of the 2023 WikiCup has come to an end. The 16 users who made it to the fourth round had at least 175 points. Our top scorers in round 3 were:

Contestants achieved 11 featured articles, 2 featured lists, 47 good articles, 72 featured or good article reviews, over 100 DYKs and 40 ITN appearances. As always, any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met. Please also remember that all submissions must meet core Wikipedia policies, regardless of the review process.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). 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 your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:17, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I changed my global CSS because of you

Fun fact #1
Your signature's color is pink.
Fun fact #2
I set my interwiki links to be pink.
Fun fact #3
I added a statement in my global.css to explicitly remove all CSS styling from your signature, because it is confusing.

--QuickQuokka [⁠talk • contribs] 20:17, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

PS, no hate, this is just something I thought was kinda funny --QuickQuokka [⁠talk • contribs] 20:17, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This would be worse if you were on meta, because I'm pretty sure my signature there is a link to this page, which is literally an interwiki link. Have fun with that one! casualdejekyll 22:37, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ping: @QuickQuokka casualdejekyll 22:38, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Casualdejekyll: Redirects seem to work just fine and appear as green, so I assume the interwiki link would appear as pink on Meta.
Also, because your signature here is a self-link, it still appears as pink. QuickQuokka [⁠talk • contribs] 23:26, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Casualdejekyll: Actually, now looking at toolforge:signatures/check/meta.wikimedia.org/casualdejekyll, you do not have an interwiki link as your Meta signature. Your userpage on Meta, however, is a soft redirect to the English Wikipedia. QuickQuokka [⁠talk • contribs] 00:05, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This Month in GLAM: June 2023



Headlines
  • Albania report: CEE Spring Campaign 2023, Albania and Kosovo
  • Asia report: Donation of images from the National Centre for Biological Sciences
  • Brazil report: Native Brazilian photographer wins Wiki Loves Folklore Brazil 2023
  • Croatia report: Half done in 2023
  • Germany report: Museum tour, WLM, handouts and image donation
  • India report: Wiki Exploration Programme GLAM activities
  • Indonesia report: Conclusion of Mini Grants; Second #1Lib1Ref Campaign; Wikisource Workshop in Bali
  • Italy report: TCI and Turin Academy of Science
  • Kosovo report: CEE Spring Campaign 2023, Albania and Kosovo
  • Netherlands report: A new book, new Wikipedia articles, videos and further images on Africa
  • New Zealand report: Report on the Society for the Preservation of Natural History Collections Conference 2023 and Auckland suburb updates
  • Philippines report: GLAM outreach activity at University of Nueva Caceres: Digitization, workshops and proofread-a-thons as future collaboration
  • Poland report: GLAM-Wiki workshops for the Czartoryski Library; Work on the GLAM-Wiki Project Page Continues; End of Internship within the "Praktykuj w Kulturze" Program
  • Sweden report: Knowledge overview; Almedalen week
  • Switzerland report: Swiss GLAM Programm
  • UK report: Cultural diversity
  • USA report: WikiWednesday returns to Manhattan; Wikimedia NYC and Art+Feminism; WikiConference North America 2023; GLAM Wiki 2023
  • Special story: Flickr Foundation and Wikimedia Foundation partner to build Flickypedia
  • GLAM Wiki conference report: The call for proposals is now open for the GLAM Wiki Conference
  • Calendar: July's GLAM events
Read this edition in full • Single-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

August 2023 Good Article Nominations backlog drive

Good article nominations | August 2023 Backlog Drive
August 2023 Backlog Drive:
  • On 1 August, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded.
  • Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate:
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year.

(t · c) buidhe 05:15, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – August 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2023).

Administrator changes

added Firefangledfeathers
removed

Interface administrator changes

added Novem Linguae

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:53, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

draft: A Yellow Butterfly Called Sphinx

Hi, casualdejekyll,

Thanks for you for your kind message. I followed your advice and I deleted the sentences lacking neutrality. Does this version fit better? 

Your opinion will be very valuable to me. Philbobison

Philbobison (talk) 05:39, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This Month in GLAM: July 2023



Headlines
Read this edition in full • Single-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

ORCP

(regarding WT:RFA:) I personally strongly recommend against submitting ORCPs or encouraging others to do so. Barkeep49's advice is, I think, the best there is for potential RfA candidates: Instead the question is does an editor have 18-36 months of work (longer tenure can work against a candidate), something substantial to point to for content creation (though not necessarily even a GA), and sysops, particularly long-established ones, showing up to their talk page or email inbox suggesting they run at RfA? If so then there's a good chance, if it's the editors first attempt at RfA, that they'll pass (the hedge is because RfA is already a small set of data and someone going through for the second or more time is even smaller and with lots of complicating factors about why the second or more RfA is occurring). When I ran my feeling was that all you needed were the sysops - I think in this changing climate you actually need more. If the sysops are not showing up and you think you would be a legitimate candidate seek out a long established sysop you've interacted with and directly ask their opinion. They might turn out to be ready to nominate you or they might give you some actionable feedback. (emphasis added). An in-depth, off-wiki review by any of the many experienced sysops out there will prove to be more helpful (with less risk) than an ORCP. And in my view, for most candidates with a fair shot, finding a good nominator is not a big hurdle. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 06:29, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@L235 - This would be better advice to give to someone who is actually intending to do an RfA somewhat soon. I'm already aware that at an ORCP I'd score in the 0-4/10 range, and if I ran for RfA it would be snowing, so I don't bother. Thanks for the advice, though! - you're very kind about what's honestly a surprisingly hard subject to navigate. casualdejekyll 14:58, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
also to be fully honest with you I know the sysops I know well enough to know that they'd tell me that running for RfA is a bad idea for anybody and probably question why I would ever want to be an admin ever. casualdejekyll 15:12, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, thanks for the note. Just to be clear, I wasn't trying to suggest that you're looking to RfA yourself. Rather, I note that you've been quite active lately in the WT:RFA thread and giving advice to others who might be prospective RfA candidates. For their sake, I recommend against suggesting ORCP (as you did here). Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 17:58, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

draft: A Yellow Butterfly Called Sphinx

Hi, casualdejekyll,

I followed your advice about my page " A yellow butterfly called Sphinx" but I dare not submit it. Do you think I can, now? Thanks for your help. Philbobison

Philbobison (talk) 03:06, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Philbobison - Ack, so sorry I didn't get to you sooner. It does look a lot more encyclopedic now. I have a few comments, one important one and a few nitpicks. The big thing is WP:GNG. I don't speak French, so I really can't evaluate this myself, but in order for the article to be accepted it needs to be sourced to multiple, independent reliable sources that provide significant coverage. You can click on that link to read more about that. Again, I don't speak French, so I personally can't tell you if your sourcing meets that standard - you might be able to get help with this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Theatre?
More nitpicky stuff - the section titles are a bit weird? You have a section titled "Story" that talks entirely about real-life events - did you mean "History" or some other word?
Generally, I think this is much improved, but you might want to get in touch with a Wikipedia user more familiar with writing articles about theatre. casualdejekyll 15:51, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Casualdejekyll,
Thanks you for your response. I don't know if I told you but, as a beginner, I wanted to submit very reliable sources. So, I searched on the web and found  that a page "A Yellow Butterfly Called Sphinx" already existed on the Italian wikipedia. https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Una_farfalla_gialla_chiamata_Sfinge
I used it a lot, and I borrowed their sources after having checked them (for instance, the source about the performance in New York https://www.theatermania.com/shows/new-york-city-theater/off-off-broadway/a-yellow-butterfly-called-sphinx_123476/
So, this time, would I have an agreement if I re-submit my draft with the corrections I made according to your suggestions?  Would your agreement be a “green light”?
I submitted this first draft in March and I admit that I am discouraged. I didn't imagine it would be so long and complicated !
I am looking forward for your reply. Yours  Philbobison
P.S  Casualdejekyll, thanks for the remark : I changed « story » to « history » Philbobison (talk) 08:55, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, writing a WIkipedia article is REALLY hard, @Philbobison. I would consider myself to have only successfully done it once, about a frog species I really liked, and I consider that article to be "C-Class" (see Academic grading in the United States for the general context behind that metaphor)
I don't think the sentence beginning "Imagining a drama made only of letters..." is quite right in tone. Perhaps something more like "In the process of writing the story, Christian Palustran said that he challenged himself to..." The goal of encyclopedic style is to be "formal, impersonal, and dispassionate." - dry facts. For the quotation, you should use Template:Refn to provide the original French quote. Something like this: [2]
I am an AfC draft reviewer, so yes, my agreement would in fact be a "green light" of sorts. Of course, I want to make sure the article is up to standards BEFORE accepting it - if I moved a bad article to the main encyclopedia, both its author and me would quickly be informed of my error! I simply don't feel very confident in assessing the French sources myself, but we do have a list of Wikipedians who speak French, who you could ask for help. Unfortunately, that list is in alphabetical order, so you may have some difficulty finding a user who is available. A post at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Theatre would probably attract interested editors who could help you more effectively than I can.
The main issue impeding the acceptance of the draft is not the quality of the writing, but rather that I'm not sure whether the sources are reliable. Perhaps User:Quinlan83, who contributed to the original Italian article, would be able to help.
"so long and complicated !" is quite the understatement, sometimes. You know how on the Main Page, we have a featured article every day? The standards for that are way, way higher and people often work on those articles for upwards of a month. There are enough requirements for those to fill a whole book!
Anyway, do keep in touch. I really do hope you stick with it and write more articles in the future - like any other activity, the only way to get better at it is to keep doing it. You're confirmed now, so the next time you write an article you can skip the months-long wait for a review and put it up directly, but I would still recommend writing it in your sandbox or making another Draft. Don't hesitate to reach out to me if you have more questions. casualdejekyll 03:25, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, casualdejekyll,
Thank you for your response and help.
No, I'm not going to give up now that I'm close to the goal !
To see what you consider an acceptable article, I read your page on the"tapir frog" Synapturanus danta. I found it interesting. (you are very rigorous and you must have a scientific background).
But literary articles are necessarily different from scientific articles, even if they must have the same encyclopedic rigor.
I will therefore follow your advice and try to contact Wikipedians specialized in theater so that they can confirm my sources in French. Then I'll come back to you.
Good Sunday. Yours  Philbobison Philbobison (talk) 05:21, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "A Yellow Butterfly Called Sphinx, trailer and video" [Un papillon jaune appelé Sphinx, bande-annonce et vidéo]. Théâtre contemporain.net (in French). May 2013.
  2. ^ "En écrivant le Papillon, je me suis lancé un double défi : tenter de faire d’une correspondance, une vraie pièce, avec des tensions, des émotions, des rebondissements et tenter de dire l’adolescence dans ce qu’elle a d’absolu et de constant"[1]

Vandal userbox

Someone added a ± at some point, so any attempts at paradoxes are voided, sadly. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 22:51, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ah well. The only reason I even tried at all is because somebody put up an edit notice on another user page telling people specifically not to do that to them, and you know what that means... casualdejekyll 22:53, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Marianne Williamson

Hi casualdejekyll, I am uninvolved with the merge proposal but the article is on my watchlist so noticed your close. The proposal, as I understand it, was not to merge the two campaigns (2020 and 2024) but to merge the the 2024 campaign into Marianne Williamson. Granted even so it fails but I suggest updating your close statement. S0091 (talk) 20:34, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@S0091: My phrasing was correct, though awkward. The only sentence that refers to the actual proposal at hand is "The proposal failed.", since I did not think it necessary to explain a lot more. I'll add a qualifier to make this more clear. casualdejekyll 20:36, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, certainly more clear, at least to me. S0091 (talk) 20:50, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't even know what to call this section

Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2023_August_11#Redirects_to_Mud_(disambiguation) deserves to be preserved here as probably the messiest mess I've ever had the... uh, pleasure?... of closing. No fault to any of the participants, either, this discussion was just quite exceptional. casualdejekyll 22:34, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

While I have a somewhat pointless section at the bottom of my User Talk, I figured I'd let you guys know that I prettied up the top of this page a little, to make it less confusing (because I'm very sure that any new editors that end up at my user talk page would be quite confused by the older version, so I've collapsed it out.) casualdejekyll 01:17, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – September 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2023).

Guideline and policy news

  • Following an RfC, TFAs will be automatically semi-protected the day before it is on the main page and through the day after.
  • A discussion at WP:VPP about revision deletion and oversight for dead names found that [s]ysops can choose to use revdel if, in their view, it's the right tool for this situation, and they need not default to oversight. But oversight could well be right where there's a particularly high risk to the person. Use your judgment.

Technical news

Arbitration

  • The SmallCat dispute case has closed. As part of the final decision, editors participating in XfD have been reminded to be careful about forming local consensus which may or may not reflect the broader community consensus. Regular closers of XfD forums were also encouraged to note when broader community discussion, or changes to policies and guidelines, would be helpful.

Miscellaneous

  • Tech tip: The "Browse history interactively" banner shown at the top of Special:Diff can be used to easily look through a history, assemble composite diffs, or find out what archive something wound up in.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:21, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Going on a "mainspace quest"(?)

Hello to everyone watching my talk page (which I'm pretty sure is just TNT).

Are you having a nice day? How's it going? Third rhetorical question?

I've been thinking about things recently. I've realized that I've kind of lost "the magic" of editing Wikipedia, and I'm not sure what to do about it. It's clear that simply "trying" to make more mainspace contributions (see my entry in WikiCup 2023) hasn't been working out for me, so I'm going to try something a bit more dramatic.

I'm going on a mainspace quest. (Possibly. Maybe. Not sure yet.) The idea is that I will restrict myself (mostly) to editing in (Article)space temporarily until I reach some criteria. I'm still working out the details.

This will be enforced by me "enacting remedies" against myself, which I will actually take seriously, I promise.

I'm currently working on this at User:Casualdejekyll/Mainspace quest, where you can see the ideas I have for "remedies" (and the one remedy I've already enacted, banning myself from editing AN/I)

Because I've been known to be somewhat erratic before, I'm going to try to take it slowly on enacting these remedies, so I probably won't start the mainspace quest until ... maybe next week? So I can be absolutely sure I actually want to do this?

Your input is appreciated. casualdejekyll 23:08, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

BOO! Book articles are a good niche, there’s tons of notable ones with plenty of sources that don’t have articles (some stuff Angela Davis wrote for example) Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 23:17, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I was THIS close to writing "TNT and Moneytrees"! You got away with it this time...
I'll make sure to add that to the list - I have a few articles about frogs (and one about a bird) that I've been intending to write for god knows how long, but a change in subject could reasonably inspire me. casualdejekyll 23:22, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
(Also, of course an Arbitrator is the first person to respond to me doing a shitty arbcom impression...) casualdejekyll 23:31, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I didn’t pick up on that— You’ll need an Ivory box template, fake/gratuitous Latin, a bold “discuss this” link, a vote count, and a final “From the Casualdejekyll Industries/Incorporated” if you want it to hit. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 23:37, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Eh. I was never one for tradition. (I did almost write (1/0/0) on the first remedy, though I backed out of it on accounts of it being somewhat stupid and possibly confusing.) casualdejekyll 23:41, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am also apparently watching this talk page. You can always go to every movie article and remove all but the first and last sentences of each paragraph in the plot section. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:40, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That would probably be an improvement, but I'm trying to focus on adding content to mainspace - I've done a whole lot of getting rid of it! casualdejekyll 23:43, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
and for the record, unlike Moneytrees, I am genuinely surprised you're watching this page.. you're a very sneaky one, you Scottish Finnish bitch![FBDB] casualdejekyll 23:46, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've probably been watching since I popped by to let you know I removed an edit request you'd replied to oh so long ago. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:55, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Really? I checked and that is in fact a thing that happened, although I don't remember it... I would've thought it'd been since that discussion about the disfavoured name proposal; that's the oldest interaction I remember having with you (on-Wiki, at least) casualdejekyll 00:01, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't remember it either, but it was a pretty common message I left when I was edit request patrolling, rather than AIV and UAA patrolling. I vaguely remember the name discussion, but I ended up doing even more yardwork, and closing an RFC about it. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:07, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2023 September newsletter

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

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

Between them during round 4, contestants achieved 12 featured articles, 3 featured lists, 3 featured pictures, 126 good articles, 46 DYK entries, 14 ITN entries, 67 featured article candidate reviews and 147 good article reviews. Congratulations to our eight finalists and all who participated! It was a generally high-scoring and productive round and I think we can expect a highly competitive finish to the competition.

Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them and within 24 hours of the end of the final. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.

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

RFC close

Hello. Although your efforts are appreciated, I think closing the RFC that pertains to depreciating NOTDIR may be a little too soon. The discussion has only been open from September 1st and it appears you closed the discussion on September 4th [1]. That is only three or four days. I know it seems that there is a strong consensus and I agree that consensus is going the way you said. But this is very early in the discussion and there will probably be other editors who wish to weigh in. I don't know if consensus will change but other editors may have other suggestions that they would like to add. So, I recommend reverting yourself or simply re-opening the RFC. Regards, ----Steve Quinn (talk) 03:56, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Casualdejekyll&oldid=1173906945"