User talk:John Carter: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎Tgeairn at AE: new section
Line 379: Line 379:
|}<!-- Substituted from Template:TAFI weekly selections notice -->
|}<!-- Substituted from Template:TAFI weekly selections notice -->
<!-- Message sent by User:EuroCarGT@enwiki using the list at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Today%27s_articles_for_improvement/Members/Notifications&oldid=649422835 -->
<!-- Message sent by User:EuroCarGT@enwiki using the list at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Today%27s_articles_for_improvement/Members/Notifications&oldid=649422835 -->

== Tgeairn at AE ==

You asked when emails were sent to the functionaries list at the [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement&curid=12936136&diff=649731499&oldid=649688388 ARE discussion]. I believe the first email was sent on 2 February 2015. For some reason, this was held up and not distributed to the list. Having received no acknowledgement, I sent and updated follow-up email on 2 March 2015. I understand that the second email was distributed to the list and the first email has also been released. Please note that I have only opened the arbcom, and now the AE case, due to the pushing of POV not based in sources but rather based upon OR and advocacy POV. That includes blanking of referenced material, which is a violation of the injunction/remedy in the arbcom decision mandating that edits be based in sources (i.e., rather than blanking material based upon editor say-so). I am obviously failing to make the point at AE, and since arbcom did not consider content, it seems that there is no dispute resolution process to enforce NPOV, V, NOTADVOCATE and similar policies related to content issues. Although community consensus generally works to protect verifiable content on highly-watched articles, the rest of Wikipedia's lightly-watched articles are open for advocacy claques, COI editors, and others who destructively edit without resorting to obvious vandalism. I have posted additional diffs at AE, but am beyond frustrated at there being no obvious way to address advocacy, and will walk away from further comment there. [[User:Astynax| &bull; Astynax]] <sup>[[User talk:Astynax|<span style='color:#3399CC'>talk</span>]]</sup> 21:03, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:03, 3 March 2015

SEMI-RETIRED
This user is no longer very active on Wikipedia.

You may want to increment {{Archive basics}} to |counter= 2 as User talk:John Carter/Archive 1 is larger than the recommended 150Kb.

Importance versus Priority

Hello! I hope I didn't offend you here. I was not concerned about how to assess biograhies, only about the use of Importance versus Priority in doing so, where guideline looks like it's being disregarded by some people almost to an extreme. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 22:54, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Asked a question on my talk. SergeWoodzing (talk) 20:25, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
How could we go about, if at all, trying to stop a user from continuing to use "Importance", rather than as per guideline using "Priority", in assessing a huge amoung of biographies? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 22:27, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've followed your advice at Template talk:WPBannerMeta, and I hope it's OK that I used some of your wording, since I don't really feel I know what I'm doing. Thank you in any case! --SergeWoodzing (talk) 05:20, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Is is unreasonable of me to ask the user I've seen ignoring the guideline for years to stop for now, while the Template talk:WPBannerMeta is ongoing? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 00:02, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please explain here, sir, why you directed me to that talk page? The main input person in that discussion does not seem to understand that and keeps referring me elsewhere. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 21:15, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation

Since you offered to comment on my talk page, you're welcome to chime in on the conversation at [1] regarding a new section with multiple reliable sources.--GodBlessYou2 (talk) 05:53, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Astronomy Project and DRN

If you want to try to moderate the Astronomy issue, you are welcome to do so, but I don't see an issue that can be addressed by moderated discussion. There are complaints about an editor's use of a tool. The privilege of using a tool isn't within the scope of DRN (as you know). There are also questions about capitalization, and I agree with you that discussion should probably be at the MOS talk page, possibly with an RFC. Good luck, but it looks like a case heading for general closure. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:49, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Christianity and Sexuality. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Christianity and Sexuality/Evidence. Please add your evidence by February 2, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Christianity and Sexuality/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Courcelles 09:16, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is a new WikiProject you may be interested in

This is a form letter sent out to members of WikiProject Lead section cleanup.

I am contacting you because you are listed as a participant of the now defunct WikiProject Lead section cleanup. I have created a new WikiProject, WikiProject Lede Improvement Team (name subject to change), that likely has the same goals as the project that you signed up for was supposed to have. If improving the lede sections of articles is something you are still interested in, please stop by and add yourself as a participant. As well, if you have any thoughts regarding your previous experience with lede section cleanup, please stop by and share them. Thank you,  DiscantX 08:40, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Remarkable deletions on Soka Gakkai talk page

Could you have a look at the conversation mentioned? Puzzles me a bit. --Catflap08 (talk) 11:26, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Catflap08: Any particular indicators exactly whose comments or which comments? There seem to have been quite a few lately. John Carter (talk) 15:19, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The ones about the Ogasawara incident. --Catflap08 (talk) 18:54, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ongoing WER Consultation

I wonder if I might cut you recent comment to the thread How many women have been involved in these discussions? and start a new thread titled 'Special characteristics. There are so many lively threads, which is great, but I'm sure you know that keeping editors on thread topic is like herding cats. Thanks for all you involvement at WER. Sidebar: In case you ever want some "consulting" or insight on one individuals experiences (Me) I just wanted to say that I have taken the Est course (70's), Lifespring (80's) and Landmark (2000+). I watched a little bit of the recent case to combine the articles but I stayed on the sidelines. Also, in the 60's, I was the Building Engineer for a multi-use building in Evanston that had as one of its major tenants----The Church of Scientology. I don't know why I needed to say all that but I just wanted you to know. I never once felt there was the least bit of similarity between Scientology and the other three...even in recruiting techniques. Buster Seven Talk 21:33, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Buster7: A new section sounds good. Regarding Scientology/Landmark and the others, believe me when I say anyone who knows anything about the topic would be welcome. The idea isn't really so much to merge est/Landmark/etc. but to create a central article, if there is cause for one, which there seems to be. Maybe. Maybe est should be a separate article - honestly, I still don't know. I doubt that there is much real "similarity" between them, other than the fact that they are profit oriented and in the same basic area - actually, if they were similar, one would probably have beat out the other in competition. I think I said to Liz I could even see Scientology become really revived and maybe even theologically interesting if it had a "gospel writer" to update Hubbard, but I don't think that likely to happen. Personally, I've kind of been waiting for NYB to return, which he said he'll do tomorrow, because I think he might be the best "drafter" for anyway RfC proposals which might be put forward. And, maybe, for helping figure out how to format the discussion. None of those I requested involve themselves, other than I think Keithbob, Liz and Maunus, have shown any interest in taking part, but the Macedonia arb was resolved with only three uninvolved parties, so even a small number will do. Maybe check the Landmark talk page for the next few days and see if anything actually happens. At heart, I would like to see the issue resolved, one way or another, and maybe the content improved to a level where most people will leave it alone and spend time more productively elsewhere. John Carter (talk) 21:50, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Buster7: as the first wound up being a typo. John Carter (talk) 21:51, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have just now invited Editor LightBreather to invite the 80 or so editors from the members list that seem to her as though they may be women. I realize I do it with a little tongue in cheek trying to make the point that we can't really know the gender of an editor. Its really too bad that the discussion and the focus is now on this tangent but ......Buster Seven Talk 08:26, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
After todays events [2] and the potential for future upsetting eventsI have stepped aside from any talk facilitating or involvement for at least a month. Rumor has it that you may soon be talking a months sabbatical. I'll facilitate the Eddy Award stuff but that's all. I look forward to working with you again in March.Buster Seven Talk 23:07, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Religions of the Hebrew Bible (Spring 2015) -- starting soon

John, Just wanted to let my course starts tomorrow. We meet M and Ws. I'm not asking students to do anything with Wikipedia until after the first two class sessions, but some may want to begin sooner.

Thank you again for your willingness to serve as an online ambassador for the course! Education Program:Miami University/Religions of the Hebrew Bible (Spring 2015)

Take care, ProfGray (talk) 19:34, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This week's article for improvement (week 5, 2015)

The opening of the Beethoven Symphony No. 5, a famous symphony.
Hello, John Carter.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Symphony


Previous selections: Prose • History of Mongolia


Get involved with the TAFI project! You can...
Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:33, 26 January 2015 (UTC) • Opt-out instructions[reply]

Thank you

Thanks for your support at ANI. I'm at my wits end trying to make edits to New Jersey. I have no idea how this has been allowed to go on for so long. I'm about to move on to some other state. He's just made it so unhappy there. Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 02:35, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
Time you get one Catflap08 (talk) 19:45, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much. John Carter (talk) 00:08, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ARCA

@NE Ent:, while I acknowledge your statement at ARCA is obviously true, that doesn't address the question raised. Nor does the recent apparent retirement of someone who retired an earlier name already, only to come back under a new name, indicate that even that retirement is necessarily likely to be of any long term. Your current comment could be seen as indicating that the request should not go forward, and I hope that perhaps you modify your comment to indicate that the request does not become invalid, either in this particular case or in general. I honestly don't know if the situation has been raised before, but I have difficulty imagining it might not be raised again. John Carter (talk) 00:03, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And my apologies for misusing my privilege of editing this talk page during the current proceedings. However, I do think that the thank you to @Catflap08: and request for clarification were justified, and thought it perhaps worth running the risk of violation of talk page editing privileges anyway. My word, which I think is of some value, is hereby given that I have no intentions of doing so any further. John Carter (talk) 00:11, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As a WER coordinator

I wonder if you could add Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Editor Retention/Editor of the Week/Nominations to your watchlist. I don't expect you to second nominations (that is what the page is for, although that would nice). Rarely there is a discussion regarding policy. There is one now. Your input would be helpful. Buster Seven Talk 21:38, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Adjusting pilot start date - WP:Co-op

Hello John Carter,

I'll be putting out a formal update sometime soon, but I wanted to inform you that I've decided to push our start date back to mid-February rather than in January. There are number of reasons for this, but the biggest factor is that we are now facing the hard work of implementing our designs on the Mediawiki interface. It's a limiting environment to work with from a web-building perspective, and the team that worked on the Teahouse can offer similar testimonials to these challenges. We also want to make sure there is time for us and for you to test the environment out, ask questions at our project's talk page, and give us a little time to make any last changes before we start inviting editors to the space. If some of you know you will be unavailable during this time, it's totally fine if you need to bow out for the pilot. But we do need all the mentors we can get, so even if you can take the time to mentor just one or two editors, that would be fantastic.
Thanks a bunch, I, JethroBT drop me a line on behalf of Wikipedia:Co-op.

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was send by Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:47, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration clarification request closed

Hi John, just letting you know that I've archived an arbitration clarification request which you filed. For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 10:27, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This week's article for improvement (week 6, 2015)

Freeze dried coffee, an example of the application of food science
Hello, John Carter.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Food science


Previous selections: Symphony • Prose


Get involved with the TAFI project! You can...
Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:29, 2 February 2015 (UTC) • Opt-out instructions[reply]

WP: RETENTION

We haven't forgotten you. We await your return. GoodDay (talk) 03:40, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

When that happens, I hope to have at least a few more works done or at least close to done over at Wikisource for use by editors here. John Carter (talk) 16:51, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
About a week to go. We're waiting for ya. GoodDay (talk) 03:34, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hopefully, by that time, I might have some of the articles from some of James Hastings' old books, and some other sources, available as well. John Carter (talk) 16:06, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
While you're on this forced vacation can you take a look at User talk:Buster Spade and tell me what you think. It's like a pre-nomination stage where the idea is to engage wiki-friends and get them involved in the process and share their experiences to make the nom more specific. When it (contact with a cohort) has happened in the past the result is awesome. You too, GD. Your input is always welcome. . Buster Seven Talk 16:31, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WELCOME BACK. GoodDay (talk) 22:41, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hey GoodDay. Go to User talk:Buster Spade and share your thoughts. Thanks, . Buster Seven Talk 22:55, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Formal mediation has been requested

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Landmark Worldwide". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 13 February 2015.

Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by MediationBot (talk) on behalf of the Mediation Committee. 15:57, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This week's article for improvement (week 7, 2015)

Empire Field, stadium made with temporary structures, cheaper than permanent.
Hello, John Carter.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Stadium


Previous selections: Food science • Symphony


Get involved with the TAFI project! You can...
Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:16, 9 February 2015 (UTC) • Opt-out instructions[reply]

WikiProject X Newsletter • Issue 1

Hi! Thank you for subscribing to the WikiProject X Newsletter. For our first issue...

Has WikiProject X changed the world yet? No.

We opened up shop last month and announced our existence to the world. Our first phase is the "research" phase, consisting mostly of reading and listening. We set up our landing page and started collecting stories. So far, 28 stories have been shared about WikiProjects, describing a variety of experiences across numerous WikiProjects. A recurring story involves a WikiProject that starts off strong but has trouble continuing to stay active. Most people describe using WikiProjects as a way to get feedback from other editors. Some quotes:

  • "Working on requested articles, utilising the reliable sources section, and having an active WikiProject to ask questions in really helped me learn how to edit Wikipedia and looking back I don't know how long I would have stayed editing without that project." – Sam Walton on WikiProject Video Games
  • "I believe that the main problem of the Wikiprojects is that they are complicated to use. There should be a a much simpler way to check what do do, what needs to be improved etc." – Tetra quark
  • "In the late 2000s, WikiProject Film tried to emulate WP:MILHIST in having coordinators and elections. Unfortunately, this was not sustainable and ultimately fell apart." – Erik

Of course, these are just anecdotes. While they demonstrate what is possible, they do not necessarily explain what is typical. We will be using this information in conjunction with a quantitative analysis of WikiProjects, as documented on Meta. Particularly, we are interested in the measurement of WikiProject activity as it relates to overall editing in that WikiProject's subject area.

We also have 50 people and projects signed up for pilot testing, which is an excellent start! (An important caveat: one person volunteering a WikiProject does not mean the WikiProject as a whole is interested; just that there is at least one person, which is a start.)

While carrying out our research, we are documenting the problems with WikiProjects and our ideas for making WikiProjects better. Some ideas include better integration of existing tools into WikiProjects, recommendations of WikiProjects for people to join, and improved coordination with Articles for Creation. These are just ideas that may or may not make it to the design phase; we will see. We are also working with WikiProject Council to improve the directory of WikiProjects, with the goal of a reliable, self-updating WikiProject directory. Stay tuned! If you have any ideas, you are welcome to leave a note on our talk page.

That's all for now. Thank you for subscribing!

Harej 17:21, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

About your (non)participation in the January 2012 SOPA vote

Hi John Carter. I am Piotr Konieczny (User:Piotrus), you may know me as an active content creator (see my userpage), but I am also a professional researcher of Wikipedia. Recently I published a paper (downloadable here) on reasons editors participated in Wikipedia's biggest vote to date (January 2012 WP:SOPA). I am now developing a supplementary paper, which analyzes why many editors did not take part in that vote. Which is where you come in :) You are a highly active Wikipedian (92nd), and you were active back during the January 2012 discussion/voting for the SOPA, yet you did not chose to participate in said vote. I'd appreciate it if you could tell me why was that so? For your convenience, I prepared a short survey at meta, which should not take more than a minute of your time. I would dearly appreciate you taking this minute; not only as a Wikipedia researcher but as a fellow content creator and concerned member of the community (I believe your answers may help us eventually improve our policies and thus, the project's governance). PS. If you chose to reply here (on your userpage), please WP:ECHO me. Thank you! --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:09, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Co-op news for December 2014 – Feburary 2015

Hey John Carter, it's been a while. The Co-op team has been hard at work during over the winter, so let's get right into what's been happening:

Landing page draft. You know it's a draft when you need to squint at the logo, ha ha.
  • Graphic design work is nearing completion and development work is coming along slowly but surely. The main components of the space, profiles, the landing page, and the mentor landing page have all been built, and we're basically just putting the pieces together. We have close-to-final draft of the landing page, which is currently at User:Slalani/Landing_page, and in the thumbnail to the right. You can check out other components over at User:Slalani if you're curious. Soni, Slalani, and I are working together on some of the front page elements. We've also been doing some testing on test.wikipedia.org for profile building and matching. If you're curious about checking that out, let me know.
  • We've finished up a survey for newer editors to assess their experiences of using existing help spaces (e.g. Reference Desk, Teahouse, IRC, The Wikipedia Adventure) on en.wikipedia. Gabrielm199 is putting together a summary of that survey, and in the meantime, some findings from that survey of 45 newer editors include:
    • On average, editors found contributing to Wikipedia to be easier after using the help space compared to before.
      • However, after using one or more help spaces, only half of editors reported that editing, addressing social challenges, and resolving technical issues were easy or very easy. The other half of editors were either neutral, or reported that these matters were difficult or very difficult.
    • Just under 30% (11 of 38 editors) of newer editors said they probably would have stopped editing entirely had they not received support from the help space they used.
    • Editors frequently reported either 1) that they would not have been learn what they needed without the help space, or 2) That they could have found it, but admitted that it would have been difficult or taken much longer.
  • We will be making one final move of the pilot start date to March 4th, 2015. This is the last move (I promise), because we can't afford to run the pilot any later than that. So there it is: March 4th or bust! But we won't bust, because there are just a few things left on our plate before we can run our pilot successfully. I'll be alerting you about when you will be able to make mentor profiles soon, so when you get a message about that, please take a minute or two to create your profile here (otherwise, you won't get matched to any editors!).

Thanks to all of the new mentors who have joined over the past few months. Big thanks to Missvain to posting about our little project here to the gendergap-l mailing list. I, JethroBT drop me a line 00:47, 13 February 2015 (UTC) on behalf of Wikipedia:Co-op.[reply]

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was send by Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:36, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Valentine Greets!!!

Valentine Greets!!!

Hello John Carter, love is the language of hearts and is the feeling that joins two souls and brings two hearts together in a bond. Taking love to the level of Wikipedia, spread the WikiLove by wishing each other Happy Valentine's Day, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person.
Sending you a heartfelt and warm love on the eve,
Happy editing,
 - T H (here I am) 12:08, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Valentine Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Request for mediation rejected

The request for formal mediation concerning Landmark Worldwide, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

For the Mediation Committee, TransporterMan (TALK) 18:48, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
(Delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)

E-mail

@Dennis Brown: You've got mail. John Carter (talk) 19:40, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This week's article for improvement (week 8, 2015)

Hello, John Carter.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Ice cream parlour


Previous selections: Stadium • Food science


Get involved with the TAFI project! You can...
Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:27, 16 February 2015 (UTC) • Opt-out instructions[reply]

An Sock puppet investigation concerning Cultural Marxism Deletion

[[3]] This investigation has been started to investigate RGloucester and suspected sock or meat puppet Jobrot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.56.15.36 (talk) 12:59, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See Jimbo's Page and ANI

See Jimbo's page [4] and ANI[5] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.56.32.8 (talk) 03:22, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This week's article for improvement (week 9, 2015)

Trailer Trash is a US derogatory term for poor people living in trailers or caravans. It appears that these trailer trash happen to live on a trailer park.
Hello, John Carter.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Trailer Trash


Previous selections: Ice cream parlour • Stadium


Get involved with the TAFI project! You can...
Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:55, 23 February 2015 (UTC) • Opt-out instructions[reply]

WP:Co-op: Presentation at Wikimania 2015

Hey John Carter. I've put in a submission for a presentation at Wikimania 2015 called Is Two the Magic Number?: The Co-op and New Editor Engagement through Mentorship. I'll be talking about the state of finding help spaces on en.wiki and how our new mentorship space, The Co-op, factors into that picture. Reviewing will begin soon and I'll need your help to be able to present our work. Please review our proposal and give us feedback. If you would be interested in seeing this presentation, whether you are attending or not, please add your name to the signup at the bottom of the proposal (you do not need to attend Wikimania to express interest in presentations). I, JethroBT drop me a line on behalf of Wikipedia:Co-op.

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was send by Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:19, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

Thanks John for trying to help out on the latetst ANI. Since I got insulted by that person it has gone a bit too far. --Catflap08 (talk) 18:24, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2015 March newsletter

One of several of Godot13's quality submissions during round 1

That's it, the first round is done, sign-ups are closed and we're into round 2. 64 competitors made it into this round, and are now broken into eight groups of eight. The top two of each group will go through to round 3, and then the top scoring 16 "wildcards" across all groups. Round 1 saw some interesting work on some very important articles, with the round leader Australia Freikorp (submissions) owing most of his 622 points scored to a Featured Article on the 2001 film Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within which qualified for a times-two multiplier. This is a higher score than in previous years, as Smithsonian Institution Godot13 (submissions) had 500 points in 2014 at the end of round 1, and our very own judge, Colorado Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) led round 1 with 601 points in 2013.

In addition to Freikorp's work, some other important articles and pictures were improved during round one, here's a snapshot of a few of them:

You may also wish to know that The Core Contest is running through the month of March. Head there for further details - they even have actual prizes!

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. Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), Miyagawa (talk · contribs · email) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email)

Thanks for your assistance! Miyagawa (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiCup.

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was send by Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:54, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2015 March newsletter

One of several of Godot13's quality submissions during round 1

That's it, the first round is done, sign-ups are closed and we're into round 2. 64 competitors made it into this round, and are now broken into eight groups of eight. The top two of each group will go through to round 3, and then the top scoring 16 "wildcards" across all groups. Round 1 saw some interesting work on some very important articles, with the round leader Australia Freikorp (submissions) owing most of his 622 points scored to a Featured Article on the 2001 film Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within which qualified for a times-two multiplier. This is a higher score than in previous years, as Smithsonian Institution Godot13 (submissions) had 500 points in 2014 at the end of round 1, and our very own judge, Colorado Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) led round 1 with 601 points in 2013.

In addition to Freikorp's work, some other important articles and pictures were improved during round one, here's a snapshot of a few of them:

You may also wish to know that The Core Contest is running through the month of March. Head there for further details - they even have actual prizes!

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. Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), Miyagawa (talk · contribs · email) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email)

Thanks for your assistance! Miyagawa (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiCup.

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was send by Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:55, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Co-op: Mentor profiles and final pilot prep

Hey mentors, two announcements:

  1. You can now make your profile at The Co-op! Please set up your mentor profile here as soon as you are able, as the pilot begins on March 4th. It isn't very involved and should only take a minute. If you need more info about what the different skills mean (e.g. writing, communication), please refer to these descriptions.
  2. Profile creation, invitations, and automated matching of editors, profile creation, that will be coordinated through HostBot and a few gadgets may not be ready for our pilot, and will have to be done manually until they are ready. In preparation for the pilot, please read over these instructions on how we will be manually performing these tasks until the automated components are ready. I, JethroBT drop me a line on behalf of Wikipedia:Co-op.

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was send by Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:41, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This week's article for improvement (week 10, 2015)

There are many backup dancers accompanying the dances of the main dancer.
Hello, John Carter.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Backup dancer


Previous selections: Trailer Trash • Ice cream parlour


Get involved with the TAFI project! You can...
Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:58, 2 March 2015 (UTC) • Opt-out instructions[reply]

Tgeairn at AE

You asked when emails were sent to the functionaries list at the ARE discussion. I believe the first email was sent on 2 February 2015. For some reason, this was held up and not distributed to the list. Having received no acknowledgement, I sent and updated follow-up email on 2 March 2015. I understand that the second email was distributed to the list and the first email has also been released. Please note that I have only opened the arbcom, and now the AE case, due to the pushing of POV not based in sources but rather based upon OR and advocacy POV. That includes blanking of referenced material, which is a violation of the injunction/remedy in the arbcom decision mandating that edits be based in sources (i.e., rather than blanking material based upon editor say-so). I am obviously failing to make the point at AE, and since arbcom did not consider content, it seems that there is no dispute resolution process to enforce NPOV, V, NOTADVOCATE and similar policies related to content issues. Although community consensus generally works to protect verifiable content on highly-watched articles, the rest of Wikipedia's lightly-watched articles are open for advocacy claques, COI editors, and others who destructively edit without resorting to obvious vandalism. I have posted additional diffs at AE, but am beyond frustrated at there being no obvious way to address advocacy, and will walk away from further comment there. • Astynax talk 21:03, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]