User talk:Nanobear~enwiki

Archives:

• User talk:Nanobear/Archive1
• User talk:Nanobear/Archive2
• User talk:Nanobear/Archive3
• User talk:Nanobear/Archive4
• User talk:Nanobear/Archive5

Barnstar

		The Business and Economics Barnstar
		I award you with this shining star for your quality work on the articles related to the Russian economy, an increasingly important topic area. GreyHood Talk 19:27, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I really appreciate this. Offliner (talk) 21:18, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Alexei Kudrin

-- Cirt (talk) 18:03, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

WP:AE#Vecrumba

Hello Offliner. You opened this enforcement request some time ago, and till now no admin has chimed in. Lately Vecrumba has been saying some rather diplomatic things (see the bottom of the AE). Your main issue appears to be personal attacks. Since we are used to harsh language from most of these participants, it's not clear if any of the statements are rising above the general din. For the EEML editors and Petri Krohn to exchange sharp criticism is not a surprise. Do you want to make a further comment at the AE to help the admins focus their attention, or do you think that enough has been said that the AE might be closed with no action. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 19:55, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Never mind. I'm going through all your complaints individually to see what the conclusion should be. EdJohnston (talk) 19:56, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Nanobear~enwiki. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2010/Candidates/Casliber/Questions.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Your question at ACE

Sorry, for some reason I missed it. I have responded now. [1] --Elen of the Roads (talk) 21:59, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

CE is not a group "seeking to set up a religious state in northern Chechnya"

But in all of Chechnya, but especially (mostly) beyond Chechnya, so Mr. Gollia's allegation must refer to some local group in northern Chechnya (maybe actually existing, but probably not). --Asperchu (talk) 08:43, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

I know, but I couldn't figure out in exactly what article to put it. I think Caucasus Emirate is the closest; isn't it a kind of general name for all the various Islamists trying to establish an Islamist republic in the Caucasus? Offliner (talk) 08:47, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

No article, because it is either some actually existing mysterious very-local-and-yet-international group in northern Chechnya, or Mr. Gollia is simply confused like hell, which also tell a lot about this allegation of his. (The whole things reminds me of the so-called "Chechen Network" plot to blow up stuff in France few years ago, in which all of them were North Africans and it was named "Chechen" because one of the Algerians once allegedly travelled to Georgia which is near Chechnya, but hey, "Chechen" sure sounds scary.)

Btw, the Chechen "province of Caucasian Emirate" is right now totally mutined and mostly under the effective contol of Hussein Gakayev (yes, my article), but this makes no "northern Chechnya" either, as even his personal stomping ground is in Vedensky (ie: in the south-east). And this is not even mentioned in the CE article, but oh well. --Asperchu (talk) 09:13, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Also, an emirate and not a republic. Like, it's in the name, you know? --Asperchu (talk) 09:14, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Your new filing about Piotrus at WP:AE

Hello Offliner. You've included a diff of Piotrus at Peace of Riga in your complaint, but you have not given the required explanation of how this edit violates the editor's current restriction. ("Diffs of edits that violate this sanction or remedy, and an explanation how these edits violate it"). I also take note that you haven't participated on the article's talk page. Piotrus made only one edit, and since he made it, an IP editor has reverted it. The IP has opened a discussion on talk that appears sensible, at first sight. There are no further reverts. You'll need to give a stronger argument for why we should consider this as bad behavior on the part of Piotrus. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 16:58, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

There is no need for me to demonstrate any "bad behaviour" by Piotrus (other than the topic ban violation) or to be personally involved in the dispute and its discussions. I'm simply presenting a diff which I think is a clear topic ban violation for investigation. Piotrus is prohibited from editing anywhere near the topics of national and ethnic disputes in Eastern Europe. Arbitrator Coren specifically warned Piotrus not to even try to toe the line. The ArbCom's wish is clear: no violations are to be tolerated. The diff is clearly about national and ethnic disputes in Eastern Europe ("he Belarusian language was banned, in speaking and in literature, and local leadership was sent to a concentration camp at Bereza Kartuska"). Offliner (talk) 17:15, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK for ZALA Aero

Materialscientist (talk) 12:03, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Restriction

As the outcome of this request for arbitration enforcement, you are prohibited from commencing or participating in dispute resolution or enforcement processes (including arbitration enforcement) relating to user conduct within the area of conflict (as defined by WP:DIGWUREN#Discretionary sanctions) for a period of two months, save for processes concerning your own conduct. To avoid doubt, "commencing or participating in" includes doing so by proxy. Regards --Mkativerata (talk) 22:43, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I have made a comment in relation to the above at Dojarco's appeal (WP:AE). Ncmvocalist (talk) 10:26, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you very much for your support in your voter guide, as well as for your other thoughtful observations. I'll also take your more critical comments into account as I continue my service during the next two years. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 01:50, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Medvedev modernisation programme

Materialscientist (talk) 00:03, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2011 WikiCup!

Hello, happy new year and welcome to the 2011 WikiCup! Your submissions' page can be found here and instructions of how to update the page can be found here and on the submissions' page itself. From the submissions' page, a bot will update the main scoresheet. Our rules have been very slightly updated from last year; the full rules can be found here. Please remember that you can only receive points for content on which you have done significant work in 2011; nominations of work from last year and "drive-by" nominations will not be awarded points. Signups are going to remain open through January, so if you know of anyone who would like to take part, please direct them to Wikipedia:WikiCup/2011 signups. The judges can be contacted on the WikiCup talk page, on their respective talk pages, or by email. Other than that, we will be in contact at the end of every month with the newsletter. If you want to stop or start receiving newsletters, please remove your name from or add your name to this list. Good luck! J Milburn and The ed17 12:59, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Monotown

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Kola Peninsula

Hi there! I am trying to work on the Kola Peninsula article to bring it to the GA status, and was wondering if you would be able/willing to help me with the section about the economy. If the GA passes, it may help your WikiCup standing :) If not, that's fine too, but please let me know either way so I could plan accordingly. And of course, should you wish to work on any other section of that article, you are most welcome to! Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); January 19, 2011; 21:31 (UTC)

Yes, I'd love to help (and get potential points). What kind of material do you think the economy section should include? It seems to overlap a lot with that of Murmansk Oblast. I don't have much time this week, but the next week should be better. Nanobear (talk) 21:52, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm not really looking at this week; I myself still have plenty of work to do on that article. Regarding the kind of material to include, anything specific to the peninsula (and not to the whole oblast) would be great. But separating the peninsula from the oblast, I guess, is the hard part :)—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); January 19, 2011; 21:55 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program is looking for new Online Ambassadors

Hi! I noticed your activity as a Good Article reviewer, and wanted to let you know about the Wikipedia Ambassador Program, and specifically the role of Online Ambassador. We're looking for friendly Wikipedians who are good at reviewing articles and giving feedback to serve as mentors for students who are assigned to write for Wikipedia in their classes.

If you're interested, I encourage you to take a look at the Online Ambassador guidelines; the "mentorship process" describes roughly what will be expected of mentors in the coming term. If that's something you want to do, please apply!

You can find instructions for applying at WP:ONLINE. The main things we're looking for in Online Ambassadors are friendliness, regular activity (since mentorship is a commitment that spans several months), and the ability to give detailed, substantive feedback on articles (both short new articles, and longer, more mature ones).

I hope to hear from you soon.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 20:48, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Re Use of leaked diplomatic cables

Good point. Discuss on further my talk page?

Orphaned non-free image File:PhobosGruntDesign.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:PhobosGruntDesign.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 04:41, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Elektro–L

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:03, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

I need some help with updating articles

Hello! I've nominated the 2011 World Economic Forum on ITN, as well as the joint development of the Black Sea shelf by Rosneft and ExxonMobil, and that of the Arctic shelf by Rosneft and BP, which was announced during the Forum. Could you help me with updating the four related articles: World Economic Forum (the section Deals is needed), Rosneft, ExxonMobil and British Petroleum? GreyHood ^Talk 01:20, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Updating Wikipedia on a night shift? Does this mean I will get a barnstar which is 30% bigger than usual? ;) But seriously, this is interesting news, so I'll see what I can do. Nanobear (talk) 01:53, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Well, I've had a hope that night comes to your place later than to mine ;) Anyway, the Forum concludes later on January 30, so there is enough time for update in the next two days. There is a consensus on posting the Forum conclusion, while the oil companies part is still questionable. The updates could be copied between the articles, though, and all four could be updated as easily as one of them. I'll also return to this task tomorrow, just thought it would be interesting to you since it involves some of your favourite topics. GreyHood ^Talk 02:05, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

I have updated Rosneft. But are you sure the arctic shelf deal was signed during the World Economic Forum? I could not immediately find any sources saying it was signed at Davos. Due to this, I only copied the ExxonMobil deal to the forum article and not the BP one. Nanobear (talk) 03:54, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Btw, I think this is interesting and probably worth a mention in some article. Nanobear (talk) 04:13, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

As this Russian source says, on the Forum BP and Rosneft signed a deal on "strategic cooperation" and "in development of the strategic alliance of the two oil companies on the joint development of the Arctic, achieved two weeks ago in London". Also, as far as I understand, they announced more details of their cooperation in the Arctic and other places. GreyHood ^Talk 11:56, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

And yes, thanks for the updates! I'll see what credits to give you... GreyHood ^Talk 12:00, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

And here is your rewards

		The Teamwork Barnstar
		For your timely contributions and your willingness to help even in the midst of night. Maybe this award is not 30% bigger than usual, but it does contain 10 times more barnstars than usual! GreyHood Talk 16:22, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! Nanobear (talk) 22:55, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 January newsletter

We are half way through round one of the WikiCup. Signups are now closed, and we have 129 listed competitors, 64 of whom will make it to round two. Congratulations to The Bushranger (submissions), who, at the time of writing, has a comfortable lead with 228 points, followed by Hurricanehink (submissions), with 144 points. Four others have over 100 points. Congratulations also go to Yellow Evan (submissions), who scored the first points in the competition, claiming for Talk:Hurricane King/GA1, Miyagawa (submissions), who scored the first non-review points in the competition, claiming for Dognapping, and Jarry1250 (submissions) who was the first in the competition to use our new "multiplier" mechanic (explanation), claiming for Grigory Potemkin, a subject covered on numerous Wikipedias. Thanks must also go to Jarry1250 for dealing with all bot work- without you, the competition wouldn't be happening!

A running total of claims can be seen here. However, numerous competitors are yet to score at all- please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. The number of points that will be needed to reach round two is not clear- everyone needs to get their entries in now to guarantee their places! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, 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 22:39, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank's for signing up

It was my intention to ask you to sign up later, when I've done with the transfer of my old to-do lists to the page. But since now you are signed in, I expect you may start some work for the project right now. Also, me and Ezhiki have planned to set up Wikipedia:WikiProject Russia/Economy of Russia task force as the next aim, and pour most of contents of my giant to-do list there. If you like, you may start the project yourself, copying the existing page infrastructure from Wikipedia:WikiProject Russia/Science and technology in Russia task force and starting to fill the to-do list in a way you find appropriate. Since it was you who actually drawn me into editing Russian economy articles on Wikipedia, I'd like you to start that page, while I could join the editing when I finish my work with S&T. GreyHood ^Talk 16:16, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Also, we may start Wikipedia:WikiProject Russia/Politics of Russia task force, and few more projects, namely History, Geography and Culture, and then the whole range of topics will be well-covered. I'm not a great expert in politics, and I was planning to ask either you or User:Russavia to start the politics task force. What do you think about this idea? GreyHood ^Talk 16:16, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

I'll think about creating the politics and economy task forces. I think the main advantage of the task forces is synchronizing and merging everyone's to-do lists. But I will probably have little time the next two weeks. Nanobear (talk) 15:08, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Glonass-K1

You are right that Glonass-K1 is a separate type of satellite, however the instance which you changed in 2011 in spaceflight was referring to a K1 satellite. The designation Glonass-K is no longer used; K1 refers to the prototypes, and K2 the operational satellites. --GW… 11:02, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

What's the source for this? All the sources I've seen call the first satellite a GLONASS-K satellite, and it's not a prototype. Nanobear (talk) 11:06, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

The manufacturer calls it GLONASS-K No. 11. Nanobear (talk) 11:09, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

I found a source in which a Roscosmos officials says there is a division to K1 and K2. Although the K1 seems to be a fully operational satellite. As long as all the official sources (Reshetnev, Roscosmos, RIA Novosti, etc.) use GLONASS-K instead of GLONASS-K1, that's what I'm going to use too. Nanobear (talk) 11:23, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

I would say that Glonass-K is the collective/programme name, and K1 and K2 are the individual types of spacecraft. --GW… 16:06, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

It's realistic that Glonass-K will eventually have an improved version. But currently there seems to be only a single source (the Roscosmos official) who thinks the K1-K2 scheme will be used. All other sources which talk about the scheme base their information on this official. The manufacturer calls the first satellite GLONASS-K No. 11 and Roscosmos calls it just GLONASS-K, so even if the scheme will eventually be used, it has clearly not yet been adopted. Nanobear (talk) 16:29, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Automotive industry in Russia

Materialscientist (talk) 18:03, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

ITN for GLONASS-K

--BorgQueen (talk) 20:16, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Nanobear~enwiki. You have new messages at Greyhood's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

WikiCup 2011 February newsletter

So begins round two of the WikiCup! We now have eight pools, each with eight random contestants. This round will continue until the end of April, when the top two of each pool, as well as the next 16 highest scorers of those remaining, will make it to round three. Congratulations to The Bushranger (submissions) (first, with 487 points) and Hurricanehink (submissions) (second, with 459), who stormed the first round. Casliber (submissions) finished third with 223. Twelve others finished with over 100 points- well done to all of you! The final standings in round one can be seen here. A mere 8 points were required to reach round two; competition will no doubt be much more fierce this round, so be ready for a challenge! A special thanks goes, again, to Jarry1250 (submissions) for dealing with all bot work. This year's bot, as well as running smoothly, is doing some very helpful things that last year's did not. Also, thanks to Stone (submissions) for some helpful behind-the-scenes updating and number crunching.

Some news for those who are interested- March will see a GAN backlog elimination drive, which you are still free to join. Organised by WikiProject Good articles, the drive aims to minimise the GAN backlog and offers prizes to those who help out. Of course, you may well be able to claim WikiCup points for the articles you review as part of the drive. Also ongoing is the Great Backlog Drive, looking to work on clearing all of the backlogs on Wikipedia; again, incentives are offered, and the spirit of friendly competition is alive, while helping the encyclopedia is the ultimate aim. Though unrelated to the WikiCup, these may well be of interest to some of you.

Just a reminder of the rules; if you have done significant work on content this year and it is promoted in this round, you may claim for it. Also, anything that was promoted after the end of round one but before the beginning of round two may be claimed for in round two. Details of the rules can be found on this page. For those interested in statistics, a running total of claims can be seen here, and a very interesting table of that information (along with the highest scorers in each category) can be seen here. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, 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 23:47, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Mir GA nomination

Hello! The article Mir was nominated for GA status. Do you think you could make the requested GA review here? GreyHood ^Talk 15:40, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps, if I have the time soon. It's a pretty long article to review. Thanks for notifying me. Nanobear (talk) 15:43, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

I've noticed this nomination among "Article bot alerts" on WP:RUSSIA page. Recently, the main project page has been updated by me, and I hope it will become more useful facility to work on Russia-related articles. And I think the project could do better with few more good articles. GreyHood ^Talk 15:50, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Sedmoi Kontinent

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:55, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Islamic Djamaat of Dagestan

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:05, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 March newsletter

We are half way through round two of the WikiCup, which will end on 28 April. Of the 64 current contestants, 32 will make it through to the next round; the two highest in each pool, and the 16 next highest scorers. At the time of writing, our current overall leader is Hurricanehink (submissions) with 231 points, who leads Pool H. Piotrus (submissions) (Pool G) also has over 200 points, while 9 others (three of whom are in Pool D) have over 100 points. Remember that certain content (specifically, articles/portals included in at least 20 Wikipedias as of 31 December 2010 or articles which are considered "vital") is worth double points if promoted to good or featured status, or if it appears on the main page in the Did You Know column. There were some articles last round which were eligible for double points, but which were not claimed for. For more details, see Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring.

A running total of claims can be seen here. However, numerous competitors are yet to score at all- please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. The number of points that will be needed to reach round three is not clear- everyone needs to get their entries in now to guarantee their places! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, 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 01:03, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Russian police reform

Hello! Your submission of Russian police reform at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 09:57, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Russian police reform

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Databases

I am hoping to eventually add at least some statistics to my database, but don't have any immediate plans for that yet. There's still much work to be done on the database core, but on the bright side, the database design is certainly conducive to adding whatever statistics on top of the core data. I'll certainly take a look at what you are doing, but the caveat is that my database is in MS Access, not in MySQL. I know that my choice of Access tends to raise a lot of eyebrows :), but, unfortunately, it is the only database product to which I have access both at home and at work. Additionally, my database experience is mostly with the commercial products such as MS SQL and Oracle, and my knowledge of the open-source products is very, very limited (not that I'm unwilling to learn them, mind you; it's just that I don't have any practical use for them). Perl, that I don't know at all (but again, I'm more than interested in learning it). If all this doesn't scare you away, please feel free to email me about any collaboration plans you can think of. It would most certainly be convenient to have a database which can be updated quickly and off of which scripts could be run to update the data in the articles—it certainly beats updating the articles manually every time new data are released! Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); April 25, 2011; 16:33 (UTC)

Our recent exchange

Hello, Nanobear~enwiki. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

PЄTЄRS J V ►TALK 15:39, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

I have refactored my comment since some people did not like it. Nanobear (talk) 16:00, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Still needlessly refers to my (implied) lack of integrity but at least an improvement. Спасибо. PЄTЄRS J V ►TALK 19:03, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Uruguay

Thanks for reviewing Uruguay against the GA critieria. I'm going to have a stab at making your recommended changes over the next few days. --Matthew Proctor (talk) 08:26, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 April newsletter

Round 2 of the 2011 WikiCup is over, and the new round will begin on 1 May. Note that any points scored in the interim (that is, for content promoted or reviews completed on 29-30 April) can be claimed in the next round, but please do not start updating your submissions' pages until the next round has begun. Fewer than a quarter of our original contestants remain; 32 enter round 3, and, in two months' time, only 16 will progress to our penultimate round. Casliber (submissions), who led Pool F, was our round champion, with 411 points, while 7 contestants scored between 200 and 300 points. At the other end of the scale, a score of 41 was high enough to reach round 3; more than five times the score required to reach round 2, and competition will no doubt become tighter now we're approaching the later rounds. Those progressing to round 3 were spread fairly evenly across the pools; 4 progressed from each of pools A, B, E and H, while 3 progressed from both pools C and F. Pools D and G were the most successful; each had 5 contestants advancing.

This round saw our first good topic points this year; congratulations to Hurricanehink (submissions) and Nergaal (submissions) who also led pool H and pool B respectively. However, there remain content types for which no points have yet been scored; featured sounds, featured portals and featured topics. In addition to prizes for leaderboard positions, the WikiCup awards other prizes; for instance, last year, a prize was awarded to Candlewicke (submissions) (who has been eliminated) for his work on In The News. For this reason, working on more unusual content could be even more rewarding than usual!

Sorry this newsletter is going out a little earlier than expected- there is a busy weekend coming up! A running total of claims can be seen here. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, 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 19:25, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Official Russia and RIA Novosti

You are obviously aware that there is a clique of editors who fight against including Russian sources on particular articles, especially when that source is RIA Novosti. It is derided as being state-owned and the mouthpiece of so-called "Official" Russia. What would one make of this article? "Official Russia"? Or proof that RIA Novosti does indeed publish varied points of view? What are your thoughts on this? --Russavia ^{I'm chanting as we speak} 16:31, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Non-free files in your user space

Hey there Nanobear, thank you for your contributions. I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:Nanobear/JR. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.

• See a log of files removed today here.

• Shut off the bot here.

• Report errors here.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 05:13, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Hodja and HanzoHattori

Noticed your diff to the Hodja Nasreddin-HanzoHattori link an the Amendments requests page. Looks like Hodja didn't forget about Hanzo and still supports him, even several years after Hanzo's ban. Back in 2008, Biophys talked with some of the HanzoHattori sockpuppets: RamboKadyrov, Putinjugend, [2]. But all this is quite old stuff and irrelevant to the current amendment request. --DonaldDuck (talk) 10:53, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 May newsletter

We're half way through round 3 of the 2011 WikiCup. There are currently 32 remaining in the competition, but only 16 will progress to our penultimate round. Casliber (submissions), of pool D, is our overall leader with nearly 200 points, while pools A, B and C are led by Racepacket (submissions), Hurricanehink (submissions) and Canada Hky (submissions) respectively. The score required to reach the next round is 35, though this will no doubt go up significantly as the round progresses. We have a good number of high scorers, but also a considerable number who are yet to score. Please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. Also, an important note concerning nominations at featured article candidates: if you are nominating content for which you intend to claim WikiCup points, please make this clear in the nomination statement so that the FAC director and his delegates are aware of the fact.

A running total of claims can be seen here. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, 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 23:33, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

SPI

[3] -> Would you mind removing or modifying your comments at Amendment page, please? It was not me. Thanks, Biophys (talk) 18:12, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

[4] -> Thank you. Biophys (talk) 19:42, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 June newsletter

We are half way through 2011, and entering the penultimate round of this year's WikiCup; the semi-finals are upon us! Points scored in the interim (29/30 June) may be counted towards next round, but please do not update your submissions' pages until the next round has begun. 16 contestants remain, and all have shown dedication to the project to reach this far. Our round leader was Casliber (submissions) who, among other things, successfully passed three articles through featured article candidates and claimed an impressive 29 articles at Did You Know, scoring 555 points. Casliber led pool D. Pool A was led by Wizardman (submissions), claiming points for a featured article, a featured list and seven good article reviews, while pool C was led by Eisfbnore (submissions), who claimed for two good articles, ten articles at Did You Know and four good article reviews. They scored 154 and 118 respectively. Pool B was by far our most competitive pool; six of the eight competitors made it through to round 4, with all of them scoring over 100 points. The pool was led by Hurricanehink (submissions), who claimed for, among other things, three featured articles and five good articles. In addition to the four pool leaders, 12 others (the four second places, and the 8 next highest overall) make up our final 16. The lowest scorer who reached round 4 scored 76 points; a significant increase on the 41 needed to reach round 3. Eight of our semi-finalists scored at least twice as much as this.

No points were awarded this round for featured pictures, good topics or In the News, and no points have been awarded in the whole competition for featured topics, featured portals or featured sounds. Instead, the highest percentage of points has come from good articles. Featured articles, despite their high point cost, are low in number, and so, overall, share a comparable number of points with Did You Know, which are high in number but low in cost. A comparatively small but still considerable number of points come from featured lists and good article reviews, rounding out this round's overall scores.

We would again like to thank Jarry1250 (submissions) and Stone (submissions) for invaluable background work, as well as all of those helping to provide reviews for the articles listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Please do keep using it, and please do help by providing reviews for the articles listed there. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews generally at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup.

Two final notes: Firstly, please remember to state your participation in the WikiCup when nominating articles at FAC. Finally, some WikiCup-related statistics can be seen here and here, for those interested, though it appears that neither are completely accurate at this time. 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 23:37, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Sockpuppets

I have come across a lot of obvious sockpuppets and it is sometimes difficult to determine who they are and to gather the evidence. I do not see any at the moment, but will let you know. Funny too that every time I make a report, User:Collect and sometimes Martintg show up and defend them, although they never provide evidence. TFD (talk) 20:31, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 July newsletter

We are half way through the penultimate round of this year's WikiCup; there is less than a month to go before we have our final 8. Our pool leaders are Adabow (submissions) (Pool A, 189 points) and PresN (submissions) (Pool B, 165 points). The number of points required to reach the next round is not clear at this time; there are some users who still do not have any recorded points. Please remember to update your submissions' pages promptly. In addition, congratulations to PresN, who scored the first featured topic points in the competition for his work on Thatgamecompany related articles. Most points this round generally have, so far, come from good articles, with only one featured article (White-bellied Sea Eagle, from Casliber (submissions)) and two featured lists (Hugo Award for Best Graphic Story, from PresN and Grammy Award for Best Native American Music Album, from Another Believer (submissions)). Points for Did You Know and good article reviews round out the scoring. No points have been awarded for In the News, good topics or featured pictures this round, and no points for featured sounds or portals have been awarded in the entire competition. On an unrelated note, preparation will be beginning soon for next year's WikiCup- watch this space!

There is little else to be said beyond the usual. Please list anything you need reviewing on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews, so others following the WikiCup can help, and please do help if you can by providing reviews for the articles listed there. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews generally at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup- points are, of course, offered for reviews at GAC. Two final notes: Firstly, please remember to state your participation in the WikiCup when nominating articles at FAC. Finally, some WikiCup-related statistics can be seen here and here. 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 11:38, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 July newsletter

The finals are upon us; we're down to the last few. One of the eight remaining contestants will be this year's WikiCup champion! 150 was the score needed to progress to the final; just under double the 76 required to reach round 4, and more than triple the 41 required to reach round 3. Our eight finalists are:

• Casliber (submissions), Pool A's winner. Casliber has the highest total score in the competition, with 1528, the bulk of which is made up of 8 featured articles. He has the highest number of total featured articles (8, 1 of which was eligible for double points) and total did you knows (72) of any finalist. Casliber writes mostly on biology, including ornithology, botany and mycology.
• PresN (submissions), Pool B's winner and the highest scorer this round. PresN is the only finalist who has scored featured topic points, and he has gathered an impressive 330, but most of his points come from his 4 featured articles, one of which scored double. PresN writes mostly on video games and the Hugo Awards.
• Hurricanehink (submissions), Pool A's runner-up. Hurricanehink's points are mostly from his 30 good articles, more than any other finalist, and he is also the only finalist to score good topic points. Hurricanehink, as his name suggests, writes mostly on meteorology.
• Wizardman (submissions), Pool B's runner-up. Wizardman has completed 86 good article reviews, more than any other finalist, but most of his points come from his 2 featured articles. Wizardman writes mostly on American sport, especially baseball.
• Miyagawa (submissions), the "fastest loser" (Pool A). Miyagawa has written 3 featured lists, one of which was awarded double points, more than any other finalist, but he was awarded points mostly for his 68 did you knows. Miyagawa writes on a variety of topics, including dogs, military history and sport.
• Resolute (submissions), the second "fastest loser" (Pool B). Most of Resolute's points come from his 9 good articles. He writes mostly on Canadian topics, including ice hockey.
• Yellow Evan (submissions), who was joint third "fastest loser" (Pool A). Most of Evan's points come from his 10 good articles, and he writes mostly on meteorology.
• Sp33dyphil (submissions), who was joint third "fastest loser" (Pool B). Most of Phil's points come from his 9 good articles, 4 of which (more than any other finalist) were eligible for double points. He writes mostly on aeronautics.

We say goodbye to our seven other semi-finalists, Another Believer (submissions), Piotrus (submissions), Grandiose (submissions), Stone (submissions), Eisfbnore (submissions), Canada Hky (submissions) and MuZemike (submissions). Everyone still in the competition at this stage has done fantastically well, and contributed greatly to Wikipedia. We're on the home straight now, and we will know our winner in two months.

In other news, preparations for next year's competition have begun with a brainstorming thread. Please, feel free to drop by and share any thoughts you have about how the competition should work next year. Sign ups are not yet open, but will be opened in due course. Watch this space. Further, there has been a discussion about the rule whereby those in the WikiCup must delcare their participation when nominating articles at featured article candidates. This has resulted in a bot being created by new featured article delegate Ucucha (talk · contribs). The bot will leave a message on FAC pages if the nominator is a participant in the WikiCup.

A reminder of the rules: any points scored after August 29 may be claimed for the final round, and please remember to update submission pages promptly. 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 00:09, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Notification per procedure

I regret your continued inflammatory and acrimonious relitigation of the past.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Nanobear.2FOffliner.2C_grossly_offensive_personal_attack

PЄTЄRS J V ►TALK 20:07, 24 September 2011 (UTC)