User talk:Biblioworm/Archive 2014

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Notice: The first part of this archive covers the period of time when I was still a complete newbie, unfamiliar with all policies. Do not judge me based on those threads!

Welcome![edit]

Hello, WritingEnthusiast14, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or click here to ask for help here on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you here shortly. Again, welcome! ミーラー強斗武 (StG88ぬ会話) 02:05, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi and welcome. Happy to help you to adjust to Wikipedia... you might also help me to adjust to Wikihow, I've a neglected project there at http://www.wikihow.com/Discussion:Print-Double-Sided-Documents-on-Any-Printer to which I intend to return someday!

See also WP:THREAD for the way indendation should work on talk pages. Andrewa (talk) 11:33, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Help with Wikihow[edit]

I have forgotten my wikihow password, and their captcha system is busted so I can't reset it, and there doesn't seem any way to contact support there... or if there is, I can't find it. Suggestions? Andrewa (talk) 00:04, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, Biblioworm. You have new messages at Lugia2453's talk page.
Message added 14:44, 27 August 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Lugia2453 (talk) 14:44, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of NutriBullet[edit]

A tag has been placed on NutriBullet, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

non notable product

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. TheLongTone (talk) 22:38, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of NutriBullet for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article NutriBullet is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NutriBullet until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. TheLongTone (talk) 14:46, 30 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Grove Pointe[edit]

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

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

A tag has been placed on Grove Pointe requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content or organised event, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here.

This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because it provides information about the apartment complex - Grove Pointe in Jersey City, that has been listed in the "List of tallest buildings in Jersey City". WritingEnthusiast14, please advise what additional information would need to be provided in order to publish this article. - Thank you, Anshulmisra

Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I was, at the time, unaware that the complex was listed in "List of tallest buildings in Jersey City". I must concede that I made a mistake. I will remove the tag. Writing Enthusiast (talk) 21:04, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Deletion of 2013 Palanca Awards[edit]

Hello!

Got your message about 2013_Palanca_Awards. I started the page but haven't gotten around to putting in more content. Hope to do it sometime this week. What are the rules on the length of time for enough content to be added?

Thanks!

User:Riacale17 — Preceding undated comment added 01:26, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You can put an {{Under construction}} template on the page while you're working on it. Writing Enthusiast (talk) 03:21, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to your message[edit]

Hello, Biblioworm. You have new messages at Vertium's talk page.
Message added 13:28, 6 September 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Farm to market road 3463[edit]

Hello WritingEnthusiast14. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Farm to market road 3463, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 does not apply to places, roads, etc. Thank you. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 00:44, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

CVUA[edit]

Hi. I'm one of the Counter-Vandalism Academy instructors. I removed your name from the instructors list because as described in the notes: "It is unlikely that new users with less than 1,000 edits or newly graduated students will already have sufficient experience for training other users." You yourself have only recently become qualified enough to be a student. If you're interested in doing counter-vandalism work, I encourage you to take our course. After a year of experience you might be ready to serve as an instructor. I applaud your enthusiasm but Wikipedia has a lot of rules and you wouldn't be able to teach practices with which you're not familiar. Chris Troutman (talk) 02:46, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I intended to add myself as a student of Vertium. I'm sure I added myself to the students column. Writing Enthusiast ☎ 03:14, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm so sorry; you are entirely right. I reverted myself. Have fun with CVUA. Chris Troutman (talk) 03:44, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started![edit]

Hi WE14! Now that you're settled in at the academy, I've created a page just for you, that enables us to have a place to discuss anti-vandalism and your progression through the academy. I've posted a couple of questions there for you to consider once you've done the required reading. In the meantime, give me a shout on that page if you have any questions. It's your page, so use it, decorate it... whatever you want! Looking forward to working with you! Vertium When all is said and done 21:23, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I'm about to read the page on vandalism. By the way, where on the page do I ask questions? Writing Enthusiast ☎ 23:11, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Regrets[edit]

My removal of talk page material was done in error. I attempted to reverse, but you beat me two it. Accept my regrets24.187.214.210 (talk) 14:40, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :) Writing Enthusiast ☎ 14:44, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dayemi etc[edit]

Whew, I got an edit saying you'd reverted me, although you didn't. The apparent edit conflict may have been a bug in the software, happens to me at times, I get the message but I've already saved it. Dougweller (talk) 16:01, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Blue bird episode[edit]

Please review the speedy deletion criterion You nominated Blue bird episode using the WP:A7 criterion. A7 is limited to very specific subject areas. TV episodes are not one of those subject areas. GB fan 00:58, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I just couldn't think of anything better to tag it with. What is the appropriate thing to do with articles like these? Writing Enthusiast ☎ 02:15, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A few things[edit]

Hello. Italian cruiser Calabria is the proper naming format per WP:NCSHIPS. Also, red links for notable topics are perfectly fine per WP:REDLINK, since they encourage the creation of those articles. Thanks. Parsecboy (talk) 02:20, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't know that. I apologize for any mistakes. Writing Enthusiast ☎ 02:24, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, there are very few things on Wikipedia that can't be easily reversed (the only thing that comes to mind are very messy page history splices). Just figured I ought to point them out so you know about them going forward. Cheers. Parsecboy (talk) 02:26, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Germantown High School (Mississippi)[edit]

Hi. If you follow up on youir nomination, you'll see where you went wrong with it. That said, as I understand you have just started a course at the CVUA, you're probably still out of your depth for deletion stuff for a while. In the meantime, the CVU needs all the help it can get. Learn well with your instructor, and you'll probably find that when you eventually tire of the routine of reverting vandalism it will be time to take a serious look at how you can help out at NPP. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:39, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I help out with NPP occasionally, but I'm doing mostly vandalism reversion at the moment. I would watch my AfD nominations on my watchlist, but I'm rather unsatisfied with how it works, because every page I edit gets added to it. Over time, as you can imagine, it gets very cluttered, and I can no longer track specific pages. Writing Enthusiast ☎ 16:12, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

im sorry for my false edit of the last page i made :D thank you for your reply!

AFD / Watchlist[edit]

Don't get discouraged. Some people like to take an air of superiority and predict that you're both likely to "tire of the routine of reverting vandalism" and that you're not ready to "take a serious look at...NPP". I guess it's a foreign idea to some that reverting vandalism is not the drudgery that some see it as. Also, the same process you went through to learn about Vandalism can be used to learn about criteria for page deletion. Study up and you'll get it in no time though you might hold off nominating (unless it is a clear candidate for WP:CSD until you get a little more time under your belt. One thing to do before you nominate a page for deletion is do a news search for the topic and see if you can find notability. It's always better to improve a notable topic than delete it. Another idea is to spend time reviewing those articles already in AfD and chiming in with your opinion as to whether an article should be kept or tossed. You'll learn a lot about the thought process and rationale in doing so.

On the watchlist issue, when you get Rollbacker rights, you'll be able to use Stiki, which has the option to "not watchlist" the pages you revert. Similarly, you can edit your raw watchlist and take out the articles that you just don't want to follow... that's how I keep my list down to a manageable level. I know there are some out there who take pride in the number of pages that they watchlist... in fact I've seen one person's page where they boast that they watch 18,000 pages... but to my thinking, that's just insanity. It's improbable that you can effectively manage that large a list. If you need any help in editing your watchlist, let me know. Vertium When all is said and done 21:53, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • WritingEnthusiast14, Wikipedia can sometimes be a strange place and some people won't always give you the help you need: every page you edit gets added to your watch list because that option is checked in your user preferences. All you need to do is go there and uncheck it. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:25, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the advice, Vertium. :) @Kudpung I have that option unchecked, but all pages still get added to my watchlist. --Writing Enthusiast ☎ 16:53, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If you are sure about that, then it may be something that has site-wide implications and in which case, you should possibly consider reporting it at Bugzilla. That said, a watchlist with 17,000 items will only return around 300 or so entries over the last 48 hours. Such a list only takes two or three minutes to scan through. What takes time, is when you stop to do any action on any of them, but that's what the watchlist is for. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:39, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, Biblioworm. You have new messages at Frozen4322's talk page.
Message added 20:33, 21 September 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Frozen4322 : Chat 20:33, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

To WritingEnthusiast14[edit]

Hello, I see you delete my edit on Namtso. I went there A month ago. I the information I said is what I saw their. If you are not real expert about this subject, please do not do this things again. Thank you!

Please see my reply to the message below. We do not accept original research, per WP:OR. --Writing Enthusiast ☎ 22:35, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Dear WritingEnthusiast14: Would you delete a knowledgeable person's contribution? You seem not very helpful in letting people at a very advanced level to make any kind of contributions about the person's they have known. I am surely disappointed by you. People are losing respect for wikipedia because of things like these. I hope you would be more professional as a wikipedian and be friendly to the users of the globe than use mean words and belittle them. A professor, a wise man, a philosopher, a doctor or a well educated man would be able to make a good contribution, you can't stop them. A smart way would be to ask them to give references for their text inserts and give them time duration to do so. There is a decent way for things than to delete. It's just a suggestion. If you block them, wikipedia, I'm afraid, might never make progress. Please, think before you act impulsively like you have been doing. It's a prayer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.63.118.113 (talk) 06:14, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for voicing your concerns. I am not doing this because of personal feelings or opinions. I am just following Wikipedia's policy of no original research and our biographies of living persons policy. I highly advise you to read them. Please let me know if you have any more questions. --Writing Enthusiast ☎ 14:53, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback[edit]

Hello, this is just to let you know that I've granted you Rollback rights. Just remember:

If you have any questions, please do let me know.

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:29, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :) --Writing Enthusiast ☎ 14:44, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

CVUA Graduation[edit]

Congratulations on your graduation from CVUA and earning Rollbacker rights. If you have questions, you're always welcome to contact me. Thanks for all your efforts in fighting vandalism on the project! Vertium When all is said and done 19:28, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar[edit]

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
I appreciate the work you're doing in fighting vandalism. Thanks for your efforts! Vertium When all is said and done 18:27, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Untitled[edit]

Oh dear- Why thank you oh Enthusiast Writer. Even in the Sandbox I still managed to click one of the many nifty buttons offered. I'm awfully grateful that you possess such the 'Eagle Eye' to spy what I would not wish to be saved. I must say, that I can very much relate to your user page and the elements shown and feel quite strongly about nearly each one individually. I'm peeved at how much of my more strong-sighted hours are spent on trying to rid myself of any pesky users trying to compromise either one of my devices...and who'll ultimately ruin it for all of us that are enjoying what liberties we have on the net- ...for now. Please, advice is always welcome. Thanks!poeemah — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ptfuimaono (talk • contribs) 02:00, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/internationalhorizonscollege[edit]

Hi I am trying to upload the college page and it keeps giving me a speedy deletion tag. Could you please let me know what I am doing wrong?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arsalan.yunus (talk • contribs) 19:38, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It appeared that your article was promotional, which is not allowed. If you wish to write articles, be sure they are written from a neutral point of view. --Writing Enthusiast ☎ 20:57, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey![edit]

Hey,

I was wondering if you were the wikiHow WE14?

Thanks,

Batreeqah (talk) 05:30, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, I am. :) --Writing Enthusiast ☎ 15:10, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 24 September 2014[edit]

OWAIS KHURSHEED[edit]

why on the earth you have messaged me after tagging Palam Kalyanasundaram for deletion. i have not created it. check its history with hawk eye. Owais khursheed (talk) 20:26, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused. It looks like you moved the page, so there might have been a tag mix-up between the redirect and the page that you moved it to. I'll place the tag on the appropriate article. Thanks for letting me know. :) --Writing Enthusiast ☎ 20:32, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK[edit]

it is all right. the link above will take you to the right article. Owais khursheed (talk) 20:36, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Murder of Michele MacNeill[edit]

Hi Writing Enthusiast (great name)!

I saw that you made were working on the article and thought I would just touch base in the event you didn't know that there was a decision to merge two articles, which is discussed on Talk:Murder of Michele MacNeill.

The merge and retrofitting to an "event" article are done, so feel free to jump in with edits. If you have any comments on the talk page - please feel free to respond there.--CaroleHenson (talk) 20:53, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Sorry about the revert, by the way. I thought you were adding non-cited information. --Writing Enthusiast ☎ 21:13, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for keeping a look-out!--CaroleHenson (talk) 22:10, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you![edit]

You're always reverting vandalism, spam, and improving articles. I am awarding a kitten for you. :)

Batreeqah (Talk) (Contribs) 00:00, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! :) --Writing Enthusiast ☎ 22:55, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Maritz Rebellion[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Maritz Rebellion. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:02, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

White Ash Mine Disaster Article[edit]

Hello. Thanks for your encouragement, despite the rejection. I am fairly new to working on Wikipedia. (This is the first time I've tried to leave a message on a Talk Page.). I will seek out more supporting references as you advise. Georgialh (talk) 03:52, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Beeline VMS[edit]

I want to dispute the deletion of our company page, Beeline VMS...we are currently gathering information each day to add to our page. It is a " work in progress" we wanted to have the basics down. You can find more information about us at www.beeline.com. Will you please put our page back up. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaylatagner (talk • contribs) 17:17, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For your information, we do not allow "company pages" (when they serve to promote the company, anyway) per our policy on advertizing. Articles created to promote a person, company, etc. will be deleted under WP:CSD#G11. If you want to write an article about your company, it must be from a neutral point of view and it must be verifiable. Thank you. --Writing Enthusiast ☎ 16:07, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WT:RFA[edit]

Your comment here on WT:RFA messed up DexDor's comment above. Please fix it. BethNaught (talk) 19:13, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. How did that ever happen? Thanks for letting me know. :) --Writing Enthusiast ☎ 19:15, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Fixed --Writing Enthusiast ☎ 19:31, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 01 October 2014[edit]

Hi There[edit]

Hi Jim

I am disturbed that you feel that my page about the history of St Michaels Church in Chiswick was unambiguous advertising or promotion and frankly very surprised. The page contained historical facts about a church that is a listed building by a well known architect and traced its history including the memorial to the men who died in WW1. Please define your definition of what was wrong, the facts are well researched by the church team and evidence is available at the church to support this. Slightly confused and as we are not "advertising" anything this is clearly a mistake. Please let me know why you have deleted us in detail and I will of course ammend

It seems like Jim already answered your questions pretty well. :) --Writing Enthusiast ☎ 15:27, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Julian calendar[edit]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Julian calendar. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:02, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled[edit]

Hi

I am trying to provide a biography of Chief T.O. Onduku and you have provided comments, for which I an grateful.

I am yet to get to the Style Manual and apply its principles, but will do so. The initial biography draft was based on the biography extracted from a booklet about his life produced for his burial.

It is extraordinarily difficult, within reasonable constraints of Wikipedia contribution budgets, to obtain references for a man who meant a lot to so many people in such an isolated part of the world. The online documentation is extremely scant and I fear inadequate for your standards. However, I respectfully submit that this creates a bias against the capacity to document biographies of influential Africans from remote areas in contrast to European persons of the same age. I shall ask some of his family for references, which do not exist on the World Wide Web, but again I fear this burden is a higher cost than that imposed on Europeans or Americans because of the time and remoteness of Chief T.O. Onduku's life.

By way of example I attended Chief T.O. Onduku's burial in 2009 at Ayakoromo - a burial attended by many thousand from around the Niger Delta - Ijaws and others. In 2009 Ayakoromo had no electricity, no telephone network, no television - that references of T.O. Onduku's life and achievements would be reasonably available to persons with ready access to Wikipedia is extremely unlikely. Exacerbating the problems to access objective evidence is that Chief T.O. Onduku's home was destroyed by the Nigerian military attacks in 2010 (http://saharareporters.com/2010/12/14/military-attacks-ayakoromo).

I would appreciate any constructive guidance you might provide to reasonable overcome hurdles that would not affect biographies of Westerners or persons from more developed areas of the world.

many thanks

alan (Casino Consultant) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Casino Consultant (talk • contribs) 09:21, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Casino Consultant: Hi Alan. I can sympathize with you. I'm sure that must be rather frustrating. Please understand, though, that Wikipedia must adhere to our policies of verifiability and no original research. Any information that cannot be backed up with a reliable source is subject to removal. This is not because of bias, nor is it something to take personally, but rather to maintain our standard of verifiability (which is crucial to the reputation of the site as a whole). Our founder, Jimmy Wales, has described these policies as "non-negotiable". However, all your sources do not have to be online. If there's any written documentation of his life, that would be fine as well. I'll try my best to answer any other questions you may have. :)
P.S. - To avoid any disappointment, you may also want to make sure that Chief Onduku meets the notability guideline. --Writing Enthusiast ☎ 16:07, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted edit[edit]

Hi, I reverted this edit as the IPs contributions seemed to be contructive edits. Kiwiguy12 (talk) 09:17, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your 'snow keep' closure of the Patrick Sawyer article.[edit]

Given that you are not an admin, that the AfD had only been open for 3 days, and that you yourself have created an article on an Ebola victim, I have to suggest that your 'snow' closure of the AfD seems questionable to me. I suggest you self-revert, and let the AfD run its course. AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:39, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. I've reversed my actions. Admittedly, I did this closure at night when my mental state probably wasn't at its best. I appreciate your telling me this. Thanks, --Writing Enthusiast (talk | contribs) 14:28, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:48, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You made a mistake[edit]

Edward Salcedo is an outfielder now! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:E:CE00:B2B:45CA:C6EA:C748:F64B (talk) 21:19, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a reliable source to support this? Per WP:V, all facts in articles (particularly about living persons, which is covered in WP:BLP) should be backed up by a reliable third-party source. I might have missed something though, so please let me know if I have. :) --Writing Enthusiast (talk | contribs) 21:27, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Removing AfD template[edit]

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with Kidnapping in Islamism. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. This is an automated message from a bot about this edit, where you removed the deletion template from an article before the deletion discussion was complete. If this message is in error, please report it.—cyberbot I NotifyOnline 00:19, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 08 October 2014[edit]

GOCE Requests page[edit]

Hi WritingEnthusiast14, I've moving a comment you left about a request for a copy-edit to the article Cliff Lee intended for Brambleberry of RiverClan (talk) to his user space because I've removed the request for archiving. The original comment is here. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 02:53, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kidnapping in Islamism (2nd nomination)[edit]

Your Closure of this AFD as Keep has been reopened by Drmies just for information.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 14:37, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:American-led intervention in Syria[edit]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:American-led intervention in Syria. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA Cup - Round 1 Newsletter #2[edit]

WikiProject Good Articles's 2014-15 GA Cup - Round 1

Hello GA Cup competitors!

The judges have learned a great deal in this first part of the competition, and we appreciate your patience with us as we've figured out what works and what doesn't work. As we reported in our last newsletter, an inadequacy in the scoring system has been illuminated in the past 15 days, which has resulted in a major change in the rules. It has also resulted in one withdrawal.

To ensure fairness, we've decided to further increase the number of participants moving onto Round 2. Everyone who has reviewed at least one article will automatically be moved forward, and will be placed in pools. You have until October 29 to take advantage of this opportunity. It is our hope that this will make up for the unforeseen glitch in our scoring system.

Best of wishes to all of you as you continue to help improve articles and make Wikipedia a better place.

Cheers from NickGibson3900, Dom497, TheQ Editor and Figureskatingfan.

To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletter, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:03, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion: Operation Inherent Resolve[edit]

A discussion in which you may be interested [opened here]. - SantiLak (talk) 19:18, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 15 October 2014[edit]

Hi[edit]

Hey there WritingEnthusiast14 Biblioworm! Just curious about the name change~ ミーラー強斗武 (StG88ぬ会話) 04:50, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • I had been wanting my username changed to something book related for some time. Unfortunately, my first choice (Bookworm) was already taken. Since "Biblio" essentially means the same thing as "Book", I decided on this compromise. One reason I changed was because my old name had a "14" at the end. It was meant to resemble 2014 (I couldn't think of anything better when I signed up). However, that will obviously be outdated at the end of this year, so I wanted a username with no numbers. That way, it will never get outdated. Besides all this, I am a biblioworm, because I'm known for getting deeply absorbed in long books (and Wikipedia articles). I'm quite satisfied with this username, so I intend for this change to be permanent. --Biblioworm 16:49, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well that sounds good. Thanks for the explanation! ミーラー強斗武 (StG88ぬ会話) 20:14, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In Response to Your Message[edit]

Hi there! I'm just getting the hang of Wikipedia, so I apologize for any amateurish mistakes. Just a question for future reference: what should I reference, and what should I leave as common knowledge? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suburbian Mongoose (talk • contribs) 22:50, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You should reference reliable third-party sources (especially in biographies of living persons). Reliable sources include (but are not limited to) well-known news sites (CNN, ABC News, etc.), books (you should use good judgement in deciding whether or not the book is reliable, though), government websites, research papers written by respected organizations or persons, and quite a bit more that I can't think of now (even if I did, it would be too much to type). Example of sources that are not reliable include social media pages, gossip sites, personal blogs, etc. If you want a more detailed explanations (that could explain it better than I ever could ), check out WP:V, WP:OR, and WP:BLP. Let me know if you have any more questions. Thanks, --Biblioworm 23:03, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Message for you on my talk page[edit]

Hello, Biblioworm. You have new messages at Vertium's talk page.
Message added 19:12, 21 October 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Requests for page protection[edit]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Requests for page protection. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:09, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your NAC on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Streltsy (Hungary)[edit]

Hey there, what made you close the AfD as "no consensus"? While not technically incorrect, there's a general consensus that low-participation AfDs with no keep votes should be closed as delete (which of course non-admins can't do). Just letting you know, if you didn't already - I don't particularly care what happens to that specific article. ansh666 02:33, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have heard of that rule, but I thought it applied only to BLPs. --Biblioworm 15:05, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm... The latest discussion I could find was at WP:Village pump (policy)/Archive 110#Deprecate PROD, close unchallenged AfDs as delete without prejudice, which came up with a consensus that no-participation AfDs (of any kind) should be closed as a PROD - which isn't exactly the situation at the AfD I mentioned above, but is probably a weaker delete consensus. ansh666 17:49, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 22 October 2014[edit]

Relisting articles[edit]

Hi, I've noticed that there are several articles that you relisted that did not show up on the correct AfD page. For example, I noticed that the Relisted notice was added to this page: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SoCal Coyotes, but it was not correctly transcluded on the correct AfD page here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2014 October 24. I manually added it to that page.

Please follow the procedures here for relisting: WP:Relist. "When relisting a discussion, it should be removed from the log for its original date (this does not apply at Categories for discussion) and moved to the current date's log where the discussion will continue." Thanks. Natg 19 (talk) 21:38, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have the CloseAFD script installed, so perhaps I should start using that to relist debates instead of adding {{subst:relist}} manually. (The page you linked to says that the CloseAFD script automates the process.) --Biblioworm 21:51, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Just wanted to let you know in case you were unaware. Natg 19 (talk) 05:37, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Biblioworm, you may wish to hold off doing NAC until you are fully conversant with all the policies and guidelines, especially the exceptions to the rules, which although well documented, are not always easy to find. Like New Page Patrolling, NAC needs a near-admin knowledge (something that takes years to accumulate) so it's not an area where learning by trial and error first is a particularly good idea. --~~
@Kudpung: you didn't sign properly...never thought I'd see that... ansh666 05:55, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Kudpung: I appreciate your advice, but Wikipedia is "learn on the job" and is just not something that can be fully learned by reading pages full of text (i.e. policy pages). If I never close or relist AfDs, the realistic result is that I'll never learn how to close them properly. Yes, I will make mistakes, but just like in real life, mistakes are a part of (and essential to) the learning process. Thanks, --Biblioworm 15:00, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Mistakes in AfD are a big deal, not something small that can be immediately and trivially corrected. Participate in AfDs as a !voter first to see how administrators or more experienced editors close them. That's the best way to learn the quirks of the system, not by having people rant on your talk page about how you're wrong (it's happened to me several times, even as an experienced AfD participant). ansh666 19:25, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I can see your point. (I don't completely agree that AfD errors are "not something small that can be immediately and trivially corrrected", because everything on a wiki is reversible.) Anyway, how about this? For about a month or two, I'll only relist and !vote on AfDs, and for the said time period, I won't do any NACs unless the consensus is plainly clear. --Biblioworm 19:54, 26 October 2014 (UTC) After considering this carefully, I'm beginning to wonder how, in only two days, this escalated from a couple of friendly reminders to me not being allowed to perform NACs. Thinking back, I really haven't made too many mistakes when closing AfDs, with the exception of two or three mistakes (which I have learned from). The feedback I'm getting is helping me get better at this, and the relisting issue is just a technical aspect that can easily be fixed, now that I know the correct way to do it. Instead of imposing arbitrary restrictions on myself, I'll thoroughly re-read the relevant policies and be a bit more cautious when working in AfD. Thanks, --Biblioworm 20:29, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, Biblioworm. You have new messages at I dream of horses's talk page.
Message added 06:21, 26 October 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2014 September 28[edit]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2014 September 28. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:08, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A brownie for you![edit]

I know being involved in the RfA reform mess is stressful, so have a brownie! AmaryllisGardener talk 01:35, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I must say, you have quite a lot of knowledge of Wikipedia, and your ideas have been very logical. Depending on how things go, maybe you'll be one of the first users to be promoted with a new RfA process! I'll certainly be supporting you if so! Regards, --AmaryllisGardener talk 01:36, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! That was very kind. I'm also kind of surprised that I haven't lost my sanity (yet). I often read about all the different Wikipedia bureaucracy levels, committees, and policies, so that's probably why I seem to have a good knowledge of how things work around here. I'm also a fairly experienced user at another wiki (wikiHow, to be specific), so I have pretty good knowledge of how wikis generally work.
While I'm hoping for the best, I have doubts that I will be elected as an admin anytime in the near future, as there's a pretty good chance that I'll get slammed for my lack of content creation, assuming that people still oppose on that basis in a future admin election system. (However, I'm hoping to make up for that by getting more involved in copyediting.) In fact, I'm planning to write an essay that will attempt to explain why all contributors are equally valuable, regardless of their specialty. Anyway, back to your post, I very much appreciate your support. I look forward to seeing you at a future election. --Biblioworm 03:10, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 October 2014[edit]

Happy Halloween!!![edit]

 Wilhelmina Will has given you some caramel and a candy apple! Caramel and candy-coated apples are fun Halloween treats, and promote WikiLove on Halloween. Hopefully these have made your Halloween (and the proceeding days) much sweeter. Happy Halloween!

'"On Psych, A USA Network TV series Episode 8, The Tao of Gus, Season 6, Shawn refers to pumpkins as "Halloween Apples" because he thinks all round fruits are a type of apple.


If Trick-or-treaters come your way, add {{subst:Halloween apples}} to their talkpage with a spoooooky message!


Cheers! "We could read for-EVER; reading round the wiki!" (talk) 18:29, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA Cup - Round 2[edit]

WikiProject Good Articles's 2014-15 GA Cup - Round 2

Greetings, GA Cup competitors!

Wednesday saw the end of Round 1. Jaguar took out Round 1 with an amazing score of 238. In a tight race for second, Peacemaker67 and Ritchie333 finished second and third with 152 and 141 points, respectively.

Two users have scored the maximum five bonus points for article length (60,000 characters+). Anotherclown reviewed Spanish conquest of Yucatán (77,350 characters) and MrWooHoo reviewed Communist Party of China (76,740 characters). The longest review was by Bilorv who reviewed Caldas da Rainha. The review was approximately 22,400 characters which earned s/he two bonus points (20, 000 - 29, 999 characters).

In Round 1, 117 reviews were completed, making the first round of the GA Cup a success! A total of 86 articles were removed from the backlog during the month of October! We hope to see all remaining users fighting it out in Round 2 so we can lower the backlog as much as possible.

To qualify for the second round, one completed review was needed, which 28 users accomplished. Participants have been randomly put into 7 pools of 4; the top 2 in each pool will move onto Round 3. There will also be one wildcard. This means that the participant who comes in 15th place (all pools combined) will also move on. Round 2 will start on November 1 at 0:00:01 UTC and end on November 29 at 23:59:59 UTC. Information about Round 2 and the pools can be found here

Also, remember that a major rule change will go into affect starting on November 1, which marks the beginning of Round Two. Round 1 displayed a weakness in the rules, which we are correcting with this new rule. We believe that this change will make the competition more inherently fair. The new rule is: Your review must provide feedback/suggestions for improvement, and then you must wait until the nominator has responded and all issues/suggestions have been resolved before you can pass the article. Failure to follow this rule will result in disqualification. The judges will strictly enforce this new rule.

Good luck and remember to have fun!

Cheers from NickGibson3900, Dom497, TheQ Editor and Figureskatingfan.

To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletter, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant still competing, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:04, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Arius[edit]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Arius. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled[edit]

Hello, I'm On Xiy Ciy Zoil and I think that I did a mistake of what I did about cirrus clouds. I will tell you my reason of my cumulonimbus changes. First of all, there was a better restatement of what I thought, and I had to get my thought down in an editable place. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.138.168.217 (talk) 00:29, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ummm... hi!? it is me. I tried to talk to you yesterday and I think that there was trouble e-mailing you but luckily I found this talk page. Remember me , On Xiy-Ciy Zoil? Well, I was very interested in your comments so I decided to contact you in a friendly way.--66.138.168.217 (talk) 15:09, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Sorry about the late reply. I reverted your edit ("There should be no such thing as contrails since they are just pollution") because it was biased. At Wikipedia, we strive for a neutral point of view, and "There should be no such thing" and "they are just pollution" fail to comply with neutral point of view and no original research. Now, if you were to cite reliable sources that criticized contrails, and wrote neutrally (for example, "Experts have raised concerns that contrails may be damaging to the environment"), you would be fine. Feel free to let me know if you have any more questions, and you can also go to the Teahouse, where you're much more likely to get fast replies. Thanks, --Biblioworm 15:57, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 3[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Philippine Revolution, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Spanish. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:53, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Trey Burke/archive1[edit]

Your attentive and detailed review at Talk:2013–14 Michigan Wolverines men's basketball team/GA1 makes me feel that you are just the kind of reviewer that I need at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Trey Burke/archive1 which is in dire need of further commentary. Please feel free to comment there if you have some time.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:32, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 05 November 2014[edit]

Please comment on Talk:2014 Winter Olympics opening ceremony[edit]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:2014 Winter Olympics opening ceremony. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:02, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Heads up[edit]

Per your move at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Aspromonte_goat&oldid=632880661 ; this was actually a highly controversial move, please note the number of editors, not the wall of text put in by one person. (smiles to you) and thanks Montanabw(talk) 05:23, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Montanabw: Hi. I didn't know that the move was controversial until just recently. I assumed that it wasn't because it was listed under the uncontroversial technical requests section on WP:RM. However, if you think that would be the best thing to do, I'd be more than happy to move the page back and allow the move discussion to take its course. --Biblioworm 05:27, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think it wise. There are about a dozen other articles there. And you should be aware of this little forum-shopping problem (and related). Just FYI. Montanabw(talk) 07:29, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, it looks like the page has been moved back already. In any case, I don't like getting involved in disputes and taking sides (which is why I intentionally avoid the drama boards, and whenever I do visit them, it will hopefully be for the purpose of mediation), so I'm going to stay out of this one. Regards, --Biblioworm 18:01, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
SMC is now blocked. No worries. Wise to avoid the drama boards. Montanabw(talk) 08:47, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
With compliments! Mootros (talk) 03:37, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I appreciate it. In my time contributing to wikis, I've observed that civility and kindness is always much more effective than behaving aggressively. --Biblioworm 16:59, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Worcester RM[edit]

I don't usually do this, but I hope you strongly consider reopening the move request because a non-human should not be the one closing something that contentious per WP:RMNAC. -- Calidum 15:43, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Calidum: Hi. I have good reasons for my closure, and I will explain them. However, before we go any further, what exactly do you mean when you say "non-human"? I am quite certain that I am a human. --Biblioworm 17:16, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Non-admin. Sorry. I'm on my phone today and it autocorrected it. -- Calidum 18:44, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've explained my rationale on the Move review page. --Biblioworm 19:04, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Move review for Worcester[edit]

An editor has asked for a Move review of Worcester. Because you closed the move discussion for this page, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the move review. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:24, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Battle of Cedar Creek[edit]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Battle of Cedar Creek. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:02, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DRN[edit]

First, thank you for volunteering to help at DRN. You're giving a very direct and positive benefit to the encyclopedia by helping to reduce conflict. Second, re civility at DRN: You might want to take a look at the Mediation policy. DRN volunteers have the right under that policy to maintain control of the discussion and to enforce a much higher level of civility than in ordinary discussions. Since the volunteer may "edit the mediation page, the mediation page's talk page, and any subpages of those pages in the same way and to the same extent that a user may edit his or her own talk page," edits which fail to meet the higher standard set by the volunteer may be redacted or (more commonly) collapsed. Having noted that, however, I'd be very careful, as you have been already, in issuing admonitions since they can easily put you in conflict with one side or the other of the dispute and diminish your effectiveness as a mediator. I generally only admonish if incivility starts snowballing; the occasional spat I let slide. I only invoke the policy if I can't get the incivility stopped with a general admonition to all parties and even then I generally invoke it in a warning and don't start redacting or collapsing unless the incivility continues after that warning. Your mileage may, however, vary. Again, thanks for lending a hand. — TransporterMan (TALK) 21:29, 11 November 2014 (UTC) (current DRN coordinator)[reply]

Thillana Mohanambal[edit]

Hi, would you be interested in copy-editing this article? Thank you. :) Thamizhan1994 (Appo Pesu) 10:26, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Thamizhan1994: Hi. Thanks for asking. However, I'm quite busy copyediting two very large articles (total word count of around 20,000) for the GOCE backlog elimination drive, so I just don't have the time. You might want to list the article on the copyediting requests page. Thanks, --Biblioworm 17:36, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have done so on 12 October 2014. :) Thamizhan1994 (Appo Pesu) 06:24, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you can copy-edit this article first as it is comparatively smaller tham Theodore Roosevelt :) Thamizhan1994 (Appo Pesu) 16:02, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Would you like to take it up now that you have finished Theodore Roosevelt. Thank you. :) Thamizhan1994 (Appo Pesu) 05:22, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Thamizhan1994: Very well. I'll begin soon. --Biblioworm 18:01, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Need help with some edits that are being obstructed[edit]

Hi Biblioworm. I noticed your simple and clear opinion on the 2014 Russian Grand Prix discussion. My situation is similar and involves the interpretation of the Minsk Protocol in relation to the Donbass Elections. I tried 3rd opinion but the dispute was deemed to be between 3, me against 2 others. Can you please help? Its the last discussion on the talk page "Russian Government believes that Minsk agreement was for elections between 19 Oct 3 Nov". Happy to elaborate on my position if needed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Donbass_general_elections,_2014 Thank you.Tobeortobe (talk) 21:46, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to give my feedback if I have time. --Biblioworm 22:50, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

!vote at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Northamerica1000 2[edit]

Hi. I noticed you were concerned about the candidate's potential editing as a sockpuppet. You may wish to review the following thread: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Casting aspersions. Dennis Brown states that he knows "all three accounts, and CU has been run without matching". There is further discussion relating to the absence of sock-puppetry in this case. FYI, I haven't yet decided where to stand on this RFA. - tucoxn\talk 06:31, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tucoxn. I stayed up later than usual last night looking into the accusations (I wasn't going to just !vote blindly, after all). I've looked at registration dates, common interests, and article topics that they commonly intersect. There are certainly abnormal coincidences, especially considering that some people opposed NA1K's last RfA because he was not open about previous accounts. However, I suppose that CU is the most authoritative tool there is when it comes to determining sockpuppetry, so that does largely disprove the theory. In any case, sockpuppet or not, there are other factors that are making me consider my !vote carefully. --Biblioworm 16:27, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your response. All the best! - tucoxn\talk 22:49, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 12 November 2014[edit]

Copyright checks when performing AfC reviews[edit]

Hello Biblioworm. This message is part of a mass mailing to people who appear active in reviewing articles for creation submissions. First of all, thank you for taking part in this important work! I'm sorry this message is a form letter – it really was the only way I could think of to covey the issue economically. Of course, this also means that I have not looked to see whether the matter is applicable to you in particular.

The issue is in rather large numbers of copyright violations ("copyvios") making their way through AfC reviews without being detected (even when easy to check, and even when hallmarks of copyvios in the text that should have invited a check, were glaring). A second issue is the correct method of dealing with them when discovered.

If you don't do so already, I'd like to ask for your to help with this problem by taking on the practice of performing a copyvio check as the first step in any AfC review. The most basic method is to simply copy a unique but small portion of text from the draft body and run it through a search engine in quotation marks. Trying this from two different paragraphs is recommended. (If you have any question about whether the text was copied from the draft, rather than the other way around (a "backwards copyvio"), the Wayback Machine is very useful for sussing that out.)

If you do find a copyright violation, please do not decline the draft on that basis. Copyright violations need to be dealt with immediately as they may harm those whose content is being used and expose Wikipedia to potential legal liability. If the draft is substantially a copyvio, and there's no non-infringing version to revert to, please mark the page for speedy deletion right away using {{db-g12|url=URL of source}}. If there is an assertion of permission, please replace the draft article's content with {{subst:copyvio|url=URL of source}}.

Some of the more obvious indicia of a copyvio are use of the first person ("we/our/us..."), phrases like "this site", or apparent artifacts of content written for somewhere else ("top", "go to top", "next page", "click here", use of smartquotes, etc.); inappropriate tone of voice, such as an overly informal tone or a very slanted marketing voice with weasel words; including intellectual property symbols (™,®); and blocks of text being added all at once in a finished form with no misspellings or other errors.

I hope this message finds you well and thanks again you for your efforts in this area. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC).[reply]

       Sent via--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

RfC[edit]

As you participated in a previous related discussion you are invited to comment at Wikipedia:Administrators/RfC for an Admin Review Board. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:52, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please fix your signature[edit]

Your signature causes problems with syntax highlighter. All you have to do is put the final </span> inside the double right square brackets. Chris Troutman (talk) 15:32, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. Is it fixed now? --Biblioworm 17:37, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, thanks! Chris Troutman (talk) 15:33, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Gary Webb[edit]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Gary Webb. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:02, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GOCE[edit]

Copy Editor's Barnstar
I award you this Copy Editor's Barnstar for insisting on clear, comprehensible, and grammatically correct articles. Biblioworm, I hereby award you this Copy Editor's Barnstar in recognition of your comprehensive review and copyedit of Alexander White (Virginia). Your tremendous efforts are greatly appreciated! Thank you! —Caponer (talk) 08:35, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! The barnstar is much appreciated. --Biblioworm 18:03, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

RfC United States same-sex marriage map[edit]

I opened up an RfC for the U.S. same-sex marriage map due to the complicated situation of Kansas: RfC: How should we color Kansas? Prcc27 (talk) 06:06, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled[edit]

I just wanted to say 'thanks' for your thorough feedback and guidance. I appreciate the time you took. Cheers! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robwgraham (talk • contribs)

Pardon me, but...[edit]

Why did you revert my edit at the Village Pump? Did you misunderstand the tone in which I wrote the comment? It wasn't hostile if that's what you were wondering.

I've already said that I understand Maunus' qualms with the current system, and I'm not actually against a new system being put into place. But what I take issue with is what they put forth in their proposal.

The edit that I made was to point out a problem with something that Maunus said, and point at what seems to be the real issue with their proposal.

As such, I cannot see any reason for your reversion of my edit. Please explain.

EDIT: Ah, I see that it was a mistake. No worries. Tharthandorf Aquanashi (talk) 03:28, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dubrovnik[edit]

I honestly didn't expect someone to respond to my request this fast. It looks great, thank you for your effort! :-). --Saxum (talk) 16:19, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You're very welcome. :) --Biblioworm 21:38, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 26 November 2014[edit]

Thank you[edit]

The Reviewer Barnstar
Biblioworm, I hereby award you The Reviewer Barnstar for your thorough copyedits to the article, Francis White (Virginia). Thank you for devoting your time to improving the overall quality of Wikipedia, one article at a time. -- Caponer (talk) 08:52, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! :) --Biblioworm 18:52, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA Cup - Round 3[edit]

WikiProject Good Articles's 2014-15 GA Cup - Round 3

Greetings, all! We hope that all of our American GA Cup competitors had an enjoyable Thanksgiving holiday.

Friday saw the end of Round 2. Two from 7 pools, plus a tie score and one wildcard (16 in all) moved onto the next round. Some pools were more competitive than others. Round 2's highest scorer was 3family6, with an impressive 255 points. Good888, who came in second place overall with 202 points, reviewed the most articles (19). The wildcard slot for Round 2 went to Jaguar. Congrats to all!

Round 3 will have 15 competitors in three pools. The key to moving forward in Round 2 seemed to be reviewing articles with the longest nomination dates; almost everyone who moved forward nominated at least one article from the pink nomination box (20 points) or reviewed articles that had languished in the queue for over 5 months (18 points). The GA Cup was also used to promote a group of articles about The Boat Race, a rowing race held annually since 1856 between Oxford University and Cambridge University, on the River Thames. 17 Boat Race articles were promoted to GA in November.

In Round 2, 110 reviews were completed, as compared to 117 in Round 1. The GA Cup continues to be a success. This month, we got a report from User:AmericanLemming, who maintains the GA statistics, that in October, there was a net gain of 201 articles nominated for GA. He thought that more open GANs could mean that more editors are submitting more of their articles to the GAN process. In addition, having a high-throughput of GANs means that more articles get reviewed more quickly, which reduces the frustration of potentially waiting several months to get an article reviewed. The activity in Round 2 of the GA Cup seems to bear that out. It's our hope that the competitors' enthusiasm continues in Round 3, and we can continue to make a difference in helping more editors improve their articles.

For Round 3, participants have been randomly put in 3 pools of 5 contestants each; the top two in each pool progressing, as well as the top 2 of all remaining users. Round 3 will start on December 1 at 0:00:01 UTC and end on December 29 at 23:59:59 UTC. Information about Round 3 and the pools can be found here.

There have been a couple of rules clarifications to announce. We're slightly changing the wording to the second bullet in "General rules", which now reads: You may only score points in a round for reviews which have been completed in that round. We're also including this clarification: Only reviews started during the competition are eligible. We have also lost a judge, so there are now only three judges.

Good luck and remember to have fun as we move into the holiday season. It is the judges' hope that every competitor in the GA Cup has a joyous holiday season and Happy New Year.

Cheers from Dom497, TheQ Editor and Figureskatingfan.

To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletter, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant still competing, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:33, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Guild of Copy Editors coordinator self-nomination[edit]

Thank you for nominating yourself for the GOCE coordinator position. We do need some fresh lead copy-editors who can preserve the low-drama, high-productivity nature of our project while trying to keep quality at a high level. Some of us who have been around for a while are getting a bit burned out. Please let me know if you have any questions. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:59, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll be sure to ask you if I have any questions. --Biblioworm 01:07, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to echo Jonesey's thanks. The GOCE leadership can use some new blood, and I really appreciate your stepping forward. All the best, Miniapolis 23:49, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WP:PERM Request[edit]

Your AWB access has been enabled. — xaosflux Talk 22:24, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Desysopping proposal[edit]

I hope you are not frustrated with me for my comments at WT:RFA. I am most certainly not trying to obstruct your ideas, and have no intent of doing anything other than improving the project. Nothing personal towards you or your proposals are intended nor should be taken. I wish you the best. --Hammersoft (talk) 00:32, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:2014 Hong Kong protests[edit]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:2014 Hong Kong protests. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:02, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Re: Edit on Woodrow Wilson Middle School(Edison, New Jersey)[edit]

Although, Woodrow Wilson is not known internationally, it is famous throughout the Tri-State Area and has won many awards in competitions. Also, Wikipedia should be as broad as possible, no matter what topics as long as the information is correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RainWizard29422 (talk • contribs) 01:28, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GOCE November copy editing drive awards[edit]

The (modern) Guild of Copy Editors Barnstar
This barnstar is awarded to Biblioworm for copy edits totaling over 40,000 words during the GOCE November 2014 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:20, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Guild of Copy Editors Leaderboard Award: Long Articles, 1st Place
This Leaderboard Barnstar is awarded to Biblioworm for copyediting 3 long articles during the GOCE November 2014 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:20, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Guild of Copy Editors Leaderboard Award: Longest Article, 2nd Place
This Leaderboard Barnstar is awarded to Biblioworm for copyediting one of the five longest articles – 12,497 words – during the GOCE November 2014 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:20, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Guild of Copy Editors Leaderboard Award: Total Words, 2nd Place
This Leaderboard Barnstar is awarded to Biblioworm for copyediting 35,817 total words during the GOCE November 2014 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:20, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Great work on typing up that GOCE awards template, too. --Biblioworm 16:26, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I realized after I had given out all of the awards that I made a few mistakes in the template. I have fixed almost all of them and will be re-delivering the awards when I am done. The template made award delivery so much easier, though. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:24, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 03 December 2014[edit]

Please comment on Talk:Chandra Levy[edit]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Chandra Levy. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kajaani[edit]

Thanks for your interest in this article. I've made some suggestions on how it could be improved on the talk page. GA is a pretty high level of achievement for articles of this type, especially those covered more extensively in other languages. Unfortunately Kajaani is in the Finnish-speaking part of Finnland and I don't speak Finnish. Had it been in the Swedish part, I could have helped more directly with the article's improvement. Nevertheless, I would be happy to take a look at it again if you decide to assist with further improvements.--Ipigott (talk) 15:22, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've made some major improvements today. I've done pretty much what I can now I think, we now need a fluent Finnish speaker to research the history and geology etc to further improve it, but it should at least be nearer GA now.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:57, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Very impressive expansion, Dr. Blofeld. --Biblioworm 00:44, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GOCE coordinator elections[edit]

Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors
Candidate nominations for Guild coordinators to serve from January 1 to June 30, 2015, are currently underway. The nomination period will close at 23:59 on December 15 (UTC), after which voting will commence until 23:59 on December 31, 2014. Self-nominations are welcomed. Please consider getting involved; it's your Guild and it won't coordinate itself, so if you'd like to help coordinate Guild activities we'd love to hear from you.

Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, and Miniapolis.
Message sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:17, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Gojoseon[edit]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Gojoseon. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 10 December 2014[edit]

Thank you[edit]

I value each and every idea, project, and proposal you come up with Biblioworm. You're doing great things for the project and at least you have the guts to bring these proposals to text and submit them. You're trying to make change, and that's more than 99% of us can say. Thank you. Dusti*Let's talk!* 22:59, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I second that. WT:RFA is really more dysfunctional than the actual process, because that's where all the frustration of years of denied change boils over. ansh666 02:29, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
And I third that. Don't listen to the hateful sarcastic stuff, Biblio. Some people don't appreciate people who try to come up with ideas for RfA. It seems that WT:RFA has a curse when it comes to the open mindedness (or lack of) of the people to proposals. Drink a cup of tea, and remember, you've got people that'll stand with you. :) --AmaryllisGardener talk 02:53, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the encouragement, everyone. I do not have any plans to leave, but I find it rather amusing that people treat good faith contributors like this and then go around wondering why we have a hard time retaining editors... --Biblioworm 19:04, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

December 2014 GOCE newsletter[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors December 2014 Newsletter

Drive: Thanks to everyone who participated in November's Backlog Elimination Drive. Of the 43 people who signed up for this drive, 26 copy edited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

Progress report: The November Drive removed 26 requests from the Requests page and 509 articles from the {{copy edit}} backlog. We copy edited 83 articles tagged in the target months; July, August, and September 2013. Together with tag removals from articles unsuitable for copy editing, we eliminated July 2013 from the backlog and reduced August and September's tags to 61 and 70 respectively. As of 01:01, 1 December 2014 (UTC), the backlog stood at 1,974 articles, dipping below 2,000 for the first time in the Guild's history (see graph at right). Well done everyone!

Blitz: The December Blitz will run from December 14–20 and will focus on articles related to Religion, in recognition of this month's religious holidays in much of the English-speaking world. Awards will be given out to everyone who copy edits at least one of the target articles. Sign up here!

Election time again: The election of coordinators to serve from 1 January to 30 June 2015 is now underway. Candidates can nominate themselves or others from December 01, 00:01 (UTC), until December 15, 23:59. The voting period will run from December 16, 00:01 (UTC), until December 31, 23:59. You can read about coordinators' duties here. Please consider getting involved and remember to cast you vote—it's your Guild and it doesn't organize itself!

Thank you all once again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve anything without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, and Miniapolis.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:15, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts/CloseAFD[edit]

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts/CloseAFD. I am inviting you to try the improved script! It makes relisting and closing debates much easier and now works in Vector. Support has been added to deal with some incompatibility it had with other gadgets (like wikEd). It also makes use of the new relist count parameter in {{Relist}} to make that process easier. Please do check out the description page and give it a try! Thanks. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 16:27, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GAR notification[edit]

2013–14 Michigan Wolverines men's basketball team, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:55, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Moondram Pirai[edit]

Hi, would you be interested in copyediting this film? I have posted it on the request page in the December 2014 section. If so, I also recommend that you watch the film as well to get a better hang of it .

Here are the links

Moondram Pirai - Part 1

Moondram Pirai - Part 2

Hope you enjoy it. It has subtitles BTW. Ssven2 speak 2 me 04:39, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thanks for asking. Unfortunately, film is not really my area of interest, and I prefer to copyedit articles on topics that I'm interested in. (Now, if we were talking about some historical topic or event, it might be different...) Besides, I'm honestly not too keen on direct copyediting requests, as they sometimes catch me unexpectedly while I'm working on something else. I'll put a notice to that effect on my talk page soon. I would advise you to ask Baffle gab1978, as he recently copyedited an article on an Indian film, but he doesn't accept direct requests, either. --Biblioworm 19:41, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Biblioworm. 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 remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.— Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:40, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright of the sketch[edit]

Hey Biblio. Yes, all indications are that the sketch is in the public domain. See Commons:Copyright rules by territory#United Kingdom and scroll down to "Unknown author". I am not an expert on Commons license tagging, but I believe you would use {{PD-UK-unknown}} coupled with {{PD-anon-1923}}. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:17, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia:Education noticeboard[edit]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Education noticeboard. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:07, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 17 December 2014[edit]

The material on the Allies of World War II is long standing[edit]

The material on the Allies of World War II is long standing, so it should stay until consensus decides that it should go. I don't think that removing it prematurely is based in the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle guidelines. --E-960 (talk) 23:36, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ANI revert, accidental[edit]

Sorry about stepping on your comment -- I wouldn't have done so intentionally had I seen you had replied, and I'm surprised I didn't get an edit conflict. I'd rather not restore it for the benefit of the original poster but naturally I will if you feel strongly about it. NE Ent 23:38, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@NE Ent: No, that's fine. I have more important things to be concerned about than an accidentally removed ANI comment. ;) --Biblioworm 23:45, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Seasonal Greets![edit]

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015!!!

Hello Biblioworm, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, 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 greetings for Christmas and New Year 2015.
Happy editing,
AmaryllisGardener talk 19:20, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Merry Christmas! :) --AmaryllisGardener talk 19:20, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Amaryllis, and the same to you. --Biblioworm 19:31, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Requests query[edit]

Hi Biblioworm, I notice you've currently got two copy-edit requests—Silesians and Béla III of Hungary—marked  Working on the Requests page. Is this a mistake or are you working on them together? Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 22:19, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for messaging me about that. I intend to work on the Silesians article after I finish the one on the Hungarian king (I'm just about done with it). Thanks, --Biblioworm 22:57, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, No worries. ;-) Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 00:37, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Béla III of Hungary[edit]

Thank you for your bold copyedits. I made some minor changes. I would appreciate if you could checque them. Merry Christmas! Borsoka (talk) 06:50, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Borsoka: Thanks for your changes, and sorry about those typos of mine. I guess either my spellchecker failed me, or I was just tired and didn't notice... --Biblioworm 16:51, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GOCE holiday 2014 newsletter[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors Late December 2014 Newsletter

Blitz: Thanks to everyone who participated in the December Blitz. Of the 14 editors who signed up for the blitz, 11 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

January drive: The January backlog-reduction drive is just around the corner; sign up here!

Election time again: The election of coordinators to serve from January 1 to June 30, 2015 is now underway. The voting period runs from December 16, 00:01 (UTC), until December 31, 23:59. Please cast your vote—it's your Guild, and it doesn't run itself!

Happy holidays from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978 and Miniapolis.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:44, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Mediator Barnstar[edit]

The Mediator Barnstar
I notice that you're fairly new to Wikipedia but you did a great job mediating the dispute at "Kosovo at the 2016 Summer Olympics". You were very brave volunteering to mediate on a topic which is as toxic as a Kosovo-Serbia related dispute. I don't know how much you already knew about Kosovo and Serbia, but after mediating this dispute, I hope you're much more informed and that is what Wikipedia is all about... Knowledge. So thank you very much for your role in the mediating the dispute. You might make a great admin one day. And Merry Christmas. Kind regards IJA (talk) 02:00, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, IJA! I was happy to help out. --Biblioworm 04:17, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 24 December 2014[edit]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Copyeditor's Barnstar
For your awesome work on Béla III of Hungary, Emeric, King of Hungary and Ladislaus III of Hungary. Borsoka (talk) 03:00, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It was my pleasure to copy edit those articles, as they were very interesting. (I learn quite a bit from the articles I work on.) Good look with your GANs, and I hope you're having a good time over the holidays. Thanks, --Biblioworm 04:20, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Silesians[edit]

Hi Biblioworm; it's me again. :-o Regarding your note on the GOCE request for this article, I think you'd be fine to do a full c/e there. Copy-editors are just that; we edit copy. You shouldn't need sepcialised knowledge or to check sources to do a c/e; if the information isn't clear you can always ask the requester to clarify if needed. You might sometimes want to check sources, but generally that's the job of the person who adds the content. I see there's some ropey grammar in there; as long as you're careful not to alter the meaning of the article's text, you'll be fine. ;-) Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 16:19, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I said that because there's some areas where the text is unclear to the point where I don't know what it's trying to say. In particular, I'm talking about the 3rd and 4th paragraph of the lede, and the first portion of the history section. In any case, though, I suppose I can take my best guess at what it means. --Biblioworm 16:25, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Trout[edit]

Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

for [1]. :) Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 15:53, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, yes, I know. This incident has sufficiently convinced me to go search for that script that hides the rollback button from your watchlist. (Assuming that I have not been site banned for this by the the time I find it. ;)) --Biblioworm 16:00, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If you haven't found it yet, you can add the following to User:Biblioworm/common.css or User:Biblioworm/global.css:
.mw-special-Watchlist .mw-rollback-link {
    display: none;
}
:) --AmaryllisGardener talk 20:34, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Amaryllis. --Biblioworm 23:28, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome! :) --AmaryllisGardener talk 23:42, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

diffs[edit]

Thanks for your comment on my question on the Teahouse! [2]. I have responded there, to show some diffs to demonstrate what has gone on. I hope it is okay to do that. As I said, I just don't want a repeat of what I went through in relation to that, especially from the 3 editors that I listed there in the diffs. I am not trying to cause trouble, but those 3 have persistently harassed and threatened me, and encouraged at least 8 others to briefly join in, and I'd just like it to stop, and also to work out how to avoid such situations in the future. Thanks. KrampusC (talk) 16:38, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again KrampusC. I'm currently typing up a rather lengthy reply to all of it, so be patient! :) --Biblioworm 16:44, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
NP. Time for me to go to bed, I think. I am going to the cricket tomorrow :) KrampusC (talk) 16:45, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA Cup - Round 4 (Semi-Finals)[edit]

WikiProject Good Articles's 2014-15 GA Cup - Round 4

Happy New Year! We hope that all of our GA Cup competitors had an enjoyable and safe holiday season.

Monday saw the end of Round 3. Eight contestants moved forward to Round 4—the top two contestants from each of Round 3's three pools and the top two participants of all remaining users. It was an exciting competition, especially towards the end. Round 3's highest scorer was Jaguar, Round 2's wildcard, with an impressive 305 points, the highest score in the GA Cup thus far. Pool B was the closest race; J_Milburn and Cwmhiraeth switched places a few times in the final hours of the competition, although J Milburn edged out Cwmhiraeth by just 9 points. Pool A was, by far, the most competitive; four out of five moved onto Round 4, and its competitors earned a cumulative 935 points and reviewed 59 articles. Ritchie333, who came in second overall with 255 points, reviewed the most articles (17). Peacemaker67 and Wizardman earned the two wildcard slots, with 184 and 154 points, respectively. Congrats to all!

114 articles were reviewed this round, as compared to 110 in Round 2 and 117 in Round 1. The key to success in Round 3, like in Round 2, was reviewing articles with the longest nomination dates; everyone who moved forward reviewed articles from the pink nomination box (20 points) or reviewed articles that had languished in the queue for over 5 months (18 points). Many of these articles had languished because their nominators had left Wikipedia and had little chance of passing to GA, so our competitors provided a great service by helping remove them from the queue. Also as in Round 2, The Boat Race articles proved to be popular review choices, with 10% of all the articles reviewed in December. We appreciate the competitors' continued enthusiasm, even during the busy holiday season. At least one competitor even reviewed articles while preparing for a holiday meal!

For Round 4, participants have been randomly put in 2 pools of 4 contestants each. The top two in each pool will progress to the finals, as well as the top participant (5th place) of all remaining users. The semi-finals will start on January 1 at 0:00:01 UTC and end on January 29 at 23:59:59 UTC. Information about Round 4 and the pools can be found here.

We received some excellent feedback about how to improve the GA Cup in the future, including the definition of "quickfails" and the use of pools, which we'll seriously consider as we move forward. As a result of this feedback and the experience we've gained, there will be some changes to the rules come next years GA Cup.

Good luck to all our semi-finalists! It is the judges' hope that every competitor in the GA Cup continue to have fun and be enthusiastic about reviewing and passing articles to GA!

Cheers from Dom497, TheQ Editor and Figureskatingfan.

To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletter, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant still competing, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:09, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Co-op[edit]

Hey Biblioworm. I wanted to ask if you might be interested in mentoring one or more editors during our pilot of the mentorship space called the Co-op. We plan to run the pilot in late January for about one month. The idea is that mentors will be doing one-on-one teaching based on how an editor wants to contribute, and it's not some huge commitment to teach comprehensively about Wikipedia. Your experience in helping editors out at the Teahouse, doing Mediation work, and your background in copy-editing would really useful. If you're interested, please sign up here and feel free to peruse, make suggestions, or ask questions about how the Co-op will work. Thanks a bunch, I, JethroBT drop me a line 03:33, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Jethro. It looks interesting, and I will certainly consider it. --Biblioworm 03:44, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome! Let me know if you have any questions. I, JethroBT drop me a line 03:48, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Biblioworm/Archive_2014&oldid=1195702488"