User talk:Chess/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5

06:53, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 June newsletter

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

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

The judges would like to remind participants to update submission pages promptly. This means that content can be checked, and allows those following the competition (including those participating) to keep track of scores effectively. This round has seen discussion about various aspects of the WikiCup's rules and procedures. Those interested in the competition can be assured that formal discussions about how next year's competition will work will be opened shortly, and all are welcome to voice their views then. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk · contribs) The ed17 (talk · contribs) and Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 18:48, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikimedia Highlights from May 2014

Highlights from the Wikimedia Foundation Report and the Wikimedia engineering report for May 2014, with a selection of other important events from the Wikimedia movement
About · Subscribe/unsubscribe, 16:33, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q2 2014

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 7, No. 2 — 2nd Quarter, 2014
Previous issue | Index | Next issue

Project At a Glance
As of Q2 2014, the project has:


Content


Project Navigation
To receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to sign up on the distribution list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:06, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 July 2014

07:07, 7 July 2014 (UTC)


|} @Shafi5001: Are you sure you know what a barnstar is for? Grognard 123chess456 (talk) 12:44, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 July 2014

07:48, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Media Viewer RfC case opened

You were recently recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Media Viewer RfC. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Media Viewer RfC/Evidence. Please add your evidence by July 26, 2014, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Media Viewer RfC/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. Before adding evidence please review the scope of the case. For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:10, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 July 2014

The Bugle: Issue C, July 2014

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 03:48, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

00:48:40, 18 July 2014 review of submission by Vicsmith0123


After consultation with the group of authors and publishing professionals with whom I am preparing this entry on Visionary Fiction, which you rejected on 6/17, we decided it would be wise to ask for clarification about the grounds for the rejection (Neologism) and review the revisions we plan to make to adjust the article rather than merely revise and resubmit, taking our chances on having this rather lengthy article rejected on other grounds.

THE NEOLOGISM ISSUE: All participants, including writers who have been publishing VF since the ‘90s, do not see visionary fiction as a new term that this article is attempting to popularize. I offer three factual proofs as to the term’s longevity and currency: Visionary Fiction is used and explained extensively in Carl Jung’s 1929 lecture, “Psychology and Literature,” (which is still in print as a chapter in Modern Man in Search of a Soul), as is cited in the entry. Several scholarly works, including Flo Keyes’ The Literature of Hope in the Middle Ages And Today (also cited) use the term, citing Jung’s lecture as its source. As the entry states in the introduction: “In the Book Industry Study Group's BISAC (Book Industry Subject and Category) Subject Headings, Visionary Fiction is assigned a top-level Main Subject Category under FICTION: Visionary & Metaphysical with the code FIC039000.” Former Hampton Roads Press editor Bob Friedman pointed out: “the VF name is used prominently on Amazon as a fiction genre. If you look it up, there are 353 titles listed under the name.” There are more proofs, which can be added to the entry, but these three should suffice to retire the neologism issue. Do you agree?

SOURCES ISSUE: I believe the appearance that most of the sources cited come from blogs may be a rookie error on my part: inconsistent citation. I listed the “reliable sources” in the body of the entry and largely footnoted what came from blogs without also including the print sources in the References section. If you looked only at References without checking through the article, I can see some grounds for your judgment: “Yeah, most of your sources that describe ‘Visionary fiction’ are blogs.” My oversight is easily corrected. I will add sources cited in the text to References this time. Also there are several places where I can cite the original text rather than the on-line material discussing it easily enough and can add further reliable sources to enhance the bibliography. In your opinion, would these steps suffice to resolve the sources issue? Your rejection also claims re some of the sources: “The rest don't describe it at all.” I don’t understand this statement. Please explain further.

ON-LINE REFERENCES Perhaps I am misreading here, but I sense some bias against on-line citations as opposed to print publication. As much of the concentrated developmental discussion of VF has occurred in the last 15 years, most of that research and commentary has only been published on line, as happens in many fields today. I did not notice any restrictions against on-line publication as reliable sources in your guidelines, but I may have missed some directive. I still want to use some on-line material in the entry as it is most current. If I were to reduce the number of such citations, using print material when possible and consolidating so as not to repeat (using ibid.), would that pass muster?

Lively participation by authors and readers in on-line discussions on the nature and scope of visionary fiction prompted us to spend the extensive time it took to research and write this article. The visionary fiction community believes that a comprehensive summary of the subject will contribute substantially to Wikipedia’s marvelous knowledge bank. If you have other suggestions or references that will make this presentation more acceptable and speed it to completion, please let me know.

Vicsmith0123 (talk) 00:48, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

@Vicsmith0123: Sorry for being late getting back to you, but most of your sources are from a single Wordpress blog. Also, visionary fiction sounds a lot like science fiction. We at Wikipedia don't have a prejudice against online sources, a lot of people say we're prejudiced TOWARDS them, but the main reason why I described your sources as unreliable were because they were from Wordpress. You should cite the actual books/articles/newspapers/etc discussing Visionary fiction. You can submit it again, if you'd like, with the Wordpress sources changed to the actual sources, because if you do that, I'll accept it myself if you notify me. That was mostly my entire problem with the submission, and I or many other editors would happily accept it if you were to do that. Grognard 123chess456 (talk) 19:12, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

07:41, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Zumpa fuj

Already protected.  :) Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 16:54, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

23:40:50, 25 July 2014 review of submission by Vicsmith0123

Received your reply of 19:12, 20 July 2014 (UTC). Sorry if this is not the correct way to reply. Could not find any other link that allowed me to reply directly to yours, keeping it in the thread. I will revise per your instructions and let you know directly when I have completed the work. Thank you for your attention.

Vicsmith0123 (talk) 23:40, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 July 2014

08:08, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 7

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 7, June-July 2014
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs)

  • Seven new donations, two expanded partnerships
  • TWL's Final Report up, read the summary
  • Adventures in Las Vegas, WikiConference USA, and updates from TWL coordinators
  • Spotlight: Blog post on BNA's impact on one editor's research

Read the full newsletter

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:20, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

A brownie for you!

A brownie to you for reviewing at least 15 submissions during the WikiProject Articles for creation June 2014 Backlog Elimination Drive. Thanks for contributing to the backlog elimination drive!
Posted by (tJosve05a (c) on 23:17, 31 July 2014 (UTC), on behalf of WikiProject Articles for creation.

The Signpost: 30 July 2014

Media Viewer RfC draft principles & findings

Hello. This is a courtesy note that the draft findings and principles in the Media Viewer RfC case have now been posted. The drafters of the proposed decision anticipate a final version of the PD will be posted after 11 August. You are welcome to give feedback on the workshop page. For the Committee, Lord Roem ~ (talk) 02:43, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

07:37, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

23:17:43, 8 August 2014 review of submission by Vicsmith0123


Advising you per your note of 7/20/14 that the issue with the sources in the "Visionary Fiction" entry has been addressed and the entry resubmitted on 8/8/14. Please take another look at the article as I hope it now passes muster. Vicsmith0123 (talk) 23:17, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

@Vicsmith0123: Good article you've made! Very in depth article! I would suggest to improve the article more and try and make it meet the Wikipedia:Good article criteria, and very hopefully the Wikipedia:Featured article criteria. If you could do that, it would be incredibly helpful to Wikipedia, as you have obviously put a lot of work into this article already, and improving it to either good article or featured article status would obviously be in your area of expertise. Also, I've nominated it at Template:Did you know nominations/Visionary Fiction, for the "Did you know?" section of the main page. Also, if you create an article, improve it to Did you know? status (you don't have to nominate it), improve it to Good Article status, and improve it to Featured Article status, you can be eligible for a Wikipedia:4AWARD, which is a highly prestigious Wikipedia award for those who significantly help in improving articles. Grognard 123chess456 (talk) 23:50, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 August 2014

Congratulations from STiki!

The Anti-Vandalism + STiki Barnstar

Congratulations, 123chess456! You're receiving this barnstar because you recently crossed the 1,000 classification threshold using STiki. We thank you both for your contributions to Wikipedia at-large and your use of the tool. We hope you continue your ascent up the leaderboard and stay in touch at the talk page. Thank you and keep up the good work! West.andrew.g (developer) and Pratyya (Hello!) 13:13, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Visionary Fiction at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 10:35, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

07:43, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:STIKI no red glitch.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:STIKI no red glitch.png. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:04, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

@Stefan2: Please direct me to how to show the image is a screenshot of a free program, licensed under the GNU GPL. Grognard 123chess456 (talk) 08:50, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Divine Stiki revert

Hello 123chess456. That recent edit to the Divine article wasn't vandalism - it was the name of the episode of the TV series in which Divine appeared. Though whether that's unnecessary detail in that article is another matter.... PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 22:22, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Just to inform, a film need not be the sole topic when covered by sources and I found ample coverage to meet WP:NF. Care to withdraw? Schmidt, Michael Q. 01:22, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Media Viewer RfC arbitration case - extension of closure dates

Hello, you are receiving this message because you have commented on the Media Viewer RfC arbitration case. This is a courtesy message to inform you that the closure date for the submission of evidence has been extended to 17 August 2014 and the closure date for workshop proposals has been extended to 22 August 2014, as has the expected date of the proposed decision being posted. The closure dates have been changed to allow for recent developments to be included in the case. If you wish to comment, please review the evidence guidance. For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:00, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CI, August 2014

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:23, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 August 2014

07:16, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 August 2014

Media Viewer RfC arbitration case - motion to suspend case

You are receiving this message as you have either commented on a case page or are named as a party to the case. A motion has been proposed to suspend the Media Viewer RfC arbitration case for a maximum of 60 days due to recent developments. If you wish to comment regarding the motion there is a section on the proposed decision talk page for this. For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc (talkcontribslogs). Message delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 02:33, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

09:21, 25 August 2014 (UTC)