User talk:Drew.ward

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Tense[edit]

Awesome, sounds great in general. I would like to see more source references. If I have a chance I'll dig some up and intersperse. Penumbra 2k (talk) 04:18, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Modals[edit]

Hey Drew, I've answered you on my talk page. Trigaranus (talk) 13:10, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Vote of confidence[edit]

Hi Drew, see "auxiliary verb" and "Talk:Auxiliary verb" for your vindication. I just stopped by here to encourage you to hang in there with helping out Wikipedia on language topics, despite the frustrations (which, sadly, even I added to yesterday). I dream of doing the translational work (as the medical science people call it) that will bring the basic science being generated by linguistics and turn it into broadly applied science to be mixed into language pedagogy, which is currently still just a folk art (like shaman healing in the medical analogy). Which will take a lot of explication and side-by-side, point-by-point comparison—e.g., "people often believe X, but it's actually Y"—a huge task that is like moving a mountain one stone at a time. The fact that I'm not a trained linguist will complicate that goal, of course. No rush; I'm just laying out the dream of where I'd like to see WP's coverage of language go over the next decade or two, if we get the chance. Thanks for all you do. — ¾-10 12:32, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Infinitive with auxiliary verb?[edit]

Hey, in the edit summary of your recent edit of the article Infinitive, you said that the verb form after certain auxiliaries isn't an infinitive, as for example "be" in "will be". But the article itself states that this verb is an infinitive, in the section Infinitive#Bare, so I reverted your edit, since the article should remain consistent with itself. Why do you say that the verbs aren't infinitives? Must infinitives always have the particle "to" before them? And if they aren't infinitives, what are they? — Eru·tuon 13:55, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi Erutuon,
Yeah that article is wrong in a lot of ways as are the vast majority of grammar and linguistics articles on wp. This seems to be one academic field where the beauty of wikipedia (the fact that anyone can contribute and edit) is the downfall of it as well. Language is quite simple if you know what you're looking at. Unfortunately most people have no clue what they are actually looking at! The article itself is wrong in a lot of ways because many of the assumptions on which it is based are incorrect. I haven't even thought about editing the actual article as a whole to any major extent because it would take a full rewrite and even then, it's more likely that it would just be reverted because while incorrect, a lot of the ideas proposed in the article are commonly thought to be correct and on wikipedia (especially with linguistics), consensus wins out over accuracy every time, so it tends not to be worth the effort. However, when there is something simple that is wrong (like the line I deleted in this one), I tend to go ahead and try to at least clean up the article to keep it from doing as much damage (damage to others who tend to believe everything on sites like WP as fact).
Much of that article conflates two different things -- infinitives and the infinitive form. Infinitives are simply a verb taken out of context and separated out syntactically from the other verbal components of the utterance in which it appears. If you happened to read or watch Angels and Demons, they had a container that was able to hold antimatter suspended within it so that that antimatter could be kept separate from all regular matter, but where they could still move it around, observe it, talk about it, discuss it, etc. In language, an infinitive is like that container because it keeps the verb isolated and separate from all other "verby" things, yet still allows it to be discussed, moved, talked about, etc.
Infinitives in English can be of three forms: to+verb, verb, and verb+ing. The most common of these is to+verb. Verb+ing is also fairly common, but most people mistakenly analyze such infinitives as being gerunds. Because to+verb is the common form used for infinitives, this is generically called the 'infinitive form'. Of course, this is not THE infinitive form because infinitives can just as easily be in two other forms. But still, in English, to+verb is considered the 'infinitive form' of a verb. Keep in mind though, infinitive form simply describes a structure (to+verb). It does not specify something as being functionally an infinitive (a verb taken out of context). Unfortunately, most people, including the vast majority of grammarians and linguists, fail to make this separation, and assume that any time they see to+verb, that it is an infinitive.
The statement that infinitives occur after auxiliaries is inherently flawed because an infinitive can't be part of the actual verb of an utterance. By 'verb' here I mean 'whole verb', and I actually like the term 'verject', which is basically everything that conveys the verbal information of an utterance. Within a verject, you always have at least one auxiliary, and at least one vector (idea verb). Different auxiliaries require their subordinate (the verb immediately following them)to take on a certain form. Modal auxiliaries always subordinate to one of two forms -- the infinitive form (to+verb) and the finite form (verb -- the dictionary form). Which form is required varies by the structural class to which that individual auxiliary belongs.
Will, would, should, shall, can, must, etc all subordinate to the finite form (will be, will eat, will address).
have (modal), ought, want, like, etc all subordinate to the infinitive form (have to leave, ought to go, want to eat, like to play).
need, dare, and some others can do both (I need to go, you need not know, dare to dream, dare not ask).
The thing to remember though is that those are only forms, they're not infinitives because the verbs are all part of the verject (verbal component of the utterance), they just LOOK like infinitives.
SO that's why I removed that line. Make sense? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drew.ward (talkcontribs) 06:01, 26 May 2011
Ohh, I see where you're coming from. You have a different definition of infinitive from mine. As I learned it, an infinitive is a form not specifying person or number, which does not restrict it from being part of the verbal component of a sentence. I have only encountered this definition in Latin and Ancient Greek and old Germanic grammars, and it's the one given in SIL Glossary of Linguistic Terms. Which references use your definition? — Eru·tuon 21:53, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Dative/Accusative[edit]

Would you mind telling where you've run across this term to describe the English case system?·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 18:08, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

I won't be at the computer for any decent amount of time till later tonight but will google again and post then. I haven't specifically messed with google scholar on this but just a regular google search brings up many hits and also includes variations like dative-accusative, accusative-dative, accusative/dative as well (I put dative before accusative for this article because there are already several uses of "accusative/dative" in articles here on WP in which they are just referring to the two cases collectively and I did not want to risk someone confusing that string of words with this. Also, the dative case generally precedes the accusative word order wise so it seems logical. Keep in mind though that neither I nor anything I've seen argues for a dative/accusative case but rather for there being a single form of pronouns that is common to both dative and accusative in English. Prior to this encounter with Kwami I have never heard of case being restricted to only an expression of morphology. In English it's primarily established by word order with the pronouns (and nouns as well in the genitive) having the only remainder of morphological markings. As to English having only two cases as Kwami purports, or three cases as the subjective/objective/possessive guys purport, I can't find a consensus supporting either. The S/O/P system seems restricted to mostly US-based K-12 English materials and some ESL publishers and seems to have started falling out of use around the same time that sentence=subject+predicate did. The remaining uses of objective (in lieu of dative and accusative) seem to be a holdover of that term from S/O/P but with the rest updated. The problem with all of these is of course that they attempt to treat English uniquely and separately from other languages and the simplest response to that is that it's not linguistically kosher. I have found articles claiming that the dative and accusative have merged (with some calling the merged thing dative, some accusative, and others objective). I can find very little and nothing of good quality that supports the idea of English having an oblique case. What I can find is people mixing up oblique constructions and usage such as "oblique cases (with those cases then usually listed as dative and accusative)" with the idea of a separate oblique case. It seems that the proposal of oblique case is that it occurs in a group of languages in which there would only be an unmarked nominative case and then some secondary single marked case covering everything else. The descriptions out there seem to preclude this 'oblique' case from occurring in conjunction with anything but nominative (including genitive which means it can't occur in English). Regarding case in general, everything I have ever encountered and the references I find online list it as a grammatical category along with tense, aspect, mood, etc. Grammatical categories by definition are attributes expressed via grammar (syntax). Sometimes these expressions are carried at the lexical level, but either way, without being in some grammatical construction, even such lexical expression can have no meaning. Case in English meets this accepted description with word order establishing the bulk of case marking and these different pronoun forms backing that up. I just don't understand why it's ok for Kwami to constantly take it upon himself to rewrite the rules of linguistics to mesh with whatever his interest at that time is and then that it be on the rest of WP to argue that his changes are not the norm. He's done this with mood, his TAM article, tense, aspect, all sorts of things and every time not only changed one article but then systematically gone through all related articles to make them match. With tense he argued something similar pushing the idea that tense is somehow only expressed via marked lexemes and with case again he seems incapable of separating the idea of form from function. These pronouns are just the same form. By themselves, they're just words. Case is either dative or accusative depending on where those pronouns are used in the sentence. If you go for his analysis then the only existence of case at all in English would be those pronouns because nouns are unmarked.Drew.ward (talk) 00:14, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
The question is one of linguistic theory - its not about being right or wron it is about theoretical preferences, and I think this needs to come clear in the treatment of the topic. One drawback of your definition is that all languages will have case because it makes it impossible to distinguish case from syntactic roles. That is what Kwami is reacting against, he argues that case should only be used to describe those languages where syntactic roles are marked morphologically. This argument is pretty common in functional/typological literature and goes back to Jespersen and Sweets descriptions of English Grammar. You on the other hand also have a point by defining "dative" and "accusative" as functions - but in the typological literature these functions tend to be labled as "indirect object" (or oblique object) and "direct object" respectively. In this approach one would say that English uses the same morphological case for both syntactic roles. I think that calling it accusative/dative is to commit the age old error of using the categories of Latin as the basic categories for describing other languages. Latin distinguishes has distinct cases with which to mark IO and O, whereas English mark both IO and O the same - it is only from the latinate standpoint that this would mean that English has a dative-accusative case. This was definitely Jespersens argument - one should name the categories of any language in accordance with their specific functions in that language - not through hoe they map on to cases in another language. Definitely I thini it is a common and valid analysis of English and Danish to sy that thereis only case in the pronouns (and in Danish there are vestiges of Dative in some nouns). I don't think Kwami is more at fault here than you are - you both seem to argue that you have the right interpretation and the other is wrong. In fact they are different perspectives that are both reasonable if argued as such - right now kwamis argument is stronger because he in fact backs it with some sources. You shoud both try better to situate our arguments in relation to theory and in relation to the literature and then we may reach a way to describe both interpretations and achieve true NPOV.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 02:09, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Putting my words in your mouth[edit]

Hello, Drew.ward. At Talk:Do-support you asked, ' "I note Drew.ward's suggestions above that experts, not the usage of English speakers and writers, determine what is Standard English" ummm...where exactly did I say that??Drew.ward (talk) 16:28, 19 June 2012 (UTC)'

That is my interpretation of this statement: 'Just because an error is common does not make it grammatical. I can go out into the street and here "She be hatin on him" but to include it in a reference to English grammar would be wrong because no matter how many people say it, it's grammatically incorrect. Drew.ward (talk) 13:41, 12 October 2011 (UTC)'

It is unfair of me to put words in your mouth. But if your declaration, 'it's grammatically incorrect' does not come from common usage, then I assume it comes from expert knowledge. Cnilep (talk) 01:50, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Grammar and Semantics of Tense[edit]

  1. . Saussure in "Cours de linguistique générale" establishes that grammar is a system of syntagmatic and paradigmatic structures, that can be described in relation to each other independently of their meanings.
  2. . This line of thinking is followed by the Bloomfieldians and by Chomsky. Chomsky's famous example of Colorless green ideas sleep furiously from Syntactic Structures (p. 15) exactly demonstrates the distinction between syntax (which determines what is grammatical) and semanitics (which determines what is meaningful). Following Chomsky's logics "The fish had swum" is syntactically equivalent to the "the man had spoken", or "my dog had died" and the addition of a temporal adverb has nothing to do with grammaticality. Most functional theories of grammar accept the distinction between meaning and grammar, although some such as lexical functional grammar do not - but in my understanding there is no reason to think that even LFG people would consider "tomorrow" to be an expression of tense.
  3. . As for what it means for tyense to be grammatical and whether adverbs express tense Comrie 1985 discusses this on pages 10 - 12. Arguing very cogently that they do not, because the only adverb in English that corresponds exactly in meaning to a tense is "now", there is no adverb that has the exact meaning of the past or future tense. "formerly" denotes pastness, but also habituality. "Tomorrow" denotes an absolute time reference to the day after the day on which the utterance is said, which is not a gramatical category in English (although apparently "yesterday"-tense exists in Czech).
  4. . As for English Tense: Otto Jespersen in his grammar of English makes it a point to establish that Time and Tense are two different things. He explicitly gives the example that "I am here tomorrow" is a statement in the present tense which refers to a future time. I don't know of any grammarians that have contradicted Jespersen on this point. Peter Harder who wrote "Functional Semantics: A Theory of Meaning, Structure, and Tense in English" certainly does not - although he does disagree with Jespersen that English has no future tense. Harder considers the "will"-construction to be a future tense, albeit one that also has a modal component - i.e. not "pure tense". I personally agree with him here, but this is not the most common analysis, rather the analysis of English as having only two tenses is predominant, as Harder states on page 368. The same point (the dominance of the two tense analysis) is maintained by Laura Michaelis (2008) in the chapter Tense in English, in The Handbook of English Linguistics. Arguing against the notion of "will" as a future tense she writes that: "Additional evidence that an aspectual construction may function as a tense without losing its aspectual properties is provided by the so-called future tense of English, a periphrastic construction whose head is the modal verb will. A number of scholars, including Binnick (1991: 251–2) and Hornstein (1991: 19–20), have argued that the modal future of English does not have future reference but rather present-time reference, as indicated by patterns of adverbial co-occurrence. This will lead us to conclude that modal-future sentences are in fact present-tense stative predications. As we will see in section 4, this analysis of the English modal future, combined with the analysis of the present tense developed in section 3, has a significant implication for our description of the tense system of English: this system, rather than being based upon a past–nonpast division, as many scholars (e.g., Comrie 1985; Van Valin and LaPolla 1997) have assumed, is in fact based upon the opposition between past and present."(p. )·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 20:19, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
I give you this, and you give me a google search. That is offensive. I am ignoring you from now on, but I will revert any unsourced edits you make on sight.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 18:58, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
Why on earth are you assuming intended offense? Maunus, you stated that "It is an absolute an non-negotiable requirement for any change to take place that you present sources in support of the notion that there is a pre-theoretical sense of semantic "tense", and that this view is shared by a majority of scholars. The wikipedia article must reflect the general literature on this topic." My reply is neither offensive or anything else, but does clearly show (click on any of the links) that the world views tense in a myriad of ways and not only in the narrow definitions that you've argued for on here. I took the time to write what I feel is a VERY fair option through which all of the grievances that everyone (including you) have raised about the treatment of tense on wikipedia. It neither promotes my views nor limits discussion to my views, nor does it preclude or demote your views. It instead provides a means by which all views can be presented and it does so with the justification that no single view (mine, yours, a grammar guide's, or anyone else') can represent the wide range of meanings and uses attributed this concept. The fact that just typing in "english tense" into google brings up over 31 million hits, and that on that first page they not only appear to be different from each other but that not a single one is wholly in line with any of the versions (including yours and including mine) of what tense has been argued to be here on wikipedia should be evidence enough that we can't just choose one treatment of tense. That was the intention and if you are offended by that I have no clue how to un-offend you.Drew.ward (talk) 19:51, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Do-support and the three-revert rule[edit]

Hello Drew.ward. You and Tjo3ya appear to be engaged in an edit war on the article Do-support. I know that you both have strong ideas about this article, but there is a bright-line rule called the "three revert rule" or 3RR which says that if you revert an article three or more times within twenty-four hours you will be temporarily blocked from editing. In order to deal with an editor who repeatedly reverts an article without discussion, you should report the behavior to one of the Wikipedia:Noticeboards such as Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

I am leaving a similar message on Tjo3ya's user talk page. Cnilep (talk) 06:37, 14 September 2012 (UTC)


Drew, I am now going to report your behavior to the Wikipedia noticeboards. I am going to link my message to the a couple of the talk pages that demonstrate how you operate. Apparently, I am required to notify you that this is being done. --Tjo3ya (talk) 07:41, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

GOCE fall newsletter[edit]

Fall Events from the Guild of Copy Editors
Writing Magnifying.PNG

The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in its events:

  • The October 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest is currently in the submissions stage. Submit your best October copy edit there before the end of the month. Submissions end, and discussion and voting begin, on November 1 at 00:00 (UTC).
  • Voting is in progress for the September 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest. Everyone is welcome to vote, whether they have entered the contest or not.
  • NEW!! In the week from Sunday 21 October to Saturday 27 October, we are holding a Project Blitz, in which we will copy edit articles tagged with {{copyedit}} belonging to selected project(s). For the first blitz, we'll start with WikiProject Olympics and WikiProject Albums and add more Projects to the blitz as we clear them. The blitz works much like our bimonthly drives, but a bit simpler. Everyone is welcome to take part, and barnstars will be awarded.
  • November 2012 Backlog elimination drive is a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on November 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on November 30 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goals are to copy edit all articles tagged in 2011 and to complete all requests placed before the end of October. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits at least one article, and special awards will be given to the top five in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", "Number of articles of over 5,000 words", "Number of articles tagged in 2011", and "Longest article". We hope to see you there! – Your drive coordinators: Stfg, Allens, and Torchiest.
>>> Blitz sign-up <<<         >>> Drive sign-up <<<

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Message delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 19:10, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 9[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Peabody Magnet High School, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Pineville High School and Tioga High School (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:38, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Second language acquisition[edit]

I have proposed that Category:Second language acquisition be renamed to Category:Second-language acquisition, and I am notifying you because you either participated in discussions about the hyphenation of "second(-)language acquisition" on the article's talk page, or because you participated in the previous CfD discussion. I would be grateful if you could give your opinion on the latest discussion, which you can find at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 November 10#Category:Second language acquisition. Thank you for your time. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 03:13, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

GOCE November 2012 copy edit drive update[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors November 2012 backlog elimination drive mid-drive newsletter
Writing Magnifying.PNG

  • Participation: Out of 31 people signed up for this drive so far, 22 have copy-edited at least one article. If you've signed up but haven't yet copy-edited any articles, every bit helps; if you haven't signed up yet, it's not too late. Join us!
  • Progress report: We're on track to meet our targets for the drive. We have reduced our target group of articles—November and December 2011—by over 50%, and 34 of the the 56 requests made in September and October this year have already been fulfilled. However, the rate of tagging for copy edit has increased, and this month we are just keeping the size of the backlog stable. So, all you copy editors, please do come along and help us!
  • The September 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest was won by Baffle gab1978 for his copy edit of Expulsion of the Acadians. Runner up was Gareth Griffith-Jones for his edit of I Could Fall in Love. Congratulations to both.
  • The October 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest is in the discussion and voting stage until midnight November 30 (UTC). You don't have to make a submission to vote!
  • November 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest is in the submissions stage until midnight November 30 (UTC), when discussion and voting begin.
  • Seasonal oversight: We had a slight fall from grace in the title of our last newletter, which mentioned the season in the northern hemisphere and thus got it wrong for the southern. Fortunately an observant GOCE member was ready to spring into action to advise us. Thanks! In future we'll stay meteorologically neutral.
>>> Sign up now <<<

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 19:38, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

GOCE November drive wrap-up[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors November 2012 backlog elimination drive wrap-up
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Participation: Thanks to all who participated! Out of 38 people who signed up this drive, 33 copy-edited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. All the barnstars have now been distributed.

Progress report: We achieved our primary goal of clearing November and December 2011 from the backlog. For the first time since the drives began, the backlog consists only of articles tagged in the current year. The total backlog at the end of the month was 2690 articles, down from 8323 when we started out over two years ago. We completed all 56 requests outstanding before November 2012 as well as eight of those made in November.

Copy Edit of the Month: Voting is now over for the October 2012 competition, and prizes have been issued. The November 2012 contest is closed for submissions and open for voting. The December 2012 contest is now open for submissions. Everyone is welcome to submit entries and to vote.

GOCE Coordinator.png

Coodinator election: The six-month term for our fourth tranche of Guild coordinators will expire at the end of December. Nominations are open for the fifth tranche of coordinators, who will serve from 1 January to 30 June 2013. For complete information, please have a look at the election page.

– Your drive coordinators: Stfg, Allens, and Torchiest.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 21:18, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

GOCE mid-December newsletter[edit]

End of Year Events from the Guild of Copy Editors
Writing Magnifying.PNG

The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in its events:

  • The December 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest is currently in the submissions stage. Submit your best December copy edit there before the end of the month. Submissions end, and discussion and voting begin, on January 1 at 00:00 (UTC).
  • Voting is in progress for the November 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest. Everyone is welcome to vote, whether they have entered the contest or not.
  • From Sunday 16 December to Saturday 22 December, we are holding a Project Blitz, in which we will copy edit articles tagged with {{copyedit}} from January 2012. The blitz works much like our bimonthly drives, but a bit simpler. Everyone is welcome to take part, and barnstars will be awarded.
  • January 2013 Backlog elimination drive is a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on January 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on January 31 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goals are to copy edit all articles tagged in January, February, and March 2012 and complete all requests placed before the end of 2012. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits at least one article, and special awards will be given to the top five in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", "Number of articles of over 5,000 words", "Number of articles tagged in January, February, and March 2012", and "Longest article". We hope to see you there! – Your drive coordinators: Stfg, Allens, and Torchiest.
GOCE Coordinator.png

Coodinator election: Nominations are open for candidates to serve as GOCE coordinators from 1 January to 30 June 2013. Nominations close on December 15 at 23:59 UTC, after which voting will run until the end of December. For complete information, please have a look at the election page.

>>> Blitz sign-up <<<         >>> Drive sign-up <<<

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Message delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 00:39, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

GOCE 2012 Annual Report[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors 2012 Annual Report
Writing Magnifying.PNG

The GOCE has wrapped up another successful year of operations!

Our 2012 Annual Report is now ready for review.

– Your project coordinators: Torchiest, BDD, and Miniapolis

Sign up for the January drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 00:58, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

WP Linguistics in the Signpost[edit]

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Linguistics for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. –Mabeenot (talk) 18:40, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

GOCE March newsletter[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors March 2015 Newsletter
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Copyeditors progress.png

Blitz: Thanks to everyone who participated in the February Blitz. Of the 21 people who signed up, eight copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

Progress report: The blitz removed 16 articles from the requests list, and we're almost done with December 2014. Many thanks, everyone!

Drive: The month-long March drive begins in about a week. Awards will be given to everyone who copyedits at least one article from the backlog. Sign up here!

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Miniapolis, Jonesey95, Biblioworm and Philg88.

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

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:41, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

April 2015 GOCE newsletter[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors April 2015 Newsletter
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Copyeditors progress.png

March drive: Thanks to everyone who participated in last month's backlog-reduction drive. Of the 38 people who signed up, 18 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

April blitz: The one-week April blitz, again targeting our long requests list, will run from April 19–25. Awards will be given to everyone who copyedits at least one article from the requests page. Sign up here!

May drive: The month-long May backlog-reduction drive, with extra credit for articles tagged in December 2013, January and February 2014 and all request articles, begins soon. Sign up now!

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Miniapolis, Jonesey95, Biblioworm and Philg88.

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

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:28, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

GOCE June 2015 newsletter[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors June 2015 News
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Copyeditors progress.png

May drive: Thanks to everyone who participated in last month's backlog-reduction drive. Of the 38 people who signed up, 29 copyedited at least one article, and we got within 50 articles of our all-time low in the backlog. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

Coordinator elections: Nominations are open through June 15 for GOCE coordinators, with voting from June 16–30. Self-nominations are welcome and encouraged.

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Miniapolis, Jonesey95, Biblioworm and Philg88.

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

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:08, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

GOCE August 2015 newsletter[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors August 2015 Newsletter
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Copyeditors progress.png

July drive: Thanks to everyone who participated in last month's backlog-reduction drive. Of the 24 people who signed up, 17 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

August blitz: The one-week April blitz, targeting biographical articles that have been tagged for copy editing for over a year, will run from August 16–22. Awards will be given to everyone who copyedits at least one article from the article list on the blitz page. Sign up here!

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators, Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, KieranTribe, Miniapolis, and Pax85.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
sent by Jonesey95 via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:43, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Re: subcategories of the hortative subjunctive[edit]

Dear Mr. Ward,

I noticed that you've added a number of subcategories to the hortative page (e.g. suprahortative, infrahortative, etc.). Can you point me to a source for those subcategories? I've been unable to find them online.

Best, --2604:5500:F:1DFC:5577:EAB7:13AD:645D (talk) 05:40, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

language education programs[edit]

Hi Drew.ward -- I'm a long-time editor, academic copyright attorney / librarian, and now parent of a kid in elementary school, and I am consequently educating myself about various literacy methods. Looking at the various items in List of phonics programs, I've been disturbed to see that many of them appear to be basically ad copy from commercial companies marketing these services. I have no confidence that the list itself adequately covers the most significant phonics programs. I also have virtually no knowledge of the programs to get a foothold on the editing. I went to a WikiProject page on education and saw you listed as a project participant with interests in these areas; hence this contact!

So I could keep poking along cleaning up these articles and learning about the topic, but it occurred to me -- I'm going to run a wikipedia edit-a-thon on our campus (UMass Amherst) later this month as part of Open Access Week, so I could do some outreach to our Ed grad students & recruit some to work on these articles. Would you be able to advise about good topics, or help generate such a list?

--Lquilter (talk) 11:53, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

October 2015 GOCE newsletter[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors October 2015 Newsletter
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Copyeditors progress.png

September drive: Thanks to everyone who participated in last month's backlog-reduction drive. Of the 25 editors who signed up, 18 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

October blitz: The one-week October blitz, targeting requests, has just concluded. Of the nine editors who signed up, seven copyedited at least one request; check your talk page for your barnstar!

The month-long November drive, focusing on our oldest backlog articles (June, July, and August 2014) and the October requests, is just around the corner. Hope to see you there!

Thanks again for your support; together, we can improve the encyclopedia! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, KieranTribe, Miniapolis and Pax85.

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

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:55, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:37, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors 2015 End of Year Report[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors 2015 End of Year Report
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Our 2015 End of Year Report is now ready for review.

Highlights:

  • Summary of Drives, Blitzes, and the Requests page;
  • New record lows in the article backlog and on the Requests page;
  • Coordinator election results;
  • Membership news;
  • Changes around the Guild's pages;
  • Plans for 2016.
– Your project coordinators: Jonesey95, Miniapolis and Baffle gab1978.
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by Jonesey95 via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:42, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors April 2016 Newsletter[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors April 2016 Newsletter
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Copyeditors progress.png

March drive: Thanks to everyone who participated in last month's backlog-reduction drive. Of the 28 people who signed up, 21 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

April blitz: The one-week April blitz, again targeting our long requests list, will run from April 17–23. Awards will be given to everyone who copyedits at least one article from the requests page. Sign up here!

May drive: The month-long May backlog-reduction drive, with extra credit for articles tagged in March, April, and May 2015, and all request articles, begins May 1. Sign up now!

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

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

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:47, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

June 2016 Guild of Copy Editors Newsletter[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors June 2016 News
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Copyeditors progress.png

Hello everyone, welcome to the June 2016 GOCE newsletter. It's been a few months since we sent one out; we hope y'all haven't forgotten about the Guild! Your coordinators have been busy behind the scenes as usual, though real life has a habit of reducing our personal wiki-time. The May backlog reduction drive, the usual coordinating tasks and preparations for the June election are keeping us on our toes!

May drive: Thanks to everyone who participated in last month's record-setting backlog reduction drive. Of the 29 people who signed up, 16 copyedited at least one article, 197 copyedits were recorded on the drive page, and the copyedit backlog fell below 1,500 for the first time! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

June Blitz: this one-week copy-editing blitz will occur from 12 June through 18 June; the themes will be video games and Asian geography.

Coordinator elections: It's election time again; how quickly they seem to roll around! Nominations for the next tranche of Guild coordinators, who will serve a six-month term that begins at 00:01 UTC on 1 July and ends at 23:59 UTC on 31 December, opens at 00:01 UTC on 1 June and closes at 23:59 UTC on 15 June. Voting takes place between 00:01 UTC on 16 June and 23:59 UTC on 30 June. If you'd like to assist behind the scenes, please consider stepping forward; self-nominations are welcomed and encouraged. All Wikipedia editors in good standing are eligible; remember it's your Guild, and it doesn't run itself!

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

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

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:01, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors July 2016 News[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors July 2016 News
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Copyeditors progress.png

Hello everyone, and welcome to the July 2016 GOCE newsletter.

June Blitz: this one-week copy-editing blitz ran from 12 through 18 June; the themes were video games and Asian geography. Of the 18 editors who signed up, 11 removed 47 articles from the backlog. Barnstars and rollover totals are located here. Thanks to all editors who took part.

Coordinator elections: The second tranche of Guild coordinators for 2016, who will serve a six-month term until 23:59 UTC on 31 December, have been elected. Jonesey95 remains as your drama-free Lead Coordinator, and Corinne and Tdslk are your new assistant coordinators. For her long service to the Guild, Miniapolis has been enrolled in the GOCE Hall of Fame. Thanks to everyone who voted in the election; our next scheduled one occurs in December 2016. All Wikipedia editors in good standing are eligible; self-nominations are welcome and encouraged.

July Drive: Our month-long July Copy Editing Backlog Elimination Drive is now underway. Our aim is to remove articles tagged for copy-edit in April, May and June 2015, and to complete all requests on the GOCE Requests page from June 2016. The drive ends at 23:59 on 31 July 2016 (UTC).

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators: Jonesey95, Corinne and Tdlsk.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:54, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors September 2016 News[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors September 2016 News
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Copyeditors progress.png

Hello everyone, and welcome to the September 2016 GOCE newsletter.

>>> Sign up for the September Drive, already in progress! <<<

July Drive: The July drive was a roaring success. We set out to remove April, May, and June 2015 from our backlog (our 149 oldest articles), and by 23 July, we were done with those months. We added July 2015 (66 articles) and copy-edited 37 of those. We also handled all of the remaining Requests from June 2016. Well done! Overall, we recorded copy edits to 240 articles by 20 editors, reducing our total backlog to 13 months and 1,656 articles, the second-lowest month-end total ever.

August Blitz: this one-week copy-editing blitz ran from 21 through 27 August; the theme was sports-related articles in honor of the 2016 Summer Olympics. Of the eight editors who signed up, five editors removed 11 articles from the backlog. A quiet blitz – everyone must be on vacation. Barnstars and rollover totals are located here. Thanks to all editors who took part.

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators: Jonesey95, Corinne and Tdlsk.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:36, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors December 2016 News[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors December 2016 News
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Copyeditors progress.png

Hello everyone, and welcome to the December 2016 GOCE newsletter. We had an October newsletter all set to go, but it looks like we never pushed the button to deliver it, so this one contains a few months of updates. We have been busy and successful!

Coordinator elections for the first half of 2017: Nominations are open for election of Coordinators for the first half of 2017. Please visit the election page to nominate yourself or another editor, and then return after December 15 to vote. Thanks for participating!

September Drive: The September drive was fruitful. We set out to remove July through October 2015 from our backlog (an ambitious 269 articles), and by the end of the month, we had cut that pile of oldest articles to just 83. We reduced our overall backlog by 97 articles, even with new copyedit tags being added to articles every day. We also handled 75% of the remaining Requests from August 2016. Overall, 19 editors recorded copy edits to 233 articles (over 378,000 words).

October Blitz: this one-week copy-editing blitz ran from 16 through 22 October; the theme was Requests, since the backlog was getting a bit long. Of the 16 editors who signed up, 10 editors completed 29 requests. Barnstars and rollover totals are located here. Thanks to all editors who took part.

November Drive: The November drive was a record-breaker! We set out to remove September through December 2015 from our backlog (239 articles), and by the end of the month, we had cut that pile of old articles to just 66, eliminating the two oldest months! We reduced our overall backlog by 523 articles, to a new record low of 1,414 articles, even with new tags being added to articles every day, which means we removed copy-editing tags from over 800 articles. We also handled all of the remaining Requests from October 2016. Officially, 14 editors recorded copy edits to 200 articles (over 312,000 words), but over 600 articles, usually quick fixes and short articles, were not recorded on the drive page.

Housekeeping note: we do not send a newsletter before every drive or blitz. To have a better chance of knowing when the next event will start, add the GOCE's message box to your Watchlist.

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators: Jonesey95, Corinne and Tdslk.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors February 2017 News[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors February 2017 News
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Copyeditors progress.png

Hello everyone, and welcome to the February 2017 GOCE newsletter. The Guild has been busy since the last time your coordinators sent out a newsletter!

December blitz: This one-week copy-editing blitz ran from 11 through 17 December; the themes were Requests and eliminating the November 2015 backlog. Of the 14 editors who signed up, nine editors completed 29 articles. Barnstars and rollover totals are located here. Thanks to all who took part.

January drive: The January drive was a great success. We set out to remove December 2015 and January and February 2016 from our backlog (195 articles), and by 22 January we had cleared those and had to add a third month (March 2016). At the end of the month we had almost cleared out that last month as well, for a total of 180 old articles removed from the backlog! We reduced our overall backlog by 337 articles, to a low of 1,465 articles, our second-lowest month-end total ever. We also handled all of the remaining requests from December 2016. Officially, 19 editors recorded 337 copy edits (over 679,000 words).

February blitz: The one-week February blitz, focusing on the remaining March 2016 backlog and January 2017 requests, ran from 12 to 18 February. Seven editors reduced the total in those two backlog segments from 32 to 10 articles, leaving us in good shape going in to the March drive.

Coordinator elections for the first half of 2017: In December, coordinators for the first half of 2017 were elected. Jonesey95 stepped aside as lead coordinator, remaining as coordinator and allowing Miniapolis to be the lead, and Tdslk and Corinne returned as coordinators. Thanks to all who participated!

Speaking of coordinators, congratulations to Jonesey95 on their well-deserved induction into the Guild of Copy Editors Hall of Fame. The plaque reads: "For dedicated service as lead coordinator (2014, 1 July – 31 December 2015 and all of 2016) and coordinator (1 January – 30 June 2015 and 1 January – 30 June 2017); exceptional template-creation work (considerably streamlining project administration), and their emphasis on keeping the GOCE a drama-free zone."

Housekeeping note: We do not send a newsletter before every drive or blitz. To have a better chance of knowing when the next event will start, add the GOCE's message box to your watchlist.

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators: Miniapolis, Jonesey95, Corinne and Tdslk.

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

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:20, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Drew.ward. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors December 2017 News[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors December 2017 News
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Copyeditors progress.png

Hello copy editors! Welcome to the December 2017 GOCE newsletter, which contains nine months(!) of updates. The Guild has been busy and successful; your diligent efforts in 2017 has brought the backlog of articles requiring copy edit to below 1,000 articles for the first time. Thanks to all editors who have contributed their time and energy to help make this happen.

Our copy-editing drives (month-long backlog-reduction drives held in odd-numbered months) and blitzes (week-long themed editing in even-numbered months) have been very successful this year.

March drive: We set out to remove April, May, and June 2016 from our backlog and all February 2017 Requests (a total of 304 articles). By the end of the month, all but 22 of these articles were cleared. Officially, of the 28 who signed up, 22 editors recorded 257 copy edits (439,952 words). (These numbers do not always make sense when you compare them to the overall reduction in the backlog, because not all editors record every copy edit on the drive page.)

April blitz: This one-week copy-editing blitz ran from 16 through 22 April; the theme was Requests. Of the 15 who signed up, 9 editors completed 43 articles (81,822 words).

May drive: The goals were to remove July, August, and September 2016 from the backlog and to complete all March 2017 Requests (a total of 300 articles). By the end of the month, we had reduced our overall backlog to an all-time low of 1,388 articles. Of the 28 who signed up, 17 editors completed 187 articles (321,810 words).

June blitz: This one-week copy-editing blitz ran from 18 through 24 June; the theme was Requests. Of the 16 who signed up, 9 editors completed 28 copy edits (117,089 words).

2017 Coordinator elections: In June, coordinators for the second half of 2017 were elected. Jonesey95 moved back into the lead coordinator position, with Miniapolis stepping down to remain as coordinator; Tdslk and Corinne returned as coordinators, and Keira1996 rejoined after an extended absence. Thanks to all who participated!

July drive: We set out to remove August, September, October, and November 2016 from the backlog and to complete all May and June 2017 Requests (a total of 242 articles). The drive was an enormous success, and the target was nearly achieved within three weeks, so that December 2016 was added to the "old articles" list used as a goal for the drive. By the end of the month, only three articles from 2016 remained, and for the second drive in a row, the backlog was reduced to a new all-time low, this time to 1,363 articles. Of the 33 who signed up, 21 editors completed 337 articles (556,482 words).

August blitz: This one-week copy-editing blitz ran from 20 through 26 August; the theme was biographical articles tagged for copy editing for more than six months (47 articles). Of the 13 who signed up, 11 editors completed 38 copy edits (42,589 words).

September drive: The goals were to remove January, February, and March 2017 from the backlog and to complete all August 2017 Requests (a total of 338 articles). Of the 19 who signed up, 14 editors completed 121 copy edits (267,227 words).

October blitz: This one-week copy-editing blitz ran from 22 through 28 October; the theme was Requests. Of the 14 who signed up, 8 editors completed 20 articles (55,642 words).

November drive: We set out again to remove January, February, and March 2017 from the backlog and to complete all October 2017 Requests (a total of 207 articles). By the end of the month, these goals were reached and the backlog shrank to its lowest total ever, 997 articles, the first time it had fallen under one thousand (click on the graph above to see this amazing feat in graphical form). It was also the first time that the oldest copy-edit tag was less than eight months old. Of the 25 who signed up, 16 editors completed 159 articles (285,929 words).

2018 Coordinator elections: Voting is open for the election of coordinators for the first half of 2018. Please visit the election page to vote between now and December 31 at 23:59 (UTC). Thanks for participating!

Housekeeping note: We do not send a newsletter before (or after) every drive or blitz. To have a better chance of knowing when the next event will start, add the GOCE's message box to your watchlist.

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators: Jonesey95, Miniapolis, Corinne, Tdslk, and Keira1996.

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

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:04, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

GOCE February 2018 news[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors February 2018 News
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Copyeditors progress.png

Welcome to the February 2018 GOCE newsletter in which you will find Guild updates since the December edition. We got to a great start for the year, holding the backlog at nine months. 100 requests were submitted in the first 6 weeks of the year and were swiftly handled with an average completion time of 9 days.

Coordinator elections: In December, coordinators for the first half of 2018 were elected. Jonesey95 remained as lead coordinator and Corrine, Miniapolis and Tdslk as assistant coordinators. Keira1996 stepped down as assistant coordinator and was replaced by Reidgreg. Thanks to all who participated!

End of year reports were prepared for 2016 and 2017, providing a detailed look at the Guild's long-term progress.

January drive: We set out to remove April, May, and June 2017 from our backlog and all December 2017 Requests (a total of 275 articles). As with previous years, the January drive was an outstanding success and by the end of the month all but 57 of these articles were cleared. Officially, of the 38 who signed up, 21 editors recorded 259 copy edits (490,256 words).

February blitz: This one-week copy-editing blitz ran from 11 through 17 February, focusing on Requests and the last articles tagged in May 2017. At the end of the week there were only 14 pending requests, with none older than 20 days. Of the 11 who signed up, 10 editors completed 35 copy edits (98,538 words).

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators: Jonesey95, Miniapolis, Corinne, Tdslk, and Reidgreg.

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

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:00, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

June 2018 GOCE newsletter[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors June 2018 News
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Copyeditors progress.png

Welcome to the June 2018 GOCE newsletter, in which you will find Guild updates since the February edition. Progress continues to be made on the copyediting backlog, which has been reduced to 7 months and reached a new all-time low. Requests continue to be handled efficiently this year, with 272 completed by the end of May (an average completion time of 10.5 days). Fewer than 10% of these waited longer than 20 days, and the longest wait time was 29 days.

Wikipedia in general, and the Guild in particular, experienced a deep loss with the death on 20 March of Corinne. Corinne (a GOCE coordinator since 1 July 2016) was a tireless aide on the requests page, and her peerless copyediting is a part of innumerable GAs and FAs. Her good cheer, courtesy and tact are very much missed.

March drive: The goal was to remove June, July and August 2017 from our backlog and all February 2018 Requests (a total of 219 articles). This drive was an outstanding success, and by the end of the month all but eight of these articles were cleared. Of the 33 editors who signed up, 19 recorded 277 copy edits (425,758 words).

April blitz: This one-week copy-editing blitz ran from 15 through 21 April, focusing on Requests and the last eight articles tagged in August 2017. At the end of the week there were only 17 pending requests, with none older than 17 days. Of the nine editors who signed up, eight editors completed 22 copy edits (62,412 words).

May drive: We set out to remove September, October and November 2017 from our backlog and all April 2018 Requests (a total of 298 articles). There was great success this month with the backlog more than halved from 1,449 articles at the beginning of the month to a record low of 716 articles. Officially, of the 20 who signed up, 15 editors recorded 151 copy edits (248,813 words).

Coordinator elections: It's election time again. Nominations for Guild coordinators (who will serve a six-month term for the second half of 2018) have begun, and will close at 23:59 UTC on 15 June. All Wikipedia editors in good standing are eligible, and self-nominations are encouraged. Voting will take place between 00:01 UTC on 16 June and 23:59 UTC on 30 June.

June blitz: Stay tuned for this one-week copy-editing blitz, which will take place in mid-June.

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators: Corinne, Jonesey95, Miniapolis, Reidgreg and Tdslk.

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

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:26, 5 June 2018 (UTC)