User talk: Jonas Vinther

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


Kursk[edit]

Thanks for the heads up. I will try to contribute (if I can). Cheers MisterBee1966 (talk) 11:41, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Linking to copyright works[edit]

It's okay to link to copyright works, but not if the link is to a copyvio version of the material. The YourTube material about Heydrich is the property of The History Channel, but it was not uploaded there by them but by someone else, and hence is a copyright violation. Please see WP:COPYLINK for more information on this topic. Thanks, -- Diannaa (talk) 21:37, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Diannaa, to be honest, I was well aware the link to the YouTube video was a copyright violation, but decided to add it anyway because I felt the specific attribution would make the article better and because the video was uploaded in 2013 and yet no takedown notice has been given to YouTube, meaning The History Channel properly didn't deem this small clip to be of any relevance or real importance. Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 16:37, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
I understand your thinking, but we have to take it down anyway. Sorry, -- Diannaa (talk) 16:49, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
I know. Admire your diligence. Best, Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 16:56, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

List of people killed or wounded in the 20 July plot[edit]

I left a few comments MisterBee1966 (talk) 07:07, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

MisterBee1966, thank you very much! All very useful comments, will implement them sofort :) Jonas Vinther • (Click here to collect your price!) 14:13, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
Moved to support, you may wish to address the missing alt text issue. I also still think that the article should start with a few sentences addressing the main topic of the article first. But this is your call MisterBee1966 (talk) 14:46, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for that, although what does "alt text issue" refer to in plain English? Jonas Vinther • (Click here to collect your price!) 14:48, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
I will add an example and you need to do the same for every image in the article. MisterBee1966 (talk) 14:52, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
Have a look at Hermann Fegelein's image. It now includes the mandated alt text MisterBee1966 (talk) 14:56, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
I understand now. That being said, why in the world is alt text wanted on any articles? What good are they doing? Jonas Vinther • (Click here to collect your price!) 14:59, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
Alt text is a brief narrative which should help the visually impaired understand the article better. It is written for automated screen readers. Wikipedia requires this for featured articles and lists because higher rated articles must follow the requirements for barrier free content. MisterBee1966 (talk) 15:02, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── What was that all about, "This candidate has been withdrawn" ??? The list was making good progress until just now! Why did you withdraw prematurely? MisterBee1966 (talk) 13:31, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm done trying to promote list to featured status, my time is better spent elsewhere. Jonas Vinther • (Click here to collect your price!) 15:08, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
I am sorry to see this happen; it did not need much more, really. Anyway, Jonas, try to relax and reflect. Kierzek (talk) 19:21, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

June 2015[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Schutzstaffel may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • SVG1.1.svg|16px|Runic "ᛋᛋ"]] with stylized "[[Armanen runes|Armanen]]" [[Sig (rune)|''sig'' runes]]) was a major [[paramilitary]] organization under [[Adolf Hitler]] and the [[Nazi Party]] (NSDAP).

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:06, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Battle of Kursk[edit]

Thanks for your help on the GA review for Kursk. It looks like we've dealt with all the issues you've pointed out so far, and I'm ready to proceed. Once again, thanks for your time. GeneralizationsAreBad (talk) 22:12, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. I'll continue the review tomorrow. :) Jonas Vinther • (Click here to collect your price!) 22:24, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm a bastard, deal with it![edit]

Million award logo.svg The Million Award
For bringing Sleight of hand (estimated annual readership: 900,000) to Good Article status, I hereby present myself the Million Award. Jonas Vinther • (Click here to collect your price!) 20:45, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:French theatrical release poster of The Lives of a Bengal Lancer.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:French theatrical release poster of The Lives of a Bengal Lancer.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently 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. --B-bot (talk) 02:20, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Leni Riefenstahl[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Leni Riefenstahl you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Maile66 -- Maile66 (talk) 19:00, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Please see the review template. We need to clear up the rights question of the photo of Leni and her brother. — Maile (talk) 21:55, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
I replied on Commons. Jonas Vinther • (Click here to collect your price!) 22:05, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

GA Cup[edit]

WikiProject Good Articles's 2015 GA Cup - June 2015
Symbol support vote.svg

Welcome to the GA Cup! In less than 72 hours, the competition will begin! Before you all start reviewing nominations and reassessments we want to make sure you understand the following:

  • This is a friendly competition so we don't want any cheating/breaking of the rules. However, if you do believe someone is going against the rules, notify the judges. All the rules are listed here.
  • If you are a new editor or new to reviewing Good article nominations, it is imperative that you read the 4 essays/guides listed under FAQ #4. If you do not understand something, ask a judge for clarification ASAP!
  • The competition is not entirely about who can review the most nominations. Per the "Scoring" page, there is different criteria in which you can earn more points. Theoretically, you could review 10 nominations and have 80 points but another user could have reviewed 5 nominations and have 100 points. Yes, we want you to review as many nominations as you can as this will greatly increase the number of points you earn, but you must also keep in mind that every single review will be looked over by a judge. If we find that you are "rubber-stamping" (in other words, the review is not complete but you still passed/failed the article) you may be disqualified without warning. The same applies with reassessments. If you just say that the article should be delisted or kept with no explanation, points will not be awarded.
  • Remember, to submit Good article reviews and reassessments on your submissions page (Some of you have not created your submissions page yet. Only reviews/reassessments submitted on your submissions page can earn points. If you participated in the 2014-2015 GA Cup, you still need to re-create your submissions page.). Detailed instructions on how to submit reviews and reassessments can be found under the "Submissions" page. Ask a judge if you need clarification.

Also, rather than creating a long list on what to remember, make sure you have read the "Scoring", "Submissions", and "FAQ" pages.

Now some of you are probably wondering how on earth the rounds will work.

The rounds will work in a similar fashion as the previous competition, with the exception of the first round. Round 1 will have everyone compete in one big pool. Depending on the final number of participants after sign-ups close, a to-be-determined number of participants will move on (highest scorers will move on) to Round 2. We guarantee that the top 15 will move on (this number may change), so make sure you aim for those top positions! Moving on to Round 2, participants will be split into pools. The pools will be determined by a computer program that places participants by random. More details regarding Round 2 will be sent out at the end of Round 1.

It is important to note that the GA Cup will run on UTC time, so make sure you know what time that is for where you live! On that note, the GA Cup will start on July 1 at 0:00:01 UTC; Round 1 will end on July 29 at 23:59:59 UTC; Round 2 will commence on August 1 at 0:00:01 UTC. All reviews must be started after or on the start time of the round. If you qualify for Round 2 but do not complete a review before the end of Round 1, the review can be carried over to Round 2; however that review will not count for Round 1. Prior to the start of the the second round, participants who qualify to move on will be notified.

Finally, if you know anyone else that might be interesting in participating, let them know! Sign-ups close on July 15 so there is still plenty of time to join in on the action!

If you have any further questions, contact one of the judges or leave a message here.

After sign-ups close, check the Pools page as we will post the exact number of participants that will move on to the next round. Because this number will be determined past the halfway mark of Round 1, we encourage you to aim to be in the top 15 as the top 15 at the end of the round are guaranteed to move on.

Cheers from 3family6, Dom497, Figureskatingfan, Jaguar and MrWooHoo.

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.

--Dom497 (talk) 00:42, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Wigger[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Wigger has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Article appears to be coat rack and synthesis. Renominating since no noticeable improvement since last AfD in 2010

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Nowa (talk) 13:54, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Your GA reviews[edit]

Just an FYI, quick passing/failing reviews is worth 0 points for the GA cup and is generally frowned upon. You might want to read over Wikipedia:Reviewing good articles again. Happy reviewing! Winner 42 Talk to me! 02:13, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Winner 42, if you deem it important enough, read the message I left for Jaguar and Christine (Figureskatingfan) in the section down below. Jonas Vinther • (Click here to collect your price!) 17:17, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

GA Cup[edit]

Jonas,

I just checked your entries to the GA Cup, and unfortunately had to award you 0 points, since none of your reviews were properly conducted. One of them, Talk:Great Depression/GA1, you submitted to GAC yourself, which although isn't a violation of the rules, doesn't follow the spirit of the rules. I direct your attention to the GA Cup rules (Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/GA Cup/Scoring), which state: "Short reviews are not allowed; quick fails and very short reviews will not be awarded points. No review shorter than 1000 characters will be considered, though the judges reserve the right to remove other short reviews. Exceptions can be made at the sole discretion of the judge; based on the "Scoring" section above. If the judges deem that a competitor is passing articles just for the purpose of racking up points, the review will be removed and the competitor may be disqualified." Also, please look at the Quick fails and Quick passing sections on the Scoring page. I also refer you User:Dom497/GA Reviews, another judge's review of two of the reviews you submitted to the GA Cup for further explanation.

I also wanted to tell you that if you continue to violate both the spirit and intent of the GA Cup rules, the judges will disqualify you. Just like last competition, when you pulled similar things simply to chalk up your points, this kind of behavior will not be tolerated. The intent of the GA Cup is, I remind you, two-fold: to help fellow editors improve their articles, and to have fun. Your behavior does neither. Quick passing or quick failing articles does nothing to improve them, and your behavior has the potential to ruin the fun for everyone else. Again, if it continues, you will be disqualified. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 04:28, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Seems this is not worth my time. Could you withdraw me Christine (Figureskatingfan)? Cheers, Jonas Vinther • (Click here to collect your price!) 10:04, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Are you sure you want to withdraw? I think you can still compete as long as your reviews turn into something much more comprehensive, as of all, one of the GA Cup's motives are to decrease backlog as well as having fun... JAGUAR  10:52, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Jaguar and Christine (Figureskatingfan), this is not the first time my review during the GA-Cup has been the subject of discussions. I've reviewed 51 Good Article Nominations and written more than 27 Good Articles. In short, I know what is a Good Article and what is not! I'm not going to allow myself to be tutored on how to "properly" review an article; I do it the way I deem best and efficient which, besides the GA-Cup, have only been met with gratefulness. Also, demanding that users forcefully make their review long when it isn't necessary at all is extremely counterproductive. In this case, I've deliberately only chosen articles I knew was either a quick pass or quick fails, precisely because it's the GA-Cup. If this is considered "against the rules", then yes, I would very much like to withdraw. Jonas Vinther • (Click here to collect your price!) 17:12, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
The fact that you have chosen articles that would be quick passes or quick fails tells me you haven't even looked at the scoring page...--Dom497 (talk) 17:57, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Quite right, I haven't; I just wanted to review a lot of good article nominations. Jonas Vinther • (Click here to collect your price!) 18:08, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Why on earth would you participate if you don't even know what the rules are? We wouldn't be having this discussion if you had read the rules (I didn't send you the newsletter above just because I had nothing better to do with my time).--Dom497 (talk) 18:24, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
I participated in the first GA-Cup where I did read the rules. I assumed the rules were the same as the first cup so I didn't re-check the help and info pages relating to the cup. Jonas Vinther • (Click here to collect your price!) 19:08, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Hmmm....what about this?--Dom497 (talk) 19:36, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Misreading/misunderstanding on my part. Jonas Vinther • (Click here to collect your price!) 20:49, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Jonas, I have withdrawn you from the competition as per your request. You may know what a GA is, but you seem to lack a basic understanding of what the GA Cup is, even though it's been explained to you over and over. Actually, the rule about reviews needing to be longer than 1000 characters is something we took from the WikiCup, probably to prevent the kind of thing you've tried to do here. If you had a problem with this rule, it would've been so much more constructive to express your opinion before we started this competition, and you wouldn't have wasted our time with your outbursts. I don't believe you when you say that you review an article in the most efficient way possible; this review certainly wasn't efficient, but it is helpful and exactly what we're looking for.

What I don't understand is your instance to circumvent our scoring rules. It's just a competition. The important thing is that we improve articles and help others do so as well, and to have fun. It's not about racking up as many points as you can, or even about winning. Yes, you participated in the first GA Cup, but you were driven away for exactly the same reasons as this one. I don't understand what the big deal is about; why it's so important to win at all costs, even if it's destructive. You're welcome to participate the next time, but it's my hope that you have fun and work within the confines of what we're trying to accomplish, which is important and makes a difference here. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 21:44, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Julius Schreck[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Julius Schreck you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zwerg Nase -- Zwerg Nase (talk) 09:00, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Salon Kitty[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Salon Kitty you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zwerg Nase -- Zwerg Nase (talk) 09:00, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Julius Schaub[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Julius Schaub you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tomandjerry211 -- Tomandjerry211 (talk) 12:20, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject Eurovision Cup news[edit]

WikiProject Eurovision Cup
EuroCup News
Project Eurovision Cup.png


Dear Project Member

The winner of the second Project Eurovision Cup is Moldova98, who achieved a score of 54 points. Androptrnt finished in second place once again with 40 points, and Sims2aholic8 in third with 16 points.

The third edition has begun and will run from 1 July to 30 September, allowing participants a reasonable amount of time to have their articles which they may have nominated for GA or FA status, to be reviewed. The aim of the competition is to help improve many of the articles within Project Eurovision that would have been otherwise left neglected, by carrying out as many objectives as possible. The more objectives you do, the more points you will earn. So have you got what it takes to be crowned winner of the next Project Eurovision Cup? Project members who wish to participate can now register or de-register at any time by clicking here.

The Project Cup judges, Wesley Mouse and CT Cooper, wish you all the best of luck.

This notice was delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk), on behalf of WikiProject Eurovision at 13:57, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Julius Schaub[edit]

The article Julius Schaub you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Julius Schaub for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tomandjerry211 -- Tomandjerry211 (talk) 23:21, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Salon Kitty[edit]

The article Salon Kitty you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold Symbol wait.svg. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Salon Kitty for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zwerg Nase -- Zwerg Nase (talk) 16:00, 2 July 2015 (UTC)