User talk:Miniapolis

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from User talk:Wi2g)
Jump to: navigation, search


This is the talk page for Miniapolis, who is proud to be a Wikipedia editor. Although I can be reached by email, I prefer keeping discussions on-wiki as much as possible. Due to time constraints, I no longer accept direct copyedit requests; please list articles requiring copyediting for GAN, FAC and the like on the Guild of Copy Editors request page (and consider pitching in with the GOCE, which can always use more help!). Since I take the occasional wikibreak, feel free to undo any administrative action I've taken as you see fit.
RfA candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report
RfB candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report

No RfXs since 15:28, 26 September 2016 (UTC).—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online

I IZ SERIUS ADMNIM THIZ IZ SERIUS BIZNIS lolcat.jpg


Your nice review of Austen[edit]

Following your nice review and copy edit for Jane Austen I then did submit it for FA assessment. The interest now at the current FA assessment following your nice review for it has now moved to the references and citations format with some comment that they were developed by 6 different editors over the last 7 years including the late Wadewitz. Most all of the references are formatted and serviceable to readers needs, though the formats do vary given the number of editors and years involved. Could you glance at the FA assessment to see if this is large concern and if there is a GOCE approach to the references format in use there which can be applied. Fountains-of-Paris (talk) 15:09, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

I'm looking at the FAC page now. Lingzhi's point (that WP needs a standard referencing template) is a good one, but as things stand now GANs and FACs are expected to have a consistent citation style (whatever that style is). According to WP:CITESTYLE, "Citations within any given article should (my emphasis) follow a consistent style"; what I don't like about the GA and FA processes is the large number of unwritten rules in addition to WP:GA? and WP:FA?. Although Jonesey95 has very kindly offered to help make the citations more consistent, unlike a copyedit this isn't just something you can turn over to the GOCE. If I were you, I would work with him but not expect him to do the heavy lifting; it's your nomination, not his. Sorry I can't help, but I'm busy with other things. FWIW, in my experience submitting an FAC with a deadline (in this case, the October publication date) tends to put editors off but that may be just me. Good luck and all the best, Miniapolis 19:02, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for getting back to me on this. It looks like its about 95% done now and almost there to full cite consistency for the full article. I just noticed that someone there during Talk page debate has removed your nice GOCE template review template from the Talk page announcement without first checking with you. We sort of liked your template there and it let people know the nice efforts of GOCE all around Wikipedia. Did you notice that your GOCE template announcement was removed from the Austen Talk page by someone, could you glance at this. Fountains-of-Paris (talk) 14:30, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
Since the prose doesn't seem to be the primary issue any more, there's no further need for {{GOCE}}; it's mainly to alert GA and FA reviewers that the article has already been copyedited. All the best, Miniapolis 14:51, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Copyeditor Barnstar Hires.png The Copyeditor's Barnstar
For a thorough and speedy copyedit of the Gabriel Pleydell article. The quality of your prose knows no bounds! Curlymanjaro (talk) 23:25, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
Aw, thanks; I was just going to ping you! Good luck and all the best, Miniapolis 23:31, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Miniapolis[edit]

The username caught my attention! Are you just a fan of Minneapolis, Minnesota? I just had cheese curds at the Minnesota State Fair. I hope you get a chance to check it out if you haven't ever been! -- Dane2007 talk 03:21, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I guess, because of the old Mary Tyler Moore Show and my enjoyment of cooler climates :-). No direct connection to the Twin Cities, though; the spelling is an old family joke. Glad you enjoyed the fair—one of the best things about state and county fairs (besides the agricultural stuff) is the food. All the best, Miniapolis 13:21, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Arbitration Case opened[edit]

You 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/The Rambling Man.

Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/The Rambling Man/Evidence.

Please add your evidence by September 17, 2016, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/The Rambling Man/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration.

For non-parties who wish to opt out of further notifications for this case please remove yourself from the list held here

For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:04, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

WikiProject Food and Drink Newsletter: September 2016[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:05, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 September 2016[edit]

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)

Extended confirmed protection[edit]

Padlock-blue.svg Hello, Miniapolis. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

  • Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
  • A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.
Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:48, 23 September 2016 (UTC)