Round 1 is already over! The 64 highest scorers have progressed to round 2. Our highest scorer was
Grapple X (
submissions), again thanks mostly to a swathe of good articles on The X-Files. In second place was
Tigerboy1966 (
submissions), thanks an impressive list of did you knows about racehorses. Both scored over 400 points. Following behind with over 300 points were
Ruby2010 (
submissions),
Cwmhiraeth (
submissions),
Miyagawa (
submissions) and
Casliber (
submissions). February also saw the competition's first featured list:
List of colleges and universities in North Dakota, from
Ruby2010 (
submissions). At the other end of the scale, 11 points was enough to secure a place in this round, and some contestants with 10 points made it into the round on a tiebreaker. This is higher than the 8 points that were needed last year, but lower than the 20 points required the year before. The number of points required to progress to round 3 will be significantly higher.
The remaining contestants have been split into 8 pools of 8, named A through H. Round two will finish in two months time on 28 April, when the two highest scorers in each pool, as well as the next 16 highest scorers, will progress to round 3. The pools were entirely random, so while some pools may end up being more competitive than others, this is by chance rather than design.
The judges would like to point out two quick rules reminders. First, any content promoted during the interim period (that is, on or after 27 February) is eligible for points in round 2. Second, any content worked on significantly this year is eligible for points if promoted in this round. On a related note, if you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which would otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, 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 receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn ( talk • email) and The ed17 ( talk • email) 00:09, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
Just wanted to check in here and confirm that if Freddie Mitchell ends up being promoted to FA, I cannot receive points for it. Correct? Eagles 24/7 (C) 00:11, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
He Andrwsc/Ed17; the template is protected so that only admins can edit. Probably this is done to avoid too many changes on a very heavily used template. I suggest thus to use a bit of restraint in editing even if you are one of the few who can edit there.... L.tak ( talk) 21:02, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
Clearly I'm "involved" here, but if you could take a look at this... - The Bushranger One ping only 22:41, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
. Ritish? British? PMG ( talk) 13:31, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for reverting my my disastrous change which truncated 33 kb from the Battleship Richelieu page. It looks like my connection must have been interrupted while transmitting the edit. NeilFraser ( talk) 16:33, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi! You indicated you'd like to help us beta-test the new MediaWiki 1.19 extension for the Education Program. Click here to get started!
Thanks, Rob SchnautZ (WMF) ( talk • contribs) 18:57, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
Hey, Ed, you might be interested on this book which has been just published. -- Lecen ( talk) 00:45, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing my word order. :D Silly little brain farts that inverse words. :D
LauraHale (
talk) 10:35, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
Take a peek here. Long story short, the idea is to morph on the volunteer side into a wikiproject which should help show the difference between the WMF and the volunteer side (and give us a chance to try to shed some of the IEP issues, and focus more on what is going right). Anyways you are more than welcome to participate in the process, in particular if you want to help write the new OA selection process go here Epistemophiliac ( talk) 00:33, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
Guild of Copy Editors March 2012 backlog elimination drive update
![]() Greetings from the
Guild of Copy Editors
March 2012 Backlog elimination drive! Here's the mid-drive newsletter. Participation: We have had 58 people sign up for this drive so far, which compares favorably with our last drive, and 27 have copy-edited at least one article. If you have signed up but have not yet copy-edited any articles, please consider doing so. Every bit helps! If you haven't signed up yet, it's not too late. Join us! Progress report: Our target of completing the 2010 articles has almost been reached, with only 56 remaining of the 194 we had at the start of the drive. The last ones are always the most difficult, so thank you if you are able to help copy-edit any of the remaining articles. We have reduced the total backlog by 163 articles so far. Special thanks: Special thanks to Stfg, who has been going through the backlog and doing some preliminary vetting of the articles—removing copyright violations, doing initial clean-up, and nominating some for deletion. This work has helped make the drive a more pleasant experience for all our volunteers. Your drive coordinators – Dianna ( talk), Stfg ( talk), and Dank ( talk)To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. |
Please see Wikipedia_talk:WikiCup#Gemma_McCluskie_DYK AndyTheGrump ( talk) 17:03, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Regarding this, you'll have to change "Start" to "Really start" at User:EdwardsBot/Status in order to bypass the bot's database replication lag protections. However, these users will not be delivered to with the bot, as the bot is only aware of the links on that page as of a few days ago (due to the lag). Hope that helps. -- MZMcBride ( talk) 20:24, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
|
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
Ed
[talk]
[majestic titan] 02:45, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
I thought this was a bit harsh. He started articles on a well chosen trio of Chicago public housing projects that I would never have even known about without his effort. I thought he deserved credit for writing about them. Yngvadottir ( talk) 15:25, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
![]() |
GLAM-Wiki Online Volunteer |
Hi Ed! Thank you for signing up as an Online Volunteer on the new GLAM-Wiki US portal. It's very helpful to have a solid list of interested Wikipedians willing to assist cultural institutions - and as we promote this portal over the coming months it will become even more important! I appreciate it! LoriLee ( talk) 13:34, 28 March 2012 (UTC) |
Hi Ed! I noticed that you tried to foster a collaboration with the German "Portal Diskussion:Militär". One German editor expressed his concerns regarding my work on the English Wikipedia and therefore believes that a collaboration to be devastating. I always believed to have worked in accordance to the rules here on the English Wikipedia but for sure my doing cannot be considered error free. If it helps the project and/or eases collaboration with the German community I have no emotional problems with handing in the awards presented to me, down-rating of the articles I worked on, and even resigning is not out of the question. I cannot deny that my personal interest lies in the Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross, its recipients, and all its facets from a propaganda point of view to the individual bravery it required to earn the distinction. I follow the discussions on the German Wikipedia often but passively. The level of personal abuse around this topic is so excessive on the German Wikipedia. I don't want to be a focal point for such abuse or personal insult. I value the open, honest and constructive discussions we have established here in our review processes. As indicated, if it helps the collective objective here I gladly resign. Thanks for listening MisterBee1966 ( talk) 09:41, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
Hello Ed, after waiting a while if there are any more reactions for supporting a collaboration between the two projects in en:Wiki and de:Wiki it seems to me that sadly there isn't any real interest in such a grouping together. On the other hand this can (maybe) be good because it keeps all the "Political POV-Warriors" from discovering the en:Wiki Project as a battleground. Best regards -- Bomzibar ( talk) 13:05, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
How do you feel about this claiming points? I am not sure I feel that this review is an appropriate one for the article in question. J Milburn ( talk) 13:55, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
...you want to make before the next newsletter goes out? J Milburn ( talk) 16:36, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
We are over half way through the second round of this year's WikiCup and things are going well!
Grapple X (
submissions), of Pool B, is our highest overall scorer thanks to his prolific writings on television and film. In second place is Pool H's
Cwmhiraeth (
submissions), thanks primarily to work on biological articles, especially in
marine biology and
herpetology. Third place goes to Pool E's
Casliber (
submissions), who also writes primarily on biology (including
ornithology and
botany) and has already submitted two featured articles this round. Of the 63 contestants remaining, 15 (just under a quarter) have over 100 points this round. However, 25 are yet to score. Please remember to update your submission pages promptly. 32 contestants, the top two from each pool and the 16 next-highest scorers, will advance to round 3.
Congratulations to
Matthewedwards (
submissions), whose impressive
File:Wacht am Rhein map (Opaque).svg became the competition's first featured picture. Also, congratulations to
12george1 (
submissions), who claimed good topic points, our first contestant this year to do so, for his work on
Wikipedia:Featured topics/1982 Atlantic hurricane season. This leaves featured topics and featured portals as the only sources of points not yet utilised. However, as
recent statistics from
Miyagawa (
submissions) show, no source has yet been utilised this competition to the same extent it has been previously!
It has been observed that the backlogs at good article candidates are building up again. While the points for good article reviews will be remaining constant, any help that can be offered keeping the backlog down would be appreciated. On a related note, if you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. As ever, 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 receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn ( talk • email) and The ed17 ( talk • email) 23:29, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
Round 1 is already over! The 64 highest scorers have progressed to round 2. Our highest scorer was
Grapple X (
submissions), again thanks mostly to a swathe of good articles on The X-Files. In second place was
Tigerboy1966 (
submissions), thanks an impressive list of did you knows about racehorses. Both scored over 400 points. Following behind with over 300 points were
Ruby2010 (
submissions),
Cwmhiraeth (
submissions),
Miyagawa (
submissions) and
Casliber (
submissions). February also saw the competition's first featured list:
List of colleges and universities in North Dakota, from
Ruby2010 (
submissions). At the other end of the scale, 11 points was enough to secure a place in this round, and some contestants with 10 points made it into the round on a tiebreaker. This is higher than the 8 points that were needed last year, but lower than the 20 points required the year before. The number of points required to progress to round 3 will be significantly higher.
The remaining contestants have been split into 8 pools of 8, named A through H. Round two will finish in two months time on 28 April, when the two highest scorers in each pool, as well as the next 16 highest scorers, will progress to round 3. The pools were entirely random, so while some pools may end up being more competitive than others, this is by chance rather than design.
The judges would like to point out two quick rules reminders. First, any content promoted during the interim period (that is, on or after 27 February) is eligible for points in round 2. Second, any content worked on significantly this year is eligible for points if promoted in this round. On a related note, if you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which would otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, 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 receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn ( talk • email) and The ed17 ( talk • email) 00:09, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
Just wanted to check in here and confirm that if Freddie Mitchell ends up being promoted to FA, I cannot receive points for it. Correct? Eagles 24/7 (C) 00:11, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
|
He Andrwsc/Ed17; the template is protected so that only admins can edit. Probably this is done to avoid too many changes on a very heavily used template. I suggest thus to use a bit of restraint in editing even if you are one of the few who can edit there.... L.tak ( talk) 21:02, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
Clearly I'm "involved" here, but if you could take a look at this... - The Bushranger One ping only 22:41, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
. Ritish? British? PMG ( talk) 13:31, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for reverting my my disastrous change which truncated 33 kb from the Battleship Richelieu page. It looks like my connection must have been interrupted while transmitting the edit. NeilFraser ( talk) 16:33, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi! You indicated you'd like to help us beta-test the new MediaWiki 1.19 extension for the Education Program. Click here to get started!
Thanks, Rob SchnautZ (WMF) ( talk • contribs) 18:57, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
Hey, Ed, you might be interested on this book which has been just published. -- Lecen ( talk) 00:45, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing my word order. :D Silly little brain farts that inverse words. :D
LauraHale (
talk) 10:35, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
Take a peek here. Long story short, the idea is to morph on the volunteer side into a wikiproject which should help show the difference between the WMF and the volunteer side (and give us a chance to try to shed some of the IEP issues, and focus more on what is going right). Anyways you are more than welcome to participate in the process, in particular if you want to help write the new OA selection process go here Epistemophiliac ( talk) 00:33, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
Guild of Copy Editors March 2012 backlog elimination drive update
![]() Greetings from the
Guild of Copy Editors
March 2012 Backlog elimination drive! Here's the mid-drive newsletter. Participation: We have had 58 people sign up for this drive so far, which compares favorably with our last drive, and 27 have copy-edited at least one article. If you have signed up but have not yet copy-edited any articles, please consider doing so. Every bit helps! If you haven't signed up yet, it's not too late. Join us! Progress report: Our target of completing the 2010 articles has almost been reached, with only 56 remaining of the 194 we had at the start of the drive. The last ones are always the most difficult, so thank you if you are able to help copy-edit any of the remaining articles. We have reduced the total backlog by 163 articles so far. Special thanks: Special thanks to Stfg, who has been going through the backlog and doing some preliminary vetting of the articles—removing copyright violations, doing initial clean-up, and nominating some for deletion. This work has helped make the drive a more pleasant experience for all our volunteers. Your drive coordinators – Dianna ( talk), Stfg ( talk), and Dank ( talk)To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. |
Please see Wikipedia_talk:WikiCup#Gemma_McCluskie_DYK AndyTheGrump ( talk) 17:03, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Regarding this, you'll have to change "Start" to "Really start" at User:EdwardsBot/Status in order to bypass the bot's database replication lag protections. However, these users will not be delivered to with the bot, as the bot is only aware of the links on that page as of a few days ago (due to the lag). Hope that helps. -- MZMcBride ( talk) 20:24, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
|
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
Ed
[talk]
[majestic titan] 02:45, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
I thought this was a bit harsh. He started articles on a well chosen trio of Chicago public housing projects that I would never have even known about without his effort. I thought he deserved credit for writing about them. Yngvadottir ( talk) 15:25, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
![]() |
GLAM-Wiki Online Volunteer |
Hi Ed! Thank you for signing up as an Online Volunteer on the new GLAM-Wiki US portal. It's very helpful to have a solid list of interested Wikipedians willing to assist cultural institutions - and as we promote this portal over the coming months it will become even more important! I appreciate it! LoriLee ( talk) 13:34, 28 March 2012 (UTC) |
Hi Ed! I noticed that you tried to foster a collaboration with the German "Portal Diskussion:Militär". One German editor expressed his concerns regarding my work on the English Wikipedia and therefore believes that a collaboration to be devastating. I always believed to have worked in accordance to the rules here on the English Wikipedia but for sure my doing cannot be considered error free. If it helps the project and/or eases collaboration with the German community I have no emotional problems with handing in the awards presented to me, down-rating of the articles I worked on, and even resigning is not out of the question. I cannot deny that my personal interest lies in the Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross, its recipients, and all its facets from a propaganda point of view to the individual bravery it required to earn the distinction. I follow the discussions on the German Wikipedia often but passively. The level of personal abuse around this topic is so excessive on the German Wikipedia. I don't want to be a focal point for such abuse or personal insult. I value the open, honest and constructive discussions we have established here in our review processes. As indicated, if it helps the collective objective here I gladly resign. Thanks for listening MisterBee1966 ( talk) 09:41, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
Hello Ed, after waiting a while if there are any more reactions for supporting a collaboration between the two projects in en:Wiki and de:Wiki it seems to me that sadly there isn't any real interest in such a grouping together. On the other hand this can (maybe) be good because it keeps all the "Political POV-Warriors" from discovering the en:Wiki Project as a battleground. Best regards -- Bomzibar ( talk) 13:05, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
How do you feel about this claiming points? I am not sure I feel that this review is an appropriate one for the article in question. J Milburn ( talk) 13:55, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
...you want to make before the next newsletter goes out? J Milburn ( talk) 16:36, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
We are over half way through the second round of this year's WikiCup and things are going well!
Grapple X (
submissions), of Pool B, is our highest overall scorer thanks to his prolific writings on television and film. In second place is Pool H's
Cwmhiraeth (
submissions), thanks primarily to work on biological articles, especially in
marine biology and
herpetology. Third place goes to Pool E's
Casliber (
submissions), who also writes primarily on biology (including
ornithology and
botany) and has already submitted two featured articles this round. Of the 63 contestants remaining, 15 (just under a quarter) have over 100 points this round. However, 25 are yet to score. Please remember to update your submission pages promptly. 32 contestants, the top two from each pool and the 16 next-highest scorers, will advance to round 3.
Congratulations to
Matthewedwards (
submissions), whose impressive
File:Wacht am Rhein map (Opaque).svg became the competition's first featured picture. Also, congratulations to
12george1 (
submissions), who claimed good topic points, our first contestant this year to do so, for his work on
Wikipedia:Featured topics/1982 Atlantic hurricane season. This leaves featured topics and featured portals as the only sources of points not yet utilised. However, as
recent statistics from
Miyagawa (
submissions) show, no source has yet been utilised this competition to the same extent it has been previously!
It has been observed that the backlogs at good article candidates are building up again. While the points for good article reviews will be remaining constant, any help that can be offered keeping the backlog down would be appreciated. On a related note, if you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. As ever, 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 receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn ( talk • email) and The ed17 ( talk • email) 23:29, 31 March 2012 (UTC)