The Wikicup page says that May 1 is a milestone for this year's Wikicup competition. Would you and Milburn be willing to write a brief update about the competition for The May 6th Signpost FC report? -- Pine ✉ 07:58, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
Even if too late for this edition, take a look this draft. I did a compact version of the Top 25, making it a Top 10, and found it not very difficult to do. Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2013-04-29/Article_Popularity_Report.-- Milowent • has spoken 19:01, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
Re our earlier conversation, I am working on something, but realistically it will be for the first Signpost in July rather than June, as I have a lot of stuff going on at the moment, and need more time for research. I'll drop you a note later, when I am a little more advanced. Brianboulton ( talk) 10:27, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
Whenever you get a chance, I'd appreciate it if you could see if the images that I swapped out for the problematic ones are good to go in the Saratoga review.-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 02:22, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
As far as I am aware there is no other theatre with such a title, so I am just wondering why you tacked on "of World War II" to the end of the article? Regards EnigmaMcmxc ( talk) 02:23, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
I have started a conversation about the changes to Template:WW2InfoBox at Talk:World War II#Template:WW2InfoBox:. I personally dont really have a problem with the changes but going to bring it up for a talk because its a big change and the fact UrbanNerd nor you have started a conversation about this since the reversals. UrbanNerd has a reputation of editwaring and insulting people and I dont what to see this happen on such a high profile article. Lets =simply get a few others to chime in on this before it gets out of hand. Moxy ( talk) 16:39, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
We have a problem concerning who did/should have reached this current round of the WikiCup. Our lowest possibly-qualifying scorers were Wizardman (144), Sven Manguard (137, but see below), Grandiose (136) and MasterOfHisOwnDomain (123). MasterOfHisOwnDomain was the second highest scorer in a pool, so he makes it through- them's the rules. Wizardman would have been the lowest scoring fastest loser, but requested that he be withdrawn if he made it though; as such, I put Sven through. However, I have just realised that Sven actually claimed a good article review completed after the round end- I understand that there was a legitimate misunderstanding about the rules here, but I didn't catch the issue, and Sven's started this round with a relish. As such, Grandiose should have made it through to the next round. I feel Grandiose is being denied something that should be his if he is not put through, but I also feel unfair taking from Sven what has already been given, especially when he certainly was not attempting to deceive, and is very much taking part in this round. What I propose is that we make an exception and allow 65, instead of 64, to make it through to this round. One pool (I'll roll a D4) will have an extra competitor. What do you think about this? I will also notify the users I mentioned. J Milburn ( talk) 17:05, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
Great, done. I'm also sending out the most recent newsletter now. It's only a week late... J Milburn ( talk) 15:14, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ed. I was curious, have they stopped doing the interview series at The Signpost? Based on the schedule at the Interviews desk, it looks like they haven't done one in five months or so. CorporateM ( Talk) 00:25, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
My work-in-progress is at: User:CorporateM/signpost. I'll keep working on it next week. CorporateM ( Talk) 18:47, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
We are a week into Round 3, but it is off to a flying start, with
Sven Manguard (
submissions) claiming for the high-importance
Portal:Sports and
Portal:Geography (which are the first portals ever awarded bonus points in the WikiCup) and
Cwmhiraeth (
submissions) claiming for a did you know of
sea, the highest scoring individual did you know article ever submitted for the WikiCup. Round 2 saw very impressive scores at close; first place
Casliber (
submissions) and second place
Sturmvogel_66 (
submissions) both scored over 1000 points; a feat not seen in Round 2 since 2010. This, in part, has been made possible by the change in the bonus points rules, but is also testament to the quality of the competition this year. Pool C and Pool G were most competitive, with three quarters of participants making it to Round 3, while Pool D was the least, with only the top two scorers making it through. The lowest qualifying score was 123, significantly higher than last year's 65, 2011's 41 or even 2010's 100.
The next issue of The Signpost is due to include a brief update on the current WikiCup, comparing it to previous years' competitions. This may be of interest to current WikiCup followers, and may help bring some more new faces into the community. We would also like to note that this round includes an extra competitor to the 32 advertised, who has been added to a random pool. This extra inclusion seems to have been the fairest way to deal with a small mistake made before the beginning of this round, but should not affect the competition in a large way. If you have any questions or concerns about this, please feel free to contact one of the judges.
A rules clarification: content promoted between rounds can be claimed in the round after the break, but not the round before. The case in point is content promoted on 29/30 April, which may be claimed in this round. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn ( talk • email) and The ed17 ( talk • email) 15:46, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
I reverted this move See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Capital letters#Compass points. SEAC or "save our English colonies" was primarily a British Empire theatre, so it should use British English spelling. -- PBS ( talk) 19:36, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
Another subject to mention. I think you would enjoy this blog from one of the museum curators here in Newcastle. http://www.twmuseums.org.uk/engage/blog/author/ianwhitehead/ . I have then found the relevant Wikipedia article and tried to add material to it. I am explaining on this side all google searches find the Wiki article long before they find the blog. TWAMWIR ( talk) 17:45, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
-- Pine ✉ 18:30, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
|
What's going on with the issue of the Signpost presumably for May 5? I have commenced work on May 12, but am afraid it'll be out-of-date at the time of publication. Go Phightins ! 22:57, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
New TIFF uploads are now here http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:ListFiles/TWAMWIR . They are from the same set as before so the same copyright situation save one is a shipyard photo and not a postcard. I tried very hard to copy and paste the licensing information you provided. Try as I might when I cut and paste it refused to upload so I resorted to another answer which has some truth. TWAMWIR ( talk) 09:35, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
I am afraid the original postcard printer cut the lifeboats if they were ever there on the negative. Getting people to work out the folk in the picture of the launch would be an interesting challenge. An interesting Agincourt letter is now beside me. I hope to scan it. TWAMWIR ( talk) 10:49, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
FYI I've started a proposal for a drive in Jun here [3]. Was hoping to get some more co-ord opinions before I look to implement this. If you are able to have a look I would be interested in your opinion. Thanks. Anotherclown ( talk) 11:29, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Dear The ed17, you may be interested in a discussion that I've started at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article#Request for comment - images in TFA blurbs. All views welcome. Bencherlite Talk 16:29, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
On Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2013-05-06/News_and_notes - "more than US$11M in its first of operation" - first year, I assume? -- Menti fisto 04:29, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
A couple weeks ago, you closed the American Women Novelists CfD with the following result:
This decision has since been ignored in favor of splitting Category:American novelists into "men" and "women" subcategories, leaving only a handful in the parent category. As it happens, my own preference was for neither of those results, but I was willing to abide by the consensus. Am I missing some reason why it can be flouted as it apparently has been? — Shmuel ( talk) 21:07, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
And a great job you are doing too! I would imagine moving all the subpages would work just fine, so long as redirects are left in place for all of the many template inclusions. It would be worth making sure the talk page delivery bot doesn't break, too. --— Pretzels Hii! 16:21, 21 May 2013 (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
Nick-D (
talk) 13:07, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
World Digital Library Wikipedia Partnership - We need you! | |
---|---|
![]() |
Hi The ed17! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the World Digital Library, a project of the Library of Congress and UNESCO. I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about history & culture to participate in improving Wikipedia using the WDL's vast free online resources. Participants can earn our awesome WDL barnstar and help to disseminate free knowledge from over 100 libraries in 7 different languages. Please sign up to participate here. Thanks for editing Wikipedia and I look forward to working with you! SarahStierch ( talk) 20:29, 22 May 2013 (UTC) |
Why was the KFC FA nomination deleted? Farrtj ( talk) 10:16, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
Hey, I've been asked to make a judgement call on the issue raised here and here. I'm having a rather stressful time on Wikipedia at the moment for non-WikiCup reasons. If you have any thoughts on the matter, feel free to post/take action as appropriate. J Milburn ( talk) 15:09, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
I've been having a slow-motion edit war with Newzild ( talk · contribs) over some of the language in the Arizona article. Check it out and see what you think about his edits. I'm not a fan, but you may disagree.-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 16:22, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
Who made you administrator???? Periglio ( talk) 16:35, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
We've confirmed we're having the meetups on June 1 and July 6 at Minneapolis Central Library; details aren't up for the Wiknic. It'd be great to have you come, but I don't expect much of a turnout for any of the summer events, so it might not be worth your while to come to these especially if you can come to later ones. — innotata 14:21, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Can you contact the author of the book on the Alaska-class variants so we can see what changes we need to make to the article in prep for FAC like we discussed before?-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 03:08, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
Ok i will any specific article you are referring to? Koala15 ( talk) 16:04, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
Thank you Ed for resolving the issue and clarifying what significant work entailed. I had actually known about how some of this user's WikiCup submissions were questionably significant long before, but chose to stay silent until now. I didn't want to be a difficult nitpick for both you and J Milburn, but after seeing how this isn't a one-off thing, I actually went through each of his DYK submissions. I found two more ( Friedrich Wilhelm Rust and Mahango Game Park) that appear borderline, but as with last time, you make the call on their significance. Once again, thanks for all your assistance. Cheers! — Bloom6132 ( talk) 04:24, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Unfortunately I believe that User:Phead128 was unblocked prematurely. He is still being very disruptive and attacking editors. Edits like this are completely unacceptable. I would have to recommend the user be blocked again, or banned from editing. He has obviously not learnt his lesson. UrbanNerd ( talk) 00:35, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
Did you see this before you posted just now? You may have just taken the discussion at face value, but there was a lot of activity — both postings and deletions — before you gave your opinion. Klein zach 01:25, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
Here is the latest deletion of my messages by UrbanNerd : [5]. Will he start deleting messages from your talk page as well? -- Klein zach 04:51, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
My apologies too for even including those to begin with. Here's another question -- will it count if your contributions provided the basis of the DYK hook? ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 05:13, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
I saw your comment about the caption in the picture being US based. Just to let you know, I actually addressed that in the article body, noting that while we originally had a primarily US based quality article pool its evolved now to include a more global representation, singling out ships from Germany and Japan as the specific example. TomStar81 ( Talk) 05:52, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
Sorry to trouble you again Ed, but that user added 3 more DYKs ( Roholte Church, Wildlife of Haiti and Emilio Boggio) to claim WIkiCup points after my last notification. You make the call, but IMHO, those three articles don't appear to have much "significant work" put into them. This is getting pretty ridiculous – he's already placed 4 ineligible DYKs that had to be removed by you and yet he's still continuing to do this?! Isn't there a rule dealing with persistently problematic WikiCup competitors somewhere? — Bloom6132 ( talk) 21:11, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your support! :)
The Wikicup page says that May 1 is a milestone for this year's Wikicup competition. Would you and Milburn be willing to write a brief update about the competition for The May 6th Signpost FC report? -- Pine ✉ 07:58, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
Even if too late for this edition, take a look this draft. I did a compact version of the Top 25, making it a Top 10, and found it not very difficult to do. Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2013-04-29/Article_Popularity_Report.-- Milowent • has spoken 19:01, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
Re our earlier conversation, I am working on something, but realistically it will be for the first Signpost in July rather than June, as I have a lot of stuff going on at the moment, and need more time for research. I'll drop you a note later, when I am a little more advanced. Brianboulton ( talk) 10:27, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
Whenever you get a chance, I'd appreciate it if you could see if the images that I swapped out for the problematic ones are good to go in the Saratoga review.-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 02:22, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
As far as I am aware there is no other theatre with such a title, so I am just wondering why you tacked on "of World War II" to the end of the article? Regards EnigmaMcmxc ( talk) 02:23, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
I have started a conversation about the changes to Template:WW2InfoBox at Talk:World War II#Template:WW2InfoBox:. I personally dont really have a problem with the changes but going to bring it up for a talk because its a big change and the fact UrbanNerd nor you have started a conversation about this since the reversals. UrbanNerd has a reputation of editwaring and insulting people and I dont what to see this happen on such a high profile article. Lets =simply get a few others to chime in on this before it gets out of hand. Moxy ( talk) 16:39, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
We have a problem concerning who did/should have reached this current round of the WikiCup. Our lowest possibly-qualifying scorers were Wizardman (144), Sven Manguard (137, but see below), Grandiose (136) and MasterOfHisOwnDomain (123). MasterOfHisOwnDomain was the second highest scorer in a pool, so he makes it through- them's the rules. Wizardman would have been the lowest scoring fastest loser, but requested that he be withdrawn if he made it though; as such, I put Sven through. However, I have just realised that Sven actually claimed a good article review completed after the round end- I understand that there was a legitimate misunderstanding about the rules here, but I didn't catch the issue, and Sven's started this round with a relish. As such, Grandiose should have made it through to the next round. I feel Grandiose is being denied something that should be his if he is not put through, but I also feel unfair taking from Sven what has already been given, especially when he certainly was not attempting to deceive, and is very much taking part in this round. What I propose is that we make an exception and allow 65, instead of 64, to make it through to this round. One pool (I'll roll a D4) will have an extra competitor. What do you think about this? I will also notify the users I mentioned. J Milburn ( talk) 17:05, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
Great, done. I'm also sending out the most recent newsletter now. It's only a week late... J Milburn ( talk) 15:14, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ed. I was curious, have they stopped doing the interview series at The Signpost? Based on the schedule at the Interviews desk, it looks like they haven't done one in five months or so. CorporateM ( Talk) 00:25, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
My work-in-progress is at: User:CorporateM/signpost. I'll keep working on it next week. CorporateM ( Talk) 18:47, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
We are a week into Round 3, but it is off to a flying start, with
Sven Manguard (
submissions) claiming for the high-importance
Portal:Sports and
Portal:Geography (which are the first portals ever awarded bonus points in the WikiCup) and
Cwmhiraeth (
submissions) claiming for a did you know of
sea, the highest scoring individual did you know article ever submitted for the WikiCup. Round 2 saw very impressive scores at close; first place
Casliber (
submissions) and second place
Sturmvogel_66 (
submissions) both scored over 1000 points; a feat not seen in Round 2 since 2010. This, in part, has been made possible by the change in the bonus points rules, but is also testament to the quality of the competition this year. Pool C and Pool G were most competitive, with three quarters of participants making it to Round 3, while Pool D was the least, with only the top two scorers making it through. The lowest qualifying score was 123, significantly higher than last year's 65, 2011's 41 or even 2010's 100.
The next issue of The Signpost is due to include a brief update on the current WikiCup, comparing it to previous years' competitions. This may be of interest to current WikiCup followers, and may help bring some more new faces into the community. We would also like to note that this round includes an extra competitor to the 32 advertised, who has been added to a random pool. This extra inclusion seems to have been the fairest way to deal with a small mistake made before the beginning of this round, but should not affect the competition in a large way. If you have any questions or concerns about this, please feel free to contact one of the judges.
A rules clarification: content promoted between rounds can be claimed in the round after the break, but not the round before. The case in point is content promoted on 29/30 April, which may be claimed in this round. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn ( talk • email) and The ed17 ( talk • email) 15:46, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
I reverted this move See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Capital letters#Compass points. SEAC or "save our English colonies" was primarily a British Empire theatre, so it should use British English spelling. -- PBS ( talk) 19:36, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
Another subject to mention. I think you would enjoy this blog from one of the museum curators here in Newcastle. http://www.twmuseums.org.uk/engage/blog/author/ianwhitehead/ . I have then found the relevant Wikipedia article and tried to add material to it. I am explaining on this side all google searches find the Wiki article long before they find the blog. TWAMWIR ( talk) 17:45, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
-- Pine ✉ 18:30, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
|
What's going on with the issue of the Signpost presumably for May 5? I have commenced work on May 12, but am afraid it'll be out-of-date at the time of publication. Go Phightins ! 22:57, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
New TIFF uploads are now here http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:ListFiles/TWAMWIR . They are from the same set as before so the same copyright situation save one is a shipyard photo and not a postcard. I tried very hard to copy and paste the licensing information you provided. Try as I might when I cut and paste it refused to upload so I resorted to another answer which has some truth. TWAMWIR ( talk) 09:35, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
I am afraid the original postcard printer cut the lifeboats if they were ever there on the negative. Getting people to work out the folk in the picture of the launch would be an interesting challenge. An interesting Agincourt letter is now beside me. I hope to scan it. TWAMWIR ( talk) 10:49, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
FYI I've started a proposal for a drive in Jun here [3]. Was hoping to get some more co-ord opinions before I look to implement this. If you are able to have a look I would be interested in your opinion. Thanks. Anotherclown ( talk) 11:29, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Dear The ed17, you may be interested in a discussion that I've started at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article#Request for comment - images in TFA blurbs. All views welcome. Bencherlite Talk 16:29, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
On Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2013-05-06/News_and_notes - "more than US$11M in its first of operation" - first year, I assume? -- Menti fisto 04:29, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
A couple weeks ago, you closed the American Women Novelists CfD with the following result:
This decision has since been ignored in favor of splitting Category:American novelists into "men" and "women" subcategories, leaving only a handful in the parent category. As it happens, my own preference was for neither of those results, but I was willing to abide by the consensus. Am I missing some reason why it can be flouted as it apparently has been? — Shmuel ( talk) 21:07, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
And a great job you are doing too! I would imagine moving all the subpages would work just fine, so long as redirects are left in place for all of the many template inclusions. It would be worth making sure the talk page delivery bot doesn't break, too. --— Pretzels Hii! 16:21, 21 May 2013 (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
Nick-D (
talk) 13:07, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
World Digital Library Wikipedia Partnership - We need you! | |
---|---|
![]() |
Hi The ed17! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the World Digital Library, a project of the Library of Congress and UNESCO. I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about history & culture to participate in improving Wikipedia using the WDL's vast free online resources. Participants can earn our awesome WDL barnstar and help to disseminate free knowledge from over 100 libraries in 7 different languages. Please sign up to participate here. Thanks for editing Wikipedia and I look forward to working with you! SarahStierch ( talk) 20:29, 22 May 2013 (UTC) |
Why was the KFC FA nomination deleted? Farrtj ( talk) 10:16, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
Hey, I've been asked to make a judgement call on the issue raised here and here. I'm having a rather stressful time on Wikipedia at the moment for non-WikiCup reasons. If you have any thoughts on the matter, feel free to post/take action as appropriate. J Milburn ( talk) 15:09, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
I've been having a slow-motion edit war with Newzild ( talk · contribs) over some of the language in the Arizona article. Check it out and see what you think about his edits. I'm not a fan, but you may disagree.-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 16:22, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
Who made you administrator???? Periglio ( talk) 16:35, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
We've confirmed we're having the meetups on June 1 and July 6 at Minneapolis Central Library; details aren't up for the Wiknic. It'd be great to have you come, but I don't expect much of a turnout for any of the summer events, so it might not be worth your while to come to these especially if you can come to later ones. — innotata 14:21, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Can you contact the author of the book on the Alaska-class variants so we can see what changes we need to make to the article in prep for FAC like we discussed before?-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 03:08, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
Ok i will any specific article you are referring to? Koala15 ( talk) 16:04, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
Thank you Ed for resolving the issue and clarifying what significant work entailed. I had actually known about how some of this user's WikiCup submissions were questionably significant long before, but chose to stay silent until now. I didn't want to be a difficult nitpick for both you and J Milburn, but after seeing how this isn't a one-off thing, I actually went through each of his DYK submissions. I found two more ( Friedrich Wilhelm Rust and Mahango Game Park) that appear borderline, but as with last time, you make the call on their significance. Once again, thanks for all your assistance. Cheers! — Bloom6132 ( talk) 04:24, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Unfortunately I believe that User:Phead128 was unblocked prematurely. He is still being very disruptive and attacking editors. Edits like this are completely unacceptable. I would have to recommend the user be blocked again, or banned from editing. He has obviously not learnt his lesson. UrbanNerd ( talk) 00:35, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
Did you see this before you posted just now? You may have just taken the discussion at face value, but there was a lot of activity — both postings and deletions — before you gave your opinion. Klein zach 01:25, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
Here is the latest deletion of my messages by UrbanNerd : [5]. Will he start deleting messages from your talk page as well? -- Klein zach 04:51, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
My apologies too for even including those to begin with. Here's another question -- will it count if your contributions provided the basis of the DYK hook? ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 05:13, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
I saw your comment about the caption in the picture being US based. Just to let you know, I actually addressed that in the article body, noting that while we originally had a primarily US based quality article pool its evolved now to include a more global representation, singling out ships from Germany and Japan as the specific example. TomStar81 ( Talk) 05:52, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
Sorry to trouble you again Ed, but that user added 3 more DYKs ( Roholte Church, Wildlife of Haiti and Emilio Boggio) to claim WIkiCup points after my last notification. You make the call, but IMHO, those three articles don't appear to have much "significant work" put into them. This is getting pretty ridiculous – he's already placed 4 ineligible DYKs that had to be removed by you and yet he's still continuing to do this?! Isn't there a rule dealing with persistently problematic WikiCup competitors somewhere? — Bloom6132 ( talk) 21:11, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your support! :)