Thank you and I will study the rights and responsibilities. Mugginsx ( talk) 17:14, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
Enjoy. - Dank ( push to talk) 23:15, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
I would use JSTOR mostly for articles on geology and geography: faults, basins, mountains, parks etc. I tend to focus on an article for as long as it takes to fit together as good a view as I can get from online sources, which could be two hours or two days, and then move on. Usually I just work through the sources as I come across them, fitting what they say into the article. I see a JSTOR article, wish I could use it, shrug... So I don't have a specific wishlist, but sure wish I had access. Thanks, Aymatth2 ( talk) 20:13, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
Guild of Copy Editors March 2012 backlog elimination drive
Greetings from the
Guild of Copy Editors
March 2012 Backlog elimination drive! This is the most successful drive we have had for quite a while. Here is your end-of-drive wrap-up newsletter. Participation Of the 70 people who signed up for this drive, 40 copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Special acknowledgement goes out to Lfstevens, who did over 200 articles, most of them in the last third of the drive, and topped all three leaderboard categories. You're a superstar! Stfg and others have been pre-checking the articles for quality and conformance to Wikipedia guidelines; some have been nominated for deletion or had some preliminary clean-up done to help make the copy-edit process more fun and appealing. Thanks to all who helped get those nasty last few articles out of the target months. Progress report During this drive we were successful in eliminating our target months—October, November, and December 2010—from the queue, and have now eliminated all the 2010 articles from our list. We were able to complete 500 articles this month! End-of-drive results and barnstar information can be found here. When working on the backlog, please keep in mind that there are options other than copy-editing available; some articles may be candidates for deletion, or may not be suitable for copy-editing at this time for other reasons. The {{ GOCEreviewed}} tag can be placed on any article you find to be totally uneditable, and you can nominate for deletion any that you discover to be copyright violations or completely unintelligible. If you need help deciding what to do, please contact any of the coordinators. Thank you for participating in the March 2012 drive! All contributions are appreciated. Our next copy-edit drive will be in May. Your drive coordinators – Dianna ( Talk), Stfg ( Talk), and Dank ( talk)To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. EdwardsBot ( talk) 22:22, 4 April 2012 (UTC) |
Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite Hello The ed17/Archives. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released. Please click
HERE to participate. You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 01:15, 6 April 2012 (UTC) |
Shh. Take it. Don't ask questions. Just take the damn cat and snuggle it already. — La Pianista ♫ ♪ 14:10, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi Ed! Have followed this. A good part of interested autors haver already quit german wikipedia for reasons which might interact with the mainstream in deWP. Nevertheless for you good luck with your idea. BTW i am the autor of the international linkbox which you find in the header on relevant project-discussion pages f.e. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] At present situation an update/extension would be fine in any way. It would be a good idea to extend this navigationblock with an entry for an international newsletter ;-) Take it or leave it + bonne chance -- Gruß Tom ( talk) 20:36, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Template:FootnotesSmall. Since you had some involvement with the Template:FootnotesSmall redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Magioladitis ( talk) 10:38, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi Ed, don't suppose you could identify some of these? The commons description is a tad lacking. Ϣere SpielChequers 14:16, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
My name is Elaine and I'm a communications intern with the Wikimedia Foundation in San Francisco. I'm working on a post about the WikiCup for the Foundation blog [13]. Since you are one of the judges for this year's WikiCup, I would love to do a short interview with you either by phone, Skype, or email to ask you a few quick questions. Let me know if you're interested! You can reach me at communicationsinternwikimedia.org.
Thanks,
Elaine CommIntern ( talk) 19:05, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
Any chance I could put something in The Bugle about the World War I editathon I'm organising? Happy to write a story if that helps, just let me know. The Land ( talk) 18:49, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
(od) Cripes, didn't think you'd still be up mate -- I've got the bot running now and seems to be delivering... Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 23:49, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Good news! You now have access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research. Here's what you need to know:
Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi t | c 21:04, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
Dear The ed17, I commended your practice in dealing with newspapers here: Wikipedia_talk:Identifying_reliable_sources#Newspapers. Fifelfoo ( talk) 01:56, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Hey Ed, are you going to the Wiki meetup thing in DC this summer? I got the grant to do research at the National Archives over the summer and will be there from early June to early August. Parsecboy ( talk) 17:17, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
Invitation from the
Guild of Copy Editors
The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in their May 2012 Backlog elimination drive, a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on May 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on May 31 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goal for the drive will be to eliminate January, February, and March 2011 from the queue. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits more than 4,000 words, and special awards will be given to the top 5 in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", and "Number of articles of over 5,000 words". We hope to see you there! – Your drive coordinators: Dank, Diannaa, and Stfg. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. EdwardsBot ( talk) 18:55, 22 April 2012 (UTC) |
Can you explain exactly why you've moved the ITN page, please? I don't think it's appropriate. Tony (talk) 02:19, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Your unilateral move from ITN is the deal-breaker. Do that, and The Signpost loses a key writer and gains a stern critic. You'll be living with that. Tony (talk) 04:12, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
I see that you've still failed to move it back into the ITN slot, where it was for many days, uncontested by anyone. That is the minimum when you're asking others to comment: otherwise, you risk contaminating views by displaying its altered status, which will inevitably be perceived as the natural one. I note that you didn't even contact the authors—at least not me—when taking this heavy-handed action. The fact that your purpose was to subdue the piece is clear from your simultaneous substitution of the title with a lame one.
Now, let me get this right: ITN, from now on has rules:
Fine, I've got it. Let's spread the news on this. Tony (talk) 04:47, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
oh dear; alright folks, time to sort this out. first of all a point of clarification: i did not say "it's too opinionated for ITN", if i would have thought so i would have said so long ago (monday morning, as i saw the drafts, most likely). what i suggested was that it _could_ (not required to) also run as a special, because of its length & argumentative value, to have more maneuvering space. in my understanding Jarry tabled a very different argument in his own right.
said that & for the sake of falling not too far behind deadline: could we please stick to how it was before we (unintentionally, afaik) started to play chinese whispers for now, publish, and figure out who misunderstood the reasoning of whom from which point of view as well as the actions by different editors out of it all in a proper inquest after that? thanks, regards --
Jan eissfeldt (
talk) 09:39, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
- Jarry1250 Deliberation needed 16:14, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Remove your protection of Cla68 or remove his advertisment. His advertisment fails WP:SOAP and can't stay per that policy. WP:SOAP would need to be changed for that to happen. So either remove his add or your protection. It cannot be protected in it's current state per policy. @- Kosh ► Talk to the Vorlons► Moon Base Alpha-@ 11:30, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
@- Kosh ► Talk to the Vorlons► Moon Base Alpha-@ 14:31, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi Ed! Stopping by here with a quick (or possibly not so quick) request... It looks like the discussion at Talk:Iowa class battleship is a go-ahead on the merge of the Illinois and the Kentucky. I would go ahead and close it and do the merge, except that I really have no idea (never having written a battleship article before) of what information is appropriate, UNDUE, etc. Would you be willing to help with the actual merge if I were to go ahead and close this as an uninvolved admin? I can also do the FA-paperwork duties inherent in delisting a FAR through merging. I'm mainly just concerned about screwing up the actual information merge when dealing with multiple FA/GA-class articles on a subject that I don't write about... Let me know, Dana boomer ( talk) 00:24, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
I've drafted the next newsletter. There was talk about a GAC backlog elimination drive which I would have mentioned, but that seems to have come to nothing. Anything to add? J Milburn ( talk) 15:44, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
After checking and rechecking, I still got a name wrong in the newsletter. I've sent my bot chasing after the newsletter bot making the change. You'd have thought that, after doing it for this long, I'd have ironed out these sort of problems. Oh well. J Milburn ( talk) 23:17, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Round 2 of this year's WikiCup is over, and so we are down to our final 32, in what could be called our quarter-finals. The two highest scorers from each pool, as well as the next 16 highest scorers overall, have entered round 3, while 30 participants have been eliminated. Pool B's Grapple X ( submissions) remains our top scorer with over 700 points; he continues to gain high numbers of points for his good articles on The X-Files, but also Millennium and other subjects. He has also gained points for a good topic, a featured list, multiple good article reviews and several did you knows. Pool E's Casliber ( submissions) was second, thanks primarily to his biology articles, with Pool H's Muboshgu ( submissions) coming in third, with an impressive 46 did you knows, mostly on the subject of baseball. Casliber and Cwmhiraeth both scored over 600 points. Pools E and H proved our most successful, with each seeing 5 members qualify for round 3, while Pools C and D were the least, with each seeing only 3 reach round 3. However, it was Pool G which saw the lowest scoring, with a little under 400 points combined; Pool H, the highest scoring group, saw over triple that score.
65 points was the lowest qualifying score for round 3; significantly higher than the 11 required to enter round 2, and also higher than the 41 required to reach round 3 last year. However, in 2010, 100 points were needed to secure a place in round 3. 16 will progress to round 4. In round 3, 150 points was the 16th highest score, though, statistically, people tend to up their game a little in later rounds. Last year, 76 points secured a place, while in 2010, a massive 250 points were needed. Guessing how many points will be required is not easy. We still have not seen any featured portals or topics this year, but, on the subject of less common content types, a small correction needs to be made to the previous newsletter: File:Wacht am Rhein map (Opaque).svg, our first featured picture, was the work of both Matthewedwards ( submissions) and Grandiose ( submissions), the latter of whom has also gone on to score with File:Map of the Battle of Guam, 1944.svg. Bonus points also continue to roll in; this round, Ealdgyth ( submissions) earned triple points for her good articles on William the Conqueror and the Middle Ages, Casliber and Cwmhiraeth both earned triple points for their work on Western Jackdaw, now a good article, Dana Boomer ( submissions) earned triple points for her work on lettuce and work by Stone ( submissions) to ready antimony for good article status earned him triple points. Jarry1250 ( submissions) managed to expand Vitus Bering far enough for a did you know, which was also worth triple points. All of these highly important topics featured on 50 or more Wikipedias at the start of the year.
An article on the WikiCup in the Wikimedia Blog, " Improving Wikipedia with friendly competition", was posted at the end of April. This may be of interest to those who are signed up to this newsletter, as well as serving as another way to draw attention to our project. Also, we would again like to thank Jarry1250 ( submissions) and Stone ( submissions), for continued help behind the scenes. As ever, 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. 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) 23:23, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
I believe you can now lift the protection of my userpage, based on this. Nevertheless, I would ask that if anyone still attempts to remove the text from my userpage, that they be blocked. Thank you. Cla68 ( talk) 23:37, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Thank you and I will study the rights and responsibilities. Mugginsx ( talk) 17:14, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
Enjoy. - Dank ( push to talk) 23:15, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
|
I would use JSTOR mostly for articles on geology and geography: faults, basins, mountains, parks etc. I tend to focus on an article for as long as it takes to fit together as good a view as I can get from online sources, which could be two hours or two days, and then move on. Usually I just work through the sources as I come across them, fitting what they say into the article. I see a JSTOR article, wish I could use it, shrug... So I don't have a specific wishlist, but sure wish I had access. Thanks, Aymatth2 ( talk) 20:13, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
Guild of Copy Editors March 2012 backlog elimination drive
Greetings from the
Guild of Copy Editors
March 2012 Backlog elimination drive! This is the most successful drive we have had for quite a while. Here is your end-of-drive wrap-up newsletter. Participation Of the 70 people who signed up for this drive, 40 copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Special acknowledgement goes out to Lfstevens, who did over 200 articles, most of them in the last third of the drive, and topped all three leaderboard categories. You're a superstar! Stfg and others have been pre-checking the articles for quality and conformance to Wikipedia guidelines; some have been nominated for deletion or had some preliminary clean-up done to help make the copy-edit process more fun and appealing. Thanks to all who helped get those nasty last few articles out of the target months. Progress report During this drive we were successful in eliminating our target months—October, November, and December 2010—from the queue, and have now eliminated all the 2010 articles from our list. We were able to complete 500 articles this month! End-of-drive results and barnstar information can be found here. When working on the backlog, please keep in mind that there are options other than copy-editing available; some articles may be candidates for deletion, or may not be suitable for copy-editing at this time for other reasons. The {{ GOCEreviewed}} tag can be placed on any article you find to be totally uneditable, and you can nominate for deletion any that you discover to be copyright violations or completely unintelligible. If you need help deciding what to do, please contact any of the coordinators. Thank you for participating in the March 2012 drive! All contributions are appreciated. Our next copy-edit drive will be in May. Your drive coordinators – Dianna ( Talk), Stfg ( Talk), and Dank ( talk)To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. EdwardsBot ( talk) 22:22, 4 April 2012 (UTC) |
Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite Hello The ed17/Archives. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released. Please click
HERE to participate. You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 01:15, 6 April 2012 (UTC) |
Shh. Take it. Don't ask questions. Just take the damn cat and snuggle it already. — La Pianista ♫ ♪ 14:10, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi Ed! Have followed this. A good part of interested autors haver already quit german wikipedia for reasons which might interact with the mainstream in deWP. Nevertheless for you good luck with your idea. BTW i am the autor of the international linkbox which you find in the header on relevant project-discussion pages f.e. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] At present situation an update/extension would be fine in any way. It would be a good idea to extend this navigationblock with an entry for an international newsletter ;-) Take it or leave it + bonne chance -- Gruß Tom ( talk) 20:36, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Template:FootnotesSmall. Since you had some involvement with the Template:FootnotesSmall redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Magioladitis ( talk) 10:38, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi Ed, don't suppose you could identify some of these? The commons description is a tad lacking. Ϣere SpielChequers 14:16, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
My name is Elaine and I'm a communications intern with the Wikimedia Foundation in San Francisco. I'm working on a post about the WikiCup for the Foundation blog [13]. Since you are one of the judges for this year's WikiCup, I would love to do a short interview with you either by phone, Skype, or email to ask you a few quick questions. Let me know if you're interested! You can reach me at communicationsinternwikimedia.org.
Thanks,
Elaine CommIntern ( talk) 19:05, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
Any chance I could put something in The Bugle about the World War I editathon I'm organising? Happy to write a story if that helps, just let me know. The Land ( talk) 18:49, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
(od) Cripes, didn't think you'd still be up mate -- I've got the bot running now and seems to be delivering... Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 23:49, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Good news! You now have access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research. Here's what you need to know:
Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi t | c 21:04, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
Dear The ed17, I commended your practice in dealing with newspapers here: Wikipedia_talk:Identifying_reliable_sources#Newspapers. Fifelfoo ( talk) 01:56, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Hey Ed, are you going to the Wiki meetup thing in DC this summer? I got the grant to do research at the National Archives over the summer and will be there from early June to early August. Parsecboy ( talk) 17:17, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
Invitation from the
Guild of Copy Editors
The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in their May 2012 Backlog elimination drive, a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on May 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on May 31 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goal for the drive will be to eliminate January, February, and March 2011 from the queue. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits more than 4,000 words, and special awards will be given to the top 5 in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", and "Number of articles of over 5,000 words". We hope to see you there! – Your drive coordinators: Dank, Diannaa, and Stfg. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. EdwardsBot ( talk) 18:55, 22 April 2012 (UTC) |
Can you explain exactly why you've moved the ITN page, please? I don't think it's appropriate. Tony (talk) 02:19, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Your unilateral move from ITN is the deal-breaker. Do that, and The Signpost loses a key writer and gains a stern critic. You'll be living with that. Tony (talk) 04:12, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
I see that you've still failed to move it back into the ITN slot, where it was for many days, uncontested by anyone. That is the minimum when you're asking others to comment: otherwise, you risk contaminating views by displaying its altered status, which will inevitably be perceived as the natural one. I note that you didn't even contact the authors—at least not me—when taking this heavy-handed action. The fact that your purpose was to subdue the piece is clear from your simultaneous substitution of the title with a lame one.
Now, let me get this right: ITN, from now on has rules:
Fine, I've got it. Let's spread the news on this. Tony (talk) 04:47, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
oh dear; alright folks, time to sort this out. first of all a point of clarification: i did not say "it's too opinionated for ITN", if i would have thought so i would have said so long ago (monday morning, as i saw the drafts, most likely). what i suggested was that it _could_ (not required to) also run as a special, because of its length & argumentative value, to have more maneuvering space. in my understanding Jarry tabled a very different argument in his own right.
said that & for the sake of falling not too far behind deadline: could we please stick to how it was before we (unintentionally, afaik) started to play chinese whispers for now, publish, and figure out who misunderstood the reasoning of whom from which point of view as well as the actions by different editors out of it all in a proper inquest after that? thanks, regards --
Jan eissfeldt (
talk) 09:39, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
- Jarry1250 Deliberation needed 16:14, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Remove your protection of Cla68 or remove his advertisment. His advertisment fails WP:SOAP and can't stay per that policy. WP:SOAP would need to be changed for that to happen. So either remove his add or your protection. It cannot be protected in it's current state per policy. @- Kosh ► Talk to the Vorlons► Moon Base Alpha-@ 11:30, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
@- Kosh ► Talk to the Vorlons► Moon Base Alpha-@ 14:31, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi Ed! Stopping by here with a quick (or possibly not so quick) request... It looks like the discussion at Talk:Iowa class battleship is a go-ahead on the merge of the Illinois and the Kentucky. I would go ahead and close it and do the merge, except that I really have no idea (never having written a battleship article before) of what information is appropriate, UNDUE, etc. Would you be willing to help with the actual merge if I were to go ahead and close this as an uninvolved admin? I can also do the FA-paperwork duties inherent in delisting a FAR through merging. I'm mainly just concerned about screwing up the actual information merge when dealing with multiple FA/GA-class articles on a subject that I don't write about... Let me know, Dana boomer ( talk) 00:24, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
I've drafted the next newsletter. There was talk about a GAC backlog elimination drive which I would have mentioned, but that seems to have come to nothing. Anything to add? J Milburn ( talk) 15:44, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
After checking and rechecking, I still got a name wrong in the newsletter. I've sent my bot chasing after the newsletter bot making the change. You'd have thought that, after doing it for this long, I'd have ironed out these sort of problems. Oh well. J Milburn ( talk) 23:17, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Round 2 of this year's WikiCup is over, and so we are down to our final 32, in what could be called our quarter-finals. The two highest scorers from each pool, as well as the next 16 highest scorers overall, have entered round 3, while 30 participants have been eliminated. Pool B's Grapple X ( submissions) remains our top scorer with over 700 points; he continues to gain high numbers of points for his good articles on The X-Files, but also Millennium and other subjects. He has also gained points for a good topic, a featured list, multiple good article reviews and several did you knows. Pool E's Casliber ( submissions) was second, thanks primarily to his biology articles, with Pool H's Muboshgu ( submissions) coming in third, with an impressive 46 did you knows, mostly on the subject of baseball. Casliber and Cwmhiraeth both scored over 600 points. Pools E and H proved our most successful, with each seeing 5 members qualify for round 3, while Pools C and D were the least, with each seeing only 3 reach round 3. However, it was Pool G which saw the lowest scoring, with a little under 400 points combined; Pool H, the highest scoring group, saw over triple that score.
65 points was the lowest qualifying score for round 3; significantly higher than the 11 required to enter round 2, and also higher than the 41 required to reach round 3 last year. However, in 2010, 100 points were needed to secure a place in round 3. 16 will progress to round 4. In round 3, 150 points was the 16th highest score, though, statistically, people tend to up their game a little in later rounds. Last year, 76 points secured a place, while in 2010, a massive 250 points were needed. Guessing how many points will be required is not easy. We still have not seen any featured portals or topics this year, but, on the subject of less common content types, a small correction needs to be made to the previous newsletter: File:Wacht am Rhein map (Opaque).svg, our first featured picture, was the work of both Matthewedwards ( submissions) and Grandiose ( submissions), the latter of whom has also gone on to score with File:Map of the Battle of Guam, 1944.svg. Bonus points also continue to roll in; this round, Ealdgyth ( submissions) earned triple points for her good articles on William the Conqueror and the Middle Ages, Casliber and Cwmhiraeth both earned triple points for their work on Western Jackdaw, now a good article, Dana Boomer ( submissions) earned triple points for her work on lettuce and work by Stone ( submissions) to ready antimony for good article status earned him triple points. Jarry1250 ( submissions) managed to expand Vitus Bering far enough for a did you know, which was also worth triple points. All of these highly important topics featured on 50 or more Wikipedias at the start of the year.
An article on the WikiCup in the Wikimedia Blog, " Improving Wikipedia with friendly competition", was posted at the end of April. This may be of interest to those who are signed up to this newsletter, as well as serving as another way to draw attention to our project. Also, we would again like to thank Jarry1250 ( submissions) and Stone ( submissions), for continued help behind the scenes. As ever, 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. 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) 23:23, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
I believe you can now lift the protection of my userpage, based on this. Nevertheless, I would ask that if anyone still attempts to remove the text from my userpage, that they be blocked. Thank you. Cla68 ( talk) 23:37, 30 April 2012 (UTC)