This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2024).

Administrator changes

Graham Beards

• Deskana
• Mets501
• Staxringold

Bureaucrat changes

• Deskana
• Warofdreams

Oversight changes

Dreamy Jazz

Guideline and policy news

• Phase II of the 2024 RfA review has commenced to improve and refine the proposals passed in Phase I.

Technical news

• The Nuke feature, which enables administrators to mass delete pages, will now correctly delete pages which were moved to another title. T43351

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Venezuelan politics has been closed.
• The Committee is seeking volunteers for various roles, including access to the conflict of interest VRT queue.

Miscellaneous

• WikiProject Reliability's unsourced statements drive is happening in June 2024 to replace {{ citation needed}} tags with references! Sign up here to participate!

106medregt was blocked at 04:58 17 May 2024. Therefore, all drafts made by 832LT socks afterward can be deleted under G5. Air on White ( talk) 19:26, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

@ Air on White: I'm going based off the date of block of the named master. Whether they're actually the master or not can be discussed, but, that account you're referencing wasn't reported until today at the SPI. Ponyo also did not say whether it was definitively confirmed, so it's better, from my POV, to err on the side of caution and let the drafts expire and be G13 deleted if necessary unless the account has been definitively linked. If that is the original account name, then it makes sense to propose moving the case there. Until some further confirmation, I'm going to operate under the assumption that anything prior to May 27 is not G5 eligible. Hey man im josh ( talk) 19:33, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Greetings, Josh,

It seems the barn stars for the May backlog drive have not been awarded yet. Feel free to ping me if you need any assistance. Regards! Maliner ( talk) 15:22, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

We're aware that they've not yet been given out @ Maliner. Please be patient. Hey man im josh ( talk) 15:23, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

I am not getting impatient. I just wanted to help out if needed. Maliner ( talk) 15:30, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello. Why did you edit my addition of the Canadian monarchists category on Justin Trudeau? Other Canadian politicians', like Pierre Poilievre and past Canadian Prime Minister have it. CGP05 ( talk) 01:09, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

@ CGP05: As I said in my edit summary, it's not an appropriate category. You're welcome to start a discussion on the talk page proposing the addition of the category. Hey man im josh ( talk) 01:52, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

		The Order of the Superior Scribe of Wikipedia
		This award is given in recognition to Hey man im josh for accumulating at least 500 points during the May 2024 NPP backlog drive. Your contributions helped play a part in the 14,452 reviews completed during the drive. Thank you so much for taking part and contributing to help reduce the backlog! – DreamRimmer ( talk) 07:44, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Also this:

		Unnecessarily complicated Gears Award
		This award is given in recognition to Hey man im josh for accumulating at least 150 points during each week of the May 2024 NPP backlog drive. Your contributions played a part in the 14,452 reviews completed during the drive. Thank you so much for taking part and contributing to help reduce the backlog! – DreamRimmer ( talk) 07:44, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

I had sent an email (didnt do via my discord it is a bit of a mess atm) but in the time I sent - the problem was solved - just a heads up if the email seemed a bit strange/strained - all is fixed. JarrahTree 16:09, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

I noticed that IABot has suddenly surged in activity since yesterday. When checking the configuration, and the change log respectively, I see you made alterations to the bot's wiki-wide behavior. Is there a recent policy change that I missed where adding archive links to both dead and live sources is desired? Otherwise, can you please explain the configuration change? — CYBERPOWER ( Chat) 17:03, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Oh my god, this deserves a big ol' trout @ Cyberpower678. I had no idea that I had the ability to change wiki-wide configurations. Being that I was logged in, I thought this was a preference that was set specifically for requests I made via the interface. I've reversed the configuration change and I'm so sorry for any inconvenience, headache, or extra load this may have caused! Hey man im josh ( talk) 17:07, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

No worries. Yes, all sysops have the power to reconfigure the bot's behavior. Being the enforces of consensus, how the bot should run on a wiki can have a changing consensus. :-) Thank you for reversing. — CYBERPOWER ( Chat) 17:09, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

BTW, I'm fresh out of trouts. I ate them all yesterday. — CYBERPOWER ( Chat) 17:11, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

@ Cyberpower678: I think my confusion came into play from heavily utilizing IABot BEFORE I became an admin, and then not noticing that I was suddenly able to do something I hadn't even looked to try to do before. Woops! Lessons learned!!! Thanks for understanding :) Hey man im josh ( talk) 17:12, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Hey, we all have our admin slip ups. I once blocked editing to all of Wikipedia because I neglected to properly clean up a spam blacklist regex entry, leaving behind a single period, which matched to everything naturally. — CYBERPOWER ( Chat) 17:22, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

@ Cyberpower678: Wow! That sounds Wikipedia:Village stocks worthy based on its impact lol. It happens :) Hey man im josh ( talk) 17:23, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Oh oops, my mistake, I think somebody else did that on the spam blacklist. I accidentally borked the title blacklist which denied the creation of accounts and pages if I'm not mistaken. It's been a while. Here's my blunder edit. — CYBERPOWER ( Chat) 17:46, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Ohhhhh yeah, that's not as bad :) Hey man im josh ( talk) 17:47, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Hey Josh, could you remove my page mover and new page reviewer rights? Thanks! – Hilst  [talk] 01:20, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

@ Hilst: Done. Feel free to reach out on my talk page any time to request these back and I'll be happy to grant them back without question. I'm sad to see you leave the NPP but I'm thankful for everything review and tag you've done! Hey man im josh ( talk) 01:31, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Alright, thank you! I'll definitely think about returning to NPP in the future. – Hilst  [talk] 01:35, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Congratulations, Hey man im josh! The list you nominated, List of Jacksonville Jaguars first-round draft picks, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best lists on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured list. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Giants2008 ( talk) via FACBot ( talk) 00:25, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

I'm glad I have nothing against using the word 'congratulations'. CONGRATULATIONS, JOSH!! :) Regards, John. Bringingthewood ( talk) 01:12, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Thank you John! Hey man im josh ( talk) 17:11, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

	Greetings, Hey man im josh. You are receiving this notification because you've agreed to consider endorsing prospective admin candidates identified by the process outlined at Administrators without tools. Recently, the following editor(s) received this distinction and the associated endearing title: Theroadislong KylieTastic
Thank you for supporting this effort. Your contributions are an integral part of overall success, and an example for others to follow. To stop receiving these notifications, remove your name from the list.

Tol Bot ( talk) 21:00, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Josh,

Do you know much about the Quarry program? I basically run queries I inherited from other editors years ago and one is giving me an error message. It's worked for years and for some reason now has a problem. Would you be willing to troubleshoot the code? Thanks and I hope you are doing well this summer. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:18, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

@ Liz: I'm in the same boat as you, I'm a forker! I know a bit but not enough to help with trouble shooting, I'm sorry. Hey man im josh ( talk) 02:24, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Didn't know we checked Xbox Store page for issues like this. Then we should change all the previous titles except for the first game. ภץאคгöร 17:10, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

@ Nyxaros: I had a number of links I could have used, but, at least to me, it looks like everywhere you can order it from uses the lowercase version. That's not even counting the number of articles I found that use the lowercase version as well (with some uppercased versions mixed in as well). Based on what I found, and per MOS:CAPS, there was enough of a valid reason to reject the CSD/move request. You're welcome, and encouraged, to bring this up at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Capital letters. Hey man im josh ( talk) 17:58, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

To be clear, I admit I may be wrong on the proper capitalization, but I thought it enough to merit a move discussion instead of a speedy deletion. Hey man im josh ( talk) 18:00, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

See this and this. ภץאคгöร 12:14, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

@ Nyxaros: So it seems there was support to down case to "is". Probably worth a RM by someone interested in doing so. Hey man im josh ( talk) 15:45, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

There was some support, yes, but as mentioned, MOS:5 exists (Every verb, including forms of to be (Be, Am, Is, Are, Being, Was, Were, Been)). ภץאคгöร 16:56, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

@ Nyxaros: MOS:CAPS still applies. Your own links show that there's been a shift to usage of lowercase "is". Additionally, the quoted section is specifically when the title of the work includes the word capitalized, it does not automatically mean that we capitalize it. Furthermore, the stylization used by the games themselves is all caps, which is not a stylistic convention that we follow. It appears, from sources online, that it's not officially capitalized but it's not something that's been addressed on-wiki yet. Hey man im josh ( talk) 17:03, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Those are not "my links". I'm just showing previous discussions that still led to "Is" usage. Don't get me wrong here, I'd rather prefer "is" (for the other games too, except for the first game) since it is included in the official title. ภץאคгöร 17:06, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

@ Nyxaros: Fyi, I've started a move discussion. Hopefully that resolves the issue one way or another. Hey man im josh ( talk) 18:33, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks but it looks like we're back where we started. The page will have "Is" despite your comments. ภץאคгöร 09:17, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

I nominated this article for Featured List status back in early May and it doesn't look like much has been done while plenty of other lists submitted later have undergone thorough reviews. I am new to this process, but is this unusual? Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:34, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

@ Bgsu98: We do typically try to support newcomers at WP:FLC, but the best way I've found to get my items reviews is to review the nominations of other users. It's tough when you're new to the area though. If you're comfortable, you could still provide prose reviews and review nominations to the best of your abilities. I think people just aren't necessarily interested in reviewing the topic unfortunately, and I think that sucks. Hey man im josh ( talk) 13:25, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

I guess I am just not sure where to even begin. Several of us spent a lot of time making sure those tables are properly formatted, everything is properly sourced. Figure skating is one of the most popular Olympic sports, and I get that this isn't the Olympic article, but the World Championships are the next in line in the hierarchy of importance. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:59, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

@ Bgsu98: Are you comfortable reviewing prose? Give a read through a list and see what kind of feedback you can give, I like to think it all helps. I don't think there's anything wrong with your choice of subject, I just think it's not something that reviewers have felt like diving into yet. As one of the older lists though, it'll soon be listed as a nomination needing further attention, which should hopefully attract more reviewers. Hey man im josh ( talk) 16:55, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Hey Josh, thought I'd just post here instead. As I wanted to do my due diligence as well. So I did some digging of my own and found an example of the split approach, although this is FT. Overview of Meghan Trainor is the artist topic. Her discography article was used as the main article for two FTs. Meghan Traino albums and Meghan Trainor's Billboard Hot 100 entries. From what I've checked, both FTs aren't listed as sub topics to the Discography article in the Overview FT, but are just standalone FTs. Hopefully that is something that can be used as a reference. I understand you had already supported the nom (which is much appreciated), but thought I'd have the i's dotted and t's crossed just to be sure :) Pseud 14 ( talk) 16:04, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Hey @ Pseud 14, thanks for the follow-up! It's a relevant and good grouping for a topic, I have no doubt about that. I do think the Meghan Trainer discography one in this case can't be a subtopic because of all the extra stuff that's not promoted under one of your topics. With that said, I think, if you were interested, it'd make sense to ask at Wikipedia talk:Featured topics whether the residencies and live concerts GTs could be combined under one sub topic, or even possibly two sub topics? At least to know, right? Hey man im josh ( talk) 16:12, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Told you that you could put the nomination up with your name instead of mine. In any case, feel free to support! igordebraga ≠ 11:59, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks @ Igordebraga, but I'd feel weird doing so since I hadn't contributed in the slightest way. At least you're involved in the WikiProject, so it makes sense for you to do so. I wouldn't even know what to write for the nom lol. Hey man im josh ( talk) 12:00, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

I'm not that involved, usually just seeking topics to promote or restore (albeit in Madonna's case, once the guy who nominated Vogue vanished during the GA review took upon myself to finish the process). Still, waiting for your input on the nomination. igordebraga ≠ 03:26, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind words and support on my nomination on the Editor for the Week! It is much appreciated. Best wishes. Red Director ( talk) 14:56, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

It's well overdue and I can't say enough about how much I appreciate all the work you do @ Red Director! Hey man im josh ( talk) 14:14, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

FYI there are errors that cropped up due to your Rcat additions. The "avoided double redirect" template needs the parameter of the other redirect.   —  TARDIS builder ^✉     ★       11:09, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

@ TARDIS Builder: I did not add any rcats to the pages. Never the less, I've fixed the error. Hey man im josh ( talk) 14:18, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

You did indeed, on May 24th – one, two, three, four – I was just mentioning / reminding that {{ R avoided double redirect}} needs a parameter to not spit out an error. Thanks!   —  TARDIS builder ^✉     ★       03:35, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Hey, the QPQ was awaited for it. I thought I'll do it this week. —  The Herald (Benison) ( talk) 15:41, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Grrrrr, my bad. Thanks for pointing this out to me @ The Herald, I'll undo that. As a noobie at DYK... I've got a lot to learn! Hey man im josh ( talk) 15:43, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Lol, no probs. Happy editing :) —  The Herald (Benison) ( talk) 15:45, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi Josh, thanks for sharing the load at WP:CFDW!

Please note that when we check categories before de-listing, we not only check that they are empty, but also check "what links here", and update links where necessary. WP:CFDAI has some detailed guidance about this.

I noticed that in this edit you overlooked several links from category pages. ( [1]) You may notice that I also maintain user drafts – this is merely optional, but updating category pages is important. – Fayenatic London 08:48, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Hey @ Fayenatic london, thank you for the feedback, I'll definitely working at doing a better job based on this feedback. I hadn't consider user drafts, so that's definitely something I'll keep in mind. As for the redirects you created, do the bots that deal with fixing double redirects not work in category space? I would have thought those particular edits would be addressed by one of them instead of having to do so manually. Hey man im josh ( talk) 12:14, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Updating user drafts is optional, but some users thank me when I do bother with drafts that are still WIP, and in other cases it turns up WP:COPIES that should be blanked or deleted.

As for these category redirects, the bot run left them redlinked, so it's unlikely that another bot would be able to update them – it's more likely that they would have been deleted. As they are redirects from alt spellings, which another editor had created intentionally, I judged that they were worth keeping. So in each case I updated the target to the new lowercase name, and then moved the redirect to the corresponding alt-spelling lowercase name. There was no need to leave another redirect at the old uppercase name, as that had not been done in the case of the mainstream spelling. Hope that makes sense! – Fayenatic London 14:30, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

That's a good point. It absolutely makes sense! Thanks for the help and guidance :) Hey man im josh ( talk) 12:47, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Hey man im josh. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, " Template:2019 NHL Entry Draft".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:14, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi Hey man im josh, I saw a recent AfD requests where you deleted the article ( /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_New_England_Revolution_broadcasters). Would it be possible to provide me with the content of the deleted article (perhaps by moving it to my userspace?). I'm not planning on restoring that article, but I would like to have access to it as I improve a lot of New England Revolution pages and the sources/content might be useful. Thanks! Brindille1 ( talk) 12:45, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

@ Brindille1: I've created User:Brindille1/List of New England Revolution broadcasters for you. If you ever do decide you want to work on that list and move it back to main space, the notability concerns would obviously need to be addressed first, but the page would also need to be histmerged with List of New England Revolution broadcasters since I copied the deleted content and we would need to preserve attribution. Hey man im josh ( talk) 15:34, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Hey Josh, thanks for all the help in the past and I hope you good today. I honestly feel like there are some remixes as well cover songs that deserve a standalone article. " Creepin'" has a standalone article and it is a cover of " I Don't Wanna Know", other than this I have never seen a standalone cover or remix article. I believe " At Your Best (You Are Love)" deserves a standalone article as the article is composed of almost its achievements and they are kept hidden under the original song. " Save Your Tears (Remix)" and " Die for You (Ariana Grande Remix)" both did well on the charts and even peaked at number one on the Billboard Hot 100 chart, certified in multiple countries and performed well commercially. My question is, is there a way these articles (especially "At Your Best (You Are Love)") can ever get standalone articles? I'm willing to go through the trouble of splitting them if need may be. I'll be on the lookout for your response. dxneo ( talk) 12:00, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

( talk page watcher): do they pass WP:GNG? Vestrian24Bio ( TALK) 14:29, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Vestrian24Bio, without a doubt. Please check them out. I mean they are certified higher than Gold in multiple countries, won awards and I did mention that they peaked at number one on the Hot 100 chart; ultimately pass WP:NSONG. Surprisingly, " Die for You (Ariana Grande Remix)" performed better than "Creepin" according to the IFPI. dxneo ( talk) 15:25, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Notability aside, a standalone article is appropriate only when there is enough material to warrant a reasonably detailed article; articles unlikely ever to grow beyond stubs should be merged to articles about an artist or album. – If there could be enough content for a standalone article, I'd say go for it. Vestrian24Bio ( TALK) 15:38, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

		The Original Barnstar
		Hey man thank you. I just looked at some lists (NFL annual rushing TDs and INTs leaders) and saw that you did a lot of work on them. I made them back in 2014 and I really appreciate all the work you did on them to help get them from the simple lists to featured list status which makes them the first pieces of featured content I've created. I think that's pretty cool. Thank you again and best wishes, Soulbust ( talk) 04:10, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much @ Soulbust! It's always wonderful to have your work recognized and I very much appreciate the work that was put in by you before I picked up where I did. Hey man im josh ( talk) 15:48, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi there @ Hey man im josh,

It's been a while since we interacted. I hope all is well with you. I was wondering if you could review some articles for me, if you don't mind. I think I made a request on your talk page before, and I have a number of articles in the backlog that need reviewing (I translated/brought them over from the Russian Wikipedia, as a heads up). If you are able to review some articles, here are a couple that I created: Smoky Mo, Matrang, Alex Davia, Thrill Pill, and Beverly Hills (Zivert song). If you are able to review more, let me know and I'll give you more articles. If you cannot review any, that's perfectly fine! I was just wondering if you could do them. Thank you in advance. Losipov ( talk) 03:41, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Hey @ Losipov, I'm sorry, but I typically don't review articles upon request. I decline to do so because I have a lot on my plate already and I don't want to overcommit myself and end up with a lot of regular requests like this. Hey man im josh ( talk) 15:28, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Oh, I will say though that I very much appreciate you putting in the work to create all of these! I hope someone from the NPP team to be by at their earliest convenience. Hey man im josh ( talk) 15:29, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

@ Hey man im josh That's fine, I understand. Thank you, though, for the kind words! Hopefully these articles get reviewed soon because I have a good amount of them in NPP right now. Thanks again! Losipov ( talk) 16:20, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

@ Hey man im josh:, what do I even do here? I haven’t the slightest idea how to program a table the way MPGuy wants, and it seems to me like an unreasonably high standard for promotion. The Kip ^{( contribs)} 16:34, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Not Josh, but I noticed the discussion and just went ahead and tried to implement it into the article. Feel free to revert if you don't like it, just wanted to help out :) ULPS ^{( talk • contribs)} 17:21, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks - I’m not sure if that fully addresses his concern (that not all the rows have a unique header), but I hope it does. I don’t have any idea how to style the header boxes to look normal in the way he’s saying I should. The Kip ^{( contribs)} 17:26, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

@ The Kip: I hope the changes @ ULPS made are satisfactory, because I don't personally see a reason to move the row scopes if you do not want to. In all fairness, I really should have proposed merging the cells for the draft year the way that ULPS did. Hey man im josh ( talk) 17:29, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

I think it technically does cause of the !scope="row" I added but oh well 🤷‍♂️. Hopefully he finds it satisfactory. ULPS ^{( talk • contribs)} 17:30, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Ahh.... My understanding is you should not have added that second set of "!scope=row". I believe you shouldn't be trying to specify the scope of the row twice, but I'll follow up with PresN about it. Hey man im josh ( talk) 17:40, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Accessibility/Data_tables_tutorial#Complex_tables does have an example of using multiple row scopes, but I really don't think this is a situation where it's appropriate, but I'm still trying to expand my knowledge on accessibility and table formatting. Hey man im josh ( talk) 17:46, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Damn, should I remove it then? This table stuff gets too complicated sometimes ULPS ^{( talk • contribs)} 17:49, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

It IS possibly to add the players as a second row scope from playing around with it, but again, I'm not sure if it's actually proper. Hey man im josh ( talk) 17:57, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

At this point, if it’s not possible (at least without extremely technical programming), what do I even do? The Kip ^{( contribs)} 18:34, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

@ The Kip: Hold up for a bit while I verify with PresN whether it's required. If so... There's a lot of lists I need to start making changes at haha. Hey man im josh ( talk) 18:43, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Congratulations, Hey man im josh! The list you nominated, Detroit Lions draft history, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best lists on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured list. Keep up the great work! Cheers, PresN ( talk) via FACBot ( talk) 00:25, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Thoughts on this? I don't think I have ever had an FLC go 3 weeks without a substantial review before. You think people are avoiding it because its an index list? « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 19:16, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Hey @ Gonzo fan2007: In short, yeah, I do think people are avoiding it because it's an index list. I think some people are uncomfortable with the idea. I myself haven't reviewed it because I'm just not sure how to and what the expectations are out of index lists like this. Hey man im josh ( talk) 19:19, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

I'm withdrawing it for now. Deal with it some other day! *shrug* Thanks for the input :) « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 19:43, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

@ Gonzo fan2007: Unless you have some lists already ready for nomination, it might be beneficial to let it reach the back of the queue, but that's up to you. Hey man im josh ( talk) 19:44, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

I have like 7 in the queue. It's going to take me at least a year to get through all of them. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 19:46, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

@ Gonzo fan2007: Your queue is longer than mine! I had mine up to about 8 or 9 at one point... I vowed to get it to 10. I've dwindled down to 5 with one about to be nommed. I still want to reach that goal and you and your dirty Packers list are motivating me to do so, so thank you for that! Hey man im josh ( talk) 12:04, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

I really only have one more list to create at this point, List of Green Bay Packers award winners, but it has sent me down a rabbit hole (who knew there were so many awards) so I have let the draft sit for a while. I also have to figure out what to do with Green Bay Packers All-Time Roster *facepalm*. My project now is notable games. It has oddly been one of the more enjoyable writing projects so far, its fun (and sad) to relive some of the more exciting games in Packers' history. After that, I may start taking a crack at rivalries. I'm serious about a collab on Lions–Packers rivalry, if you are ever interested later this year. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 14:18, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Congrats again, Josh! I heard the rumbling the other day and didn't want to jink anything, lol. Now I saw the 'Promotion' message. Great job! John. Bringingthewood ( talk) 00:46, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks John! That's part 2 of 4 in the books, with part 3 of 4 of the future featured topics nominated! Hey man im josh ( talk) 01:14, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

You got it! Great to hear. I'll be back soon. :) Regards, Bringingthewood ( talk) 01:28, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

On 29 June 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Detroit Lions draft history, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that fifteen future Pro Football Hall of Fame players have been drafted by the Detroit Lions? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Detroit Lions draft history. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Detroit Lions draft history), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 —  Amakuru ( talk) 00:03, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

The third round of the 2024 WikiCup ended on 28 June. As with Round 2, this round was competitive: each of the 16 contestants who advanced to Round 4 scored at least 256 points.

The following editors all scored more than 400 points in Round 3:

• Generalissima ( submissions) with 1,059 points, mostly from 1 featured article on DeLancey W. Gill, 11 good articles, 18 did you know nominations, and dozens of reviews;
• Skyshifter ( submissions) with 673 points, mostly from 2 featured articles on Worlds (Porter Robinson album) and I'm God, 5 good articles, and 2 did you know nominations;
• Sammi Brie ( submissions) with 557 points, mostly from 1 featured article on KNXV-TV, 5 good articles, and 8 did you know nominations; and
• AryKun ( submissions) with 415 points, mostly from 1 featured article on Great cuckoo-dove, with a high number of bonus points from that article.

The full scores for round 3 can be seen here. So far this year, competitors have gotten 28 featured articles, 38 featured lists, 240 good articles, 92 in the news credits, and at least 285 did you know credits. They have conducted 279 featured article reviews, as well as 492 good article reviews and peer reviews, and have added 22 articles to featured topics and good topics.

Remember that any content promoted after 28 June but before the start of Round 4 can be claimed during Round 4, which starts on 1 July at 00:00 (UTC). Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether for a good article, featured content, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed.

If you would like to learn more about rules and scoring for the 2024 WikiCup, please see this page. Further questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges ( Cwmhiraeth ( talk · contribs), Epicgenius ( talk · contribs), and Frostly ( talk · contribs)) are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 21:30, 29 June 2024 (UTC)