The finals for the 2015 Wikicup has now begun! Congrats to the 8 contestants who have survived to the finals, and well done and thanks to everyone who took part in rounds 3 and 4.
In round 3, we had a three-way tie for qualification among the wildcard contestants, so we had 34 competitors. The leader was by far
Casliber (
submissions) in Group B, who earned 1496 points. Although 913 of these points were bonus points, he submitted 15 articles in the DYK category. Second place overall was
Coemgenus (
submissions) at 864 points, who although submitted just 2 FAs for 400 points, earned double that amount for those articles in bonus points. Everyone who moved forward to Round 4 earned at least 100 points.
The scores required to move onto the semifinals were impressive; the lowest scorer to move onto the finals was 407, making this year's Wikicup as competitive as it's always been. Our finalists, ordered by round 4 score, are:
-
Cas Liber (
submissions), who is competing in his sixth consecutive Wikicup final, again finished the round in first place, with an impressive 1666 points in Pool B. Casliber writes about the natural sciences, including ornithology, botany and astronomy. A large bulk of his points this round were bonus points. -
Godot13 (
submissions) (
FP bonus points), second place both in Pool B and overall, earned the bulk of his points with FPs, mostly depicting currency. -
Cwmhiraeth (
submissions), first in Pool A, came in third. His specialty is natural science articles; in Round 4, he mostly submitted articles about insects and botany. Five out of the six of the GAs he submitted were level-4 vital articles. -
Harrias (
submissions), second in Pool A, took fourth overall. He tends to focus on articles about
cricket and military history, specifically the 1640s
First English Civil War. -
West Virginian (
submissions), from Pool A, was our highest-scoring wildcard. West Virginia tends to focus on articles about the history of (what for it!) the U.S. state of West Virginia. -
Rodw (
submissions), from Pool A, likes to work on articles about British geography and places. Most of his points this round were earned from two impressive accomplishments: a GT about
Scheduled monuments in Somerset and a FT about
English Heritage properties in Somerset.
-
Rationalobserver (
submissions), from Pool B, came in seventh overall. RO earned the majority of her points from GARs and PRs, many of which were earned in the final hours of the round. -
Calvin999 (
submissions), also from Pool B, who was competing with RO for the final two spots in the final hours, takes the race for most GARs and PRs—48.
The intense competition between RO and Calvin999 will continue into the finals. They're both eligible for the Newcomers Trophy, given for the first time in the Wikicup; whoever makes the most points will win it.
Good luck to the finalists; the judges are sure that the competition will be fierce!
Figureskatingfan ( talk · contribs), Miyagawa ( talk · contribs) and Sturmvogel 66 ( talk · contribs) 11:48, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
We do not delete aticles because of improperly formatted references. Please give reasons based on WP:Deletion policy DGG ( talk ) 17:50, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
Why did you use BLP PROD for this article? When you nominated it, the article had 7 references, at least 2 of them to newspapers. You did this even though you had earlier been notified of the exact same problem with another article. DGG ( talk ) 17:56, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
Deletion reason A1 only applies if it is impossible to tell what the article is about. , e.g. "John has acted in several movies". DGG ( talk ) 18:02, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
Too many of your deletion nominations are incorrect, to the point of actually being disruptive, and you do not seem to have learned from the advice previously given. Please stop nominating articles for deletion until you have read and understood WP:Deletion policy, and WP:CSD. If you continue along this line, I can and will block you to prevent further disruption DGG ( talk ) 18:14, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is
User:Josu4u disruptive use of Page Curation. Thank you.
Ivanvector 🍁 (
talk) 19:01, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello Josu4u.
Your userpage claims:
- "This user has made 8,600+ edits to Wikipedia.", but you only have a total of about 1,342 [1]. 93 of which are to your userpage.
- It also claims "This user has created 165 ... articles ...", but you have only created 18 [2] (apart from talk pages or similar).
Please correct these.-- 220 of Borg 18:46, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
- Thank you 220 for notifying me, actually i made it from some user pages and i thought that edit counts will change automatically. Anyway for thanks for notifying.
Josu4u, would you be considering being mentored by another editor to get a better handle on policies and actions on en.wiki? While your good faith actions are appreciated, some of the issues identified at the ANI could be avoided if you had a person to check on stuff with. Winner 42 has offered to volunteer, I would suggest that you read WP:Mentor and if you are agreeable, then discuss with Winner 42 on the general framework of this mentorship. cheers. — Spaceman Spiff 08:26, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
- Hello
User:SpacemanSpiff, Thanks for your suggestion. I am interested for being mentored, by another editor. I cannot find any links for registering on
Winner 42. So can you please help me how to get mentored.
- Please discuss with him at User talk:Winner 42. Also, sign your posts with ~~~~ at the end of every post to a talk page. cheers. — Spaceman Spiff 19:52, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot. Josu4u ( talk) 19:56, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
- Hello
User:SpacemanSpiff, Thanks for your suggestion. I am interested for being mentored, by another editor. I cannot find any links for registering on
Winner 42. So can you please help me how to get mentored.
- ( edit conflict)Hi Josu4u. I'm interested in mentoring you. A little about me: I've been on Wikipedia for over five years now and have experience in both New Page Patrol and assisting other users. I currently am running two other mentorships through the Adopt-a-User program. In general, Mentorship is a fairly informal process so we can structure it however you would like. Several options include talk page conversations, skype conversations, adoption courses (such as the course designed by WormTT), and/or anything else you can think of. I'm here if you need any help or have any questions. Winner 42 Talk to me! 20:13, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
What is the problem of the Article Akhil G Krishnan. Please don't delete the article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akhilgkrishnanmnr ( talk • contribs) 12:56, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
- Hello Akhilgkrishnanmnr, That article is a self promotion and it doesn't have any references regarding the importance. Josu4u ( talk) 13:00, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello, its ChrisMiller203. I'd like to know what you would like for me to do so that my page looks like an article. I did not want for it to be promotional. I will make the required changes to save my page from deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChrisMiller203 ( talk • contribs) 19:22, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
Come on guy, how can you request deletion, I'm busy preparing to start about this page Smart Family. I appeal to do undeletion for this page, and let me finish it first then you can decide whether it should be tagged or be published. Ras Benjih ( talk) 10:30, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
|
of Engineering and Technology, Trivandrum |
| of Engineering and Technology, Trivandrum Josu4u ( talk) 12:17, 15 October 2011 (UTC) |
Speedy deletion declined: Saarah Hameed Ahmed
Hello Josu4u. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Saarah Hameed Ahmed, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Sending this to AFD, because it does have plausable sources. Thank you. Courcelles ( talk) 23:03, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
- Hello talk, Reason for why i noticed for speedy deletion of Saarah Hameed Ahmed is : The references used within are from some religious websites and i cannot find any articles from any major newspapers reporting about this news through their websites. Josu4u ( talk) 23:49, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'd quite like to know your reasoning for un-reviewing Sai Ankur. -- Non-Dropframe talk 10:50, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
- Hello
Non-Dropframe, I cannot find any importance of the article and it looks it should be speedy deleted, so when i Curate the newly created article, i found it to be reviewed by someone. That's why i un-reviewed. May be its caused because of time delay from my side.
Josu4u (
talk) 10:58, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
- I marked the article for deletion and the article is automatically marked as reviewed thereafter. Marking the article as reviewed does not mean it has been found as acceptable for inclusion, it merely means that it no longer requires editor's attention. -- Non-Dropframe talk 11:01, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
Speedy deletion declined: The glossary
I am not sure why you are marking The glossary for speedy deletion. Mention of The glossary at /info/en/?search=This_Is_Water is currently a red link and it is better for people to know something about them. Robin Singh ( talk) 11:29, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
The finals for the 2015 Wikicup has now begun! Congrats to the 8 contestants who have survived to the finals, and well done and thanks to everyone who took part in rounds 3 and 4.
In round 3, we had a three-way tie for qualification among the wildcard contestants, so we had 34 competitors. The leader was by far
Casliber (
submissions) in Group B, who earned 1496 points. Although 913 of these points were bonus points, he submitted 15 articles in the DYK category. Second place overall was
Coemgenus (
submissions) at 864 points, who although submitted just 2 FAs for 400 points, earned double that amount for those articles in bonus points. Everyone who moved forward to Round 4 earned at least 100 points.
The scores required to move onto the semifinals were impressive; the lowest scorer to move onto the finals was 407, making this year's Wikicup as competitive as it's always been. Our finalists, ordered by round 4 score, are:
-
Cas Liber (
submissions), who is competing in his sixth consecutive Wikicup final, again finished the round in first place, with an impressive 1666 points in Pool B. Casliber writes about the natural sciences, including ornithology, botany and astronomy. A large bulk of his points this round were bonus points.
-
Godot13 (
submissions) (
FP bonus points), second place both in Pool B and overall, earned the bulk of his points with FPs, mostly depicting currency.
-
Cwmhiraeth (
submissions), first in Pool A, came in third. His specialty is natural science articles; in Round 4, he mostly submitted articles about insects and botany. Five out of the six of the GAs he submitted were level-4 vital articles.
-
Harrias (
submissions), second in Pool A, took fourth overall. He tends to focus on articles about
cricket and military history, specifically the 1640s
First English Civil War.
-
West Virginian (
submissions), from Pool A, was our highest-scoring wildcard. West Virginia tends to focus on articles about the history of (what for it!) the U.S. state of West Virginia.
-
Rodw (
submissions), from Pool A, likes to work on articles about British geography and places. Most of his points this round were earned from two impressive accomplishments: a GT about
Scheduled monuments in Somerset and a FT about
English Heritage properties in Somerset.
-
Rationalobserver (
submissions), from Pool B, came in seventh overall. RO earned the majority of her points from GARs and PRs, many of which were earned in the final hours of the round.
-
Calvin999 (
submissions), also from Pool B, who was competing with RO for the final two spots in the final hours, takes the race for most GARs and PRs—48.
The intense competition between RO and Calvin999 will continue into the finals. They're both eligible for the Newcomers Trophy, given for the first time in the Wikicup; whoever makes the most points will win it.
Good luck to the finalists; the judges are sure that the competition will be fierce!
Figureskatingfan ( talk · contribs), Miyagawa ( talk · contribs) and Sturmvogel 66 ( talk · contribs) 11:48, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
We do not delete aticles because of improperly formatted references. Please give reasons based on WP:Deletion policy DGG ( talk ) 17:50, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
Why did you use BLP PROD for this article? When you nominated it, the article had 7 references, at least 2 of them to newspapers. You did this even though you had earlier been notified of the exact same problem with another article. DGG ( talk ) 17:56, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
Deletion reason A1 only applies if it is impossible to tell what the article is about. , e.g. "John has acted in several movies". DGG ( talk ) 18:02, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
Too many of your deletion nominations are incorrect, to the point of actually being disruptive, and you do not seem to have learned from the advice previously given. Please stop nominating articles for deletion until you have read and understood WP:Deletion policy, and WP:CSD. If you continue along this line, I can and will block you to prevent further disruption DGG ( talk ) 18:14, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is
User:Josu4u disruptive use of Page Curation. Thank you.
Ivanvector 🍁 (
talk) 19:01, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello Josu4u.
Your userpage claims:
- "This user has made 8,600+ edits to Wikipedia.", but you only have a total of about 1,342 [1]. 93 of which are to your userpage.
- It also claims "This user has created 165 ... articles ...", but you have only created 18 [2] (apart from talk pages or similar).
Please correct these.-- 220 of Borg 18:46, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
- Thank you 220 for notifying me, actually i made it from some user pages and i thought that edit counts will change automatically. Anyway for thanks for notifying.
Josu4u, would you be considering being mentored by another editor to get a better handle on policies and actions on en.wiki? While your good faith actions are appreciated, some of the issues identified at the ANI could be avoided if you had a person to check on stuff with. Winner 42 has offered to volunteer, I would suggest that you read WP:Mentor and if you are agreeable, then discuss with Winner 42 on the general framework of this mentorship. cheers. — Spaceman Spiff 08:26, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
- Hello
User:SpacemanSpiff, Thanks for your suggestion. I am interested for being mentored, by another editor. I cannot find any links for registering on
Winner 42. So can you please help me how to get mentored.
- Please discuss with him at User talk:Winner 42. Also, sign your posts with ~~~~ at the end of every post to a talk page. cheers. — Spaceman Spiff 19:52, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot. Josu4u ( talk) 19:56, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
- Hello
User:SpacemanSpiff, Thanks for your suggestion. I am interested for being mentored, by another editor. I cannot find any links for registering on
Winner 42. So can you please help me how to get mentored.
- ( edit conflict)Hi Josu4u. I'm interested in mentoring you. A little about me: I've been on Wikipedia for over five years now and have experience in both New Page Patrol and assisting other users. I currently am running two other mentorships through the Adopt-a-User program. In general, Mentorship is a fairly informal process so we can structure it however you would like. Several options include talk page conversations, skype conversations, adoption courses (such as the course designed by WormTT), and/or anything else you can think of. I'm here if you need any help or have any questions. Winner 42 Talk to me! 20:13, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
What is the problem of the Article Akhil G Krishnan. Please don't delete the article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akhilgkrishnanmnr ( talk • contribs) 12:56, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
- Hello Akhilgkrishnanmnr, That article is a self promotion and it doesn't have any references regarding the importance. Josu4u ( talk) 13:00, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello, its ChrisMiller203. I'd like to know what you would like for me to do so that my page looks like an article. I did not want for it to be promotional. I will make the required changes to save my page from deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChrisMiller203 ( talk • contribs) 19:22, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
Come on guy, how can you request deletion, I'm busy preparing to start about this page Smart Family. I appeal to do undeletion for this page, and let me finish it first then you can decide whether it should be tagged or be published. Ras Benjih ( talk) 10:30, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
|
|
of Engineering and Technology, Trivandrum |
| of Engineering and Technology, Trivandrum Josu4u ( talk) 12:17, 15 October 2011 (UTC) |
Speedy deletion declined: Saarah Hameed Ahmed
Hello Josu4u. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Saarah Hameed Ahmed, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Sending this to AFD, because it does have plausable sources. Thank you. Courcelles ( talk) 23:03, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
- Hello talk, Reason for why i noticed for speedy deletion of Saarah Hameed Ahmed is : The references used within are from some religious websites and i cannot find any articles from any major newspapers reporting about this news through their websites. Josu4u ( talk) 23:49, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'd quite like to know your reasoning for un-reviewing Sai Ankur. -- Non-Dropframe talk 10:50, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
- Hello
Non-Dropframe, I cannot find any importance of the article and it looks it should be speedy deleted, so when i Curate the newly created article, i found it to be reviewed by someone. That's why i un-reviewed. May be its caused because of time delay from my side.
Josu4u (
talk) 10:58, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
- I marked the article for deletion and the article is automatically marked as reviewed thereafter. Marking the article as reviewed does not mean it has been found as acceptable for inclusion, it merely means that it no longer requires editor's attention. -- Non-Dropframe talk 11:01, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
Speedy deletion declined: The glossary
I am not sure why you are marking The glossary for speedy deletion. Mention of The glossary at /info/en/?search=This_Is_Water is currently a red link and it is better for people to know something about them. Robin Singh ( talk) 11:29, 21 September 2015 (UTC)