This page 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. |
Letting you know Wihtred of Kent has been selected for December 3, 2018 and Other Worlds, Universe Science Fiction, and Science Stories for December 7. Thanks. Hope you are doing well.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 20:15, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
You might want to weigh in this discussion about the Dhammakaya Movement. Thanks.-- Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 11:52, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
Seasonal Greetings and Good Wishes | ||
Seasonal greetings for 2018, and best wishes for 2019 to all who continue to fight for good practice and higher standards in building this great encyclopedia. Brianboulton ( talk) 11:07, 16 December 2018 (UTC) |
Gothic Seasons Greetings | ||
Wishing you all the best for x-mass. Mike we have had minor differences of openion in the long and distant past, but I very much respect the trojan work and thought you put into the day to day tending to, and overall guidance of, the FAC process. Ceoil ( talk) 19:56, 16 December 2018 (UTC) |
A very happy Christmas and New Year to you! | |
|
Happy Saturnalia | ||
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and troll-free. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:03, 18 December 2018 (UTC) |
Books & Bytes
Issue 31, October – Novemeber 2018
French version of Books & Bytes is now available on meta!
Read the full newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 14:34, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
Hi Mike, I've been working on a recap/discussion starter to follow up the RfC at User:Wugapodes/Bibliography review draft. My plan was to tidy it up a bit (probably shorten it a bit) and seek some feedback at WP:VPI, but given the current discussion on WT:FAC I think it's best to wait a bit longer. I think taking the ideas from both these discussions to the Idea Lab for wider input would result in better ideas on how to move forward. What are your thoughts? (Also, you're free to edit that draft all you like) Wugapodes [thɑk] [ˈkan.ˌʧɹɪbz] 07:01, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
Season's Greetings | ||
Wishing everybody a Happy Holiday Season, and all best wishes for the New Year! Adoration of the Shepherds (Cariani) is my Wiki-Christmas card to all for this year. Johnbod ( talk) 10:26, 23 December 2018 (UTC) |
Austral season's greetings | |
Tuck into this! We've made about three of these in the last few days for various festivities. Supermarkets are stuffed with cheap berries. Season's greetings! Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 22:12, 24 December 2018 (UTC) |
Hello Mike Christie: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 18:44, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
Greetings and happy holidays.
I was wondering if you had some time available. I am planning sometime next year to try to get 1257 Samalas eruption through FAC and since that's a topic a mite more complex than my usual volcano articles I was wondering if you could take a gander at it before it's sent to sink or swim. Thanks! Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 20:20, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the History of US science fiction and fantasy magazines to 1950 article has been scheduled as today's featured article for January 11, 2019. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 11, 2019, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.
We also suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors on the day before and the day of this TFA. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:55, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 11:25, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
Please check out "Happy" once more, for a smile, and sharing (a Nobel Peace Prize), and resolutions. I wanted that for 1 January, but then wasn't sad about having our music pictured instead. Not too late for resolutions, New Year or not. DYK that he probably kept me on Wikipedia, back in 2012? By the line (which brought him to my attention, and earned the first precious in br'erly style) that I added to my editnotice, in fond memory? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 14:34, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
I was told to seek you out. I'm a new/old Wikipedian, currently writing the definitive set of articles on SOLRAD. Still trying to find the easiest, most efficient way to do this so that I can spend the maximum time writing good content and the minimum burning out on tedium.
Anyway, a friend noticed my interest in science fiction magazines and suggested I seek you out. :)
Cheers!
-- Neopeius ( talk) 15:09, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
Progress is typically the result of compromises. Some folks do not want QPQ because some people would not be good reviewers, and would give shoddy reviews in order to do FAC at all. Others give good reviews, and want to nominate multiple articles at a time, but we could use more reviewers/reviews. What if we had QPQ for multiple nominations? The levels could be very different (e.g. two nominations at once requires six new reviews, two new reviews, etc), but that can be decided later. QPQ would not be needed if you were nominating one FAC at a time. This is partially based off of your own research of QPQ for yourself and trying to come up with a method to use the results. What do you think? Kees08 (Talk) 19:25, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
Coenwulf is scheduled to run on the main page February 2. I'm helping user:dank with blurbs. My proposed blurb on Coenwulf is in my sandbox. I'm writing because I added that Mercia was an Anglo-Saxon kingdom and that Offa was one of the most powerful kings of the period. I got that from the Offa article, to help the main page readership. Is this OK? Anything else to change? Johnboddie ( talk) 17:50, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
Hey Mike, I see you have access to JSTOR. Is there any chance you could get me a copy of this article and email it to me at hjmwiki at gmail dot com? If it's not too much trouble, I might have some more requests in the coming days! Thanks very much, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:10, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
This is to let you know that Coenwulf of Mercia has been scheduled as WP:TFA for 2 February 2019. Please check that the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/February 2, 2019. Thanks! Ealdgyth - Talk 15:54, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
Hello, just a note to say that User:Lingzhi2/reviewsourcecheck has been update to add the option to toggle it on or off.
. The installed script will add a tab to the drop-down tab at the top, located between the 'watchlist star' and the search box (using the vector.js skin). The tab toggles between "Hide ref check" and "Show ref check" with displaying the errors as the default option. Please do drop me a line if you have any problems or suggestions. Tks. ♦ Lingzhi2 (talk) 15:05, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot ( talk) 18:08, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot ( talk) 18:09, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
Greetings,
back when we were discussing 1257 Samalas eruption you did advise to send it to peer review before FAC to get more eyes, a suggestion I took up as Allison Guyot wasn't out of FAC yet. Now that it has moved from FAC (promoted), I am wondering if you still think it needs more eyes or whether it can be sent to FAC straightaway. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 21:47, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 32, January – February 2019
French version of Books & Bytes is now available on meta!
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 03:29, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
Hello again! I have decided to return to the FAC process, as I would like try and put some articles through there at some point in time. This time around, I am just going to have more fun with the process and not take it as seriously. If something does not get promoted, it is not the end of the world and it is really no big deal. I have recently nominated the following FAC, and I have already received three support votes and an image review. I was wondering if you could possibly do a source review if you had the time, since it is a rather small article. I completely understand if you would not like to do so, but I figured that I might as well reach out and ask. Hope you are having a great week so far! Aoba47 ( talk) 05:37, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
Hello, I was wondering if you could possibly help out with the above nomination. It has been up for roughly a month, and has received six support votes so far. However, Laser brain believes there should be a more thorough prose review, and I was wondering if you could help with that. I completely understand if you would not like to. It is just frustrating since the nomination is older and it is unlikely a new reviewer will notice something that far down the FAC list in my opinion. Hope you are having a wonderful week so far! Aoba47 ( talk) 20:03, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
Mike Christie, I was wondering if you would be able to take over the review. The original reviewer declared their inability to finish this back in late November and posted for "2ndopinion" status in the hopes of attracting someone to take over, but no one has and it's now over half a year since the review was first opened. The nominator is still active. Thanks for anything you can do. Hope all is well. BlueMoonset ( talk) 01:13, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the Satellite Science Fiction article has been scheduled as today's featured article for April 11, 2019. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:29, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for the article about "one of the many science fiction magazines launched in the 1950s, and by no means the worst. Its main claim to fame is probably that it published Philip K. Dick's first novel, The Cosmic Puppets. The publisher, Leo Margulies, was a veteran of the magazine publishing world, and kept it for a couple of years before making the fatal mistake of changing from digest format to letter-size, in an attempt to get more exposure on newsstands. Sales did not compensate for the increased production costs and the magazine was closed down in 1959. Interestingly, the June 1959 issue was in galley proofs when the decision was made, and four copies are known to survive, making it one of the rarest of all science fiction magazines."! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:23, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Diligence | |
Thanks, as always, for your ongoing provision of FAC stats. They are always useful and interesting, and have the effect of reminding me to do more reviewing. Cheers – SchroCat ( talk) 23:24, 13 April 2019 (UTC) |
Is there a bot that could find and rank pagesize (maybe via drpda's readable prose stats) of all current FA articles, and far more importantly, generate graphs of mean pagesize of FAs promoted in each period through time (e.g, in Jan. 2017 the mean size was xxx, or perhaps in Jan-Apr, or whatever time range seems reasonable/practical). Actually, given a time series of raw data (promotion date/readable prose size) Many stats and graphs could be done via simple Excel spreadsheets... Ideally the bot would find pagesize at time of promotion (there's a link to the promoted version on article talk), but since FAs usually don't change much, maybe current size would do. But a graph through time is the key point here. Tks! ♦ Lingzhi2 (talk) 23:42, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
Mike Christie, I was wondering whether you could talk over this GA review, which has been open since last June and is currently the longest-open review by over 100 days.
Gatoclass has agreed that the best thing to do is to give over the review to someone else for a number of reasons, and since I know you'll do a good job with it, I'm hoping that you'll have the time to take it on. Thank you very much for anything you can do, and apologies once again for my incomplete investigation the last time I asked you for a review. BlueMoonset ( talk) 14:58, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
Hello, I hope you are having a wonderful week! I was wondering if you are willing to provide feedback for an article that I’m eyeing for an FA nomination in the future (no specific timeline; work and other commitments have limited my activity on here). A peer review has been open since mid-January to a tepid response, and given the inactivity of WP:PR, I doubt it’ll inspire much more discussion than that. Whatever you are able to do, I’d very much appreciate it. DAP 💅 20:56, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
Mike, in the recent PR for Cut the Crap, Ian suggested that I contact you for advice on the "critical reception" section. These, imo are parts of popular music articles that can go horrible wrong, i.e. become quote farms, and I remember you writing advice on how to deal with them, but cant find it to hand. Anyway, I would very much like if you could take a look, any structural pointers, in particular for this page, or in general for artist / album / song articles, would be great. I uderstand if you are busy and thanks either way. Ceoil ( talk) 00:26, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
Hey Mike, I’ve been working on the British National (Overseas) article for a while and I’ve listed it as an FAC. I’ve been able to get three supports so far, and I wanted to reach out to ask if you’d be willing to review (and hopefully support!) it as well. Would appreciate your thoughts on the article if you could take a look at it. Thanks, Horserice ( talk) 21:34, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 20:56, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
Hello. I hope your week is going well. I have been inspired lately to work on literature articles, and I have a question about it.
I am currently working on the Little Eva: The Flower of the South article. It is a very odd slice of American history. It is very much a rough draft and I will be working on it a lot more in the future. I found a nice amount of scholarly articles on the book, but I cannot find any critical reviews or information on its commercial performance. It is an older book published for a niche audience and even its exact publication date is uncertain. Given that, I am not surprised about these two gaps. I tried looking through newspapers.com to no success. I could access newspapers from the right time period, but there is just not any information.
I would like to put this article up for GAN when I am done (and possibly a peer review and an FAC, but that is very far in the future). I am concerned how reviewer would respond to the lack of this type of information in the article. Do you have any recommendations for this? Apologies for the random question. Aoba47 ( talk) 04:51, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
You know the drill - 3 May 2019. Blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 3, 2019. Ealdgyth - Talk 20:32, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
Mike Christie, I was wondering whether you could take a look at this GAN, and perhaps take over the review.
The review was started on January 10 with a significant list of issues. The nominator replied on January 31 that the issues had been addressed. Since then, nothing, despite a ping from the nominator in early March.
The reviewer,
IJzeren Jan, posted a "retired" banner on their talk page on February 25; they were still doing some edits at the end of March, so I posted
User talk:IJzeren Jan#Talk:Toki Pona/GA3 to inquire; their reply a week later seemed to be saying they would/might get back to it when they had the time, but it would be better if others look at the nomination as well
. It's been another six weeks, they haven't edited Wikipedia in a month, and I think it's time to consider this abandoned.
Thank you for anything you can do. BlueMoonset ( talk) 15:52, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 33, March – April 2019
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 06:41, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
The file File:Aelle name.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
unused, low-res, no obvious use
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
files for discussion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 01:00, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
TFA for 30 June 2019. You know the rest.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 19:44, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 34, May – June 2019
French version of Books & Bytes is now available on meta!
Read the full newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 14:21, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the Science Fiction Quarterly article has been scheduled as today's featured article for July 14, 2019. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 14, 2019, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.
We also suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors up to the day of this TFA. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:19, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
You deserve this for all the good work on the FP. Cheers – SchroCat ( talk) 16:35, 15 July 2019 (UTC) |
It's been some years in the making, but I hope to send Ursula K. Le Guin to FAC soon. Given the scope of the article, I would very much appreciate some additional feedback before I venture there, if you happen to have the time; mostly about the broad strokes, rather than the nitty-gritty. I already have an article at FAC, so there isn't a hurry; and of course, I understand completely if you're too busy. Vanamonde ( Talk) 00:28, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
Hey. Hope things are going well. I'm still gonna make a graph, or a few graphs, of FA prose size thru time (moving averages etc). I'm using exported data rather than a bor. But I will be unable to work on it for two or perhaps even three weeks. If you wanna do that using your bot, then pls let me know so I won't spend more time on it. But if not, I'll get it done very soon after my busy spell ends. ... Oh after I pressed "Publish" I saw the thread above where you mentioned you're busy too. Best of luck in your endeavors. Cheers. ♦ Lingzhi2 (talk) 16:03, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
This is to let you know that Analog Science Fiction and Fact has been scheduled as WP:TFA for 6 August 2019. Please check that the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/August 6, 2019. Thanks! Ealdgyth - Talk 14:38, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for Analog Science Fiction and Fact, "about the most important magazine in the history of science fiction. For a few years, from the late 1930s, the editor, John W. Campbell, completely changed the field, and launched the careers of numerous famous sf writers, most notably Isaac Asimov and Robert Heinlein"! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:37, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
Just FYI, I put in a bot request to check the prose size of FAs a long time ago; no response. So I'll have to do it myself. It may take weeks because I've never done it before. First couple of weeks will probably be spent just reading. Prefer to do it in Python but Javascript would be kinda possible. Hope all is well. Saw the Framageddon. That WMF action is the most un-Wikipedian or anti-Wikipedian thing I've ever seen, bar none-point-none. Recall that ... what was it called? .. Esperanza was neutron-torpedoed for secrecy. WMF is Esperanza on zombie-apocalypse steroids now... Again, hope all is well... Cheers. ♦ Lingzhi2 (talk) 10:08, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the Science Fantasy (magazine) article has been scheduled as today's featured article for October 25, 2019. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 25, 2019, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.
For Featured Articles promoted on or after October 1, 2018, there will be an existing blurb linked from the FAC talk page, which is likely to be transferred to the TFA page by a coordinator at some point.
We suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors up to the day of this TFA. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:17, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the Science Fantasy (magazine) article has been scheduled as today's featured article for October 25, 2019. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 25, 2019, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.
For Featured Articles promoted on or after October 1, 2018, there will be an existing blurb linked from the FAC talk page, which is likely to be transferred to the TFA page by a coordinator at some point.
We suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors up to the day of this TFA. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:17, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 35, July – August 2019
On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 06:58, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 36, September – October 2019
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 05:21, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the Venture Science Fiction article has been scheduled as today's featured article for January 4, 2020. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 4, 2020, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.
For Featured Articles promoted on or after October 1, 2018, there will be an existing blurb linked from the FAC talk page, which is likely to be transferred to the TFA page by a coordinator at some point.
We suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:17, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
A very happy Christmas and New Year to you! | |
|
Io, Saturnalia! | ||
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:34, 20 December 2019 (UTC) |
Faithful friends who are dear to us | ||
... gather near to us once more. May your heart be light and your troubles out of sight, now and in the New Year. |
Hello again! Hope you are having a wonderful end of the year. An editor recently suggested that my current FAC could use a "fresh set of eyes", and I was wondering if you could help if you had time or interest. I have done quite a bit of editing to the article in the past few days to address the FAC concerns and incorporate new sources, but I will refrain from doing any edits to the future to allow time for potential editors to read through and comment on a stable version. I would of course understand if you either are not interest or do not have the time for this, but I thought I might as well ask since you have helped me a lot in the past. Either way, happy holidays! Aoba47 ( talk) 23:43, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
Mike, thanks as always for your stats. It is great that whatever people 'feel' about the movements in the FAC process, you can provide some solid numbers they can take into account. Thanks very much for these - and for the guilty feeling I get when I realise I have been rather lazy (or busy) over the preceding month to have done much reviewing work. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 22:48, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
Hi Mike Christie: Thank you for reviewing Charles Morgan (businessman). Illness forced me into an extended hiatus and I am returning to Wikipedia editing, though at a lower level of participation than before. I understand why you cannot pass the article without addressing the issues. Wikipedia must go on! I will reread the article, take a look at the issues, and I will notify you when I have things in order. Thanks for your patience, Oldsanfelipe2 ( talk) 17:38, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for improving and reviewing Charles Morgan (businessman). It's unclear to me whether this passed. A bot posted a "pass" message on the article's talk page, but another bot posted a "fail" message on my talk page. Best, Oldsanfelipe2 ( talk) 23:41, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 07:10, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
Seven years! |
---|
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 10:39, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
Thank you today for Science Fantasy (magazine), "one of the mainstays of British science fiction for seventeen years, from 1950 to 1967. It helped launched the careers of Michael Moorcock and J.G. Ballard, and is also remembered as a showcase for the less famous Thomas Burnett Swann, an American author of historical fantasies."! - Also for your monthly stats, - so to be not active there as much as I'd want to, - three recent deaths on th Main page today that I cared for, and missing Márta Kurtág, - a sad record, - keeps me busy. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:52, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
Thank you today for Super Science Stories, "a companion to Astonishing Stories, which recently went through FAC: Super Science Stories and Astonishing Stories were sister magazines for much of their existence. Both were fairly minor magazines in the overall history of science fiction, but they had their moments and I hope I've managed to highlight them."! - Would you have time to look at a FAC in need? For this year, I want to write it's companion, much is still missing, so please understand that I'm not seen at other FACs right now. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:51, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
This is to let you know that Ghost Stories (magazine) has been scheduled as WP:TFA for 3 February 2020. Please check that the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/February 3, 2020. Thanks! Ealdgyth - Talk 20:16, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
Hi Mike. I just looked at your FAC stats for the month. Thanks for compiling these. Not being a significant participant in FAC, I was curious to see if the source review I started was reflected (after confirming that I started it in January), and I didn't see it. (It's in Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Bank_War/archive3#Source_review_(content).) I'm not complaining, simply wondering if it was not included because it has not concluded yet (the review, and/or the FAC), or was just missed. I can imagine a few different approaches to compiling this data and I'm not sure which you use. Outriggr ( talk) 06:57, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
I was checking that I have reviewed at least 3x the number of FAs that I have and was wondering if you had a page with that stat. I have only recently started participating in the FA process (within the last couple of years, maybe 3 at most?). Kees08 (Talk) 03:46, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
Mike--no one I know knows serials like you do. I know this isn't exactly 1950s UFO stuff, but could you maybe do a short run-through, trimming and adding a reference or two? I know you can do in five minutes what would take me hours to do... Thanks for any help you can give! Drmies ( talk) 17:04, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for March 23, 2020. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/March 23, 2020.— Wehwalt ( talk) 23:21, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 18:50, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
try it now ♦ Lingzhi2 (talk) 01:07, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi. I found your name at a recent nomination and wanted to ask if you could perform a source review for my nomination of Aftermath (Rolling Stones album). It has received several substantial reviews, leading to 4 supports and a successful image review. isento ( talk) 15:27, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
Hey Mike. Just wanted to follow back up with you on your comments on Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Open Here/archive2. I think where we left things there was an outstanding question about the use of one quotation blurb. I had responded that with my rationale for why its used the way it is, but I'm also fine with removing it if you like. Hope you don't mind me hitting up your talk page! I know that when unresolved comments are lingering it sometimes discourages other editors from chiming in, and the last FAC closed largely due to inactivity, so I'm just a little anxious to keep this one going if possible. LOL Thanks for your feedback and participation so far! — Hunter Kahn 15:34, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
Hi Mike! Long time, no talk. I do hope all's well with you, not least in these crazy times we're living in. I'm writing because I have (again) some students working on some articles this semester, which we hope to submit for GA consideration, and wondered if you could give them any feedback. The one that's closest to nomination, I think, is Gregorio Cortez. It's still a bit ragged at the edges, and in some ways its an odd topic in any case (about someone who is mostly known for one incident, celebrated in song and later analyzed in a rather important book), but I think it's nearly there, thanks to hard work from User:Pechodor13, User:Chr66, and User:Maymolina. Any feedback you had for them, with a GA nomination in mind, would be very welcome. Only, of course, if you have the time. Thanks! -- jbmurray ( talk • contribs) 19:47, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
Thank you today for Naruto, "about a Japanese manga series that focus on Naruto Uzumaki, a character who wishes for acknowledgement from the people in his hometown and to become their new leader"! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:30, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Knap Hill Camp map M.E. Cunnington 1911.png. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:
{{
Di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}}
below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason>
with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 03:23, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
Hi Mike; hope that you're doing well and staying safe amid the current viral outbreak. I haven't been on Wikipedia for the past week and thus only just logged on to find both that the Chestnuts Long Barrow has been awarded FA status and that you had raised concerns about the article (and, by extension, other articles in the series) having too much contextual discussion. The FAC might have ended I'd be very happy to discuss this further. I certainly wouldn't want to see much removed as I think the contextual information is important but I'd be interested in hearing your suggestions for what might be cut or trimmed back. All the best. Midnightblueowl ( talk) 10:49, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
The file File:VisualEditorTableCopyBugScreenshot.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
unused, low-res, no obvious use
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
files for discussion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 01:01, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
Although a newcomer to Wikipedia editing, I am extremely knowledgeable on the subject. Notifying you this article is repeatedly incorrect and a biased point of view that is non encyclopedic. I am pointing this out in order to obtain a neutral non aggressive stance for Wikipedia. Therefore how do you propose we move forward to rectify this Wikipedia dilemma? Regards and be well, Miss-Pronunciation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Miss-Pronunciation ( talk • contribs) 18:33, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
I have added an extra image to the Marvel Science Stories page because the image is to be the "Picture of the day" on 18 April, and I needed to anchor the caption to an article. If you feel the extra image should not be there, maybe you could remove it after the 18th. Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 10:20, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
Hi!
I'm the FA nominator of the article -- I wanted to ask for more feedback on the nomination page, but it's already archived so asking here is probably a good alternative.
First of all, thank you for the review! I wasn't aware of the article's weak spots, and perhaps there are much more of them I'm still unaware of. I have to learn a lot when it comes to comprehensive writing in English (since it's not my mother tongue), so please correct me more if you can.
I've made minor fixes per your review, and have some responses/questions:
More to come. Thank you! Dhio ( talk?) 07:31, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
A note for any talk page watchers: I am caught in a global block and can't edit from my home PC; fortunately I can VPN to my work PC and post from there, but I can't do most of my editing from there because of poor response time. I'm emailing the stewards and will resume editing here once the block is lifted. Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 09:50, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
There is an article in tomorrow's issue of Nature on dating archaeological pottery by measuring the amount of 14C in absorbed food residues.
Let me know if you don't have access. - Aa77zz ( talk) 18:53, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 38, January – April 2020
On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --15:57, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
I'm put Unknown (magazine) up on the main page for May 6, 2020. Please note that I attempted to write the blurb - feel free to whack it however you see fit, it is only the second blurb I've tried to write! Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 6, 2020. -- Ealdgyth ( talk) 15:51, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the The Thrill Book article has been scheduled as today's featured article for June 25, 2020. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/June 25, 2020.— Wehwalt ( talk) 00:51, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
Hi, I didn't see any rules about how this process of urgent FAC submissions works, and that's why I took the liberty of adding the nomination myself. I'm pretty upset about the limited interest the article is generating. Do you have any idea what I should do to attract a review from one of the reviewers? It was suggested that I invite editors on the Wikiprojects, but nothing has come out of it. Shahid • Talk2me 22:49, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, since you have been helpful a week ago, I would really be grateful if you could weigh in on this discussion I started. Shahid • Talk2me 17:55, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
Hi - I just noticed your FACstats page. Do you do this by hand or is it auto-generated somehow? I run the bot that updates WP:WBFAN, which picks out (at least tries to pick out) the nominator(s) for each successful nomination. I noticed your conversation with Kees08 from a while ago where several of his/her noms were missing from the list at WBFAN. If you've noticed any other anomalies, please let me know (and, if I don't respond, keep hounding me until I do - I'm not very active here at the moment). Thanks! -- Rick Block ( talk) 23:06, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Doctor Death (magazine) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of SchroCat -- SchroCat ( talk) 09:40, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
The article Doctor Death (magazine) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Doctor Death (magazine) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of SchroCat -- SchroCat ( talk) 08:21, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 39, May – June 2020
On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 06:13, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
File:Infinitysf.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate
copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{
PD-self}}
(to release all rights), {{
self|cc-by-sa-4.0}}
(to require that you be credited), or any tag
here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. -- MifterBot ( Talk • Contribs • Owner) 12:46, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly. |
"The PL was formed by the Brotherhood of Professional Base Ball Players in November 1989" [3] you're off by a mere century! Therapyisgood ( talk) 03:57, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Anna Hunger is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anna Hunger until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Clarityfiend ( talk) 06:34, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
Thank you today for The Thrill Book, "a missed opportunity; a precursor to the pulp magazines that began to specialize in fantasy and science fiction in the 1920s. It's famous now mostly because of that failure, and since it was never common to begin with its reputation has led to it becoming fabulously rare -- one historian commented that a full run of 16 issues would cost about as much as a luxury car. Despite the fact that it is no longer regarded as an sf and fantasy magazine, its reputation means that it gets quite a bit of coverage in magazine history sources"! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:05, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
This page 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. |
Letting you know Wihtred of Kent has been selected for December 3, 2018 and Other Worlds, Universe Science Fiction, and Science Stories for December 7. Thanks. Hope you are doing well.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 20:15, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
You might want to weigh in this discussion about the Dhammakaya Movement. Thanks.-- Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 11:52, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
Seasonal Greetings and Good Wishes | ||
Seasonal greetings for 2018, and best wishes for 2019 to all who continue to fight for good practice and higher standards in building this great encyclopedia. Brianboulton ( talk) 11:07, 16 December 2018 (UTC) |
Gothic Seasons Greetings | ||
Wishing you all the best for x-mass. Mike we have had minor differences of openion in the long and distant past, but I very much respect the trojan work and thought you put into the day to day tending to, and overall guidance of, the FAC process. Ceoil ( talk) 19:56, 16 December 2018 (UTC) |
A very happy Christmas and New Year to you! | |
|
Happy Saturnalia | ||
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and troll-free. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:03, 18 December 2018 (UTC) |
Books & Bytes
Issue 31, October – Novemeber 2018
French version of Books & Bytes is now available on meta!
Read the full newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 14:34, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
Hi Mike, I've been working on a recap/discussion starter to follow up the RfC at User:Wugapodes/Bibliography review draft. My plan was to tidy it up a bit (probably shorten it a bit) and seek some feedback at WP:VPI, but given the current discussion on WT:FAC I think it's best to wait a bit longer. I think taking the ideas from both these discussions to the Idea Lab for wider input would result in better ideas on how to move forward. What are your thoughts? (Also, you're free to edit that draft all you like) Wugapodes [thɑk] [ˈkan.ˌʧɹɪbz] 07:01, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
Season's Greetings | ||
Wishing everybody a Happy Holiday Season, and all best wishes for the New Year! Adoration of the Shepherds (Cariani) is my Wiki-Christmas card to all for this year. Johnbod ( talk) 10:26, 23 December 2018 (UTC) |
Austral season's greetings | |
Tuck into this! We've made about three of these in the last few days for various festivities. Supermarkets are stuffed with cheap berries. Season's greetings! Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 22:12, 24 December 2018 (UTC) |
Hello Mike Christie: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 18:44, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
Greetings and happy holidays.
I was wondering if you had some time available. I am planning sometime next year to try to get 1257 Samalas eruption through FAC and since that's a topic a mite more complex than my usual volcano articles I was wondering if you could take a gander at it before it's sent to sink or swim. Thanks! Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 20:20, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the History of US science fiction and fantasy magazines to 1950 article has been scheduled as today's featured article for January 11, 2019. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 11, 2019, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.
We also suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors on the day before and the day of this TFA. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:55, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 11:25, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
Please check out "Happy" once more, for a smile, and sharing (a Nobel Peace Prize), and resolutions. I wanted that for 1 January, but then wasn't sad about having our music pictured instead. Not too late for resolutions, New Year or not. DYK that he probably kept me on Wikipedia, back in 2012? By the line (which brought him to my attention, and earned the first precious in br'erly style) that I added to my editnotice, in fond memory? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 14:34, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
I was told to seek you out. I'm a new/old Wikipedian, currently writing the definitive set of articles on SOLRAD. Still trying to find the easiest, most efficient way to do this so that I can spend the maximum time writing good content and the minimum burning out on tedium.
Anyway, a friend noticed my interest in science fiction magazines and suggested I seek you out. :)
Cheers!
-- Neopeius ( talk) 15:09, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
Progress is typically the result of compromises. Some folks do not want QPQ because some people would not be good reviewers, and would give shoddy reviews in order to do FAC at all. Others give good reviews, and want to nominate multiple articles at a time, but we could use more reviewers/reviews. What if we had QPQ for multiple nominations? The levels could be very different (e.g. two nominations at once requires six new reviews, two new reviews, etc), but that can be decided later. QPQ would not be needed if you were nominating one FAC at a time. This is partially based off of your own research of QPQ for yourself and trying to come up with a method to use the results. What do you think? Kees08 (Talk) 19:25, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
Coenwulf is scheduled to run on the main page February 2. I'm helping user:dank with blurbs. My proposed blurb on Coenwulf is in my sandbox. I'm writing because I added that Mercia was an Anglo-Saxon kingdom and that Offa was one of the most powerful kings of the period. I got that from the Offa article, to help the main page readership. Is this OK? Anything else to change? Johnboddie ( talk) 17:50, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
Hey Mike, I see you have access to JSTOR. Is there any chance you could get me a copy of this article and email it to me at hjmwiki at gmail dot com? If it's not too much trouble, I might have some more requests in the coming days! Thanks very much, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:10, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
This is to let you know that Coenwulf of Mercia has been scheduled as WP:TFA for 2 February 2019. Please check that the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/February 2, 2019. Thanks! Ealdgyth - Talk 15:54, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
Hello, just a note to say that User:Lingzhi2/reviewsourcecheck has been update to add the option to toggle it on or off.
. The installed script will add a tab to the drop-down tab at the top, located between the 'watchlist star' and the search box (using the vector.js skin). The tab toggles between "Hide ref check" and "Show ref check" with displaying the errors as the default option. Please do drop me a line if you have any problems or suggestions. Tks. ♦ Lingzhi2 (talk) 15:05, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot ( talk) 18:08, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot ( talk) 18:09, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
Greetings,
back when we were discussing 1257 Samalas eruption you did advise to send it to peer review before FAC to get more eyes, a suggestion I took up as Allison Guyot wasn't out of FAC yet. Now that it has moved from FAC (promoted), I am wondering if you still think it needs more eyes or whether it can be sent to FAC straightaway. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 21:47, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 32, January – February 2019
French version of Books & Bytes is now available on meta!
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 03:29, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
Hello again! I have decided to return to the FAC process, as I would like try and put some articles through there at some point in time. This time around, I am just going to have more fun with the process and not take it as seriously. If something does not get promoted, it is not the end of the world and it is really no big deal. I have recently nominated the following FAC, and I have already received three support votes and an image review. I was wondering if you could possibly do a source review if you had the time, since it is a rather small article. I completely understand if you would not like to do so, but I figured that I might as well reach out and ask. Hope you are having a great week so far! Aoba47 ( talk) 05:37, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
Hello, I was wondering if you could possibly help out with the above nomination. It has been up for roughly a month, and has received six support votes so far. However, Laser brain believes there should be a more thorough prose review, and I was wondering if you could help with that. I completely understand if you would not like to. It is just frustrating since the nomination is older and it is unlikely a new reviewer will notice something that far down the FAC list in my opinion. Hope you are having a wonderful week so far! Aoba47 ( talk) 20:03, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
Mike Christie, I was wondering if you would be able to take over the review. The original reviewer declared their inability to finish this back in late November and posted for "2ndopinion" status in the hopes of attracting someone to take over, but no one has and it's now over half a year since the review was first opened. The nominator is still active. Thanks for anything you can do. Hope all is well. BlueMoonset ( talk) 01:13, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the Satellite Science Fiction article has been scheduled as today's featured article for April 11, 2019. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:29, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for the article about "one of the many science fiction magazines launched in the 1950s, and by no means the worst. Its main claim to fame is probably that it published Philip K. Dick's first novel, The Cosmic Puppets. The publisher, Leo Margulies, was a veteran of the magazine publishing world, and kept it for a couple of years before making the fatal mistake of changing from digest format to letter-size, in an attempt to get more exposure on newsstands. Sales did not compensate for the increased production costs and the magazine was closed down in 1959. Interestingly, the June 1959 issue was in galley proofs when the decision was made, and four copies are known to survive, making it one of the rarest of all science fiction magazines."! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:23, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Diligence | |
Thanks, as always, for your ongoing provision of FAC stats. They are always useful and interesting, and have the effect of reminding me to do more reviewing. Cheers – SchroCat ( talk) 23:24, 13 April 2019 (UTC) |
Is there a bot that could find and rank pagesize (maybe via drpda's readable prose stats) of all current FA articles, and far more importantly, generate graphs of mean pagesize of FAs promoted in each period through time (e.g, in Jan. 2017 the mean size was xxx, or perhaps in Jan-Apr, or whatever time range seems reasonable/practical). Actually, given a time series of raw data (promotion date/readable prose size) Many stats and graphs could be done via simple Excel spreadsheets... Ideally the bot would find pagesize at time of promotion (there's a link to the promoted version on article talk), but since FAs usually don't change much, maybe current size would do. But a graph through time is the key point here. Tks! ♦ Lingzhi2 (talk) 23:42, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
Mike Christie, I was wondering whether you could talk over this GA review, which has been open since last June and is currently the longest-open review by over 100 days.
Gatoclass has agreed that the best thing to do is to give over the review to someone else for a number of reasons, and since I know you'll do a good job with it, I'm hoping that you'll have the time to take it on. Thank you very much for anything you can do, and apologies once again for my incomplete investigation the last time I asked you for a review. BlueMoonset ( talk) 14:58, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
Hello, I hope you are having a wonderful week! I was wondering if you are willing to provide feedback for an article that I’m eyeing for an FA nomination in the future (no specific timeline; work and other commitments have limited my activity on here). A peer review has been open since mid-January to a tepid response, and given the inactivity of WP:PR, I doubt it’ll inspire much more discussion than that. Whatever you are able to do, I’d very much appreciate it. DAP 💅 20:56, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
Mike, in the recent PR for Cut the Crap, Ian suggested that I contact you for advice on the "critical reception" section. These, imo are parts of popular music articles that can go horrible wrong, i.e. become quote farms, and I remember you writing advice on how to deal with them, but cant find it to hand. Anyway, I would very much like if you could take a look, any structural pointers, in particular for this page, or in general for artist / album / song articles, would be great. I uderstand if you are busy and thanks either way. Ceoil ( talk) 00:26, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
Hey Mike, I’ve been working on the British National (Overseas) article for a while and I’ve listed it as an FAC. I’ve been able to get three supports so far, and I wanted to reach out to ask if you’d be willing to review (and hopefully support!) it as well. Would appreciate your thoughts on the article if you could take a look at it. Thanks, Horserice ( talk) 21:34, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 20:56, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
Hello. I hope your week is going well. I have been inspired lately to work on literature articles, and I have a question about it.
I am currently working on the Little Eva: The Flower of the South article. It is a very odd slice of American history. It is very much a rough draft and I will be working on it a lot more in the future. I found a nice amount of scholarly articles on the book, but I cannot find any critical reviews or information on its commercial performance. It is an older book published for a niche audience and even its exact publication date is uncertain. Given that, I am not surprised about these two gaps. I tried looking through newspapers.com to no success. I could access newspapers from the right time period, but there is just not any information.
I would like to put this article up for GAN when I am done (and possibly a peer review and an FAC, but that is very far in the future). I am concerned how reviewer would respond to the lack of this type of information in the article. Do you have any recommendations for this? Apologies for the random question. Aoba47 ( talk) 04:51, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
You know the drill - 3 May 2019. Blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 3, 2019. Ealdgyth - Talk 20:32, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
Mike Christie, I was wondering whether you could take a look at this GAN, and perhaps take over the review.
The review was started on January 10 with a significant list of issues. The nominator replied on January 31 that the issues had been addressed. Since then, nothing, despite a ping from the nominator in early March.
The reviewer,
IJzeren Jan, posted a "retired" banner on their talk page on February 25; they were still doing some edits at the end of March, so I posted
User talk:IJzeren Jan#Talk:Toki Pona/GA3 to inquire; their reply a week later seemed to be saying they would/might get back to it when they had the time, but it would be better if others look at the nomination as well
. It's been another six weeks, they haven't edited Wikipedia in a month, and I think it's time to consider this abandoned.
Thank you for anything you can do. BlueMoonset ( talk) 15:52, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 33, March – April 2019
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 06:41, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
The file File:Aelle name.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
unused, low-res, no obvious use
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
files for discussion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 01:00, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
TFA for 30 June 2019. You know the rest.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 19:44, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 34, May – June 2019
French version of Books & Bytes is now available on meta!
Read the full newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 14:21, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the Science Fiction Quarterly article has been scheduled as today's featured article for July 14, 2019. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 14, 2019, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.
We also suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors up to the day of this TFA. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:19, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
You deserve this for all the good work on the FP. Cheers – SchroCat ( talk) 16:35, 15 July 2019 (UTC) |
It's been some years in the making, but I hope to send Ursula K. Le Guin to FAC soon. Given the scope of the article, I would very much appreciate some additional feedback before I venture there, if you happen to have the time; mostly about the broad strokes, rather than the nitty-gritty. I already have an article at FAC, so there isn't a hurry; and of course, I understand completely if you're too busy. Vanamonde ( Talk) 00:28, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
Hey. Hope things are going well. I'm still gonna make a graph, or a few graphs, of FA prose size thru time (moving averages etc). I'm using exported data rather than a bor. But I will be unable to work on it for two or perhaps even three weeks. If you wanna do that using your bot, then pls let me know so I won't spend more time on it. But if not, I'll get it done very soon after my busy spell ends. ... Oh after I pressed "Publish" I saw the thread above where you mentioned you're busy too. Best of luck in your endeavors. Cheers. ♦ Lingzhi2 (talk) 16:03, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
This is to let you know that Analog Science Fiction and Fact has been scheduled as WP:TFA for 6 August 2019. Please check that the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/August 6, 2019. Thanks! Ealdgyth - Talk 14:38, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for Analog Science Fiction and Fact, "about the most important magazine in the history of science fiction. For a few years, from the late 1930s, the editor, John W. Campbell, completely changed the field, and launched the careers of numerous famous sf writers, most notably Isaac Asimov and Robert Heinlein"! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:37, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
Just FYI, I put in a bot request to check the prose size of FAs a long time ago; no response. So I'll have to do it myself. It may take weeks because I've never done it before. First couple of weeks will probably be spent just reading. Prefer to do it in Python but Javascript would be kinda possible. Hope all is well. Saw the Framageddon. That WMF action is the most un-Wikipedian or anti-Wikipedian thing I've ever seen, bar none-point-none. Recall that ... what was it called? .. Esperanza was neutron-torpedoed for secrecy. WMF is Esperanza on zombie-apocalypse steroids now... Again, hope all is well... Cheers. ♦ Lingzhi2 (talk) 10:08, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the Science Fantasy (magazine) article has been scheduled as today's featured article for October 25, 2019. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 25, 2019, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.
For Featured Articles promoted on or after October 1, 2018, there will be an existing blurb linked from the FAC talk page, which is likely to be transferred to the TFA page by a coordinator at some point.
We suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors up to the day of this TFA. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:17, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the Science Fantasy (magazine) article has been scheduled as today's featured article for October 25, 2019. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 25, 2019, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.
For Featured Articles promoted on or after October 1, 2018, there will be an existing blurb linked from the FAC talk page, which is likely to be transferred to the TFA page by a coordinator at some point.
We suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors up to the day of this TFA. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:17, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 35, July – August 2019
On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 06:58, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 36, September – October 2019
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 05:21, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the Venture Science Fiction article has been scheduled as today's featured article for January 4, 2020. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 4, 2020, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.
For Featured Articles promoted on or after October 1, 2018, there will be an existing blurb linked from the FAC talk page, which is likely to be transferred to the TFA page by a coordinator at some point.
We suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:17, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
A very happy Christmas and New Year to you! | |
|
Io, Saturnalia! | ||
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:34, 20 December 2019 (UTC) |
Faithful friends who are dear to us | ||
... gather near to us once more. May your heart be light and your troubles out of sight, now and in the New Year. |
Hello again! Hope you are having a wonderful end of the year. An editor recently suggested that my current FAC could use a "fresh set of eyes", and I was wondering if you could help if you had time or interest. I have done quite a bit of editing to the article in the past few days to address the FAC concerns and incorporate new sources, but I will refrain from doing any edits to the future to allow time for potential editors to read through and comment on a stable version. I would of course understand if you either are not interest or do not have the time for this, but I thought I might as well ask since you have helped me a lot in the past. Either way, happy holidays! Aoba47 ( talk) 23:43, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
Mike, thanks as always for your stats. It is great that whatever people 'feel' about the movements in the FAC process, you can provide some solid numbers they can take into account. Thanks very much for these - and for the guilty feeling I get when I realise I have been rather lazy (or busy) over the preceding month to have done much reviewing work. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 22:48, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
Hi Mike Christie: Thank you for reviewing Charles Morgan (businessman). Illness forced me into an extended hiatus and I am returning to Wikipedia editing, though at a lower level of participation than before. I understand why you cannot pass the article without addressing the issues. Wikipedia must go on! I will reread the article, take a look at the issues, and I will notify you when I have things in order. Thanks for your patience, Oldsanfelipe2 ( talk) 17:38, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for improving and reviewing Charles Morgan (businessman). It's unclear to me whether this passed. A bot posted a "pass" message on the article's talk page, but another bot posted a "fail" message on my talk page. Best, Oldsanfelipe2 ( talk) 23:41, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 07:10, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
Seven years! |
---|
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 10:39, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
Thank you today for Science Fantasy (magazine), "one of the mainstays of British science fiction for seventeen years, from 1950 to 1967. It helped launched the careers of Michael Moorcock and J.G. Ballard, and is also remembered as a showcase for the less famous Thomas Burnett Swann, an American author of historical fantasies."! - Also for your monthly stats, - so to be not active there as much as I'd want to, - three recent deaths on th Main page today that I cared for, and missing Márta Kurtág, - a sad record, - keeps me busy. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:52, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
Thank you today for Super Science Stories, "a companion to Astonishing Stories, which recently went through FAC: Super Science Stories and Astonishing Stories were sister magazines for much of their existence. Both were fairly minor magazines in the overall history of science fiction, but they had their moments and I hope I've managed to highlight them."! - Would you have time to look at a FAC in need? For this year, I want to write it's companion, much is still missing, so please understand that I'm not seen at other FACs right now. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:51, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
This is to let you know that Ghost Stories (magazine) has been scheduled as WP:TFA for 3 February 2020. Please check that the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/February 3, 2020. Thanks! Ealdgyth - Talk 20:16, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
Hi Mike. I just looked at your FAC stats for the month. Thanks for compiling these. Not being a significant participant in FAC, I was curious to see if the source review I started was reflected (after confirming that I started it in January), and I didn't see it. (It's in Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Bank_War/archive3#Source_review_(content).) I'm not complaining, simply wondering if it was not included because it has not concluded yet (the review, and/or the FAC), or was just missed. I can imagine a few different approaches to compiling this data and I'm not sure which you use. Outriggr ( talk) 06:57, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
I was checking that I have reviewed at least 3x the number of FAs that I have and was wondering if you had a page with that stat. I have only recently started participating in the FA process (within the last couple of years, maybe 3 at most?). Kees08 (Talk) 03:46, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
Mike--no one I know knows serials like you do. I know this isn't exactly 1950s UFO stuff, but could you maybe do a short run-through, trimming and adding a reference or two? I know you can do in five minutes what would take me hours to do... Thanks for any help you can give! Drmies ( talk) 17:04, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for March 23, 2020. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/March 23, 2020.— Wehwalt ( talk) 23:21, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 18:50, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
try it now ♦ Lingzhi2 (talk) 01:07, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi. I found your name at a recent nomination and wanted to ask if you could perform a source review for my nomination of Aftermath (Rolling Stones album). It has received several substantial reviews, leading to 4 supports and a successful image review. isento ( talk) 15:27, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
Hey Mike. Just wanted to follow back up with you on your comments on Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Open Here/archive2. I think where we left things there was an outstanding question about the use of one quotation blurb. I had responded that with my rationale for why its used the way it is, but I'm also fine with removing it if you like. Hope you don't mind me hitting up your talk page! I know that when unresolved comments are lingering it sometimes discourages other editors from chiming in, and the last FAC closed largely due to inactivity, so I'm just a little anxious to keep this one going if possible. LOL Thanks for your feedback and participation so far! — Hunter Kahn 15:34, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
Hi Mike! Long time, no talk. I do hope all's well with you, not least in these crazy times we're living in. I'm writing because I have (again) some students working on some articles this semester, which we hope to submit for GA consideration, and wondered if you could give them any feedback. The one that's closest to nomination, I think, is Gregorio Cortez. It's still a bit ragged at the edges, and in some ways its an odd topic in any case (about someone who is mostly known for one incident, celebrated in song and later analyzed in a rather important book), but I think it's nearly there, thanks to hard work from User:Pechodor13, User:Chr66, and User:Maymolina. Any feedback you had for them, with a GA nomination in mind, would be very welcome. Only, of course, if you have the time. Thanks! -- jbmurray ( talk • contribs) 19:47, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
Thank you today for Naruto, "about a Japanese manga series that focus on Naruto Uzumaki, a character who wishes for acknowledgement from the people in his hometown and to become their new leader"! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:30, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Knap Hill Camp map M.E. Cunnington 1911.png. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:
{{
Di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}}
below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason>
with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 03:23, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
Hi Mike; hope that you're doing well and staying safe amid the current viral outbreak. I haven't been on Wikipedia for the past week and thus only just logged on to find both that the Chestnuts Long Barrow has been awarded FA status and that you had raised concerns about the article (and, by extension, other articles in the series) having too much contextual discussion. The FAC might have ended I'd be very happy to discuss this further. I certainly wouldn't want to see much removed as I think the contextual information is important but I'd be interested in hearing your suggestions for what might be cut or trimmed back. All the best. Midnightblueowl ( talk) 10:49, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
The file File:VisualEditorTableCopyBugScreenshot.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
unused, low-res, no obvious use
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
files for discussion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 01:01, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
Although a newcomer to Wikipedia editing, I am extremely knowledgeable on the subject. Notifying you this article is repeatedly incorrect and a biased point of view that is non encyclopedic. I am pointing this out in order to obtain a neutral non aggressive stance for Wikipedia. Therefore how do you propose we move forward to rectify this Wikipedia dilemma? Regards and be well, Miss-Pronunciation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Miss-Pronunciation ( talk • contribs) 18:33, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
I have added an extra image to the Marvel Science Stories page because the image is to be the "Picture of the day" on 18 April, and I needed to anchor the caption to an article. If you feel the extra image should not be there, maybe you could remove it after the 18th. Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 10:20, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
Hi!
I'm the FA nominator of the article -- I wanted to ask for more feedback on the nomination page, but it's already archived so asking here is probably a good alternative.
First of all, thank you for the review! I wasn't aware of the article's weak spots, and perhaps there are much more of them I'm still unaware of. I have to learn a lot when it comes to comprehensive writing in English (since it's not my mother tongue), so please correct me more if you can.
I've made minor fixes per your review, and have some responses/questions:
More to come. Thank you! Dhio ( talk?) 07:31, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
A note for any talk page watchers: I am caught in a global block and can't edit from my home PC; fortunately I can VPN to my work PC and post from there, but I can't do most of my editing from there because of poor response time. I'm emailing the stewards and will resume editing here once the block is lifted. Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 09:50, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
There is an article in tomorrow's issue of Nature on dating archaeological pottery by measuring the amount of 14C in absorbed food residues.
Let me know if you don't have access. - Aa77zz ( talk) 18:53, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 38, January – April 2020
On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --15:57, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
I'm put Unknown (magazine) up on the main page for May 6, 2020. Please note that I attempted to write the blurb - feel free to whack it however you see fit, it is only the second blurb I've tried to write! Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 6, 2020. -- Ealdgyth ( talk) 15:51, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the The Thrill Book article has been scheduled as today's featured article for June 25, 2020. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/June 25, 2020.— Wehwalt ( talk) 00:51, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
Hi, I didn't see any rules about how this process of urgent FAC submissions works, and that's why I took the liberty of adding the nomination myself. I'm pretty upset about the limited interest the article is generating. Do you have any idea what I should do to attract a review from one of the reviewers? It was suggested that I invite editors on the Wikiprojects, but nothing has come out of it. Shahid • Talk2me 22:49, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, since you have been helpful a week ago, I would really be grateful if you could weigh in on this discussion I started. Shahid • Talk2me 17:55, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
Hi - I just noticed your FACstats page. Do you do this by hand or is it auto-generated somehow? I run the bot that updates WP:WBFAN, which picks out (at least tries to pick out) the nominator(s) for each successful nomination. I noticed your conversation with Kees08 from a while ago where several of his/her noms were missing from the list at WBFAN. If you've noticed any other anomalies, please let me know (and, if I don't respond, keep hounding me until I do - I'm not very active here at the moment). Thanks! -- Rick Block ( talk) 23:06, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Doctor Death (magazine) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of SchroCat -- SchroCat ( talk) 09:40, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
The article Doctor Death (magazine) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Doctor Death (magazine) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of SchroCat -- SchroCat ( talk) 08:21, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 39, May – June 2020
On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 06:13, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
File:Infinitysf.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate
copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{
PD-self}}
(to release all rights), {{
self|cc-by-sa-4.0}}
(to require that you be credited), or any tag
here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. -- MifterBot ( Talk • Contribs • Owner) 12:46, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly. |
"The PL was formed by the Brotherhood of Professional Base Ball Players in November 1989" [3] you're off by a mere century! Therapyisgood ( talk) 03:57, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Anna Hunger is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anna Hunger until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Clarityfiend ( talk) 06:34, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
Thank you today for The Thrill Book, "a missed opportunity; a precursor to the pulp magazines that began to specialize in fantasy and science fiction in the 1920s. It's famous now mostly because of that failure, and since it was never common to begin with its reputation has led to it becoming fabulously rare -- one historian commented that a full run of 16 issues would cost about as much as a luxury car. Despite the fact that it is no longer regarded as an sf and fantasy magazine, its reputation means that it gets quite a bit of coverage in magazine history sources"! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:05, 25 June 2020 (UTC)