Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015!!!

Hello Keilana, May you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New year 2015. Happy editing, Rosiestep ( talk) 01:48, 20 December 2014 (UTC) reply Spread the love by adding {{ subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

@ Rosiestep: Aww, thank you so much! Keilana| ^{Parlez ici} 22:22, 20 December 2014 (UTC) reply

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015 !!!

Hello Keilana! As we gather to celebrate the changing of years and reflect on the meaning of life, the universe, and everything, I would like to wish you and yours a merry Christmas and a happy New Year. Attached is a small snack which I hope will give you the energy to continue being an amazing person and editor in the coming year. Happy editing,  —  Crisco 1492 ( talk) 13:48, 20 December 2014 (UTC) reply

@ Crisco 1492: Thank you so much, this is so sweet! :) Keilana| ^{Parlez ici} 22:21, 20 December 2014 (UTC) reply

• Well, chocolate is always good for the self-confidence :) —  Crisco 1492 ( talk) 04:45, 21 December 2014 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ovarian cancer, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages FMS and EGFR. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:01, 21 December 2014 (UTC) reply

Guild of Copy Editors Late December 2014 Newsletter Blitz: Thanks to everyone who participated in the December Blitz. Of the 14 editors who signed up for the blitz, 11 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. January drive: The January backlog-reduction drive is just around the corner; sign up here! Election time again: The election of coordinators to serve from January 1 to June 30, 2015 is now underway. The voting period runs from December 16, 00:01 (UTC), until December 31, 23:59. Please cast your vote—it's your Guild, and it doesn't run itself! Happy holidays from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978 and Miniapolis. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 16:44, 24 December 2014 (UTC) reply

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015!!!

Hello Keilana, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2015. Happy editing, TheGeneralUser ( talk) 23:05, 25 December 2014 (UTC) reply Spread the love by adding {{ subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

A Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year Keilana :) Best Wishes! TheGeneralUser ( talk) 23:05, 25 December 2014 (UTC) reply

Edith Kellman was one of the creators of the MKK spectral classification standard for stars, yet is without her own article at the moment. StringTheory11 ( t •  c) 21:09, 28 December 2014 (UTC) reply

@ StringTheory11: Thanks so much for the heads up! I've started a stub to get things going.... Keilana| ^{Parlez ici} 01:52, 29 December 2014 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Edith Kellman

added links pointing to Wheaton College and William Morgan

Ovarian cancer

added a link pointing to Stroma

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:38, 29 December 2014 (UTC) reply

WikiProject Good Articles's 2014-15 GA Cup - Round 4 Happy New Year! We hope that all of our GA Cup competitors had an enjoyable and safe holiday season. Monday saw the end of Round 3. Eight contestants moved forward to Round 4—the top two contestants from each of Round 3's three pools and the top two participants of all remaining users. It was an exciting competition, especially towards the end. Round 3's highest scorer was Jaguar, Round 2's wildcard, with an impressive 305 points, the highest score in the GA Cup thus far. Pool B was the closest race; J_Milburn and Cwmhiraeth switched places a few times in the final hours of the competition, although J Milburn edged out Cwmhiraeth by just 9 points. Pool A was, by far, the most competitive; four out of five moved onto Round 4, and its competitors earned a cumulative 935 points and reviewed 59 articles. Ritchie333, who came in second overall with 255 points, reviewed the most articles (17). Peacemaker67 and Wizardman earned the two wildcard slots, with 184 and 154 points, respectively. Congrats to all! 114 articles were reviewed this round, as compared to 110 in Round 2 and 117 in Round 1. The key to success in Round 3, like in Round 2, was reviewing articles with the longest nomination dates; everyone who moved forward reviewed articles from the pink nomination box (20 points) or reviewed articles that had languished in the queue for over 5 months (18 points). Many of these articles had languished because their nominators had left Wikipedia and had little chance of passing to GA, so our competitors provided a great service by helping remove them from the queue. Also as in Round 2, The Boat Race articles proved to be popular review choices, with 10% of all the articles reviewed in December. We appreciate the competitors' continued enthusiasm, even during the busy holiday season. At least one competitor even reviewed articles while preparing for a holiday meal! For Round 4, participants have been randomly put in 2 pools of 4 contestants each. The top two in each pool will progress to the finals, as well as the top participant (5th place) of all remaining users. The semi-finals will start on January 1 at 0:00:01 UTC and end on January 29 at 23:59:59 UTC. Information about Round 4 and the pools can be found here. We received some excellent feedback about how to improve the GA Cup in the future, including the definition of "quickfails" and the use of pools, which we'll seriously consider as we move forward. As a result of this feedback and the experience we've gained, there will be some changes to the rules come next years GA Cup. Good luck to all our semi-finalists! It is the judges' hope that every competitor in the GA Cup continue to have fun and be enthusiastic about reviewing and passing articles to GA! Cheers from Dom497, TheQ Editor and Figureskatingfan. To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletter, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant still competing, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.

-- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 00:09, 30 December 2014 (UTC) reply

Round one of the 2015 WikiCup has begun! So far we've had around 80 signups, which close on February 5. If you have not already signed up and want to do so, then you can add your name here. There have been changes to to several of the points scores for various categories, and the addition of Peer Reviews for the first time. These will work in the same manner as Good Article Reviews, and all of the changes are summarised here.

Remember that only the top 64 scoring competitors will make it through to the second round, and one of the new changes this year is that all scores must be claimed within two weeks of an article's promotion or appearance, so don't forget to add them to your submissions pages! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAN, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! Figureskatingfan ( talk · contribs), Miyagawa ( talk · contribs) and Sturmvogel 66 ( talk · contribs)
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Opted-out of message delivery to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 20:51, 2 January 2015 (UTC) reply

Guild of Copy Editors 2014 Annual Report Our 2014 Annual Report is now ready for review. Highlights: Summary of Drives, Blitzes, and the Requests page; Review the election results; Membership news; Changes around the Guild's pages; Plans for 2015. – Your project coordinators: Jonesey95, Miniapolis and Baffle gab1978. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by

MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 23:55, 2 January 2015 (UTC) reply

MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 23:36, 8 January 2015 (UTC) reply

hi looks like the back room part (ie project tags etc) of the niosh project needs some work - you ok if someone other than yourself starts - or should i leave it to you? your call satusuro 23:59, 8 January 2015 (UTC) reply

@ SatuSuro: I'll be working on it this week but any advice/help would be very welcome! I'm really, really not good with templates. Keilana| ^{Parlez ici} 04:26, 12 January 2015 (UTC) reply

From what I can see so far - its not so much the template but the pages that make up an active wikiproject - very easy to reverse engineer from other projects that look compreghensively covered... satusuro 09:35, 12 January 2015 (UTC) reply

There is a proposal at the IdeaLab that may interest you. Lightbreather ( talk) 20:11, 9 January 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi User:Keilana. I am coming to your talk page as I note you signed the The Autie Pact back in 2012. I am a non- neurotypical who lives with Autism in the form of Asperger Syndrome. If you know much about those of us on the Spectrum as well as Wikipedia editors on the Spectrum, you probably understand that editing and communication can be difficult enough for neurotypicals, excruciatingly difficult at times for editors like me with Autism. I am here on your talk page not because I am asking you to intervene, I am not canvassing for support. I am here because you signed the Autie Pact that is meant to be a way to move toward bridging the gap between neurotypical editors and editors with Autism Spectrum Disorder(s). Currently, there has been a discussion for a few days at AN/I regarding my ability to edit. I have been open there about being a person with Asperger's. When that information was brought forth, the reactions have been -- shall we say -- less than complimentary to those expressing their views about editors with Autism. This discussion and the comments from long-time and not-so-long-time editors is, in my opinion, an example of how far we still have to go in Wikipedia toward understanding that we are made up of editors with different editing styles and different ways of seeing the world. Of course, the difference in editors with Autism is more obvious and can be, at times, more maddening to neurotypicals. That said, with the rate of autism being somewhere between 1:55 - 1:110 and Wikipedia being a magnet for those with ASDs, I think it's fair to say that awareness is extremely important. Also important to remember is that discrimination against editors because they have ASDs is just not appropriate nor does it echo WP:AGF. If you are interested in seeing the thread at AN/I I am referring to, the link is here [1]. I have no expectation that you will look at it, my purpose here is really just awareness that Wikipedia still has a long way to go in the way of interactions and understanding between autism-spectrum editors and neurotypical editors. And, as the title of this section says, your advice would be welcome. Thanks for your time. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 16:27, 13 January 2015 (UTC) reply

@ Winkelvi: Hi WV, thanks for your message. I'll go take a look at the thread - and please do feel free to ask me for advice in the future if you need it. Though I don't have a lot of time right now, I will try to help when I can. :) Keilana| ^{Parlez ici} 18:22, 13 January 2015 (UTC) reply

Thank you for your response as well as the offer to help in the future, Keilana. I appreciate it. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 16:05, 14 January 2015 (UTC) reply

One of my trainees just wrote Judy R. Franz, which might be of interest to you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:32, 14 January 2015 (UTC) reply

@ Pigsonthewing: She sounds like a very interesting scientist! Thanks! :) Keilana| ^{Parlez ici} 19:33, 15 January 2015 (UTC) reply

And another with a Chicago connection: Mary Hefferan. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:57, 20 January 2015 (UTC) reply

Since WikiProject Women as proposed at the IdeaLab may take some time to realize, and based on a discussion on the proposal's talk page, I have started a test Kaffeeklatsch area for women only (cisgender or trans-woman, regardless of sexual orientation).

It is a place where women can go and be sure they'll be able to participate in discussions without being dominated by men's advice, criticism, and explanations. If interested, your participation would be most welcome. Lightbreather ( talk) 23:13, 16 January 2015 (UTC) reply

WikiProject Good Articles's 2014-15 GA Cup - Round 5/Final GA Cup competitors and observers: Get ready, we're about to move into the finals of the inaugural GA Cup! Not nearly as important as another competition taking place this weekend, but significant none the less. No deflated footballs here, though! Thursday saw the end of Round 4. Out of the 8 contestants in the semi-finals, 5 have moved to the finals. The semi-finals continued to be very competitive. The highest scorer overall was Ritchie333 from Pool B, with an impressive 488 points and a total of 36 articles reviewed, the most of any competitor; close behind was Jaguar (last round's wildcard), with 477 points and 29 reviews. At times, the competition between them was a real horse-race, and exciting for the judges to witness. Both Ritchie333 and Jaguar have moved onto the finals. In Pool A, Good888 with 294 points, and Wizardman with 179 also won slots in the final. 3family6 with 285 points, won the wildcard slot. We also had one withdrawal, due to outside-of-Wikipedia priorities. Congrats to all! Although there were just 8 competitors, more reviews were conducted this round than in any other round—148, which demonstrates the commitment and enthusiasm of our participants. The most successful competitors, like in all previous rounds, reviewed articles that languished in the queue at GAC for at least five months (worth 18 points). The Boat Race articles were popular review choices again, with almost 20% of the articles reviewed this month. In other news, we received another report from GA statistics page maintainer User:AmericanLemming. See here [2] for his take on the effect the GA Cup has had on Good Article reviews. He believes that we've made a real difference. AmericanLemming says: "As you can see, ...the GA Cup has done wonders when it comes to getting the oldest nominations reviewed much sooner thanks to the system whereby you get the most points for reviewing the oldest articles." Everyone involved with this competition, especially the competitors, should be very proud of what we've been able to accomplish! The Final will start on February 1 at 0:00:01 UTC and end on February 26 at 23:59:59 UTC with a winner being crowned. Information about the Final can be found here. Good luck to all our finalists! Cheers from Dom497, TheQ Editor and Figureskatingfan. To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletters, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant still competing, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.

-- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 04:00, 30 January 2015 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Ovarian cancer page, your edit caused a broken reference name ( help). ( Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:23, 31 January 2015 (UTC) reply

Guild of Copy Editors February 2015 Newsletter Drive: Thanks to everyone who participated in January's Backlog Elimination Drive. Of the 38 people who signed up for this drive, 21 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Progress report: We were able to remove August 2013 from the general copyediting backlog and November 2014 from the request-page backlog. Many thanks, everyone! Blitz: The February Blitz will run from February 15–21 and again focuses on the requests page. Awards will be given to everyone who copyedits at least one request article. Sign up here! Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Miniapolis, Jonesey95, Biblioworm and Philg88. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 15:52, 7 February 2015 (UTC) reply

WikiProject Good Articles's 2014-15 GA Cup - Feedback Greetings, all! 4 months ago the GA Cup began and now as it comes to a close, it's time to start thinking about the next competition! Below is a link to a Google Form with several questions. We want to here from you what you thought about the GA Cup. Just over half of the questions are required while the others are optional. If you don't want to answer one of the optional questions, feel free to skip it. Your responses will only be visible to the three judges. Thank-you to all particpants for making the first GA Cup a success and we hope to see you all come out again for the next competition! 2014-15 GA Cup Feedback Form Cheers from Dom497, TheQ Editor and Figureskatingfan. To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletter, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant still competing, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.

-- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 21:01, 9 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi Keilana -

I'm an academic who researches and writes about Native American and First Nations literatures. I'm also an occasional Wikipedian and would like to work to improve the project's coverage of Native American authors and books.

With this in mind, I've proposed that the next Native American Literature Symposium (NALS) in March run a wikithon session to get academics and writers, of whom there should be around 150 in attendance, contributing to Wikipedia. I have a list of authors who don't currently have articles, and I will also get participants working on improving existing stub articles. The NALS programme can be found here [3].

I'd love to get your input on how best to get the maximum out of this session. Please feel free to email me directly at j dot mackay @ euc dot ac dot cy.

Best, James Mackay, aka Vizjim ( talk) 12:24, 17 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Jdanbeck started today. If you get a chance, please send him a welcome message. TeriEmbrey ( talk) 17:01, 20 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Yvonne Clark, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Westinghouse. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:15, 22 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Guild of Copy Editors March 2015 Newsletter Blitz: Thanks to everyone who participated in the February Blitz. Of the 21 people who signed up, eight copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Progress report: The blitz removed 16 articles from the requests list, and we're almost done with December 2014. Many thanks, everyone! Drive: The month-long March drive begins in about a week. Awards will be given to everyone who copyedits at least one article from the backlog. Sign up here! Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Miniapolis, Jonesey95, Biblioworm and Philg88. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 21:41, 22 February 2015 (UTC) reply

How to pick up more women...

Hi Emily, Victuallers and I have developed a proposal for a talk to be presented at Wikimania 2015. It's titled, How to pick up more women... -- as in more women editors and more women's biographies. Examples include the Edit-a-thon blitz during WikiWomen's History Month and the "new articles" work underway by WikiProject Women Writers. The Wikimania talk proposal review process has begun and there's no guarantee that this proposal will be accepted. That's where you come in. Please review our proposal and give us feedback. Ultimately, we hope you add your name to the signup at the bottom of the proposal which signifies you'd be interested in the talk if you were attending it (it does not commit you to attending Wikimania). Thank you! Rosiestep ( talk) 22:48, 22 February 2015 (UTC) reply

I have also proposed a proposal to make Wikipedia free of data charges for users from developing countries, I will be glad if you can sign up here (just to ensure that you are also interested in making Wikipedia free of data charges), signing up doesn't mean that you have to attend so don't worry. Thank you, friend. Jim Carter 14:04, 25 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi Keilana, I come here at the prompting of Crisco, who thinks you may be able to help. I am one of the Featured List delegates and I took an interest in the list of The Fourteen Infallibles that came through the FL process last September. It was in a poor state at the time, and did not make it through. I've been advising on a technical basis and doing a fair amount of editing on it since, assisting the main editor to get it into shape. I am rather limited in what I can do as I have no knowledge of Islam whatsoever. Would you have the time and inclination to have a look at the page and see if it looks viable as a featured list? I know the lead needs to be lengthened a little, but I'd appreciate a wiser pair of eyes than mine on this. Many thanks for any help you you're able to provide. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 18:07, 27 February 2015 (UTC) reply

WikiProject Good Articles's 2014-15 GA Cup - Finals/Wrap-Up The inaugural GA Cup is now over! The competition officially ended Thursday. Congrats to everyone who participated, and especially to our finalists. The winner of the 2014/2015 GA Cup is Jaguar! He earned an impressive 615 points, despite only being a wildcard in the Round 4. The key to Jaguar's success seemed to be reviewing lots of articles as well as reviewer the oldest nominations; he reviewed 39 nominations in this round. Overall, the key to everyone's success was reviewing articles that had been in the queue for at least three months, which was true throughout the competition. In second place was Wizardman, with 241 points, and following close behind in third place was Good888, with 211 points. Congrats! Although there were a couple of bumps along the way, the judges have thoroughly enjoyed managing this competition. We hope that the participants had fun as well. The GA Cup was a resounding success, and that's due to all of you. The judges sincerely thank each and every participant, and for the editors who were willing to subject their articles to this process. We learned a lot. For example, we learned that even with meticulous planning, it's impossible to anticipate every problem. We learned that the scoring system we set up wasn't always the most effective. The enthusiasm and motivation of Wikipedians is awesome, and we enjoyed watching what was sometimes fierce competition. We look forward to the second GA Cup later this year. We reached many of our goals. See here for GA Cup statistics. We made a big difference, especially in shortening the length of time articles spend in the queue, and in reducing the backlog. Overall, 578 nominations were reviewed throughout the competition and a total of 8,184 points were awarded. Everyone involved should be very proud of what we've accomplished through the GA Cup. Stay tuned for more information about our next competition. There will be some much-needed changes made in the scoring system next time. We appreciate your feedback, and commit to seriously consider it. If you haven't already, please fill out the feedback form here. If you're interested in being a judge in our second GA Cup, please let one of our judges know or click on the tab found in the feedback form. Again, thanks to all and congratulations to our winners! Cheers from Dom497, TheQ Editor and Figureskatingfan.

-- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 16:17, 28 February 2015 (UTC) reply

That's it, the first round is done, sign-ups are closed and we're into round 2. 64 competitors made it into this round, and are now broken into eight groups of eight. The top two of each group will go through to round 3, and then the top scoring 16 "wildcards" across all groups. Round 1 saw some interesting work on some very important articles, with the round leader Freikorp ( submissions) owing most of his 622 points scored to a Featured Article on the 2001 film Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within which qualified for a times-two multiplier. This is a higher score than in previous years, as Godot13 ( submissions) had 500 points in 2014 at the end of round 1, and our very own judge, Sturmvogel_66 ( submissions) led round 1 with 601 points in 2013.

In addition to Freikorp's work, some other important articles and pictures were improved during round one, here's a snapshot of a few of them:

• Cwmhiraeth ( submissions) took Bumblebee, a level-4 vital article, to Good Article;
• AHeneen ( submissions) worked-up the Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 article, also to Good Article status;
• Rodw ( submissions) developed an extremely timely article to Good Article, taking Magna Carta there some 800 years after it was first sealed;
• And last but not least, Godot13 ( submissions) ( FP bonus points) worked up a number of Featured Pictures during round 1, including the 1948 one Deutsche Mark (pictured right), receiving the maximum bonus due to the number of Wikis that the related article appears in.

You may also wish to know that The Core Contest is running through the month of March. Head there for further details - they even have actual prizes!

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Figureskatingfan ( talk · contribs · email), Miyagawa ( talk · contribs · email) and Sturmvogel 66 ( talk · contribs · email)

Thanks for your assistance! Miyagawa ( talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiCup.

( Opt-out Instructions) This message was send by Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 04:54, 1 March 2015 (UTC) reply

That's it, the first round is done, sign-ups are closed and we're into round 2. 64 competitors made it into this round, and are now broken into eight groups of eight. The top two of each group will go through to round 3, and then the top scoring 16 "wildcards" across all groups. Round 1 saw some interesting work on some very important articles, with the round leader Freikorp ( submissions) owing most of his 622 points scored to a Featured Article on the 2001 film Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within which qualified for a times-two multiplier. This is a higher score than in previous years, as Godot13 ( submissions) had 500 points in 2014 at the end of round 1, and our very own judge, Sturmvogel_66 ( submissions) led round 1 with 601 points in 2013.

In addition to Freikorp's work, some other important articles and pictures were improved during round one, here's a snapshot of a few of them:

• Cwmhiraeth ( submissions) took Bumblebee, a level-4 vital article, to Good Article;
• AHeneen ( submissions) worked-up the Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 article, also to Good Article status;
• Rodw ( submissions) developed an extremely timely article to Good Article, taking Magna Carta there some 800 years after it was first sealed;
• And last but not least, Godot13 ( submissions) ( FP bonus points) worked up a number of Featured Pictures during round 1, including the 1948 one Deutsche Mark (pictured right), receiving the maximum bonus due to the number of Wikis that the related article appears in.

You may also wish to know that The Core Contest is running through the month of March. Head there for further details - they even have actual prizes!

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Figureskatingfan ( talk · contribs · email), Miyagawa ( talk · contribs · email) and Sturmvogel 66 ( talk · contribs · email)

Thanks for your assistance! Miyagawa ( talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiCup.

( Opt-out Instructions) This message was send by Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 05:55, 1 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi Emily!

I'm a linguist and I'm planning a series of editathons for July 2015 in Chicago to improve linguistics-related articles on Wikipedia, especially linguistics stubs, biographies of female and other minority linguists, and under-documented languages.

Background: I'm planning them for July 2015 in Chicago because that's when the four-week Lingusitics Summer Institute will bring several hundred linguists from many institutions to the University of Chicago for special courses, to attend conferences and workshops, and so on. The organizers of the institute have already agreed to give me space for editathons on Wednesday afternoons, the 8th, 15th, 22nd, and 29th, which we've agreed is the best time in the schedule, as well as a seminar on how to use Wikipedia in the classroom. I'm hoping to not just improve linguistics-related articles, but also to increase editathon and Wikipedia expertise among linguists (your systemic bias kit looks like exactly the type of thing I'm into, so I'm definitely going to start linking to that!). I already organized an editathon in January at the Linguistics Society of America annual meeting, which went well (see report here), and I'm organizing another virtual editathon via the #lingwiki hashtag on Twitter for the last weekend in March.

User:The Interior sent me to you and User:I_JethroBT because he thought you might be in Chicago in July and willing to come help out at the editathon (I'm fairly familiar with Wikipedia policy due to a long history of lurking, but it'd be good to have more expertise around, especially as I think we may get quite a few participants!). I'm also planning to apply for funding from Wikimedia for the Chicago editathons, so if you have any advice on that I'd certainly appreciate it!

Also, I've been looking at systemic bias stats, and I've found stats for gender and Western bias, both of which I think we could help with (I didn't actually track gender of participants at the first editathon I facilitated, but it was around 50-75% female), but there doesn't seem to be much on other areas like race, sexuality, ability, etc -- I've been saying "other minority" for the moment, but I'd like to be more specific if I can. Thoughts? Thanks! -- Gretchenmcc ( talk) 23:41, 1 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi Gretchen! It's nice to meet you - it looks like you are doing some really cool work! :) I'm so glad you found the systemic bias kit useful. I'm free for a few of the edit-a-thons in July (all but the last, as of now) and would love to help out! I've got more than a passing interest in linguistics so it'll be really fun. If you want to apply for support, which I definitely think you should, head on over to meta:PEG and put in a request! We're doing a campaign to bring more women into Wikimedia right now through the grants program, and the fact that your first edit-a-thon was so heavily female makes it a really great fit. If you want me to take a look at it before you submit it, I'm happy to do that. Also, if you want to plan the Chicago workshops in more detail, shoot me an email and we can talk more or plan to meet up/Skype/exchange carrier pigeons. All the best, Keilana| ^{Parlez ici} 21:53, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Haha that didn't even register to me as heavily female -- that's basically the same as the gender ratio in linguistics as a whole, so I would've been doing something wrong if I hadn't gotten that ratio. I'd love to chat, but it'll need to be skype, as I don't actually live in Chicago (that's just where a ton of linguists are going to be this summer). Sending you an email! -- Gretchenmcc ( talk) 17:29, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi, Emily! STEM pipeline would make a great DYK-- interested in expanding it? -- Djembayz ( talk) 03:24, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

@ Djembayz: Hi! I'm actually preparing for a conference right now (eek!) so I don't think I'd be able to get it in under the 5-day limit, unfortunately. :( Keilana| ^{Parlez ici} 21:55, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi. The 18th edition of Ethnologue just came out, and if we divide up our language articles among us, it won't take long to update them. I would appreciate it if you could help out, even if it's just a few articles (5,000 articles is a lot for just me), but I won't be insulted if you delete this request.

A largely complete list of articles to be updated is at Category:Language articles citing Ethnologue 17. The priority articles are in Category:Language articles with old Ethnologue 17 speaker data. These are the 10% that have population figures at least 25 years old.

Probably 90% of the time, Ethnologue has not changed their figures between the 17th and 18th editions, so all we need to do is change "e17" to "e18" in the reference (ref) field of the language info box. That will change the citation for the artcle to the current edition. Please put the data in the proper fields, or the info box will flag it as needing editorial review. The other relevant fields are "speakers" (the number of native speakers in all countries), "date" (the date of the reference or census that Ethnologue uses, not the date of Ethnologue!), and sometimes "speakers2". Our convention has been to enter e.g. "1990 census" when a census is used, as other data can be much older than the publication date. Sometimes a citation elsewhere in the article depends on the e17 entry, in which case you will need to change "name=e17" to "name=e18" in the reference tag (assuming the 18th edition still supports the cited claim).

Remember, we want the *total* number of native speakers, which is often not the first figure given by Ethnologue. Sometimes the data is too incompatible to add together (e.g. a figure from the 1950s for one country, and a figure from 2006 for another), in which case it should be presented that way. That's one use for the "speakers2" field. If you're not sure, just ask, or skip that article.

Data should not be displayed with more than two, or at most three, significant figures. Sometimes it should be rounded off to just one significant figure, e.g. when some of the component data used by Ethnologue has been approximated with one figure (200,000, 3 million, etc.) and the other data has greater precision. For example, a figure of 200,000 for one country and 4,230 for another is really just 200,000 in total, as the 4,230 is within the margin of rounding off in the 200,000. If you want to retain the spurious precision of the number in Ethnologue, you might want to use the {{ sigfig}} template. (First parameter in this template is for the data, second is for the number of figures to round it off to.)

Dates will often need to be a range of all the country data in the Ethnologue article. When entering the date range, I often ignore dates from countries that have only a few percent of the population, as often 10% or so of the population isn't even separately listed by Ethnologue and so is undated anyway.

If Ethnologue does not provide a date for the bulk of the population, just enter "no date" in the date field. But if the population figure is undated, and hasn't changed between the 17th & 18th editions of Ethnologue, please leave the ref field set to "e17", and maybe add a comment to keep it so that other editors don't change it. In cases like this, the edition of Ethnologue that the data first appeared in may be our only indication of how old it is. We still cite the 14th edition in a couple dozen articles, so our readers can see that the data is getting old.

The articles in the categories linked above are over 90% of the job. There are probably also articles that do not currently cite Ethnologue, but which we might want to update with the 18th edition. I'll need to generate another category to capture those, probably after most of the Ethnologue 17 citations are taken care of.

Jump in at the WP:LANG talk page if you have any comments or concerns. Thanks for any help you can give!

— kwami ( talk) 02:18, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Please note the nominations have been posted, and there are standard questions to be answered. Members of the community may also ask questions, so please monitor your nomination(s) until the comment period is concluded on the 18th. Those who are running for both flags have two sections, and two copies of the standard questions -- the first two, at least, are likely to have different answers, so this isn't redundant. (The third one, well, it does.) Thanks for your willingness to serve. Courcelles ( talk) 06:35, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 17:40, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Hey there! The Regenstein Library at the University of Chicago is hosting an edit-a-thon to celebrate Women's History Month on Saturday, March 28th from 10 AM to 4 PM. Coffee and lunch is provided for free, and we'll be focusing on building a few biographical and organizational articles. We'll also have full access to archival resources maintained by the Special Collections and Research Center. If you're interested in joining us, please RSVP at the event page here! Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:27, 13 March 2015 (UTC) reply

( Opt-out Instructions) This message was send by I JethroBT through MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 12:40, 1 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Hey Emily, thanks for signing up for the event, but for a few reasons, we've moving this event to a Saturday date in April. Between April 4th and 25th, does either date work well for you? Thanks, I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 18:12, 24 March 2015 (UTC) reply

@ I JethroBT: Hey, I'm taking my MCAT on April 18 and have finals the week of the 27th so I can't make either date, unfortunately. :( Keilana| ^{Parlez ici} 18:15, 24 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Aw dang. Well, study hard! I take it there won't be any other edit-a-thons up at Loyola? I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 20:15, 24 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Hang on-- Sat. May 2nd is apparently open for the staff there. Does that continue to run into finals for you? I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 20:33, 24 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Yeah, unfortunately that's my last day of finals. Keilana| ^{Parlez ici} 05:35, 25 March 2015 (UTC) reply

.

This is occurring at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Motions. Courcelles ( talk) 19:32, 27 March 2015 (UTC) reply

A kitten by your side as you study for the MCAT, amiga. Lots of good wishes, too.

Rosiestep ( talk) 01:54, 28 March 2015 (UTC) reply

So very cute Rosie! Thanks for the good wishes. <3 Keilana| ^{Parlez ici} 21:52, 30 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Can I give you one too? Sad that Wikipedia Weekly hasn't returned yet, but I hope you still find my reports entertaining :) EDIT: Just looked up the MCAT. That's awesome! I'm sure you'll do fine, but good luck anyway. :) Serendi ^pod ous 21:57, 30 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Omg yes you can give me more kittens! I will always take more kitties! :) :) :) And your report is my favorite part of the Signpost every week -- and hopefully WW will be back once I'm done learning all the things! Thanks for thinking of me! :) Keilana| ^{Parlez ici} 02:44, 31 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Congrats to your new OS responsibility! No kitten , too seriuz, -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 12:54, 31 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Thanks, Gerda. :) Keilana| ^{Parlez ici} 14:15, 31 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Hey folks! We've got two exciting edit-a-thons happening in Chicago during the third week of April:

• Regenstein Library at the University of Chicago edit-a-thon on Wednesday, April 15th from 4 PM - 8 PM
• Pritzker Military Museum & Library edit-a-thon on Saturday, April 18th from 10 AM - 3:30 PM

If you're interested in meeting up and working together with other Wikipedians at these fantastic institutions, please RSVP at the event pages linked above. If you know someone else interested in learning about or editing Wikipedia, invite them! We will provide training and resources for new editors at both events. For questions about the events, please refer to the event pages or contact I JethroBT ( talk · contribs). MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 23:16, 3 April 2015 (UTC) reply

( Opt-out Instructions) This message was sent by I JethroBT through MediaWiki message delivery ( talk)

	Thank You!
	Hi! I just wanted to thank you for deleting that page. I too thought that it was to personal and intended to edit it later. Thanks again! ~Suzi Holter Suzi Holter ( talk) 14:32, 9 April 2015 (UTC) reply

Hello Books & Bytes subscribers. There is a new Visual Editor reference feature in development called Citoid. It is designed to "auto-fill" references using a URL or DOI. We would really appreciate you testing whether TWL partners' references work in Citoid. Sharing your results will help the developers fix bugs and improve the system. If you have a few minutes, please visit the testing page for simple instructions on how to try this new tool. Regards, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:47, 10 April 2015 (UTC) reply

Guild of Copy Editors April 2015 Newsletter March drive: Thanks to everyone who participated in last month's backlog-reduction drive. Of the 38 people who signed up, 18 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. April blitz: The one-week April blitz, again targeting our long requests list, will run from April 19–25. Awards will be given to everyone who copyedits at least one article from the requests page. Sign up here! May drive: The month-long May backlog-reduction drive, with extra credit for articles tagged in December 2013, January and February 2014 and all request articles, begins soon. Sign up now! Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Miniapolis, Jonesey95, Biblioworm and Philg88. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 13:29, 16 April 2015 (UTC) reply

The Magic Circle HQ in London own the rights to Robert Harbin's Zig Zag Lady. The wiki article exposed the method to this illusion. The users have no rights to expose such method as they do not own it. I am doing you guys a favour before The Magic Circle officially contact you. I am a member of the Magic Circle so I know the standpoint. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tboy2000 ( talk • contribs) 21:18, 18 April 2015 (UTC) reply

I apologise for the multiple undos. Am new to wiki and did not read the rules. Am just trying to protect the method to an illusion The Magic Circle have the rights to. Exposure in magic is generally not acceptable. The Zig Zag Lady is exposed in the wiki and also has references to where one can seek further info to see the method (video link). This is not acceptable ad again, The Magic Circle own this illusion now. I will contact The Magic Circle to officially make a statement about said exposure.

Once again I apologise for being so persistent, but exposing secrets to magic that genetally is protected is not right and I am being very protective about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tboy2000 ( talk • contribs) 21:30, 18 April 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi Tboy2000, unfortunately Wikipedia isn't in the business of protecting the secrets of illusions. See WP:SPOILERS for our policy on stuff like this. Keilana| ^{Parlez ici} 21:36, 18 April 2015 (UTC) reply

I am curious to know what sort of "protection" or "ownership rights" Tboy2000 thinks applies to the secrets of magic tricks. Obviously, the secret of that particular magic trick has been broadcast on a major television program in the United States (and is easily found on the web), so it is not very secret at this point. And if there was some kind of enforceable legal right involved here, the television show would not have been able to do that, and would have been successfully sued if had done it anyway – and we have no evidence that any such lawsuit existed (or, if it existed, that it was successful). I'm not aware of any law in any country that would protect the secret of the Zig-zag Girl illusion, but I am very curious to find out whether any such law actually exists somewhere. Perhaps revealing the trick might violate some voluntary "magician's code" of some particular voluntary association of magicians, but Wikipedia has presumably not joined any such association, so its rules do not govern what happens on Wikipedia. — BarrelProof ( talk) 23:34, 18 April 2015 (UTC) reply

The scientific name of the American Chestnut is Castanea dentata, not Castanea americana. The correct scientific name is used in the first paragraph of the article but not at the end. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.41.253.245 ( talk) 22:00, 18 April 2015 (UTC) reply

@ 216.41.253.245: Oops, you're absolutely right. Thought you or someone was making a vulgar joke.... it should be fixed now. Sorry for my mistake! Keilana| ^{Parlez ici} 22:05, 18 April 2015 (UTC) reply

No, my vulgar jokes are funnier — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.41.253.245 ( talk) 22:24, 18 April 2015 (UTC) reply

Concerning this revision deletion. That was blatantly the wrong rationale. You claimed RD5-selective deletion (replacement for delete/undelete), when it was actually RD4-any material that is (or looks like it might be) actual claims, facts, hints, or allusions to non-public, personal, or private information. Please use correct summaries when using powerful tools that can be abused like RevDel. EoRdE6^{( Come Talk to Me!)} 01:57, 24 April 2015 (UTC) reply

@ EoRdE6: And your response to that is to draw even more attention to that private information in a public venue such as a prominent administrator's talkpage? Does that seem like a good idea to you? -- Rs chen 7754 05:11, 24 April 2015 (UTC) reply

Sorry I clicked the wrong dropdown, that was my mistake. Keilana| ^{Parlez ici} 05:51, 24 April 2015 (UTC) reply

@ EoRdE6: To expand on what Rschen7754 above, if you think that oversightable material has been overlooked, you should either email Keilana (an oversighter) directly or email the oversight team at oversight-en-wpwikipedia.org. Posting things like this only draws attention to it, which is rather the opposite of the point. GorillaWarfare (talk) 05:54, 24 April 2015 (UTC) reply

To both @ Rschen7754 and GorillaWarfare: You do realize the material was already RevDel'ed correct? So bringing it to a public venue shouldn't matter as nobody but an admin can view it, and admins would know better than to view possibly public information, correct? EoRdE6^{( Come Talk to Me!)} 11:06, 24 April 2015 (UTC) reply

"admins would know better than to view possibly public information" -> well, viewing the information is not logged, and there are over 1300 admins. Please see Streisand effect, which is why it should be oversighted. -- Rs chen 7754 13:54, 24 April 2015 (UTC) reply

There is a considerable difference in trust levels between administrators and oversighters, given that oversighters are much fewer in number, are elected in a (supposedly) more strict process, and are required to identify to the Foundation. For that reason, it's best to reduce the number of eyes on oversightable content by requesting suppression privately, even if those eyes belong to administrators. GorillaWarfare (talk) 16:35, 24 April 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi Keilana. I was working on Frink Medal and one of the names I added there was a redlink for Vera Fretter. I noticed that she is listed at User:Keilana/Female scientist list with a reference to Haines. Is Haines a reference to this? FWIW, some additional sources are here and here (the latter behind a paywall). I probably won't get to this article for some time, but thought I'd pop a note here in case you were interested in that article. Carcharoth ( talk) 22:34, 29 April 2015 (UTC) reply

@ Carcharoth: Hi! That would be the book, yeah. I may have time to write it over the summer but if you have the chance, definitely take a crack at it! Thanks for working on women scientists! :) Keilana| ^{Parlez ici} 22:14, 3 May 2015 (UTC) reply

Two years ago, you were the 472nd recipient of my Pumpkin Sky Prize, - best wishes for your exams, for your usual calmness and competence, -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 09:05, 1 May 2015 (UTC) reply

Thank you so much Gerda! :) Keilana| ^{Parlez ici} 22:15, 3 May 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Vaginal evisceration, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Evisceration. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:17, 4 May 2015 (UTC) reply

The second round one has all wrapped up, and round three has now begun! Congratulations to the 34 contestants who have made it through, but well done and thank you to all contestants who took part in our second round. Leading the way overall was Cas Liber ( submissions) in Group B with a total of 777 points for a variety of contributions including Good Articles on Corona Borealis and Microscopium - both of which received the maximum bonus.

Special credit must be given to a number of high importance articles improved during the second round.

• Coemgenus ( submissions) was one of several users who worked on improving Ulysses S. Grant. Remember, you do not need to work on an article on your own - as long as each person has completed significant work on the article during 2015, multiple competitors can claim the same article.
• Cwmhiraeth ( submissions) took Dragonfly to Good Article for a 3x bonus - and if that wasn't enough, they also took Damselfly there as well for a 2x bonus.
• LeftAire ( submissions) worked up Alexander Hamilton to Good Article for the maximum bonus. Hamilton was one of the founding fathers of the United States and is a level 4 vital article.

The points varied across groups, with the lowest score required to gain automatic qualification was 68 in Group A - meanwhile the second place score in Group H was 404, which would have been high enough to win all but one of the other Groups! As well as the top two of each group automatically going through to the third round, a minimum score of 55 was required for a wildcard competitor to go through. We had a three-way tie at 55 points and all three have qualified for the next round, in the spirit of fairness. The third round ends on June 28, with the top two in each group progressing automatically while the remaining 16 highest scorers across all four groups go through as wildcards. Good luck to all competitors for the third round! Figureskatingfan ( talk · contribs · email), Miyagawa ( talk · contribs · email) and Sturmvogel 66 ( talk · contribs · email) 16:35, 4 May 2015 (UTC) reply

MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 23:25, 4 May 2015 (UTC) reply

.. for signing up here. Unfortunately, I will be in Berlin during the event otherwise I would have loved to help in person. See you very soon! --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 15:30, 6 May 2015 (UTC) reply

Hello, Keilana. Vaginal evisceration, an article you either created or significantly contributed to, has been nominated  to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page as part of Did you know . You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. APersonBot ( talk!) 02:17, 10 May 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi Keilana, thanks for signing up to participate during our edit-a-thon tomorrow! It will be great to have a long-time Wikipedian involved. Do you think you will work from the list of topics on our project page, or work on your own topics? I ask because I will be tracking edits made during the event so that we can get a sense of the impact. Thanks! Steelyskoal ( talk) 17:58, 11 May 2015 (UTC) reply

@ Steelyskoal: I'm excited to be involved! I'm currently working on ovarian cancer and other gynecological cancer articles, so I'll be working there, and I'm of course happy to help out people who need it at the event as possible. Keilana| ^{Parlez ici} 21:32, 11 May 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi. I noticed you listed yourself at Wikipedia:Request an RfA nomination. Please consider Ian.thomson for an RfA. Ian has the requisite longevity and editing experience and has taken a huge amount of abuse while vandal fighting. He's always been on the right side during his appearances at ANI and I think he ought to have the mop so we can cut out the middleman.

My nomination wouldn't help him but your recommendation would carry weight with the aggregate of Wikipedians. Ian has never been an admin and has never indicated he would be against a nomination. Thanks for your time. Chris Troutman ( talk) 22:04, 12 May 2015 (UTC) reply

@ Chris troutman: I'll take a look when I'm done with my exam! Keilana| ^{Parlez ici} 23:39, 12 May 2015 (UTC) reply

Thanks, but no need. I found another Wikipedian to make the nomination. You're welcome to co-nominate should you decide to. Chris Troutman ( talk) 23:24, 19 May 2015 (UTC) reply

WikiProject Good Articles's 2015 GA Cup Greetings, all! We would like to announce the start of the 2nd GA Cup, a competition that seeks to encourage the reviewing of Good article nominations! Our inaugural competition, which ran from October 2014 to April 2015, was such a resounding success that we'd like to do it again. Currently, there are over 500 GANs ready to be reviewed; competitors in the previous GA Cup reviewed about 570 GAs, so we can again make a huge impact in helping editors improve articles in Wikipedia and decrease the traditionally long queue at GAN. The 2nd GA Cup will begin on July 1, 2015. As last time, five rounds are currently scheduled (which will bring the competition to a close on November 28, 2015), but this may change based on participant numbers. The judges learned a lot during the 1st GA Cup which exposed weaknesses in its system. Using both the feedback from last year's participants and the weaknesses discovered, we've revised the scoring system to make it more fair. The sign-up and submissions process will remain the same. We also are introducing three new judges: 3family6, Jaguar and MrWooHoo. So in total, there will be six judges. We hope this will allow the competition to run more smoothly. Sign-ups for the upcoming competition are currently open and will close on July 15, 2015. Everyone is welcome to join; new and old editors, so sign-up now! If you have any questions, take a look at the FAQ page and/or contact one of the judges. Cheers from 3family6, Dom497, Figureskatingfan, Jaguar and MrWooHoo, and TheQ Editor.

-- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:53, 28 May 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi, I'm notifying you of a discussion where I mentioned you because you have been involved with The Wikipedia Adventure. You can comment here: Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Wikipedia:The_Wikipedia_Adventure_(2nd_nomination). Cheers, Jake Ocaasi ^{t | c} 15:38, 30 May 2015 (UTC) reply

-- Lucywhirlpool ( talk) 15:19, 1 June 2015 (UTC) reply

	Butterfly of trans* awesomeness
	I had to give you a shiny, because this edit just needs kudos awarding to it. Along with Tom Morris for doing the move, Annie Leibovitz for taking the photo and Caitlyn herself, you are definitely one my favourite people this week. — OwenBlacker ( Talk) 23:21, 1 June 2015 (UTC) reply

Aww, thank you! Keilana| ^{Parlez ici} 00:19, 2 June 2015 (UTC) reply

I am getting too much red notifications, that I was mentioned in this talk page and also in talk pages of GorillaWarfare and Missvain. I expected notifications about something else. The users are dragging all old nonsensical accusations. One administrator even found this interesting.

User loses their cool 2 weeks ago, not good: yeah I lost cool for this. That was not warning but gentle reminder and in other case, Yunshui accepted that I was right.

Now they are making personal attacks under the guise of giving Barnstars.

What was in that E-mail, Lucywhirlpool sent you? -- Cosmic   Emperor  00:17, 3 June 2015 (UTC) reply

I didn't get an email from anyone and I don't know anything about this situation. Keilana| ^{Parlez ici} 02:19, 3 June 2015 (UTC) reply

I got so many red notifications from socks, that i was mentioned here and there. Please semi-protect your talk page for few weeks.-- Cosmic   Emperor  04:42, 5 June 2015 (UTC) reply

Yes User:CosmicEmperor appears that you have acquired your very own pet troll. We just need to be careful not to feed it Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 04:55, 5 June 2015 (UTC) reply

But what did i do so special? The usernames are like female names. Cosmic   Emperor  05:02, 5 June 2015 (UTC) reply

No idea. Unfortunately one of the prices of this open plateform. If they bather you I can start blocking them. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 05:19, 5 June 2015 (UTC) reply

Guild of Copy Editors June 2015 News May drive: Thanks to everyone who participated in last month's backlog-reduction drive. Of the 38 people who signed up, 29 copyedited at least one article, and we got within 50 articles of our all-time low in the backlog. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Coordinator elections: Nominations are open through June 15 for GOCE coordinators, with voting from June 16–30. Self-nominations are welcome and encouraged. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Miniapolis, Jonesey95, Biblioworm and Philg88. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 23:28, 5 June 2015 (UTC) reply

Dear Keilana,

First, congratulations on your Wikipedian-in-Residence for NIOSH! Very cool and I think you'll enjoy it. FYI, Your assignment there seems to be missing from the page on Wikipedian-in-Residence that lists such assignments.

Looking through Wikipedia I see women scientists in occupational health with paltry entries that should be enhanced. Many are long dead but others are living still. Plus there is a cohort of active investigators/advocates whose contributions merit citation on Wikipedia. For example,

Alice Hamilton (with a connection to Hull house in Chicago in the early part of the last century. There are many references to her at NIOSH and in the field of occupational health. Actually this Wiki entry is pretty informative.)

Harriet Hardy has a too, too short entry. She made important contributions in study of Beryllium exposures to workers.

Karen Silkwood, an occupational health activist at a nuclear facility who died under mysteriously circumstances amid her whistle blowing attempts regarding hazards the company was covering up.

Alice Stewart, an epidemiologist who studied the effect of x-ray exposure on fetuses and later plutonium exposure among nuclear workers at Hanford, WA.

These are all dead now but there is a cohort of younger women scientists/activists who are alive and yet to be recognized. These are the ones to target for bio profiles on Wikipedia.

Some context about this field may be had in the timeline on the following site. http://ohshistory.org/

and with the American Public Health Association's Occupational Health and Safety Section. see www.apha.org/apha-communities/member-sections/occupational-health-and-safety/news-and-events

Next November, APHA has it's annual meeting in Chicago and if you are still working with NIOSH and have interest in the field, I recommend trying to connect with the section then. I believe you'll find like minded folks there who may be resources for you. See www.apha.org/events-and-meetings/annual

If you'd like to discuss this further, let's do so via email.

Thanks and be well!

Seeker42seeker ( talk) 05:03, 9 June 2015 (UTC) reply

Hey, thanks for the note! I've responded by email. Keilana| ^{Parlez ici} 19:06, 10 June 2015 (UTC) reply

Delivered on behalf of The Wikipedia Library by MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 06:16, 11 June 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi Keilana, I saw you listed yourself as an admin who is willing to consider others for Requests for Adminship, particularly those in the anti-vandal / SPI area of Wikipedia. I myself find myself most comfortable in this area of Wikipedia, and helping out new users with questions....namely because new content creation reminds me too much of college research papers and I'm done with that, heh...so as such I would like to request if you could look over my contributions, etc. and see if I'm ready or where I can improve at.

Thanks! RegistryKey ^(RegEdit) 02:40, 14 June 2015 (UTC) reply

@ RegistryKey: Hi RegistryKey, unfortunately I'm busy with work and such and wouldn't have the time to do you justice. Good luck, though! Keilana| ^{Parlez ici} 23:57, 14 June 2015 (UTC) reply

I have unintentionally messed up on one of my guidelines and made an edit to the Sexual intercourse article. I forgot to review the article editing history before I made the edit. The edit consisted of updating a reference that was outdated issued by the World Health Organization. I assure you, it was an error and I will be more diligent in the future.

   Bfpage | leave a message  14:21, 20 June 2015 (UTC) reply

On 28 June 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Vaginal evisceration, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that vaginal evisceration is a rare complication of surgically removing the uterus entirely through the vaginal canal? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Vaginal evisceration. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass ( talk) 01:50, 28 June 2015 (UTC) reply

We've been having a busy summer. The Literature award was announced on June 30th. The 2015 recipient is David Hackett Fischer. A new Civil War exhibit opened on June 24th. Lots of Library Interns/Wikipedians in Residence have been busy updating biographies and creating stubs for WWI songs. The Museum & Library has gotten a lot of good press as a result. Please help me spread the word! TeriEmbrey ( talk) 14:54, 1 July 2015 (UTC) reply

That's wonderful! :) Keilana| ^{Parlez ici} 08:09, 5 July 2015 (UTC) reply

We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!

With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:

• Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
• Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
• Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
• Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
• Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
• Research coordinators: run reference services

Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC) reply

Thank you for contributing to the grant request for training Wikipedia admins to be more aware of sexism! This grant has been approved in pilot form, and the Ada Initiative is running an Ally Skills Workshop at Wikimania 2015. This workshop will focus on teaching specific skills and techniques directly relevant to Wikipedia admins and editors, and in particular will teach people about the psychology of trolls. The workshop will be on Thursday July 16 from 2pm to 5pm in Don Diego 3.

If you are attending Wikimania, you are invited to apply to the Ally Skills Workshop! Space is limited and we may not be able to accept all applications, so apply now. More information, including a link to the application form, is here:

Ally Skills Workshop description and application form

People of all genders are welcome to attend. Unfortunately, travel scholarships for Wikimania are already closed and we don't know of any other sources of travel funding. If you know anyone else attending Wikimania who might be interested in attending this workshop, please encourage them to apply!

Thank you for your time,

Valerie Aurora (Instructor and Interim Executive Director of the Ada Initiative)

Valerietai ( talk) 20:56, 7 July 2015 (UTC) reply

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Thank you for helping PMML get started as a GLAM. According to the WikiProject directory, GLAM/Pritzker is the 2nd largest Cultural Partnership WikiProject as of today! TeriEmbrey ( talk) 16:21, 9 July 2015 (UTC) reply

	The Special Barnstar
	hello i like your work and i want to be your student if you agree Diodgta ( talk) 11:31, 11 July 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi Keilana; hope your MCATs went well; I know I'm most certainly not looking forward to having to take the GRE at some point! To get to the subject, if you're still at all interested in constellation articles, Serpens is now at FAC. StringTheory11 ( t •  c) 04:38, 16 July 2015 (UTC) reply

Hey StringTheory! I'll try to take a look when I'm back home - I'm currently at Wikimania. Keilana| ^{Parlez ici} 16:25, 16 July 2015 (UTC) reply

The Interior 15:23, 16 July 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Urethral diverticulum

added a link pointing to Incontinence

X-linked recessive hypoparathyroidism

added a link pointing to Trousseau sign

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:05, 19 July 2015 (UTC) reply

Some female scientists listed here I think ( Wikipedia:WikiProject Fungi/List of unwritten articles (high priority) and probably elsewhere) cheers, Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 12:59, 22 July 2015 (UTC) reply

@ Casliber: YAY! /bookmarks Keilana| ^{Parlez ici} 14:13, 22 July 2015 (UTC) reply

Also, if you are really keen you can see if any can be expanded to GA/FA - see Wikipedia:Four Award. I like this as the idea of there being new articles that are still capable of being buffed to this level. I tried spamming article creation to see if I made the 4000000th article (with the idea of buffing it to FA to show it was still possible with new articles), but missed out by a few. I think a few editors will try and bum-rush the 5000000th article to see if they can claim bragging rites on that one..... Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 01:48, 24 July 2015 (UTC) reply

That, my friend, is an excellent idea! Keilana| ^{Parlez ici} 01:52, 24 July 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi, I see you recently joined Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red. I've made a proposal to merge this project into Wikipedia:WikiProject Women at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red, so we can not only cover missing articles but focus on general quality of women's biographies. If interested please put your name down on the WP:Women page at the bottom.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:05, 29 July 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi Keilana, a couple of suggestions for you. First, you should add the block to WP:MRMPS. It is supposed to be logged. Second, it would make it clearer when you sanction editors per MRMPS if you use the block notice suggested at that page. Memills is familiar with the drill, even if they act like they don't, but it makes it clear to any passing administrator what they can and can't do in response to an unblock request.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 04:27, 30 July 2015 (UTC) reply

@ Bbb23: Wow, super fail on my part. I totally forgot to log it/use the right block notice. Thanks for the heads-up! Cheers, Keilana| ^{Parlez ici} 05:15, 30 July 2015 (UTC) reply

On 30 July 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Urethral diverticulum, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a urethral diverticulum is a pouch that forms in the urethra from trauma or infection? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Urethral diverticulum. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 12:57, 30 July 2015 (UTC) reply

I mentioned I might need some how-to help, but I think I found it here. Basicially, I just need to log in to my own account and create the new accounts using Special:UserLogin/signup, either using the username and (hopefully temporary) password they provide to me or their username and email address to have a temporary password emailed to them. I presume that I'll only have the 'noratelimit' bit, not the 'override-antispoof' or the 'tboverride-account' bits, so I can still rely on the username-application filters to catch any inappropriate names that I don't catch myself. Is that all about right? Best regards, TransporterMan ( TALK) 14:13, 30 July 2015 (UTC) reply

@ TransporterMan: Yeah, that's about all you need! It's pretty easy once you get the hang of it. Another thing to think about is that you can ask participants to register for an account at home and then you'll have less accounts to do at the workshop. Keilana| ^{Parlez ici} 15:45, 30 July 2015 (UTC) reply

Thanks, Keiliana, I appreciate the clarification and tip. Best regards, TransporterMan ( TALK) 16:59, 30 July 2015 (UTC) reply

WikiProject Good Articles's 2015 GA Cup - Round 2 Greetings, GA Cup competitors! Wednesday saw the end of Round 1. The Rambling Man, who was eliminated during the first round in our last competition, earned an impressive 513 points, reviewed twice as many articles (26) as any other competitor. It was a tight race for second for first-time competitors BenLinus1214 and Tomandjerry211, who finished second and third with 243 and 224 points, respectively. Close behind was Wugapodes, who earned 205 points. The change in our points system had an impact on scoring. It was easier to earn higher points, although the key to success didn't change from last time, which was choosing articles with older nomination dates. For example, most of the articles The Rambling Man reviewed were worth 18 points in the nomination date category, and he benefited from it. BenLinus1214 reviewed the longest article, A Simple Plan (at 26,536 characters, or 4,477 words), the 1994 film starring Bill Paxton, Billy Bob Thornton, and Bridget Fonda and directed by Sam Raimi, and earned all possible 5 points in that category. After feedback from our participants, the judges slightly changed the rule about review length this time out. Shorter reviews are now allowed, as long as reviewers give nominators an opportunity to address their feedback. Shorter reviews are subject to the judges' discretion; the judges will continue their diligence as we continue the competition. Despite having fewer contestants at the beginning of Round 1 than last time, 132 articles were reviewed, far more than the 117 articles that were reviewed in Round 1 of the inaugural GA Cup. All of us involved should be very proud of what we've accomplished thus far. The judges are certain that Round 2 will be just as successful. 16 contestants have moved onto Round 2 and have been randomly placed in 4 groups of 4, with the top 2 in each pool progressing to Round 3, as well as the top participant ("9th place") of all remaining competitors. Round 2 has already begun and will end on August 29 at 23:59:59 UTC. Information about Round 2 and the pools can be found here. Good luck and remember to have fun! Cheers from Dom497, Figureskatingfan, 3family6 and Jaguar, and MrWooHoo. To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletter, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant still competing, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.

-- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 03:52, 1 August 2015 (UTC) reply

Talk:Dyslexia/GA2 -- Ozzie10aaaa ( talk) 19:05, 1 August 2015 (UTC) reply

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/DOCK8 deficiency at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{ db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot ( talk) 07:59, 2 August 2015 (UTC) reply

Keilana, your request to the nominator has been responded to. Can you please return to the nomination and, if it's ready, finish off the review? Many thanks. BlueMoonset ( talk) 15:54, 3 August 2015 (UTC) reply

On 3 August 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Lucie Randoin, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Lucie Randoin was made a member of the Legion of Honour in 1958? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Lucie Randoin. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 23:27, 3 August 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Laïs (physician), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Pliny and Ram. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:42, 4 August 2015 (UTC) reply

On 4 August 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 13q deletion syndrome, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that 13q deletion syndrome can cause imperforate anus? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/13q deletion syndrome. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 11:42, 4 August 2015 (UTC) reply