Welcome to my Talk Page!

---

Archived every 50 sub-headings:
Archive 1 (July 7, 2005 to October 8, 2005)
Archive 2 (October 9, 2005 to October 22, 2005)
Archive 3 (October 23, 2005 to November 5, 2005)
Archive 4 (November 6, 2005 to November 19, 2005)
Archive 5 (November 20, 2005 to December 7, 2005)
Archive 6 (December 8, 2005 to December 18, 2005)
Archive 7 (December 19, 2005 to December 29, 2005)
Archive 8 (December 29, 2005 to January 8, 2006)
Archive 9 (January 8, 2006 to January 29, 2006)
Archive 10 (January 29, 2006 to February 11, 2006)
Archive 11 (February 11, 2006 to March 3, 2006)
Archive 12 (March 4, 2006 to April 2, 2006)
Archive 13 (April 2, 2006 to April 22, 2006)
Archive 14 (April 23, 2006 to May 11, 2006)
Archive 15 (May 12, 2006 to June 10, 2006)
Archive 16 (June 10, 2006 to July 4, 2006)
Archive 17 (July 4, 2006 to July 31, 2006)
Archive 18 (July 31, 2006 to September 14, 2006)
Archive 19 (September 15, 2006 to November 11, 2006)
Archive 20 (November 11, 2006 to December 23, 2006)
Archive 21 (December 24, 2006 to February 24, 2007)
Archive 22 (February 24, 2007 to April 12, 2007)
Archive 23 (April 12, 2007 to July 10, 2007)
Archive 24 (July 11, 2007 to November 12, 2007)
Archive 25 (November 13, 2007 to March 3, 2008)
Archive 26 (March 9, 2008 to June 21, 2008)
Archive 27 (June 28, 2008 to September 30, 2008)
Archive 28 (October 1, 2008 to June 23, 2009)
Archive 29 (June 27, 2009 to July 2, 2010)
Archive 30 (July 3, 2010 to June 9, 2011)
Archive 31 (June 10, 2011 to December 30, 2012)
Archive 32 (January 1, 2013 to January 7, 2016)
Archive 33 (January 8, 2016 to March 18, 2020)

DO NOT EDIT OR POST REPLIES TO THIS PAGE. THIS PAGE IS AN ARCHIVE.

This archive page covers approximately the dates between June 10 2011 and December 30 2012.

Post replies to the main talk page, copying or summarizing the section you are replying to if necessary.

Please add new archivals to User talk:Titoxd/Archive34. (See Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.) Thank you. Titoxd^{( ?!?)} 18:58, 12 January 2021 (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.

I shrunk the image on Cirrus cloud. Does it look good on your screen now, or should I shrink it to 350px? Thanks! Reaper Eternal ( talk) 01:24, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

I think it's ready to be posted. What do you think? -- The Egyptian Liberal ( talk) 07:46, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Oh darn, I just wrote out an unblock message, which I now won't get to use. J/k, but maybe I will post my thoughts to the editor.-- SPhilbrick T 20:49, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Mind updating the file File:2011 Atlantic hurricane season summary map.png to have Cindy, and extend Bret's track? Thanks! Hurricanefan25  ^{tropical  cyclone} 21:14, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello! Since 10.28.2010 has given you some cookies. Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully these have made your day better. Happy munching! Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:plate}} to someone's talk page, or eat these cookies on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munchplate}}.

Thanks for unblocking me. An editor since 10.28.2010. 23:37, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

	Congratulations!
	Thanks for all the work you did in making Hurricane Alex (2010) a certified "Good Article"! Your work is much appreciated. In the spirit of celebration, you may wish to review one of the Good Article nominees that someone else nominated, as there is currently a backlog, and any help is appreciated. All the best, – Quadell ( talk)

It was recently suggested that WikiProject Arizona, to which you are a member, may be inactive or semiactive and it might be beneficial to include it in the list of projects supported by WikiProject United States. After reviewing the project it appears that there haven't been much active discussion on the talk page in some time and the only content updates appear to be simple maintenance so being supported by a larger project might be beneficial. I have begun a discussion on the projects talk page to see how the members of the project feel about this suggestion. Another user has added the project to the WPUS template and I added it to the list of supported projects in the WPUS main project page but before I take any further action I wanted to contact each of the active members for their input. -- Kumioko ( talk) 22:54, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on August 10, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/August 10, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article directors Raul654 ( talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 ( talk · contribs), or at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tbhotch. ^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 03:59, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Numerical weather prediction uses mathematical models of the atmosphere and oceans to predict the weather based on current weather conditions. A number of global and regional forecast models are run in different countries worldwide, using current weather observations relayed from radiosondes or weather satellites as inputs to the models. Mathematical models based on the same physical principles can be used to generate either short-term weather forecasts or longer-term climate predictions. Manipulating the vast datasets and performing the complex calculations necessary to modern numerical weather prediction requires some of the most powerful supercomputers in the world. Even with the increasing power of supercomputers, the forecast skill of numerical weather models only extends to about six days. Factors affecting the accuracy of numerical predictions include the density and quality of observations used as input to the forecasts, along with deficiencies in the numerical models themselves. To quantify the large amount of inherent uncertainty remaining in numerical predictions, ensemble forecasts have been used since the 1990s to help gauge the confidence in the forecast, and to obtain useful results farther into the future than otherwise possible. ( more...)

I honestly meant no "dig" at you at all Titoxd. Was just explaining why I posted after I said I'd shut up. I'm very sorry if it came across that way. — Ched :  ?  06:54, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi Titoxd. I replied both on my talk to you directly, and on the crat page in general. I honestly do thank you for helping me realize that my post(s) could have come across so poorly. Cheers and best. — Ched :  ?  07:33, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Arizona USAD medals.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Monty ₈₄₅ 03:31, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

I can't figure out how to download the tropical cyclone track software. I have Cairo. Can you please help? Thanks! HurricaneFan 25 17:07, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I'm Lauren Orsini, a reporter at the Daily Dot (dailydot.com). I'm contacting you and a few other top editor to the Hurricane Irene page to do a story about how Wikipedia pages are built around events as they are still occurring. If you're interested, please contact me on Wikipedia or at lauren@dailydot.com, the sooner the better (I might lose power in this storm). And pardon any mistakes -- I'm brand new. Laureninspace ( talk) 19:48, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

The September 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
-- Kumioko ( talk) 02:40, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Do you have a larger version of this file: by any chance? Inks.LWC ( talk) 06:59, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Sadly, no. The file was based from File:Original Barnstar.png, which has the same resolution issues. Titoxd^{( ?!? - cool stuff)} 07:17, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

No problem - it looks like the image is just big enough anyway. Inks.LWC ( talk) 07:22, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Clearly the work I did during the first four months of the year on the various numerical weather prediction articles has rendered incapable of significant edits ever since. =) Thanks for the correction. Thegreatdr ( talk) 03:32, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Good for you. Differential equations destroyed the grad path for me. Maybe someday I'll go for an MS,. Thegreatdr ( talk) 04:38, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

The December 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
-- Kumioko ( talk) 04:00, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the 2012 WikiCup! The competition officially begins at the start of 2012 (UTC) after which time you may begin to claim points. Your submission page, where you must note any content for which you wish to claim points, can be found here, and formatting instructions can be found in hidden comments on the page. A bot will then update the main table, which can be seen on the WikiCup page. The full rules for what will and will not be awarded points can be found at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring. There's also a section on that page listing the changes that have been made to the rules this year, so that experienced participants can get up-to-date in a few seconds. One point of which we must remind everyone; you may only claim points for content upon which you have done significant work, and which you have nominated, in 2012. For instance, articles written or good article reviews started in 2011 are not eligible for points.

This round will last until late February, and signups will remain open until the middle of February. If you know of anyone who may like to take part, please let them know about the comeptition; the more the merrier! At the end of this round, the top 64 scorers will progress to the next round, where their scores will reset, and they will be split into pools. Note that, by default, you have been added to our newsletter list; we will be in contact at the end of every month with news. You're welcome to remove yourself from this list if you do not wish to hear from us. Conversely, those interested in following the competition are more than welcome to add themselves to the list. Please direct any questions towards the judges, or on the WikiCup talk page. Good luck! J Milburn ( talk) and The ed17 ( talk) 17:56, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited Hurricane Gilbert, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Barahona ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:53, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi,

Thanks for the review! I have replied to your comments. Please tell me if there is more I can do to fix the article.

Best wishes,

MathewTownsend ( talk) 16:37, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I think I'm all done! Ref 3 was a Press release so I stuck that in for author. Not sure the McGraw Hill book is the same edition as linked to, and I don't know page number. Hope it's all ok! MathewTownsend ( talk) 21:24, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you so much! MathewTownsend ( talk) 22:15, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

• Hello. You said that a much more extensive, much more detailed (and much better drafted) RFC (about FAC) is in the works. Would you please share a link? Thanks –One LeafKnowsAutumn  (talk) 09:47, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

The January 2012 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
-- Kumi-Taskbot ( talk) 19:50, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

		The Original Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to everyone who - whatever their opinion - contributed to the discussion about Wikipedia and SOPA. Thank you for being a part of the discussion. Presented by the Wikimedia Foundation.

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Tropical Cyclones for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. - Mabeenot ( talk) 06:10, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 is off to a flying start. At the time of writing, we have 112 contestants; comparable to last year, but slightly fewer than 2010. Signups will remain open for another week, after which time they will be closed for this year. Our currrent far-away leader is Grapple X ( submissions), due mostly to his work on a slew of good articles about The X-Files; there remain many such articles waiting to be reviewed at good article candidates. Second place is currently held by Ruby2010 ( submissions), whose points come mostly from good articles about television episodes, although good article reviews, did you knows and an article about a baroness round out the score. In third place is Jivesh boodhun ( submissions), who has scored 200 points for his work on a single featured article, as well as points for work on others, mostly in the area of pop music. In all, nine users have 100 or more points. However, at the other end of the scale, there are still dozens of participants who are yet to score. Please remember to update your submission pages promptly!

The 64 highest scoring participants will advance to round 2 in a month's time. There, they will be split into eight random groups of eight. The score needed to reach the next round is not at all clear; last year, 8 points guaranteed a place. The year before, 20.

A few participants and their work warrant a mention for achieving "firsts" in this competition.

• 12george1 ( submissions) was the first to score, with his good article review of Illinois v. McArthur.
• 12george1 ( submissions) was also the first to score points for an article, thanks to his work on Hurricane Debby (1982)- now a good article. Tropical storms have featured heavily in the Cup, and good articles currently have a relatively fast turnaround time for reviews.
• Sp33dyphil ( submissions) was the first to score points for a did you know, with Russian submarine K-114 Tula. Military history is another subject which has seen a lot of Cup activity.
• Sp33dyphil ( submissions) is also the first person to successfully claim bonus points. Terminator 2: Judgment Day is now a good article, and was eligible for bonus points because the subject was covered on more than 20 other Wikipedias at the start of the competition. It is fantastic to see bonus points being claimed so early!
• Speciate ( submissions) was the first to score points for an In the News entry, with Paedophryne amauensis. The lead image from the article was also used on the main page for a time, and it's certainly eye-catching!
• Jivesh boodhun ( submissions) was the first to score points for a featured article, and is, at the moment, the only competitor to claim for one. The article, "Halo" (Beyoncé Knowles song), was also worth double points because of its wide coverage. While this is an article that Jivesh and others have worked on for some time, it is undeniable that he has put considerable work into it this year, pushing it over the edge.

We are yet to see any featured lists, featured topics or good topics, but this is unsurprising; firstly, the nomination processes with each of these can take some time, and, secondly, it can take a considerable amount of time to work content to this level. In a similar vein, we have seen only one featured article. The requirement that content must have been worked on this year to be eligible means that we did not expect to see these at the start of the competition. No points have been claimed for featured portals or pictures, but these are not content types which are often claimed; the former has never made a big impact on the WikiCup, while the latter has not done so since 2009's competition.

A quick rules clarification before the regular notices: If you are concerned that another user is claiming points inappropriately, please contact a judge to take a look at the article. Competitors policing one another can create a bad atmosphere, and may lead to inconsistencies and mistakes. Rest assured that we, the judges, are making an effort to check submissions, but it is possible that we will miss something. On a loosely related note: If you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, 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, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 00:20, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Since you have listed yourself as a peer review volunteer interested in copyediting, would you like to support the quest to counter systemic bias on Wikipedia by giving a thorough review of the article Movement for the Intellectually Disabled of Singapore? MINDS turns 50 this year and getting their article to GA status would be a great way to appreciate their support of intellectually disabled Singaporeans. Thanks! 谢谢！Terima kasih! நன்றி! -- J.L.W.S. The Special One ( talk) 09:43, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Dear Titoxd,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and

Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's

Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we

teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community,

and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what

you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community

[[Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)/Archive_82#Learn_to_be_a_Wikipedia_Administrator_-

_New_class_at_MSU|HERE]], where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my

students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training,

motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one

of our students.

So a few things about the interviews:

• Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
• Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of

communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)

• All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will

never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.

• All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an

interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.

• The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics

review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have

been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.

Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak

with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I

will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your

name HERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be

more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar -- Jaobar ( talk) 07:26, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Young June Sah -- Yjune.sah ( talk) 21:50, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

• Wikipedia:Peer_review/Transitional_fossil/archive1
• Transitional fossil

It is a very important subject, and I wish to take it to GA/FA status in the future. Your expert input would be highly valued. -- Harizotoh9 ( talk) 00:15, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Round 1 is already over! The 64 highest scorers have progressed to round 2. Our highest scorer was Grapple X ( submissions), again thanks mostly to a swathe of good articles on The X-Files. In second place was Tigerboy1966 ( submissions), thanks an impressive list of did you knows about racehorses. Both scored over 400 points. Following behind with over 300 points were Ruby2010 ( submissions), Cwmhiraeth ( submissions), Miyagawa ( submissions) and Casliber ( submissions). February also saw the competition's first featured list: List of colleges and universities in North Dakota, from Ruby2010 ( submissions). At the other end of the scale, 11 points was enough to secure a place in this round, and some contestants with 10 points made it into the round on a tiebreaker. This is higher than the 8 points that were needed last year, but lower than the 20 points required the year before. The number of points required to progress to round 3 will be significantly higher.

The remaining contestants have been split into 8 pools of 8, named A through H. Round two will finish in two months time on 28 April, when the two highest scorers in each pool, as well as the next 16 highest scorers, will progress to round 3. The pools were entirely random, so while some pools may end up being more competitive than others, this is by chance rather than design.

The judges would like to point out two quick rules reminders. First, any content promoted during the interim period (that is, on or after 27 February) is eligible for points in round 2. Second, any content worked on significantly this year is eligible for points if promoted in this round. On a related note, if you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which would otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn ( talk • email) and The ed17 ( talk • email) 00:10, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Our involvement in the article of the fortnight last year for numerical weather prediction was probably the best experience I've had so far in wikipedia, and the best since the extratropical cyclone and tropical cyclone FA experiences, despite its three month duration. I wish the TC and met projects always worked like that. You may have noticed that, outside the past month, what little editing I've done has been relegated to wikilinks, spelling problems, and other minutia. I think after over six years, with minimal help within the meteorology articles, that this whole experience has become less "one team working together" and more "what article am I going to have to edit now which has been abandoned for years". I see the same problems within the TC project that were recently touched upon in the recent signpost article. It's funny....I used to make the same mistakes in 2006/2007 myself. Since the Chacor issues 5 years ago, I've been trying to be more supportive of new reviewers, but this only seems to be upsetting the established editors within the TC and met projects. I'm not resigning from wikipedia per se, but I'm likely going to stay much more in the background of the met and TC projects as a lurker rather than as an editor. I just don't see much of a point in editing within this environment anymore. It lost its fun. Thegreatdr ( talk) 03:21, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

You could always try out WP:SEVERE event articles...that WikiProject seems to have had some dire issues getting content to GA/FA status, and I'd be willing to pitch in and help out on some of the more recent articles (2011 outbreaks and on) as much as I could. I've never really been a big content editor; I seem to start working on an article and then forget about it relatively quickly (articles like 2011 Joplin tornado), not to mention I don't know really know the subtleties of references, prose, etc that make an article featured quality. All in all, I'd love to have some help and guidance brushing up the tornado outbreak articles from someone knowledgeable about GA/FA writing, and the editing environment seems less hectic, busy, and pressured than I've gotten the impression the tropical cyclone project has. Food for thought, at least. Ks0stm ^{( T• C• G• E)} 04:15, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

We are over half way through the second round of this year's WikiCup and things are going well! Grapple X ( submissions), of Pool B, is our highest overall scorer thanks to his prolific writings on television and film. In second place is Pool H's Cwmhiraeth ( submissions), thanks primarily to work on biological articles, especially in marine biology and herpetology. Third place goes to Pool E's Casliber ( submissions), who also writes primarily on biology (including ornithology and botany) and has already submitted two featured articles this round. Of the 63 contestants remaining, 15 (just under a quarter) have over 100 points this round. However, 25 are yet to score. Please remember to update your submission pages promptly. 32 contestants, the top two from each pool and the 16 next-highest scorers, will advance to round 3.

Congratulations to Matthewedwards ( submissions), whose impressive File:Wacht am Rhein map (Opaque).svg became the competition's first featured picture. Also, congratulations to 12george1 ( submissions), who claimed good topic points, our first contestant this year to do so, for his work on Wikipedia:Featured topics/1982 Atlantic hurricane season. This leaves featured topics and featured portals as the only sources of points not yet utilised. However, as recent statistics from Miyagawa ( submissions) show, no source has yet been utilised this competition to the same extent it has been previously!

It has been observed that the backlogs at good article candidates are building up again. While the points for good article reviews will be remaining constant, any help that can be offered keeping the backlog down would be appreciated. On a related note, if you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn ( talk • email) and The ed17 ( talk • email) 23:30, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day, Titoxd, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talk about my edits? 00:28, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Round 2 of this year's WikiCup is over, and so we are down to our final 32, in what could be called our quarter-finals. The two highest scorers from each pool, as well as the next 16 highest scorers overall, have entered round 3, while 30 participants have been eliminated. Pool B's Grapple X ( submissions) remains our top scorer with over 700 points; he continues to gain high numbers of points for his good articles on The X-Files, but also Millennium and other subjects. He has also gained points for a good topic, a featured list, multiple good article reviews and several did you knows. Pool E's Casliber ( submissions) was second, thanks primarily to his biology articles, with Pool H's Muboshgu ( submissions) coming in third, with an impressive 46 did you knows, mostly on the subject of baseball. Casliber and Cwmhiraeth both scored over 600 points. Pools E and H proved our most successful, with each seeing 5 members qualify for round 3, while Pools C and D were the least, with each seeing only 3 reach round 3. However, it was Pool G which saw the lowest scoring, with a little under 400 points combined; Pool H, the highest scoring group, saw over triple that score.

65 points was the lowest qualifying score for round 3; significantly higher than the 11 required to enter round 2, and also higher than the 41 required to reach round 3 last year. However, in 2010, 100 points were needed to secure a place in round 3. 16 will progress to round 4. In round 3, 150 points was the 16th highest score, though, statistically, people tend to up their game a little in later rounds. Last year, 76 points secured a place, while in 2010, a massive 250 points were needed. Guessing how many points will be required is not easy. We still have not seen any featured portals or topics this year, but, on the subject of less common content types, a small correction needs to be made to the previous newsletter: File:Wacht am Rhein map (Opaque).svg, our first featured picture, was the work of both Matthewedwards ( submissions) and Grandiose ( submissions), the latter of whom has also gone on to score with File:Map of the Battle of Guam, 1944.svg. Bonus points also continue to roll in; this round, Ealdgyth ( submissions) earned triple points for her good articles on William the Conqueror and the Middle Ages, Casliber and Cwmhiraeth both earned triple points for their work on Western Jackdaw, now a good article, Dana Boomer ( submissions) earned triple points for her work on lettuce and work by Stone ( submissions) to ready antimony for good article status earned him triple points. Jarry1250 ( submissions) managed to expand Vitus Bering far enough for a did you know, which was also worth triple points. All of these highly important topics featured on 50 or more Wikipedias at the start of the year.

An article on the WikiCup in the Wikimedia Blog, " Improving Wikipedia with friendly competition", was posted at the end of April. This may be of interest to those who are signed up to this newsletter, as well as serving as another way to draw attention to our project. Also, we would again like to thank Jarry1250 ( submissions) and Stone ( submissions), for continued help behind the scenes. As ever, if you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn ( talk • email) and The ed17 ( talk • email) 23:23, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi Titox. I would like to invite you and Phoenix to again join the Great American Wiknic this June ( Wikipedia:Meetup/Phoenix 3 ?) :) Also, please confirm any preliminary details at Wikipedia:Wiknic#2012 Wiknic.-- Pharos ( talk) 20:01, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Geronimo Jackson. Since you had some involvement with the Geronimo Jackson redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 09:21, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

We're halfway through round 3 (or the quarter finals, if you prefer) and things are running smoothly. We're seeing very high scoring; as of the time of writing, the top 16 all have over 90 points. This has already proved to be more competative than this time last year- in 2011, 76 points secured a place, while in 2010, a massive 250 was the lowest qualifying score. People have also upped their game slightly from last round, which is to be expected as we approach the end of the competition. Leading Pool A is Cwmhiraeth ( submissions), whose points have mostly come from a large number of did you knows on marine biology. Pool B's leader, Grapple X ( submissions), is for the first time not our highest scorer at the time of newsletter publication, but his good articles on The X-Files and Millenium keep him in second place overall. Miyagawa ( submissions) leads Pool C, our quietest pool, with content in a variety of areas on a variety of topics. Pool D is led by Casliber ( submissions), our current overall leader. Nearly half of Casliber's points come from his triple-scored Western Jackdaw, which is now a featured article.

This round has seen an unusually high number of featured lists, with nearly one in five remaining participants claiming one, and one user, Muboshgu ( submissions), claiming two. Miyagawa's featured list, 1936 Summer Olympics medal table, was even awarded double points. By comparison, good article reviews seem to be playing a smaller part, and featured topics portals remain two content-types still unutilised in this competition. Other than that, there isn't much to say! Things are coming along smoothly. As ever, 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. J Milburn ( talk • email) and The ed17 ( talk • email) 23:47, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Apologies for the lateness of this letter; our usual bot wasn't working. We are now entering round 4, our semi-finals, and have our final 16. A score of 243 was required to reach this round; significantly more than 2011's 76 points, and only a little behind 2010's 250 points. By comparison, last year, 150 points in round 4 secured a place in the final; in 2010, 430 were needed. Commiserations to Pool A's igordebraga ( submissions), who scored 242 points, missing out on a place in the round by a whisker. However, congratulations to Pool B's Grapple X ( submissions), whose television articles have brought him another round victory. Pool A's Cwmhiraeth ( submissions) came second overall, with an impressive list of biological did you knows, good articles and featured articles. Third overall was Pool D's Muboshgu ( submissions), with a long list of contibutions, mostly relating to baseball. Of course, with the points resetting every round, the playing field has been levelled. The most successful Pool was Pool D, which saw seven into the final round. Pool B saw four, C saw three and Pool A saw only the two round leaders.

A quick note about other competitions taking place on Wikipedia which may be of interest. There are 13 days remaining in the June-July GAN backlog elimination drive, but it is not too late to take part. August will also see the return of The Core Contest- a one month long competition first run in 2007. While the WikiCup awards points for audited content on any subject, The Core Contest about is raw article improvement, focussing heavily on the most important articles on Wikipedia. As ever, 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. J Milburn ( talk • email) and The ed17 ( talk • email) 11:13, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Since you have listed yourself as a peer review volunteer interested in copyediting articles, would you like to support the quest to counter systemic bias on Wikipedia by giving a thorough review of the short, but interesting, article about Ya Kun Kaya Toast, a multinational kaya toast chain and Singaporean cultural icon? Thanks! 谢谢！Terima kasih! நன்றி! -- J.L.W.S. The Special One ( talk) 10:04, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I was wondering if I could interest you with Curiosity rover which will land on Mars on 5 August. We will get loads of new info onward which I hope to transition to Wikipedia. :) -- A Certain White Cat ^chi? 03:36, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

I was reading your userpage! The Wikitst– Holy cow link is not working. BTW, you and I are the only two Wikipedians named "Tito" who are in in Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits Best-- Tito Dutta ✉ 19:06, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

We're approaching the beginning of 2012's final round. Pool A sees Cwmhiraeth ( submissions) as the leader, with 300 points being awarded for the featured article Bivalvia, and Pool B sees Grapple X ( submissions) in the lead, with 10 good articles, and over 35 articles eligible for good topic points. Pool A sees Muboshgu ( submissions) in second place with a number of articles relating to baseball, while Pool B's Ruby2010 ( submissions) follows Grapple X, with a variety of contributions including the high-scoring, high-importance featured article on the 2010 film Pride & Prejudice. Ruby2010, like Grapple X, also claimed a number of good topic points; despite this, not a single point has been claimed for featured topics in the contest so far. The same is true for featured portals.

Currently, the eighth-place competitor (and so the lowest scorer who would reach the final round right now) has scored 332, more than double the 150 needed to reach the final round last year. In 2010, however, 430 was the lowest qualifying score. In this competition, we have generally seen scores closer to those in 2010 than those in 2011. Let's see what kind of benchmark we can set for future competitions! As ever, 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. J Milburn ( talk • email) and The ed17 ( talk • email) 22:35, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

You closed an {{ afd}} on Ralph Kohlmann back in 2006. The nominator did not follow the advice of our deletion policy, and did not leave a courtesy heads-up on my talk page. I certainly would have weighed in, if he or she had done so.

I noted on Talk:Ralph Kohlmann#Afd "Our decisions are supposed to be reached through fair-minded discussion, until a consensus is arrived at. Afd is not truly a venue for fair-minded discussions when nominators choose to disclude those who are likely to disagree with them."

Could you please merge the revision histories of the original article and its talk page to the current article and talk page? Geo Swan ( talk) 11:33, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

The final is upon us! We are down to our final 8. A massive 573 was our lowest qualifying score; this is higher than the 150 points needed last year and the 430 needed in 2010. Even in 2009, when points were acquired for mainspace edit count in addition to audited content, 417 points secured a place. That leaves this year's WikiCup, by one measure at least, our most competitive ever. Our finalists, ordered by round 4 score, are:

1. Grapple X ( submissions) once again finishes the round in first place, leading Pool B. Grapple X writes articles about television, and especially The X-Files and Millenium, with good articles making up the bulk of the score.
2. Miyagawa ( submissions) led Pool A this round. Fourth-place finalist last year, Miyagawa writes on a variety of topics, and has reached the final primarily off the back of his massive number of did you knows.
3. Ruby2010 ( submissions) was second in Pool B. Ruby2010 writes primarily on television and film, and scores primarily from good articles.
4. Casliber ( submissions) finished third in Pool B. Casliber is something of a WikiCup veteran, having finished sixth in 2011 and fourth in 2010. Casliber writes on the natural sciences, including ornithology, botany and astronomy. Over half of Casliber's points this round were bonus points from the high-importance articles he has worked on.
5. Cwmhiraeth ( submissions) came second in Pool A. Also writing on biology, especially marine biology, Cwmhiraeth received 390 points for one featured article ( Bivalvia) and one good article ( pelican), topping up with a large number of did you knows.
6. Muboshgu ( submissions) was third in Pool A. Muboshgu writes primarily on baseball, and this round saw Muboshgu's first featured article, Derek Jeter, promoted on its fourth attempt at FAC.
7. Dana Boomer ( submissions) was fourth in Pool A. She writes on a variety of topics, including horses, but this round also saw the high-importance lettuce reach featured article status.
8. Sasata ( submissions) is another WikiCup veteran, having been a finalist in 2009 and 2010. He writes mostly on mycology.

However, we must also say goodbye to the eight who did not make the final, having fallen at the last hurdle: GreatOrangePumpkin ( submissions), Ealdgyth ( submissions), Calvin999 ( submissions), Piotrus ( submissions), Toa Nidhiki05 ( submissions), 12george1 ( submissions), The Bushranger ( submissions) and 1111tomica ( submissions). We hope to see you all next year.

On the subject of next year, a discussion has been opened here. Come and have your say about the competition, and how you'd like it to run in the future. This brainstorming will go on for some time before more focused discussions/polls are opened. As ever, 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. J Milburn ( talk • email) and The ed17 ( talk • email) 00:26, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

We're over half way through the final, and so it is less than a month until we know for certain our 2012 WikiCup champion. Grapple X ( submissions) currently leads, followed by Sasata ( submissions), Cwmhiraeth ( submissions) and Casliber ( submissions). However, we have no one resembling a breakaway leader, and so the competition is a long way from over. Next month's newsletter will feature a list of our winners (who are not necessarily only the finalists) and keep your eyes open for an article on the WikiCup in a future edition of The Signpost. The leaders are already on a par with last year's winners, but a long way from the huge scores seen in 2010. That said, a repeat of the competition from 2010 seems unlikely.

It is good to see that three-quarters of our finalists have already scored bonus points this round. This shows that, contrary to criticism that the WikiCup has received in the past, the competition does not merely incentivise the writing of trivial articles; instead, our top competitors are still spending their time contributing to high-importance articles, and bringing them to a high standard. This does a great service to the encyclopedia and its readers. Thank you, and good work!

The planning for next year's WikiCup is ongoing. Some straw polls have been opened concerning the scoring, and you can now sign up for next year's competition. As ever, 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. J Milburn ( talk • email) and The ed17 ( talk • email) J Milburn ( talk) 20:05, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello, there is a new article called 2012-13 United States winter storm season that is providing information about the new naming system that The Weather Channel is giving major winter storms. I would much appreciate help from you there. I understand that you might be only based around tropical cyclones, but the way that the page should look is expected to be similar to most hurricane articles. Stop by and comment on the talk page if you would like to help, thanks! STO12 ( talk) 22:41, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi. This redirect is causing a bit of a problem. We can't move Lone Ranger (2013 film) yet as the redirect is disallowing it. Could you delete that redirect? It would be most helpful. RAP ( talk) 16:05 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Redirect is gone, page moved. Titoxd^{( ?!? - cool stuff)} 16:30, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Titoxd. You have new messages at Template talk:Infobox hurricane current.
Message added 22:19, 5 October 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Anonymouse321 ( talk) 22:19, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Titoxd. You have new messages at Template talk:Infobox hurricane current.
Message added 23:00, 5 October 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Anonymouse321 ( talk) 23:00, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

The 2012 WikiCup has come to a close; congratulations to Cwmhiraeth ( submissions), our 2012 champion! Cwmhiraeth joins our exclusive club of previous winners: Dreamafter (2007), jj137 (2008), Durova (2009), Sturmvogel 66 (2010) and Hurricanehink (2011). Our final standings were as follows:

1. Cwmhiraeth ( submissions)
2. Sasata ( submissions)
3. Grapple X ( submissions)
4. Casliber ( submissions)
5. Muboshgu ( submissions)
6. Miyagawa ( submissions)
7. Ruby2010 ( submissions)
8. Dana Boomer ( submissions)

Prizes for first, second, third and fourth will be awarded, as will prizes for all those who reached the final eight. Every participant who scored in the competition will receive a ribbon of participation. In addition to the prizes based on placement, the following special prizes will be awarded based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, the prize is awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round.

• The featured article award goes to Grapple X ( submissions), for four featured articles in the final round.
• The good article award also goes to Grapple X ( submissions), for 19 good articles in the second round.
• The list award goes to Muboshgu ( submissions), for three featured lists in the final round.
• The topic award goes to Grapple X ( submissions), for three good topics (with around 40 articles) in round 4.
• The did you know award goes to Cwmhiraeth ( submissions), for well over 100 DYKs in the final round.
• The news award goes to ThaddeusB ( submissions), for 10 in the news items in round 3.
• The picture award goes to Grandiose ( submissions), for two featured pictures in round 2.
• The reviewer award goes to both Ruby2010 ( submissions) (14 reviews in round 1) and Grandiose ( submissions) (14 reviews in round 3).
• Finally, for achieving an incredible bonus point total in the final round, and for bringing the top-importance article frog to featured status, a biostar has been awarded to Cwmhiraeth ( submissions).

Awards will be handed out in the coming days; please bear with us! This year's competition also saw fantastic contributions in all rounds, from newer Wikipedians contributing their first good or featured articles, right up to highly experienced Wikipedians chasing high scores and contributing to topics outside of their usual comfort zones. It would be impossible to name all of the participants who have achieved things to be proud of, but well done to all of you, and thanks! Wikipedia has certainly benefited from the work of this year's WikiCup participants.

Next year's WikiCup will begin in January. Currently, discussions and polls are open, and all contributions are welcome. You can also sign up for next year's competition. There will be no further newsletters this year, although brief notes may be sent out in December to remind everyone about the upcoming competition. It's been a pleasure to work with you all, and we hope to see you all in January! J Milburn ( talk • email) and The ed17 ( talk • email) 00:47, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Decemmber 8 - Wikipedia Loves Libraries Seattle - You're invited

Date Saturday, December 8, 2012 Time 10 a.m. – 3 p.m. Location Seattle Public Library Meeting Room 1 on Level 4, Central Library, 1000 4th Avenue, Seattle WA, 98104 Event An editathon on Seattle-related Wikipedia articles with Wikipedia tutorials and Librarian assistance on hand. Hashtag #wikiloveslib or #glamwiki. Registration http://wll-seattle.eventbrite.com or use on-wiki regsistration. Yours, Maximilianklein ( talk) 04:10, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi there; you're receiving this message because you have previously shown interest in the WikiCup. This is just to remind you that the 2013 WikiCup will be starting on 1 January, and that signups will remain open throughout January. Old and new Wikipedians and WikiCup participants are warmly invited to take part in this year's competition. (Though, as a note to the more experienced participants, there have been a few small rules changes in the last few months.) If you have already signed up, let this be a reminder; you will receive a message with your submissions' page soon. Please direct any questions to the WikiCup talk page. Thanks! J Milburn 19:41, 30 December 2012 (UTC)