![]() | 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. |
Last year, I placed my name in this competition but was inactive throughout contest. This time I will try my best. One thing I want to clear out is how the judges will be able to cope out with the contributions of the participants and establish their positions? Thanks in advance. Ikhtiar H ( talk) 14:56, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello! Would anyone be able to fix my name on the table and move my submission page, please? Both have me listed as YMJ94. I'd do it myself, but I'm not sure about the policies around that, so I thought I would let the judges know. Thank you! MJ94 ( talk) 22:02, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
There has to be substantial work after Jan 1, right? So I can't claim Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Your Motherland Will Never Forget even though it will close this year, because I finished work on it on the 27th of December, but can claim Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Women of Britain Say - "Go!" as the work on it finished today, and could, in future, claim File:Philippe Chaperon - Rigoletto - Original.jpg, because, while work on that commenced in 2015, substantial work will still be needed this year to finish the restoration.
Is my understanding correct? Adam Cuerden ( talk) 18:00, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
I have removed two DYK submissions so far which do not qualify for 2016 Wikicup points. Both were nominated in 2015 and promoted either in December or January 1st. DYKs for the 2016 Wikicup probably should be nominated during 2016, unless significant work to satisfy reviewers has occurred in 2016...- Godot13 ( talk) 03:26, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
I'm new to the WikiCup and am a little confused about what contributions count and how to submit them. Are only new articles allowed to be counted? Where are the submission pages? I would also recommend these be clarified and more links provided as I'm having quite a hard time finding these answers. Thanks for your help and I look forward to participating! Wugapodes ( talk) 22:23, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
Where is the score table? It doesn't seem to be working. Yoshi24517 Chat Online 17:22, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Aside from GA reviews, which don't get any bonus points, the bot that awards bonus points has given 3x to all submissions (none of them qualify for that many bonus points, my own submission included). It needs to be fixed. AHeneen ( talk) 00:54, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
Congratulations to AHeneen for the first good article of the competition, Eckwersheim derailment. Adam Cuerden ( talk) 01:50, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
WP:Wikicup/Reviews. As for work in 2016, ≈3000 bytes were added this year, which seems a decent enough contribution. Adam Cuerden ( talk) 02:21, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
If one of my articles in 2015 is reviewed as a featured or good article now, will I get any points? And also do can provide the nomination link in my submission page, if not reviewed? Ikhtiar H ( talk) 07:52, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
DYKs have been scored by The C of E ( Melchior (Magi) and Balthazar (Magi)), and, a few hours later, Worm That Turned got credit for Christian Ramsay. Adam Cuerden ( talk) 03:54, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
Some of you may have seen that the Women in Red project is running a Women in Music World Virtual Edit-a-thon later in this month. This may be a great way to help focus your editing while participating in the WikiCup, especially if you're unsure of the kind of thing you want to write about, or are looking for a supportive atmosphere to help hone your editing skills. I'm always keen to see the WikiCup get involved in this kind of thing, and I commend the judges for already having arranged a link with the Year of Science project! Any interested editors would should take a look at the project pages linked. Josh Milburn ( talk) 21:53, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiCup/History/2014 should be updated to show the winner and finalists.-- DThomsen8 ( talk) 17:08, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
In the hopes of avoiding potential conflict of interest, I figured I'd ask about ITN nominations. New Year's Eve sexual assaults in Germany was initially nominated to WP:ITN/C by Banedon and following discussion, I decided to post it on the main page. It was soon removed due to issues that turned out to be more significant than I thought. I took it upon myself to fix the article up a bit (added about 4 kB and gave a modest copyedit). Following additional edits from other editors, it was restored to the main page. First question: does my involvement as the initial posting admin, but not the restoring one after editing it, yield a COI that I should opt to not collect points on this? Second question: were my edits substantial enough to collect points if I'm allowed? Thanks in advance! ~ Cyclonebiskit ( chat) 23:11, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
Can I claim Long War (mod)? I added ~4000 characters of prose in 2016 as part of the GA review, but everything else was written in 2015.
I won't be sour one way or the other, because I'm going to have more than enough points to get into the next round, but I figured I'd submit it for consideration anyways.
Thanks, The Squirrel Conspiracy ( talk) 23:37, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
If an article review is kept on hold, will it be counted by the bot? Or do I have to wait till the full revision is complete? Ikhtiar H ( talk) 07:41, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
I have had La Sombra (wrestler) listed as a GA candidate for months now, I will do a round of editing now that I've gotten some distance to the article work I did during the GAN prep. I am hoping to list it as part of the Wiki cup with the work I am doing before the review and all work from the review hopefully being "significant" enough. If this is a problem or if I don't think I actually did enough work on the article I will not put it up for GA Cup points if it passes GA. Just wanted to be up front and see if it's a problem. MPJ -US 04:02, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
Usually whenever I'm in a public area, I use NFLisAwesome for account security. While it's not often, let's say I create an article, nominate it for DYK and it ends up on the Main Page while using that account. Would it be eligible for my submissions page or do all submissions have to come from the account that I signed up with? Zappa 24 Mati 23:18, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
Already I'm seeing fluffed up and padded out reviews with superfluous sentences. I'm sorry but there needs to be a much stronger policing of reviews because people take advantage and try and make them longer in order to claim. Exact same thing happened in the 2015 cup yet nothing was done about it. Meanwhile, some of us spend a long time giving informed reviews. — Calvin999 10:15, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
I would rather have a superfluously wordy review than one that just says 'This meets all of the requirements, so it passes'. I'm seeing those here as well. That kind of review isn't accepted in DYK (where you have to specifically state that the article meets each of the requirements), and it shouldn't be accepted at GAN. The Squirrel Conspiracy ( talk) 23:34, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
I think these are still calculated wrong? Or am I missing something? If they're right, that's awesome. Adam Cuerden ( talk) 04:32, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
What will be the prizes for the winners< not that I'm going to win.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Thelockedoctor ( talk • contribs) 01:21, 13 January 2016
There are a couple of issues with contestant flags:
The Squirrel Conspiracy ( talk) 04:51, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
How can one challenge the points taken by some editor? Do we post those cases over here and maybe successfully add one more WP:WikiEnemy? Or do we trust that judges have looked into it and approved of it? Or do we through email notify judges? Or is it too early yet to ask all this and by the end of round 1 everything would be alright? §§ Dharmadhyaksha§§ { Talk / Edits} 09:31, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
How often are the submissions checked, and what are they checked for? Just a quick look and I noticed that the submission for Zesh Rahman, for example, doesn't show any work in this calendar year that's of any consequence (changing date formats and changing 1 or 2 lines doesn't seem enough - I was under the impression that copy editing/small edits as the result of a GAR weren't enough to claim significant work). I don't want to be here annoying people asking for things to be checked if it'll happen in due course, anyway, but as a person who isn't competing and just follows with interest, I'm unbiased and don't care about making a WP:WikiEnemy or 10, so happy to speak up. Neekeem ( talk) 11:51, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
...Yeah, this one's me. But I've been trying to announce the rest of the firsts, so...
Probably won't be the last. I'm always most productive near the start of the year. This is less than ideal for Wikicup rounds. Adam Cuerden ( talk) 18:55, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
If there's a problem that doesn't reflect on the person, e.g. "The bot appears to be screwing up", that's probably fine to discuss as much as we want in public. However, before this competition falls into sniping, can I ask that other concerns are raised by private e-mail message to the judges? This page is taking a distinctively negative turn... Adam Cuerden ( talk) 13:37, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for my late understanding. I removed some short GAR points from my submission. That's because they were very short reviews who met immediate failure according to the GA criteria. I also removed Stuart Scott and Sheamus because I did only some minor edits to meet the GA criteria. I did not expect this kind of logical display from me. Therefore, I keep my fate in the hands of the judges whether I should be disqualified for my sins in this competition. Ikhtiar H ( talk) 04:44, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
If we see Wikipedia:Good article nominations there are hundreds of articles awaiting review since ages. These article should be reviewed as soon as possible. Delay in GA review discourages nominator and his/her interest in editing or improving articles. So, I think to encourage other editors to review their nominations, there should be at least 10 points given for a GA review. 4 points seems very minor. At least 10 points should be given for detailed GA review, so that more and more editors will review GA nominations. "Quick fail" or "quick pass" reviews can be given 4 points. -- Human3015 It will rain 04:43, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure we need to have this discussion again. The judges should not, and almost certainly will not, change the points awarded mid-competition. Perhaps the topic can be revisited at the end of the year. Josh Milburn ( talk) 17:29, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
I have had a FL candidate listed for a couple of weeks at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Mexican National Lightweight Championship/archive1 and I've gotten a couple of reviews so far, I am just worried that this may die on the vine from lack of input. With FL and FA it's all about multiple reviews, not just one so please if you can help out. Honestly I would rather this fails on it's merits that get closed for lack of input with the effort I've put into this article over the years, of course getting it passed is better :-) I am hoping to drum up a little interest even if the FLC reviews do not give us any points. MPJ -US 03:50, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
@ Ikhtiar H: - so i will gladly be "that guy". This user is gaming the points sytem. His GA points for Sheamus is ridiculous, he did less than 1000k of work, minor stuff and claims credit for other peoples work. He put GA reviews for quick fails as well, i read like fice of the links and they were all quick fails. How is that in the spirit of the competition when others work hard on actually contributing to Wikipedia through this tournament? He put up Roman Reigns yet did the equivalent of 10 minutes of work before the nomination. MPJ -US 19:48, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
By my count, only 33 people have any points. This kind of cuts down the amount of actual competition, given 64 people are meant to progress. Adam Cuerden ( talk) 12:50, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Uh, I want to edit on simplewiki. Do I get points for the wikicup? ( Lukeisawesome999 ( talk) 00:33, 26 January 2016 (UTC))
Why the bot did not reward me any bonus point for my GA Mustafizur Rahman? I had done a lot of edits to bring up that article from stub. See the article's history log. To have a more precise look, compare the current version with the oldest version preview from where I started editing. Ikhtiar H ( talk) 09:57, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks to MPJ-DK for letting me to know that DYK articles with GA status are not eligible. My put a GA status DYK nomination, Template:Did you know nominations/Mustafizur Rahman. But I also expanded the article recently. Is there any way I can replace or add that status? Thanks in advance! Ikhtiar H ( talk) 12:32, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
I did a DYK for National Wrestling Association which i expanded. It stands at around 12k but the bot only awarded it 5 base points, i thought it waz 10 base points if over 5K? Am i reading the article size wrong or is the bot incorrect? MPJ -US 13:17, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
Shouldn't I have got 10 points for
List of songs recorded by Little Mix DYK that I just added to my submissions, not 5? As per
my test edit in my sandbox when I pasted the prose into it to check the bytes, it's over 14,000, 5893 which is more than the 5,000 approx. 5120 that it says is eligible for 10 points on the rules for scoring page? Maybe I'm wrong but that's how I am interpreting it. —
Calvin999
00:18, 12 February 2016 (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. |
Last year, I placed my name in this competition but was inactive throughout contest. This time I will try my best. One thing I want to clear out is how the judges will be able to cope out with the contributions of the participants and establish their positions? Thanks in advance. Ikhtiar H ( talk) 14:56, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello! Would anyone be able to fix my name on the table and move my submission page, please? Both have me listed as YMJ94. I'd do it myself, but I'm not sure about the policies around that, so I thought I would let the judges know. Thank you! MJ94 ( talk) 22:02, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
There has to be substantial work after Jan 1, right? So I can't claim Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Your Motherland Will Never Forget even though it will close this year, because I finished work on it on the 27th of December, but can claim Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Women of Britain Say - "Go!" as the work on it finished today, and could, in future, claim File:Philippe Chaperon - Rigoletto - Original.jpg, because, while work on that commenced in 2015, substantial work will still be needed this year to finish the restoration.
Is my understanding correct? Adam Cuerden ( talk) 18:00, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
I have removed two DYK submissions so far which do not qualify for 2016 Wikicup points. Both were nominated in 2015 and promoted either in December or January 1st. DYKs for the 2016 Wikicup probably should be nominated during 2016, unless significant work to satisfy reviewers has occurred in 2016...- Godot13 ( talk) 03:26, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
I'm new to the WikiCup and am a little confused about what contributions count and how to submit them. Are only new articles allowed to be counted? Where are the submission pages? I would also recommend these be clarified and more links provided as I'm having quite a hard time finding these answers. Thanks for your help and I look forward to participating! Wugapodes ( talk) 22:23, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
Where is the score table? It doesn't seem to be working. Yoshi24517 Chat Online 17:22, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Aside from GA reviews, which don't get any bonus points, the bot that awards bonus points has given 3x to all submissions (none of them qualify for that many bonus points, my own submission included). It needs to be fixed. AHeneen ( talk) 00:54, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
Congratulations to AHeneen for the first good article of the competition, Eckwersheim derailment. Adam Cuerden ( talk) 01:50, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
WP:Wikicup/Reviews. As for work in 2016, ≈3000 bytes were added this year, which seems a decent enough contribution. Adam Cuerden ( talk) 02:21, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
If one of my articles in 2015 is reviewed as a featured or good article now, will I get any points? And also do can provide the nomination link in my submission page, if not reviewed? Ikhtiar H ( talk) 07:52, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
DYKs have been scored by The C of E ( Melchior (Magi) and Balthazar (Magi)), and, a few hours later, Worm That Turned got credit for Christian Ramsay. Adam Cuerden ( talk) 03:54, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
Some of you may have seen that the Women in Red project is running a Women in Music World Virtual Edit-a-thon later in this month. This may be a great way to help focus your editing while participating in the WikiCup, especially if you're unsure of the kind of thing you want to write about, or are looking for a supportive atmosphere to help hone your editing skills. I'm always keen to see the WikiCup get involved in this kind of thing, and I commend the judges for already having arranged a link with the Year of Science project! Any interested editors would should take a look at the project pages linked. Josh Milburn ( talk) 21:53, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiCup/History/2014 should be updated to show the winner and finalists.-- DThomsen8 ( talk) 17:08, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
In the hopes of avoiding potential conflict of interest, I figured I'd ask about ITN nominations. New Year's Eve sexual assaults in Germany was initially nominated to WP:ITN/C by Banedon and following discussion, I decided to post it on the main page. It was soon removed due to issues that turned out to be more significant than I thought. I took it upon myself to fix the article up a bit (added about 4 kB and gave a modest copyedit). Following additional edits from other editors, it was restored to the main page. First question: does my involvement as the initial posting admin, but not the restoring one after editing it, yield a COI that I should opt to not collect points on this? Second question: were my edits substantial enough to collect points if I'm allowed? Thanks in advance! ~ Cyclonebiskit ( chat) 23:11, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
Can I claim Long War (mod)? I added ~4000 characters of prose in 2016 as part of the GA review, but everything else was written in 2015.
I won't be sour one way or the other, because I'm going to have more than enough points to get into the next round, but I figured I'd submit it for consideration anyways.
Thanks, The Squirrel Conspiracy ( talk) 23:37, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
If an article review is kept on hold, will it be counted by the bot? Or do I have to wait till the full revision is complete? Ikhtiar H ( talk) 07:41, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
I have had La Sombra (wrestler) listed as a GA candidate for months now, I will do a round of editing now that I've gotten some distance to the article work I did during the GAN prep. I am hoping to list it as part of the Wiki cup with the work I am doing before the review and all work from the review hopefully being "significant" enough. If this is a problem or if I don't think I actually did enough work on the article I will not put it up for GA Cup points if it passes GA. Just wanted to be up front and see if it's a problem. MPJ -US 04:02, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
Usually whenever I'm in a public area, I use NFLisAwesome for account security. While it's not often, let's say I create an article, nominate it for DYK and it ends up on the Main Page while using that account. Would it be eligible for my submissions page or do all submissions have to come from the account that I signed up with? Zappa 24 Mati 23:18, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
Already I'm seeing fluffed up and padded out reviews with superfluous sentences. I'm sorry but there needs to be a much stronger policing of reviews because people take advantage and try and make them longer in order to claim. Exact same thing happened in the 2015 cup yet nothing was done about it. Meanwhile, some of us spend a long time giving informed reviews. — Calvin999 10:15, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
I would rather have a superfluously wordy review than one that just says 'This meets all of the requirements, so it passes'. I'm seeing those here as well. That kind of review isn't accepted in DYK (where you have to specifically state that the article meets each of the requirements), and it shouldn't be accepted at GAN. The Squirrel Conspiracy ( talk) 23:34, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
I think these are still calculated wrong? Or am I missing something? If they're right, that's awesome. Adam Cuerden ( talk) 04:32, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
What will be the prizes for the winners< not that I'm going to win.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Thelockedoctor ( talk • contribs) 01:21, 13 January 2016
There are a couple of issues with contestant flags:
The Squirrel Conspiracy ( talk) 04:51, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
How can one challenge the points taken by some editor? Do we post those cases over here and maybe successfully add one more WP:WikiEnemy? Or do we trust that judges have looked into it and approved of it? Or do we through email notify judges? Or is it too early yet to ask all this and by the end of round 1 everything would be alright? §§ Dharmadhyaksha§§ { Talk / Edits} 09:31, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
How often are the submissions checked, and what are they checked for? Just a quick look and I noticed that the submission for Zesh Rahman, for example, doesn't show any work in this calendar year that's of any consequence (changing date formats and changing 1 or 2 lines doesn't seem enough - I was under the impression that copy editing/small edits as the result of a GAR weren't enough to claim significant work). I don't want to be here annoying people asking for things to be checked if it'll happen in due course, anyway, but as a person who isn't competing and just follows with interest, I'm unbiased and don't care about making a WP:WikiEnemy or 10, so happy to speak up. Neekeem ( talk) 11:51, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
...Yeah, this one's me. But I've been trying to announce the rest of the firsts, so...
Probably won't be the last. I'm always most productive near the start of the year. This is less than ideal for Wikicup rounds. Adam Cuerden ( talk) 18:55, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
If there's a problem that doesn't reflect on the person, e.g. "The bot appears to be screwing up", that's probably fine to discuss as much as we want in public. However, before this competition falls into sniping, can I ask that other concerns are raised by private e-mail message to the judges? This page is taking a distinctively negative turn... Adam Cuerden ( talk) 13:37, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for my late understanding. I removed some short GAR points from my submission. That's because they were very short reviews who met immediate failure according to the GA criteria. I also removed Stuart Scott and Sheamus because I did only some minor edits to meet the GA criteria. I did not expect this kind of logical display from me. Therefore, I keep my fate in the hands of the judges whether I should be disqualified for my sins in this competition. Ikhtiar H ( talk) 04:44, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
If we see Wikipedia:Good article nominations there are hundreds of articles awaiting review since ages. These article should be reviewed as soon as possible. Delay in GA review discourages nominator and his/her interest in editing or improving articles. So, I think to encourage other editors to review their nominations, there should be at least 10 points given for a GA review. 4 points seems very minor. At least 10 points should be given for detailed GA review, so that more and more editors will review GA nominations. "Quick fail" or "quick pass" reviews can be given 4 points. -- Human3015 It will rain 04:43, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure we need to have this discussion again. The judges should not, and almost certainly will not, change the points awarded mid-competition. Perhaps the topic can be revisited at the end of the year. Josh Milburn ( talk) 17:29, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
I have had a FL candidate listed for a couple of weeks at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Mexican National Lightweight Championship/archive1 and I've gotten a couple of reviews so far, I am just worried that this may die on the vine from lack of input. With FL and FA it's all about multiple reviews, not just one so please if you can help out. Honestly I would rather this fails on it's merits that get closed for lack of input with the effort I've put into this article over the years, of course getting it passed is better :-) I am hoping to drum up a little interest even if the FLC reviews do not give us any points. MPJ -US 03:50, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
@ Ikhtiar H: - so i will gladly be "that guy". This user is gaming the points sytem. His GA points for Sheamus is ridiculous, he did less than 1000k of work, minor stuff and claims credit for other peoples work. He put GA reviews for quick fails as well, i read like fice of the links and they were all quick fails. How is that in the spirit of the competition when others work hard on actually contributing to Wikipedia through this tournament? He put up Roman Reigns yet did the equivalent of 10 minutes of work before the nomination. MPJ -US 19:48, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
By my count, only 33 people have any points. This kind of cuts down the amount of actual competition, given 64 people are meant to progress. Adam Cuerden ( talk) 12:50, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Uh, I want to edit on simplewiki. Do I get points for the wikicup? ( Lukeisawesome999 ( talk) 00:33, 26 January 2016 (UTC))
Why the bot did not reward me any bonus point for my GA Mustafizur Rahman? I had done a lot of edits to bring up that article from stub. See the article's history log. To have a more precise look, compare the current version with the oldest version preview from where I started editing. Ikhtiar H ( talk) 09:57, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks to MPJ-DK for letting me to know that DYK articles with GA status are not eligible. My put a GA status DYK nomination, Template:Did you know nominations/Mustafizur Rahman. But I also expanded the article recently. Is there any way I can replace or add that status? Thanks in advance! Ikhtiar H ( talk) 12:32, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
I did a DYK for National Wrestling Association which i expanded. It stands at around 12k but the bot only awarded it 5 base points, i thought it waz 10 base points if over 5K? Am i reading the article size wrong or is the bot incorrect? MPJ -US 13:17, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
Shouldn't I have got 10 points for
List of songs recorded by Little Mix DYK that I just added to my submissions, not 5? As per
my test edit in my sandbox when I pasted the prose into it to check the bytes, it's over 14,000, 5893 which is more than the 5,000 approx. 5120 that it says is eligible for 10 points on the rules for scoring page? Maybe I'm wrong but that's how I am interpreting it. —
Calvin999
00:18, 12 February 2016 (UTC)