![]() | 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. |
Hi all, just wanted to kick start any concerns anyone might have with the scoring for next years competition. I'd like to suggest improving the amount of points offered for good and featured topics. Currently, a Good Topic is worth 5 points per article. This doesn't seem all that much to me. Baring in mind that a 4 article Good Topic, which isn't all that easy to make, is worth just 20 points. By this, you'd need a Seven article topic to have the same points as a regular GA with no bonus points.
Might I suggest that we double the points for a GT (10 points per article), or have a base amount (say 30) for having a good topic? I realise the loophole is to find a series of articles that have already been to GA, and then fill in the blanks to make a large GT, but I feel doubling the points would make the GT process a lot more viable. Similarly for Featured Topics), improve the points to 20 per article. These topics are big achevements, so should score pretty heavy. Let me know if this is a sensible idea, or if you have others. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ( talk • contribs) 12:45, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
I suppose I'll again bring up counting Commons FPs like the German WikiCup does, in case that's something people want to talk about. See here and here for the most recent threads about this. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 15:36, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Not a scoring improvement, but could we have some clarification? The rules state "contestants have 14 days to nominate their work". Except we don't. We have 14 days for the first 6 or 7 weeks of a round with a cut off at the end. There seems to be some flexibility around the cliff edge nature of this, but I can't find any clarity on just how much. I had a discussion with Cwmhiraeth just over 36 hours after the end of the final round, where, in passing, it seemed to be taken as read that nomination time was over. I don't have a problem with this, and I assume that a similar timescale applies at the end of each round, but it would be helpful to be clear to everyone just what the time limit for round-end nominations is. (I am assuming that the judges have at least a custom and practice idea of what works for them.) Gog the Mild ( talk) 20:22, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
Am I confused? I thought the final round ended on 31 October and there was no grace period for anything promoted up to 14 days later? The Rambling Man ( Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 21:38, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
Based on what
Vanamonde93 said
here at the end of Round 3 ("not especially concerned about the time at which points are claimed … so much as the time at which they are earned")
, I think the 36 hours should only apply to claiming the points. If the points are earned after 23:59 UTC the day the round ends, they can be counted for the next round (per the current general rules). —
Bloom6132 (
talk)
11:28, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
Contestants have 14 days to nominate their work after promotion (for good and featured content), appearance on the main page (for did you knows and in the news articles) or the completion of good or featured article reviews and featured list reviews by entering it on their submissions page. However, work relating to a particular round must also be nominated and claimed within 24 hours of the end of the round. Nominations submitted more than 14 days after the points were earned or more than 24 hours after the end of a round are no longer eligible. Please contact the judges if you have a question regarding the submission of articles.
Gog the Mild ( talk) 20:17, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
Alternative wording: "Contestants have 14 days to nominate their work after promotion (for good and featured content), appearance on the main page (for did you knows and in the news articles) or the completion of good or featured article reviews and featured list reviews by entering it on their submissions page. However, work qualifying in a particular round must be nominated and claimed within 24 hours of the end of the round. Nominations submitted more than 14 days after the points were earned, or more than 24 hours after the end of a round, will not be eligible. Please contact the judges if you have a question regarding the submission of articles." Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 10:15, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
As it is, the only way to see what a candidate did in, say, Round 2 is to know when round 2 ended, then go into the file history, and each candidate will show a different round on the final page depending on when they are eliminated. Something like "Wikipedia:WikiCup/2021/Round 2/Submissions/Adam Cuerden" would make things far easier to follow, and mean that reporting on the WikiCup round by round could easily link to a page with the final results for the round, instead of needing to use diffs as it does now (not that anyone does half the time, unless I'm there to fix it), and going back to, say, Wikipedia:WikiCup/History/2020/Round 2 wouldn't - unlike now - link to submission pages that were completely inaccurate for anyone who passed the round. Adam Cuerden ( talk)Has about 7.7% of all FPs 21:47, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
I've noticed for each of the last 5 years in round 1, one is able to progress just by scoring the minimum of points. Just 1 DYK/GAR and you can sit back and relax for the rest of round 1. Personally I think this isn't really healthy in terms of the spirit of competition because people (and I do count myself in this) hold back on content creation in round 1 because we know we're already safely through. So my suggestion is, if we have less than the 64 who have scored points to go through, we merge rounds 1 and 2 so there is incentive to evenly create through this time. We'll still keep the cut-off at the end of Round 1 but to encourage more editing, I was wondering if this might be worthwhile considering? The C of E God Save the Queen! ( talk) 10:22, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
With the start just 2 days away, I would like to ask if there is any confirmation on the changes (if any) for 2021 @ Sturmvogel 66: and @ Cwmhiraeth:? The C of E God Save the Queen! ( talk) 07:44, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi judges, I looked at my submissions page and had some questions:
Thanks for setting up and judging this year's cup. Z1720 ( talk) 15:43, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
Is it too late to back out now? I think I changed my mind about signing up (I can be slightly indecisive sometimes).
Thanks, Rosefeather of WindClan ( talk) 01:21, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Yerp.
Thanks, Rosefeather of WindClan ( talk) 14:07, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Last year, when I claimed points separately for a prose review and a source review of an FAC in the same round I was only ever awarded one set of points and it was only recorded once in my totals. I assume that this is/was a bot issue. Has this been sorted? If not, would it be best to flag up such cases here - I don't suppose that there will be many - for hand adjustment?
When the two reviews were claimed in different rounds there was no problem. Gog the Mild ( talk) 22:36, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Not a big deal, but might someone be able to adjust the head at the top of this page to reduce the huge chunk of white space and make the archive links more prominent? --- Another Believer ( Talk) 21:04, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi there! I completed a review on January 1, which you can see here. I asked another editor and they said it might be risky to include it in my submissions, and that I should ask here just to be sure. Should I remove it from my Submissions? I should maybe add that I carried out a full-article copy edit as part of the review? Sorry for the silly question (first ever WikiCup). — ImaginesTigers ( talk) 14:36, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
is it possible to created a all time wikicup table or/and list of wikicup winners and runner up table. Fan Of Lion King 🦁 ( talk) 17:53, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
@ Cwmhiraeth: Here is the draft, I do what I can anyone wants to help feel free to do so Fan Of Lion King 🦁 ( talk) 17:37, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
I am going to move it to main space tomorrow Fan Of Lion King 🦁 ( talk) 12:00, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi all, I previously asked about the chances of having a position on the left hand side of the table to see where each user was at any one time, is this something we could implement? I'd be interested in this, as it would mean users would know where they were without sorting the table, and counting the names until theirs. I'm not sure of the technicalities, as to how we'd make this work (nor if it would break any of the bots), but something like:
Pos | User | FA | FL | FP | FT | FAR | GA | GT | GAR | DYK | ITN | Bonus | Score |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2 | User 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
1 | User 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 75 | 35 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 115 |
Might need someone a bit better at tables/coding to me to make this automate as the bot updates. Anyone know if this is possible? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ( talk • contribs) 16:49, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
So, I wrote Nichols's Missouri Cavalry Regiment from scratch last November, it was promoted to GA status in December, and I nominated it for DYK in December after the promotion. It was run on the main page on January 11. So since this ran during the 2021 competition time frame, would it be an eligible submission, or not, since I haven't really worked on it in 2021 besides some ACR stuff. Please ping with response, as I'm not watching this page. Also, while I'm at it, I've got another scenario. I wrote 13th Missouri Cavalry Regiment (Confederate) from scratch in late November, but got busy and couldn't nominate it for DYK until after it got promoted to GA status earlier today. I'm going to do the DYK nomination regardless if I can get points or not, but, incidentally, would it also be submittable? Hog Farm Bacon 03:36, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
The time-limiting rule that required content to have been worked on and nominated during the course of the competition was removed last year. — ImaginesTigers ( talk) 03:54, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
If we don't get more than 64 sign-ups (I haven't counted but it looks like we have around 40 right now), does everyone qualify for the second round? The Rambling Man ( Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 16:59, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
I put my name on the signup sheet, and was wondering when I'll appear on the list of competitors. Also, how do I access my submission page? Bear with me, first-timer.
And also, Paper Mario: Sticker Star has been around since 2008, and has recently been promoted for DYK and appeared on the front page yesterday. Does that make it eligible for the five point bonus? Le Panini [🥪] 15:39, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
Okay, thanks all, I think I'll be good for the time being. For now, can't wait until Paper Mario: The Origami King is done. Le Panini [🥪] 21:25, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
Another thing: is there a tool for me to quickly see what other Wikipedias have a certain article? Just for pre-calculation; I know a bot does it. P anini 🥪 14:47, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
I noticed I got a multiplier on a DYK I submitted. Just wondering why? starsandwhales ( talk) 16:02, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
For those who like this kind of thing, I've made a quick userbox at Template:User WikiCup result after failing to find an existing one (which is a bit surprising). The documentation is hopefully understandable enough to use but ask me if it's confusing. Feel free to make changes or create a derivative version. — Bilorv ( talk) 21:02, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Is it normal for Wikipedia:WikiCup/History/2021/Round 1 to have been created during the round? It appears Fanoflionking created it recently. This is making the current stats tool think we're up to Round 2. — Bilorv ( talk) 20:21, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi all,
We currently have 50/93 users who have points from the opening round. Is it worth a quick reminder to those who haven't that they have 10 days to score points to progress? We are 14 people short of the second round right now. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ( talk • contribs) 10:52, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi all, I noticed that two of the competitors, User:Colonel Hotdog and User:Endymiona19. Have been blocked indefinitely. Are they automatically withdrawn or are they just eliminated at the end of the round? REDMAN 2019 ( talk) 11:45, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
I'm about to complete another GA and DYK, and was wondering if I would be able to save them until the next round because I'm already in the safe zone. P anini 🥪 15:23, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
Another thing to note, I had my username changed during round one, is it possible to update it here? P anini 🥪 15:37, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Because I have started work at a new job, I won't have much time to write articles and contribute to my chances at WikiCup. Basically, Real Life is better than being here on Wikipedia for a contest. Good luck to the rest of the competitors. HawkAussie ( talk) 03:29, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
I note that the "unofficial tool" has not recorded contributions to Round 1 correctly. Which, obviously, also throws out the totals. Gog the Mild ( talk) 15:48, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Withdraw me if you would. After this, the idea of putting six to twenty hours into a restoration is seriously not something I can see myself doing for some time. Adam Cuerden ( talk)Has about 7.8% of all FPs 22:55, 27 March 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. |
Hi all, just wanted to kick start any concerns anyone might have with the scoring for next years competition. I'd like to suggest improving the amount of points offered for good and featured topics. Currently, a Good Topic is worth 5 points per article. This doesn't seem all that much to me. Baring in mind that a 4 article Good Topic, which isn't all that easy to make, is worth just 20 points. By this, you'd need a Seven article topic to have the same points as a regular GA with no bonus points.
Might I suggest that we double the points for a GT (10 points per article), or have a base amount (say 30) for having a good topic? I realise the loophole is to find a series of articles that have already been to GA, and then fill in the blanks to make a large GT, but I feel doubling the points would make the GT process a lot more viable. Similarly for Featured Topics), improve the points to 20 per article. These topics are big achevements, so should score pretty heavy. Let me know if this is a sensible idea, or if you have others. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ( talk • contribs) 12:45, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
I suppose I'll again bring up counting Commons FPs like the German WikiCup does, in case that's something people want to talk about. See here and here for the most recent threads about this. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 15:36, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Not a scoring improvement, but could we have some clarification? The rules state "contestants have 14 days to nominate their work". Except we don't. We have 14 days for the first 6 or 7 weeks of a round with a cut off at the end. There seems to be some flexibility around the cliff edge nature of this, but I can't find any clarity on just how much. I had a discussion with Cwmhiraeth just over 36 hours after the end of the final round, where, in passing, it seemed to be taken as read that nomination time was over. I don't have a problem with this, and I assume that a similar timescale applies at the end of each round, but it would be helpful to be clear to everyone just what the time limit for round-end nominations is. (I am assuming that the judges have at least a custom and practice idea of what works for them.) Gog the Mild ( talk) 20:22, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
Am I confused? I thought the final round ended on 31 October and there was no grace period for anything promoted up to 14 days later? The Rambling Man ( Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 21:38, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
Based on what
Vanamonde93 said
here at the end of Round 3 ("not especially concerned about the time at which points are claimed … so much as the time at which they are earned")
, I think the 36 hours should only apply to claiming the points. If the points are earned after 23:59 UTC the day the round ends, they can be counted for the next round (per the current general rules). —
Bloom6132 (
talk)
11:28, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
Contestants have 14 days to nominate their work after promotion (for good and featured content), appearance on the main page (for did you knows and in the news articles) or the completion of good or featured article reviews and featured list reviews by entering it on their submissions page. However, work relating to a particular round must also be nominated and claimed within 24 hours of the end of the round. Nominations submitted more than 14 days after the points were earned or more than 24 hours after the end of a round are no longer eligible. Please contact the judges if you have a question regarding the submission of articles.
Gog the Mild ( talk) 20:17, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
Alternative wording: "Contestants have 14 days to nominate their work after promotion (for good and featured content), appearance on the main page (for did you knows and in the news articles) or the completion of good or featured article reviews and featured list reviews by entering it on their submissions page. However, work qualifying in a particular round must be nominated and claimed within 24 hours of the end of the round. Nominations submitted more than 14 days after the points were earned, or more than 24 hours after the end of a round, will not be eligible. Please contact the judges if you have a question regarding the submission of articles." Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 10:15, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
As it is, the only way to see what a candidate did in, say, Round 2 is to know when round 2 ended, then go into the file history, and each candidate will show a different round on the final page depending on when they are eliminated. Something like "Wikipedia:WikiCup/2021/Round 2/Submissions/Adam Cuerden" would make things far easier to follow, and mean that reporting on the WikiCup round by round could easily link to a page with the final results for the round, instead of needing to use diffs as it does now (not that anyone does half the time, unless I'm there to fix it), and going back to, say, Wikipedia:WikiCup/History/2020/Round 2 wouldn't - unlike now - link to submission pages that were completely inaccurate for anyone who passed the round. Adam Cuerden ( talk)Has about 7.7% of all FPs 21:47, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
I've noticed for each of the last 5 years in round 1, one is able to progress just by scoring the minimum of points. Just 1 DYK/GAR and you can sit back and relax for the rest of round 1. Personally I think this isn't really healthy in terms of the spirit of competition because people (and I do count myself in this) hold back on content creation in round 1 because we know we're already safely through. So my suggestion is, if we have less than the 64 who have scored points to go through, we merge rounds 1 and 2 so there is incentive to evenly create through this time. We'll still keep the cut-off at the end of Round 1 but to encourage more editing, I was wondering if this might be worthwhile considering? The C of E God Save the Queen! ( talk) 10:22, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
With the start just 2 days away, I would like to ask if there is any confirmation on the changes (if any) for 2021 @ Sturmvogel 66: and @ Cwmhiraeth:? The C of E God Save the Queen! ( talk) 07:44, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi judges, I looked at my submissions page and had some questions:
Thanks for setting up and judging this year's cup. Z1720 ( talk) 15:43, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
Is it too late to back out now? I think I changed my mind about signing up (I can be slightly indecisive sometimes).
Thanks, Rosefeather of WindClan ( talk) 01:21, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Yerp.
Thanks, Rosefeather of WindClan ( talk) 14:07, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Last year, when I claimed points separately for a prose review and a source review of an FAC in the same round I was only ever awarded one set of points and it was only recorded once in my totals. I assume that this is/was a bot issue. Has this been sorted? If not, would it be best to flag up such cases here - I don't suppose that there will be many - for hand adjustment?
When the two reviews were claimed in different rounds there was no problem. Gog the Mild ( talk) 22:36, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Not a big deal, but might someone be able to adjust the head at the top of this page to reduce the huge chunk of white space and make the archive links more prominent? --- Another Believer ( Talk) 21:04, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi there! I completed a review on January 1, which you can see here. I asked another editor and they said it might be risky to include it in my submissions, and that I should ask here just to be sure. Should I remove it from my Submissions? I should maybe add that I carried out a full-article copy edit as part of the review? Sorry for the silly question (first ever WikiCup). — ImaginesTigers ( talk) 14:36, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
is it possible to created a all time wikicup table or/and list of wikicup winners and runner up table. Fan Of Lion King 🦁 ( talk) 17:53, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
@ Cwmhiraeth: Here is the draft, I do what I can anyone wants to help feel free to do so Fan Of Lion King 🦁 ( talk) 17:37, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
I am going to move it to main space tomorrow Fan Of Lion King 🦁 ( talk) 12:00, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi all, I previously asked about the chances of having a position on the left hand side of the table to see where each user was at any one time, is this something we could implement? I'd be interested in this, as it would mean users would know where they were without sorting the table, and counting the names until theirs. I'm not sure of the technicalities, as to how we'd make this work (nor if it would break any of the bots), but something like:
Pos | User | FA | FL | FP | FT | FAR | GA | GT | GAR | DYK | ITN | Bonus | Score |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2 | User 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
1 | User 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 75 | 35 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 115 |
Might need someone a bit better at tables/coding to me to make this automate as the bot updates. Anyone know if this is possible? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ( talk • contribs) 16:49, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
So, I wrote Nichols's Missouri Cavalry Regiment from scratch last November, it was promoted to GA status in December, and I nominated it for DYK in December after the promotion. It was run on the main page on January 11. So since this ran during the 2021 competition time frame, would it be an eligible submission, or not, since I haven't really worked on it in 2021 besides some ACR stuff. Please ping with response, as I'm not watching this page. Also, while I'm at it, I've got another scenario. I wrote 13th Missouri Cavalry Regiment (Confederate) from scratch in late November, but got busy and couldn't nominate it for DYK until after it got promoted to GA status earlier today. I'm going to do the DYK nomination regardless if I can get points or not, but, incidentally, would it also be submittable? Hog Farm Bacon 03:36, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
The time-limiting rule that required content to have been worked on and nominated during the course of the competition was removed last year. — ImaginesTigers ( talk) 03:54, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
If we don't get more than 64 sign-ups (I haven't counted but it looks like we have around 40 right now), does everyone qualify for the second round? The Rambling Man ( Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 16:59, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
I put my name on the signup sheet, and was wondering when I'll appear on the list of competitors. Also, how do I access my submission page? Bear with me, first-timer.
And also, Paper Mario: Sticker Star has been around since 2008, and has recently been promoted for DYK and appeared on the front page yesterday. Does that make it eligible for the five point bonus? Le Panini [🥪] 15:39, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
Okay, thanks all, I think I'll be good for the time being. For now, can't wait until Paper Mario: The Origami King is done. Le Panini [🥪] 21:25, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
Another thing: is there a tool for me to quickly see what other Wikipedias have a certain article? Just for pre-calculation; I know a bot does it. P anini 🥪 14:47, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
I noticed I got a multiplier on a DYK I submitted. Just wondering why? starsandwhales ( talk) 16:02, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
For those who like this kind of thing, I've made a quick userbox at Template:User WikiCup result after failing to find an existing one (which is a bit surprising). The documentation is hopefully understandable enough to use but ask me if it's confusing. Feel free to make changes or create a derivative version. — Bilorv ( talk) 21:02, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Is it normal for Wikipedia:WikiCup/History/2021/Round 1 to have been created during the round? It appears Fanoflionking created it recently. This is making the current stats tool think we're up to Round 2. — Bilorv ( talk) 20:21, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi all,
We currently have 50/93 users who have points from the opening round. Is it worth a quick reminder to those who haven't that they have 10 days to score points to progress? We are 14 people short of the second round right now. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ( talk • contribs) 10:52, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi all, I noticed that two of the competitors, User:Colonel Hotdog and User:Endymiona19. Have been blocked indefinitely. Are they automatically withdrawn or are they just eliminated at the end of the round? REDMAN 2019 ( talk) 11:45, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
I'm about to complete another GA and DYK, and was wondering if I would be able to save them until the next round because I'm already in the safe zone. P anini 🥪 15:23, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
Another thing to note, I had my username changed during round one, is it possible to update it here? P anini 🥪 15:37, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Because I have started work at a new job, I won't have much time to write articles and contribute to my chances at WikiCup. Basically, Real Life is better than being here on Wikipedia for a contest. Good luck to the rest of the competitors. HawkAussie ( talk) 03:29, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
I note that the "unofficial tool" has not recorded contributions to Round 1 correctly. Which, obviously, also throws out the totals. Gog the Mild ( talk) 15:48, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Withdraw me if you would. After this, the idea of putting six to twenty hours into a restoration is seriously not something I can see myself doing for some time. Adam Cuerden ( talk)Has about 7.8% of all FPs 22:55, 27 March 2021 (UTC)