SIR, — I have just discovered that a certain Mr. John Derbyshire has been editing his own article, as well as having been making other C.o.I.-edits. At the moment, I am at the moment a little close to death, due to Hay fever, typical in his native England, and being of a rather fluid mind, amongst other things, I am not in a position to do such a thing myself; therefore, would you, Sir, be tempted to apply for a CU on the editors of the whole article, and in particular, the User:216.3.118.200 (Derbyshire's possible private and personal, static and dedicated IP), the User:Ptvydanh (self-declared), the User:Derbyfann (pro-Derbyshire SPA, with an obvious name) and the User:Ai changhe (this is definitely a Chinese name, and his wife is, or was formerly, a Chinese citizen; yet another pro-Derbyshire SPA)? I thank you. Yours most faithfully and sincerely, I rest, — KC9TV 22:43, 1 July 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) 11:00, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi, on 9 February 2012, you move-protected The Hobbit (2012 film) page due to constant moves and disputes over the page name. We have now come to a conclusion on a new name, as seen here, mostly due to the emergence of new information regarding the film(s) on 31 July 2012. Could you please move the page to the new name of The Hobbit (film series). -- User:2nyte 9:34, 31 July 2011 (AEST)
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) 22:27, 31 July 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:
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) 00:17, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
User:E4024, an editor that reported a page at RFPP, has brought an issue to my talk page regarding the editor that you blocked, User:Mttll. He has an unblock request on his talk page [1], and seems sincere. It was an unusual circumstance, I noticed with protection and one party blocked (then blocked by someone else) so I don't pretend to have all the details in what looks like a CF. He was supposed to be on 1RR, and looking at the edits makes is seem the faith was good while his actions were obviously unacceptable. I'm leaning towards talking to him for a day or two, explaining a few things, making sure he fully understands, then unblocking if I think he has sufficient clue. I do think he is sincere in his unblock request, but I require just a little more than sincerity. Before I do any of this, I prefer to have the input from the blocking admin, and of course I want to hear if you have any objections to my use of education instead of duration in this circumstance. I've seen the ANI, but thought you might have more to add. If you could, drop a note on my talk page in the section on this with your thoughts. Thanks. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 21:48, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
I only was correcting it and you guys posted false stuff right back that ain't right!
Hi, would you mind editing the Begin Again page to list it as a single? As discussed on the Talk page, the Billboard.biz Country Update released on Monday irrefutably confirms that it is the next single from Red. Thank you! Afireinside27 (talk) 14:46, 27 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) 19:57, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
Hey, saw that you made an edit not too long ago, so not sure if you're lurking around or not...if so, I just forwarded an email to the Arbitration Committee from the OTRS system (info-en courtesy) but didn't get the usual bounce message, so I'm not sure if it went through...would you happen to be able to check that? Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 09:01, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
An anon user has posted either his or someone else's email address here. Might be a good idea to hide it from public view. Thanks. -- Nczempin (talk) 10:18, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
Would you mind taking a look at Kansas Turnpike if you get a chance? We're trying to fix the issues this FA has, and I thought that since you live in Kansas you might have some insight. --Rschen7754 07:10, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for protecting Dual Survival. daintalk 17:03, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
Re. pump
Sorry but...this is a lame dispute, and you prot'd the wrong version.
ALL I wanted to say was, that NYT has lowered their paywall, and so, Wikipedians could use it.
I have no idea why this is some kind of controversy. 88.104.5.244 (talk) 03:44, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
I think both should be blocked, and Joefromrandb should also lose rollback due to his misuse in the war. A village pump shouldn't be protected.--Jasper Deng (talk) 03:47, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
I'll stop, ks, while you figure it all out. OK? Hope that helps. I will watch THIS page and I will do nothing until/unless we discuss right here. That's fair enough, right? 88.104.5.244 (talk) 03:51, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
I strongly disagree with your actions to block the IP and not Joefromrandb. Joe was unnecessarily rude to the IP address and was told by 3 different editors that he was being unnecessarily rude and to back down. He engaged on the IP. The IPs behavior was not at all wrong until the warring started. Joefromrandb's claim of a vandalism exception is wrong. There was no vandalism by Wikipedia definition and no exemption. This should've been dealt with even handily.--v/r - TP 03:59, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi, Ks0stm. You may consider letting this go. It doesn't seem to be headed anywhere. Tiderolls 05:17, 31 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:
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.
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) 00:31, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
I was halfway done with a post at ANI when I noticed discussion on your talk page showed you had backed off and I realized the discussion between the two of you took place a while ago. In the posting at ANI, I would have argued for an extension of Joefromrandb's block to indefinite, but I was also arguing of a block for you. Your behavior there was terrible and I am beyond surprised that someone like Hersfold gave you a civility barnstar for that behavior. You took specific actions that were meant to inflame the situation (i.e. "Hmm...I hadn't thought of that...maybe I will. Thanks for the suggestion. =)" and "Ok, I have to ask though...does it require a codpiece"). You're actions are particularly poor considering you had just removed rights from the user. Ryan Vesey 00:38, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
I wish you hadn't done that. Had User:D.Lazard done his due diligence before WP:PRODing the article, he would have quickly found references such as these and these establishing the subject's notability. Can the article be restored? Yappy2bhere (talk) 19:14, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Oh, dear, and Algebrator too. I don't know that the mention at Springer [3] or the ISSAC paper [4] definitively establish WP:N, but it does suggest that notability wouldn't have been hard to establish Yappy2bhere (talk) 19:37, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Three participants were in favor of including the content and two opposed. Those in favor did not respond to counter arguments by those opposed. I do not consider any consensus to have been reached because of the lack of dialog and no sense of the opposition view being heard by those in favor. I think it's an error to interpret those results as having achieved "general consensus". I may be wrong about this but if you think there might be some value in my position, it might be useful to ask a colleague to review your decision and give feedback - not to make any changes since it's a minor issue, but for future, more important cases. Thanks for your service. Jojalozzo 02:38, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
Can you please look at Gotovina and Markač news nominees... I'd like to see your opinion. This court's decision made international reactions. --Wüstenfuchs 19:30, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
I don't know what's going on between you and Joe, and am not about to look up the archive for it, but after reversing this edit [5] of his I noticed you and he were involved in an ANI. If this amounts to an escalation on his part I don't want you to be unaware of it because I redacted it.
I noticed your username commenting at an Arbcom discussion regarding civility. An effort is underway that would likely benifit if your views were included. I hope you will append regards at: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Civility enforcement/Questionnaire Thank you for considering this request. My76Strat (talk) 11:27, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Yours, Maximilianklein (talk) 02:58, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I've made a request at WP:RFPP to change the pending changes protection on Dual Survival (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) to semi-protection. Regards, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:36, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
Come celebrate Wikipedia Day with other Kansas Wikipedians sponsored by Wikimedians Active in Local Regions in the United States (WALRUS) and hosted by the Topeka and Shawnee Public Library. Come chat, hang out and enjoy good company while find out more about Wikipedia in our regional community! RSVP at Wikipedia:Meetup/Topeka/Wikipedia_Day.
If you can't come, but still want to find out about events in the greater Topeka region (which may include KC, Manhattan, Lawrence, Salina, or other places where volunteers are interested) sign up for future notifications at Wikipedia:Meetup/Topeka/Invite list.
Hope to see you there Sadads (talk) 20:16, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for having run for an ArbCom seat. It's a hard job, and it takes dedicated people to run for it; I'm sure that with a bit more field experience, you'll get a good shot at it in the future. — Coren (talk) 22:36, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Also, could you sign my guestbook? I believe I signed yours a while back. AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 02:41, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
Many thanks! –
Gareth Griffith-Jones – The WelshBuzzard – is wishing you the season's greetings.Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's solstice or Christmas,Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus,or the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for (almost) everyone.
– – Gareth Griffith-Jones |The Welsh Buzzard| 11:01, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
Hello,
I see that you accept Request for Permissions for Reviewers. My request there has been lying there untouched for about 8 days; and I have been told that I probably should get the permission, based on my edits.
So can you please check my permission too, and please do the needful (approve or deny)? Its quite long waiting for it already...
Thanks! TheOriginalSoni (talk) 15:54, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
cyberpower is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
As one of my wikifriends, I would like to wish you a Merry Christmas. I hope you had a great one.—cyberpower OnlineMerry Christmas 02:02, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
I'm not totally sure all of the things grouped under the NCEP heading are technically should be listed under the organization.. Such as the NHC mainly. I know technically they all are under the NCEP, but the public won't know them as such. I think it'd honestly be better to have a subheader for NCEP with an overview, then same level headings with the rest, mentioning in prose that they fall under the authority of the NCEP. Thoughts? I'm watching here, so no need for talkbacks. gwickwiretalkedits 03:25, 28 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 19:13, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
