User talk:OliverTwisted/Archive 1

Archives

October 2008 /Archive 1

Art of War

Thanks for being so understanding. I hope you decide to stick around. Regarding The Art of War (disambiguation), there is already a link to Sun-Tzu's book, which El Norte Press has simply issued in a new edition. WP:DISAMBIG covers the sorts of things that are appropriate for disambiguation pages; since we wouldn't have a whole article on a single edition of a book, we wouldn't mention it on the disambiguation page. But please feel free to contribute to Wikipedia in other ways. And (ironic as it might sound now), ignore all rules: if you do something wrong, someone else will come along and fix it! RJC ^Talk_Contribs 16:20, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I had missed that you had said Mao's Art of War, not Sun Tzu's. Still, Mao never wrote a book called The Art of War. The El Norte Press edition is a compilation of four separate treatises. They would be notable individually, but none would be linked to the Art of War disambiguation page since none of them shares that title, nor could the El Norte edition be advertised on any of the articles devoted to one of those four treatises (e.g., On Protracted War). RJC ^Talk_Contribs 23:17, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is a difference between editions that on their own satisfy the requirements of WP:N and the insertion of information about a specific edition into articles about a book. A more specific notability guideline is available at WP:NB. Since The Art of War (disambiguation) is not a heavily-edited page, leaving this to another editor to correct does not seem likely to resolve this problem. If you like, you can request a third opinion, which would bring others into the discussion. RJC ^Talk_Contribs 04:23, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note. While anything written by Mao Zedong would count as notable, a collection of his writings, assembled under a title that he never chose, would not be. It is for this reason that I am loathe to include The Art of War as one of Mao's writings or to put it on the disambiguation page. One thing that caught my eye was your claim that this work is referenced in scholarly papers. That would be a sign of notability. Did Mao ever publish these works together as unit under the title, The Art of War? Who has discussed the works by this title? RJC ^Talk_Contribs 06:40, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you again for your comments. The fact that this edition appears in the footnote of an unpublished paper does not make it notable; blogs are not reliable sources, either. You mention that this book is used at West Point. I would correct you to say that this edition has been ordered by the West Point bookstore; the book in question does not exist — except as a creation of El Norte Press. You mention your expertise: expert editors addresses this issue, so we don't have to throw our credentials on the table. If you wish to pursue this further, the link for a third opinion is above. RJC ^Talk_Contribs 08:15, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nietzsche and Kant

Nietzsche and Kant? That is a tough one, though I suppose it shouldn't be. I suspect it's largely a matter of taste: those who think Nietzsche is a serious thinker have problems taking Kant seriously, and vice versa. Stanley Rosen argues that Postmodernism is just the outgrowth of Kant's philosophy (Politics as Hermeneutics), and insofar as Postmodernists have a debt to Nietzsche that would be a link. Karl Löwith's book on German philosophy begins with Hegel, not Kant. I really can't think of any direct comparison — sorry. RJC ^Talk_Contribs 05:24, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vote Early and Vote Often

Just Kidding!

Please exercise your right to vote today!

You have no idea how refreshing...

It is to see a message like that. 99% of people get all defensive, even if they are new users. Feel free to drop by my talk page for any reason.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:29, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bnuttsin2/FANET

I created the subpage Bnuttsin2/FANET as a favor to the user so his content would be preserved when the article page on which he'd inappropriately placed it was deleted. It wasn't an experiment, it's a common and ordinary use of a user subpage. —Largo Plazo (talk) 04:31, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gotcha, thanks for the heads up

--digitalmischief (talk) 04:33, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dr sunitha krishnan

I wanted to give you a heads up that I am removing the SD tag from Dr sunitha krishnan. The article is for a real person that seems to have enough G-hits to warrant listing. If you have any concerns about this please let me know. Thanks... ttonyb1 (talk) 06:01, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stop Inappropriately tagging articles

You're repeatedly tagging things for speedy deletion incorrectly. Stop now, and go read WP:CSD before tagging another article. Jclemens (talk) 07:27, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

virtually every article that i tagged for deletion that was undone, has now been tagged and deleted by other editors. I appreciate your feedback, but please respect my contributions enough to make requests, rather than demands.--digitalmischief (talk) 09:03, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am afraid that I came here to tell you the same as I noticed several mistaggings that can be avoided (likethis which might be A7 but never G2). I am advising you to read WP:CSD again (and the explanations), making yourself familiar with the very narrow scope that is speedy deletion. You might also want to readUser:Balloonman/Why I hate Speedy Deleters, which lists common mistakes made when tagging. Please do make yourself familiar with the scope of speedy deletion and consider using WP:PROD or WP:AFD as alternatives more often. Keep up the patrolling. Regards So Why 09:34, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More help required

Hello. Thank you for the message. I didn't understand the sandbox thing until now. Those are my first two articles. Please, tell me what else am I missing or what can I do to improve them. Thank you. Mirapaltecho(talk) 08:27, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you again. I'll wait 'till tomorrow and see what happens. I've still got so much work to do here... many things to learn, but that's ok for today. Mirapaltecho (talk) 08:27, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Scope question

Hey Oliver. There is a discussion going on at Talk:Mars Science Laboratory on the scope of the article. Would appreciate having your input before we close the discussion and attempt to determine if there is a consensus. Please take a look, and if you have the time and interest, weigh in on the question of "now that the article has been split, what is the scope of the MSL article? Cheers. N2e (talk) 22:50, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

RFC for community wide discussion

Right now you have a discussion going about your basic concerns regarding the Huffington Post at the Reliable sources notice board. I suggest you make a Request for comment if you wish to rehash the entire community wide consensus formed over the years. The example you use has only one problem, it is the same with any other AP story referenced from another publication...it is not the actual source. Associated Press is the source and by guidlines in regards to criteria does include authorship. The HP article shows that the attribution they give is to a journalist from the AP and not from a staff writer. It is best to use the originating reference as AP and not HP. Just using an Associated Press story does not mean that all Huffington Post material is acceptable. While this particular use is not an outright policy or guideline breach, HP is considered a "Questionable source" as defined by: "Questionable sources are those with a poor reputation for checking the facts, or with no editorial oversight. Such sources include websites and publications expressing views that are widely acknowledged as extremist, or promotional in nature, or which rely heavily on rumors and personal opinions. Questionable sources are generally unsuitable for citing contentious claims about third parties, which includes claims against institutions, persons living or dead, as well as more ill-defined entities. The proper uses of a questionable source are very limited." In order to change a community wide consensus one needs to provide accurate reasons as well as start the discussion in the right way, by adressing the community as a whole through an RFC and not just with a statement that you are addressing the entire community.--Amadscientist (talk) 10:41, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and let's keep it there to avoid any more disruption of the Paul Ryan article. I understand your view. OliverTwisted ^(Talk)(Stuff) 10:58, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, let's take a time out, after viewing your comments here, there and everywhere. The issue that was posted about originally has been addressed. The source was changed, days ago. There was an edit war going on at the time, over the Paul Ryan "brown nose" comments, among others, that were raging in media coverage... during the minutes leading up to the public announcement of Mitt Romney's running mate for the Presidency of the United States of America. This wasn't just lolly, golly, bang, bang. Take a serious look at the edit history.

I posted the link to the edit in question on the noticeboard conversation we are having. An editor deleted a contested piece of information, during a flurry of heavy reverts, with the only available edit summary being that the Huffington Post was unreliable. The source was changed at least a half a dozen times within hours, as was the statement. Rather than attempt to revert myself, after I had already attempted to intervene, I asked for a recent comment on the issue on the talk page. Later, after viewing those arguments, both for and against, I moved the discussion to a more appropriate venue to have my intellectual question answered by a group of people with less hot heads than were prevailing on that page at the time. Rather than continue to disrupt a process I was attempting to help mediate, given the lack of any admin intervention, I then moved it to the noticeboard, as per policy. I also contacted the admin who protected the Paul Ryan talk page to ask if we could upgrade the protection to avoid this incessant vandalism (revert wars). The new Pending Changes 2nd level protection status would not seem to be available yet, as it was just voted on for adoption. So, it was back to warning and reporting over the reverts.

The noticeboard conversation has been up for all of a day. At some point, when I have time, I will most likely take your advice, and open a community wide request for comment, as I believe the situation has changed, based upon my research when asking the question in the first place. I am referring to change in structure, ownership, and oversight of the Huffington Post. I am also talking about rules which have been clarified regarding the source of the material, and author vs. publisher distinctions, and I wish to explore it more fully. In the meantime, I would request that you pick a venue, of the 3 on which we are having simultaneous conversations, and let's stick with just that one. OliverTwisted ^(Talk)(Stuff) 12:39, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are doing a great job. Keep it up, however You started several different threads that are garnering different replies and i cannot promise to stick to one thread on this particular subject. I don't object to the request, just that I didn't start the threads. Perhaps it might be best to go to the Ryan talpkpage thread and close and collapse it using the {{Divhide|Collapsed "title" bar}} Full tex being collapsed {{Divhide|end}} and that way you can lable it "resolved" in the "Collpased title bar" and then no further discussion will take place there. Perhaps a link to the noticeboard discussion or the RFC you start added inside before collapsing.--Amadscientist (talk) 03:27, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Communication of this nature will win you my undivided attention. I think we just caught each other at the wrong time. I really was never asking for blanket permission to revert HuffPo citation removals all willy nilly. Before last week, I've never edited a single political page that didn't show up in a vandalism report, and I would normally rather slowly walk over hot coal than wade into politics. ~~I have a question on proceeding with collapsing the section, which is a great idea.~~ edited the template out of the page>

Never mind, fixed it. It was just a spacing issue. This ought to make things easier. Also, you were right, I am male. Your "Sir" comment just tickled my funny bone. I had a mental image of being slapped across the face with a white handkerchief and called out onto the field of honor.OliverTwisted ^(Talk)(Stuff) 03:44, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There you go.

Take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Paul_Ryan#Calling_conservative_organizations_conservative. Still-24-45-42-125 (talk) 09:12, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've been monitoring the situation. No one has ruled on my previous case for this page for a different user, and I suspect no one will rule on this one. Admins started avoiding this page like the plague on Saturday. I have had all the communication necessary with this user, and will not be editing any more content nor starting any new discussions on the Paul Ryan article. I won't be dragged into an edit war. Learned that yeas ago. I posted diffs on the user's page. You might be able to cobble a case together with the ones that you have, but a day has passed. The behavior is obvious. The specifics are going to requite more time than I have right now. OliverTwisted ^(Talk)(Stuff) 09:19, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I'm not touching the article page on this matter until every last one of his endless excuses is batted away. Still-24-45-42-125 (talk) 10:11, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding intent, behavior, and most likely suspects, I found these graphics interesting: [1],[2].OliverTwisted ^(Talk)(Stuff) 10:28, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hingorani

That may not be the right place for that information. But it is true that he got recognition from that serial on Doordarshan. The serial was Paying Guest. He acted as a live-in servant in the house. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.44.212.18 (talk) 03:05, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarification. Information or facts such as this need a reliable source, used as an in-line citation. Please see these pages on Wikipedia for more information on these guidelines: WP:RS, WP:CITE. Thanks for taking the time to communicate. OliverTwisted ^(Talk)(Stuff) 03:15, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

your claims of my edit beeing vandalism

according to the german wiki article DFC Prag my 'vandalism' is not 'vandalism' but the truth and by rewivew it evan the english article states in a later paragraoph my socalld 'vadalism' itself without me posting it so i wonder if you also change that paragraph for socalld vandalism right ???134.3.76.108 (talk) 10:53, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the misunderstanding, but the reason for the revert was that your edit was flagged as a "test edit" by an automated software bot. In this case, it was this information: [3] which was added to the article. If you feel the reversal was in error, you may attempt to re-add the information, however without an in-line citation to a reliable source, it is likely to be challenged and reverted, perhaps again by an automated bot. For more information on how to cite information from reliable sources, please visit this link: WP:CITE. Best of luck with your future editing.OliverTwisted^(Talk)(Stuff) 11:55, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Human baby

Thanks, that is very nice of you! I agree, of course. Drmies (talk) 03:56, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have no idea how refreshing it is for me to see an affirmation of life and unrestricted possibility on Wikipedia among the user talk pages, when often they tend to be full of sarcasm and the rantings of bitter little tyrants clutching at fiefdoms of air. Cherish your new precious gift! Thank YOU! ;0) OliverTwisted^(Talk)(Stuff) 04:02, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Ryan

I thought it was important to add Paul Ryan's immigrant ancestry and the first Janesville ancestor. I'm one of our family's (not Ryan's, my family lines) amateur genealogists. The research I did on Paul Ryan is not the first little bit I've done on politicians. I have noticed that Paul Ryan's Janesville roots are more and more of interest. The fact of his Irish immigrant roots was already brought up before I got to the article. Better genealogists than I am may well be able to discover more of interest, and the fact they found them on Wikipedia may be of interest and spark something factual. Thanks for deciding not to delete my addition. I have learned 100 times more about history from doing genealogy, as people's associations through family are really half the story (more often than not 100 years ago compared to now, where whom one's family knows is still very important).SongspiritUSA (talk) 04:38, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking a moment to talk. If you feel that it would be appropriate to re-add 3 generations of genealogy to the Paul Ryan article, I will not remove the information. I can't promise that others will not. My main issue was that the ancestors of Paul Ryan were named, and typically, we avoid naming people who do not themselves have notability on Wikipedia, with the exception of the immediate family, unless there is a compelling reason to do so. Otherwise, it tends to fall into the category of trivia. Notability is not inherited, nor bequeathed to previous generations. While I agree that his ancestry is not trivial, how many generations we decide to include, as well as how much information we decide to include is really up to us. Please feel free to pursue whichever course of action you feel appropriate, with my blessings. OliverTwisted^(Talk)(Stuff) 04:50, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	A strong spine makes for good posture, and good posture supports clear thinking. StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 04:47, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Archiving on Talk:Paul Ryan

I notice you had increased the archive size up to 500k. I went ahead and have consolidated the four existing archives into one and placed CSDs on the 3 now empty archives. That way, the archive sizes will be consistent and we won't have 3 very small archives and then have the remainder much larger. Safiel (talk) 04:17, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I noticed the bot was giving an "archive full" message, and 100K seemed much too small for such a fast moving page. Consistency and ease of navigation are paramount, so thanks for taking the necessary steps. OliverTwisted^(Talk)(Stuff) 04:18, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: MELOS; Shpëtim Moçka; MIMOS II; Ghanchakkar (film); Halley Armada; Waking Mars; Mariner 3; Europa Lander; Soyuz 7K-L1 No.4L; Chang'e 5; Soyuz 7K-L1 No.5L; Solar powered desalination unit; Aeroshell; Maestro (software); Luna E-8-5 No.402; Mars 5M; Kosmos 21; Foton-M2; Orbiter

Cleanup: Hayabusa Mk2; Children's literature; Chinese space program
Merge: Reductionism; Solar Dynamics Observatory; Unmanned spacecraft
Add Sources: The Present (book); Wallasey; Necklace
Wikify: Navcam; Colonization of Mars; Common Gateway Interface
Expand: Armenian Genocide recognition; Spacecraft; Scientific information from the Mars Exploration Rover mission

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 02:13, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 01 April 2013

Special report: Who reads which Wikipedia?

The Wikimedia Foundation has released its latest report card for the movement's hundreds of sites. The WMF has published statistics about the sites since 2009, but only recently have these been expanded in scope and depth to provide a rich source of data for investigating the movement and the world it serves. Dutch-born Erik Zachte is the driver of the WMF's statistical output, and he writes that the report card and accompanying traffic statistics comprise "enough tables, bar charts and plots to keep you busy for a while".

WikiProject report: Special: FAQs

This week's Report is dedicated to answering our readers' questions about WikiProjects. The following Frequently Asked Questions came from feedback at the WikiProject Report's talk page, the WikiProject Council's talk page, and from previous lists of FAQs.

Featured content: What the ?

The Signpost interviewed prolific featured content creator and former Signpost "featured content" report writer Crisco 1492 about ? and Indonesian cinema. ? was the "Today's featured article" for 1 April 2013. 1 April is popularly known as April Fools' Day in many countries.

News and notes: Grants given for Wikipedia Library, six others; April Fool's Day ructions

The first round of individual engagement grants (IEGs) have been awarded, disbursing about $55.6k (€42.7k) to seven applicants.

Arbitration report: Three open cases

A case brought by Lecen involves several articles about former Argentinian president Juan Manuel de Rosas (1793–1877).

Technology report: Wikidata phase 2 deployment timetable in doubt

Users of ten Wikipedias got access to phase 2 of Wikidata following its first rollout to production wikis.

The Signpost: 08 April 2013

Wikizine: WMF scales back feature after outcry

Numerous Wikimedia Commons editors have chimed in on the Wikimedia Foundation's deployment of a new feature to its mobile website. Allowing anonymous users to register and upload pictures for use in an article, the feature was placed prominently at the top of Wikipedia articles in multiple languages.

WikiProject report: Earthshattering WikiProject Earthquakes

This week, we felt the world tremble in the presence of WikiProject Earthquakes. The project was started in May 2008 to deal with articles about earthquakes, aftershocks, seismology, seismologists, plate tectonics, and related articles. While the project has seen success building 14 Featured Articles, one A-class Article, and 21 Good Articles, a fairly heavy workload remains, with a relative WikiWork rating of 4.94. WikiProject Earthquakes maintains a portal, a list of open tasks, a popular pages listing, and an article alerts watchlist.

News and notes: French intelligence agents threaten Wikimedia volunteer

Last Friday, the Wikimedia movement awoke to news that one of their number—Rémi Mathis, a French volunteer editor—had been summoned to the offices of the interior intelligence service DCRI and threatened with criminal charges and fines if he did not delete an article on the French Wikipedia about a radio station used by the French military.

Arbitration report: Subject experts needed for Argentine History

The arbitration committee is looking for expertise in Argentina and the Spanish language for a case involving former Argentinean president Juan Manuel de Rosas (1793–1877).

Featured content: Wikipedia loves poetry

Four articles and two pictures were promoted to "featured" status on the English Wikipedia this week.

Technology report: Testing week

The deployment of phase 2 of Wikidata to the English Wikipedia, originally scheduled for 8 April but delayed due to technical problems, may be rescheduled again as the result of community resistance.

The Signpost: 15 April 2013

Op-ed: How do we fix RfA inactivity?

The RfA process is widely discussed here on the English Wikipedia and it has been well documented that less and less new Requests for adminship are being filed. There are an abundance of bytes devoted to the discussion and analysis of this situation and plenty of hands have been wrung over the matter. Various RfCs have attempted to find a way to fix the problem. Many proposals have been made offering solutions, some more potentially drastic than others, with the goal of making the changes necessary to kick–start RfA back into regular action. However, Wikipedia operates based on consensus and, to this point, there are have simply been too many disagreeing views for us to reach a consensus on how to increase RfA activity.

WikiProject report: Unity in Diversity: South Africa

This week, we ventured to WikiProject South Africa. The project was started in February 2005 and is home to thirteen pieces of featured material, two A-class articles, and twenty-one good articles.

News and notes: Another admin reform attempt flops

The most recent move to reform the requests for adminship process on the English Wikipedia has failed, after a complex and drawn-out three-step procedure for community input was subject to decreasing participation as time wore on and came up with no clear consensus.

Featured content: The featured process swings into high gear

Four articles, twelve lists, and seven pictures were promoted to "featured" status on the English Wikipedia this week.

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Waking Mars; Electrostatic separator; Aeroshell; Halley Armada; Brezolupy; Nokia 1011; MELOS; Sharlot Hall Museum; Spacecraft Event Time; Coriolis (satellite); MIMOS II; Soyuz 7K-L1 No.5L; Solar powered desalination unit; Mann–Elkins Act; AKOM; Unmanned resupply spacecraft; Tyrolean traverse; Virgen del Pino; Maestro (software)

Cleanup: Exploration Mission 1; Sathyan (singer); Martin Walt
Merge: Unmanned spacecraft; Wearable computer; Robotic spacecraft
Add Sources: Observations and explorations of Venus; Rocker-bogie; Wallasey
Wikify: List of astronomy acronyms; Colonization of Mars; OpenLuna
Expand: NASA Social; Armenian Genocide recognition; Spacecraft

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:51, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 22 April 2013

In the media: Wikipedia inaccurate, says Florence; New Wikipedia app for breaking news

An article by John Sweeney published on 22 April 2013 on scnow.com, the website of the Florence, South Carolina Morning News, reported that Florence city officials have taken to monitoring and correcting the Wikipedia article on their city.

WikiProject report: WikiProject Editor Retention

This week, we spent some time with a project that develops tools and methods for improving the user experience in the hope that new users will continue editing the encyclopedia. The project was started in July 2012 and has grown to include 124 members. The project's members partner with the Teahouse and the Welcoming Committee to spread WikiLove, welcome new users, encourage civility, and other related activities.

News and notes: Milan conference a mixed bag

The Wikimedia Conference is an annual meeting of the chapters to discuss their status and the organisational development of the Wikimedia movement. For the first time it included groups that wish to be considered for WMF affiliation as thematic organisations and one of the three groups that was recently affiliated as a user group. The conference was also attended by members of the Wikimedia Foundation's (WMF) Board of Trustees, the Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC), the WMF Affiliations Committee, and a representative of the Wikivoyage Association.

Featured content: Batfish in the Red Sea

Nine articles, four lists, eight pictures, and one topic were promoted to "featured" status this week on the English Wikipedia.

Arbitration report: Sexology case nears closure after stalling over topic ban

The Sexology case is nearing completion after arbitrators were unable to agree on a topic ban for one of the participants.

Technology report: A flurry of deployments

On Monday, the English Wikipedia became the 12th wiki to be able to pull data from the central Wikidata.org repository, with other wikis scheduled to receive the update on Wednesday.

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: MIMOS II; Mars 5M; East Liberty Auto Plant; The Legendary Demos; Halley Armada; Explorer 7; Irving Small; MELOS; Aeroshell; Solar powered desalination unit; Orbiter; Soyuz 7K-L1 No.5L; Maestro (software); Brezolupy; Spacecraft Event Time; Electrostatic separator; Coriolis (satellite); Edmund Biernacki; Alpha Monocerotis

Cleanup: Children's literature; Martin Walt; Sathyan (singer)
Merge: High-gain antenna; Wearable technology; Low-gain antenna
Add Sources: Rocker-bogie; Mars program; Lemonade (Alexandra Stan song)
Wikify: Exploration Mission 1; Mountain View, California; List of astronomy acronyms
Expand: Armenian Genocide recognition; NASA Social; Necklace

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:43, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 April 2013

News and notes: Chapter furore over FDC knockbacks; First DC GLAM boot-camp

The Funds Dissemination Committee released its recommendations to the WMF board last Sunday. The news that the Hong Kong chapter's application for US$212K had failed was followed by a strongly worded resignation announcement by Deryck Chan on the public Wikimedia-l mailing-list.

In the media: Wikipedia's sexism; Yuri Gadyukin hoax

On 24 April 2013, novelist Amanda Filipacchi published what turned out to be an influential op-ed in the New York Times; illuminating the unusual background of the Yuri Gadyukin hoax.

Featured content: Wiki loves video games

Nine articles, three lists, three pictures, and one topic were promoted to "featured" this week.

WikiProject report: Japanese WikiProject Baseball

This week, we traveled to the Japanese Wikipedia's WikiProject Baseball for perspectives from a version of Wikipedia that treats WikiProjects as their own unique namespace (プロジェクト:) independent of "Wikipedia:".

Traffic report: Most popular Wikipedia articles

The WP:TOP25 and WP:5000 reports chronicle the most popular Wikipedia articles on a weekly basis.

Arbitration report: Sexology closed; two open cases

The Sexology case closed shortly after publication with no changes.

Recent research: Sentiment monitoring; UNESCO and systemic bias; and more

A report on an online service which was created to conduct real-time monitoring of Wikipedia articles of companies, and more.

Technology report: New notifications system deployed across Wikipedia

This week saw the deployment of the Echo extension, also known as "notifications".

Read this Signpost in full
Single-page
Unsubscribe
EdwardsBot (talk) 06:17, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 06 May 2013

News and notes: Candidates nominating for Foundation elections; Looking ahead to Wikimania 2014

Although not yet in great numbers, candidates are coming forward for Wikimedia Foundation elections, which will be held from 1 to 15 June. The elections will fill vacancies in three categories, the most prominent of which will be the three community-elected seats on the ten-member Board of Trustees (or the first Board meeting after the election results are announced, if sooner). The current two-year terms for these trustee positions ends on 1 September.

Technology report: Foundation successful in bid for larger Google subsidy

The Wikimedia Foundation will be receiving more than $100,000 worth of free developer time courtesy of internet giant Google, it was announced this week. The funds, allocated as part of Google's Summer of Code programme, will support up to 21 student developers through three months of coding time.

Featured content: WikiCup update: full speed ahead!

May sees the beginning of Round 3 of the 2013 WikiCup, with 33 of the original 127 competitors remaining. ... six articles, ten pictures, and two portals were promoted to "featured" status on the English Wikipedia this week.

In the media: New Wikipedia for Schools edition; Anders Behring Breivik's Wikipedia contributions

The SOS Children's Villages news service advised on 3 May 2013 that Wikipedia for Schools 2013 is nearly ready for release. ... On 26 April 2013, the Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation published an article reviewing Norwegian mass murderer Anders Behring Breivik's edits to the English Wikipedia, where it revealed the name of Breivik's English Wikipedia account.

WikiProject report: Earn $100 in cash... and a button!

This week's English Wikipedia project, WikiProject Biophysics, is home to several experts in their fields and a collaboration with the Biophysical Society. The project is hosting a contest through July 15 with six contributors winning $100 in cash and given the opportunity to attend the 2014 meeting of the Biophysical Society in San Francisco. Other strong entries will be awarded barnstars online and everyone who contributes can receive a physical button mailed out to them.

The Signpost: 13 May 2013

News and notes: WMF–community ruckus on Wikimedia mailing list

The removal of administrator rights from all volunteers on the Wikimedia Foundation's official website sparked a highly emotional reaction on the Wikimedia-l mailing list—one of the largest off-wiki methods of communication for the Wikimedia movement.

WikiProject report: Knock Out: WikiProject Mixed Martial Arts

This week, we spent some time watching WikiProject Mixed Martial Arts, which was started in August 2005 and has grown to include 12 Good Articles and a Featured List.

Featured content: A mushroom, a motorway, a Munich gallery, and a map

Fourteen articles, three lists, and three pictures were promoted to "featured" status on the English Wikipedia, including Boletus luridus, seen above.

In the media: PR firm accused of editing Wikipedia for government clients; can Wikipedia predict the stock market?

An article published on May 10 on Odwyerpr.com written by Greg Hazley documented a "spar" between Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales and public relations firm Qorvis partner Matt Lauer, who disputes Wikipedia's guideline discouraging public relations firms from editing articles on their clients.

Arbitration report: Race and politics opened; three open cases

The Race and politics case has been accepted for arbitration, and the evidence phase is now open. Two other cases remain open.

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Halley Armada; Alpha Monocerotis; Kosmos 21; MELOS; Bible translations into Swedish; Mann–Elkins Act; The Legendary Demos; Electrostatic separator; Tyrolean traverse; Coriolis (satellite); Irving Small; Explorer 7; Unmanned resupply spacecraft; Brezolupy; Aeroshell; Soyuz 7K-L1 No.5L; Edmund Biernacki; Nicola di Bari; Cleverbot

Cleanup: Hayabusa Mk2; Children's literature; Vanguard 3
Merge: Non-paternity event; Craft; Unmanned spacecraft
Add Sources: Wallasey; Galileo (spacecraft); New Horizons
Wikify: List of astronomy acronyms; Nokia N9; Colonization of Mars
Expand: Zanussi; Spacecraft; Robotic spacecraft

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 04:59, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 May 2013

Foundation elections: Trustee candidates speak about Board structure, China, gender, global south, endowment

Nominations closed last Friday for the three community-elected seats on the Wikimedia Foundation's (WMF) ten-member Board of Trustees—the ultimate corporate authority of the worldwide WMF. The Board has influential roles and responsibilities over one of the most powerful global information sources on the Internet.

WikiProject report: Classical Greece and Rome

This week, we traveled to WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome. The project was started in May 2006 and has 37 featured articles.

News and notes: Spanish Wikipedia leaps past one million articles

On 16 May, the Spanish Wikipedia became the seventh Wikipedia to cross the million article Rubicon, a symbolic yet important achievement.

In the media: Qworty incident continues

Salon.com published another article detailing the ongoing incidents with Wikipedia user Qworty, who has identified himself as Robert Clark Young. It documents Qworty's role in the controversy involving Amanda Filipacchi's op-ed, which kindled a debate on Wikipedia sexism as it relates to categories, where Qworty was responsible for a series of revenge edits against Filipacchi in the days after she released her op-ed.

Featured content: Up in the air

Nine articles, six lists, and eight pictures were promoted to "featured" status on the English Wikipedia this week.

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information.

Views/Day	Title	Tagged with…
421	Galileo (spacecraft) (talk)	Add sources
47	Rocker-bogie (talk)	Add sources
41	Mars program (talk)	Add sources
1,049	New Horizons (talk)	Add sources
152	Wallasey (talk)	Add sources
14	Ride Report (talk)	Add sources
1,857	Activated carbon (talk)	Cleanup
11	Hayabusa Mk2 (talk)	Cleanup
54	Exploration Mission 1 (talk)	Cleanup
2,278	Attila (talk)	Expand
33	NASA Social (talk)	Expand
769	Necklace (talk)	Expand
1,364	Space exploration (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
644	Space Shuttle program (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
225	Timeline of computer security hacker history (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
40	Non-paternity event (talk)	Merge
130	High-gain antenna (talk)	Merge
49	Unmanned spacecraft (talk)	Merge
1,044	Colonization of Mars (talk)	Wikify
655	Nokia N9 (talk)	Wikify
4	Concentric crater fill (talk)	Wikify
3	Eugene F. Lally (talk)	Orphan
1	Spacecraft naming (talk)	Orphan
3	Jesús Salgado (talk)	Orphan
3	XESDD-AM (talk)	Stub
11	Halley Armada (talk)	Stub
4	MIMOS II (talk)	Stub
11	The Legendary Demos (talk)	Stub
13	Maestro (software) (talk)	Stub
6	Mars 5M (talk)	Stub

Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions

We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:

Views/Day: Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.
Quality: Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.

The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:

Content: Is more content needed?
Headings: Does this article have an appropriate section structure?
Images: Is the number of illustrative images about right?
Links: Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?
Sources: For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:10, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 27 May 2013

News and notes: First-ever community election for FDC positions

Alongside the Signpost's interviews with the Wikimedia Foundation's (WMF) Board of Trustees candidates, the Signpost asked the candidates for the Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) and its Ombudsperson position a series of questions relating to the positions they may be taking on. For the FDC candidates, this will include specific recommendations to the WMF on how to disburse over US$11 million in donors' funds to affiliate organizations, something which appears to have garnered little attention from the editing community at large so far.

In the media: Pagans complain about Qworty's anti-Pagan editing

In the continuing saga of User:Qworty's outing as author Robert Clark Young, several blogs and websites covered the now-banned user's anti-Pagan editing. In an article published on 22 May 2013, TechEye described Qworty's edits as a "reign of terror" and were pleased to find that he had not succeeded in removing several prominent Pagan biographies from the encyclopedia.

Foundation elections: Candidates talk about the Meta problem, the nation-based chapter model, world languages, and value for money

The elections for the three community seats on the Wikimedia Foundation's Board of Trustees start on 8 June. This second and final part of the interview explores two broad themes: Meta, the site that hosts movement-wide coordination; and offline entities—the chapters and the new thematic organisations and user groups.

WikiProject report: WikiProject Geographical Coordinates

This week, we plotted out the demarcations of WikiProject Geographical Coordinates, which aims to create a single standard of handling coordinates in Wikipedia articles.

Featured content: Life of 2π

Twelve articles, four lists, and twelve pictures were promoted to "featured" status on the English Wikipedia this week.

Recent research: Motivations on the Persian Wikipedia; is science eight times more popular on the Spanish Wikipedia than the English Wikipedia?

An article in Library Review offers a much-needed comparison of data from a population of editors outside the English Wikipedia.

Technology report: Amsterdam hackathon: continuity, change, and stroopwafels

Second only to the technical track of Wikimania in terms of numbers, the Berlin Hackathon (2009–2012) provided those with an interest in the software that underpins Wikimedia wikis and supports its editors a place to gather, exchange ideas and learn new skills.

The Signpost: 05 June 2013

From the editor: Signpost developments

I am excited to announce that a Portuguese-language journal, Correio da Wikipédia has been launched by Vitorvicentevalente. It has just published its third edition, and I encourage readers who speak the language to read and contribute to its already-expansive coverage of the Portuguese Wikipedia and the Wikimedia movement.

Featured content: A week of portraits

Five articles, four lists, and thirteen images were promoted to "featured" status this week on the English Wikipedia.

Discussion report: Return of the Discussion report

This is mostly a list of requests for comment believed to be active on 4 June 2013 linked from subpages of Wikipedia:RfC or watchlist notices.

News and notes: "Cease and desist", World Trade Organization says to Wikivoyage; Could WikiLang be the next WMF project?

On 31 May, the Wikimedia Foundation's Legal and Community Advocacy team announced that the Wikivoyage logo would have to be replaced, because it has become the subject of a cease-and-desist letter from the World Trade Organization (WTO).

In the media: China blocks secure version of Wikipedia

An article on TheNextWeb.com says that the Chinese Government has effectively blocked Wikipedia by cutting off access to the HTTP Secure (https) "workaround", almost completely cutting off access to those in China.

WikiProject report: Operation Normandy

This week, we reflect on the anniversary of D-Day by storming the shores of Operation Normandy, a special initiative of WikiProject Military History.

Technology report: Developers accused of making Toolserver fight 'pointless'

Last week, the Signpost reported on a feeling at the Amsterdam hackathon that Toolserver developers were coming round to the idea of migrating to Wikimedia Labs.

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information.

Views/Day	Title	Tagged with…
377	Galileo (spacecraft) (talk)	Add sources
1,071	New Horizons (talk)	Add sources
113	Deep Space 1 (talk)	Add sources
48	Rocker-bogie (talk)	Add sources
46	Mars program (talk)	Add sources
12	Ride Report (talk)	Add sources
56	Exploration Mission 1 (talk)	Cleanup
10	Hayabusa Mk2 (talk)	Cleanup
794	Children's literature (talk)	Cleanup
1,019	Spacecraft (talk)	Expand
325	MESSENGER (talk)	Expand
2,200	Attila (talk)	Expand
1,109	Space exploration (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
35	Spacecraft design (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
1,150	Online dating service (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
45	Unmanned spacecraft (talk)	Merge
138	High-gain antenna (talk)	Merge
14	Low-gain antenna (talk)	Merge
835	Colonization of Mars (talk)	Wikify
39	Scientific research on the International Space Station (talk)	Wikify
16	University of Arkansas, Fayetteville shooting (talk)	Wikify
3	Eugene F. Lally (talk)	Orphan
1	Spacecraft naming (talk)	Orphan
1	Sean Cahill (talk)	Orphan
12	Halley Armada (talk)	Stub
42	MELOS (talk)	Stub
704	Cleverbot (talk)	Stub
10	XESDD-AM (talk)	Stub
9	The Legendary Demos (talk)	Stub
1	Irving Small (talk)	Stub

Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions

We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:

Views/Day: Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.
Quality: Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.

The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:

Content: Is more content needed?
Headings: Does this article have an appropriate section structure?
Images: Is the number of illustrative images about right?
Links: Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?
Sources: For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:11, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 12 June 2013

News and notes: How Wikimedia affiliates are spending $8.4 million; PRISM scandal

Late last year, the Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) awarded $8.4 million in donors' money to 11 Wikimedia entities, including the Wikimedia Foundation and 10 nationally defined chapters. Under this arrangement, these organisations are required to issue quarterly reports on how far they have progressed towards their declared programmatic and financial goals. The FDC has now announced that all 11 completed and submitted their reports by the 1 April deadline, and have responded to each.

Featured content: Mixing Bowl Interchange

Seven articles, two lists, five pictures, and one topic were promoted to "featured" status on the English Wikipedia this week.

In the media: VisualEditor will "change world history"

In an article published by the Huffington Post's United Kingdom edition, writer Thomas Church asserts that the new VisualEditor will change history, literally. It says that Wikipedia's mark-up language has been to its advantage, as most people didn't bother trying to learn it

Op-ed: The tragedy of Wikipedia's commons

I've long thought that we should get rid of the Wikimedia Commons as we know it. Commons has evolved into a project with interests that compete with the needs of the primary users of Commons and the reason it was created. It's also understaffed, which results in poor curation, large administrative backlogs, and poor policy development.

Discussion report: VisualEditor, elections, bots, and more

Current discussions on the English Wikipedia.

Traffic report: Who holds the throne?

Last week's most popular article list on the English Wikipedia was dominated by the massively popular TV series Game of Thrones, which claimed six slots in the top 25, including the top three. Its popularity was likely stoked by the most recent episode, The Rains of Castamere. Bollywood continued to increase its share of views as well, aided by the tragic suicide of star Nafisa Khan.

Arbitration report: Two cases suspended; proposed decision posted in Argentine History

Two cases, Race and politics and Tea Party movement have been suspended. Argentine History remains open, and a proposed decision was posted on 12 June.

WikiProject report: Processing WikiProject Computing

This week, we spent some time with WikiProject Computing. Started in October 2003, the project has grown to include 17 featured articles, 11 featured lists, 3 pieces of featured media, and 80 good articles.

The Signpost: 19 June 2013

Op-ed: Two responses to the 'Tragedy of Wikipedia's Commons'

Following last week's op-ed by Gigs ("The Tragedy of Wikipedia's Commons"), the Signpost is carrying two contrary opinions from MichaelMaggs, a bureaucrat on Wikimedia Commons, and Mattbuck, a British Commons administrator.

Traffic report: Most popular Wikipedia articles of the last week

The season finale of Game of Thrones ensured that the epic high fantasy series would dominate the top 10 again last week; however, it was joined by Maurice Sendak and Man of Steel.

In the media: South African learners want Wikipedia; Editing of Israel topics

Memeburn.com published an article on the yearning of students in South Africa for free knowledge through Wikipedia Zero.

WikiProject report: The Volunteer State: WikiProject Tennessee

This week, we visited WikiProject Tennessee, a project dedicate to the state at the geographic and cultural crossroads of the United States.

News and notes: Swedish Wikipedia's millionth article leads to protests; WMF elections—where are all the voters?

With erysichton elaborata, the Swedish Wikipedia passed the one million article Rubicon this week. While this is a mostly symbolic achievement, serving as a convenient benchmark with which to gain publicity and attention in an increasingly statistical world, the particular method by which the Swedish site has passed the mark has garnered significant attention—and controversy.

Featured content: Cheaper by the dozen

Eleven articles, twelve lists, and eleven pictures were promoted to 'featured' status on the English Wikipedia this week.

Discussion report: Citations, non-free content, and a MediaWiki meeting

A list of current discussions on the English Wikipedia.

Technology report: May engineering report published

The WMF's engineering report for May was published recently on the Wikimedia blog and on the MediaWiki wiki ("friendly" summary version), giving an overview of all Foundation-sponsored technical operations in that month.

Arbitration report: The Farmbrough amendment request—automation and arbitration enforcement

Richard Farmbrough was set to have his day in court, but as events transpired, this was not to be so. On 25 March 2013, an accusation was made against Farmbrough at Arbitration Enforcement (AE), claiming that he violated the terms of an automated edit restriction. Within hours, Farmbrough had filed his own request with the arbitration committee, citing the newly filed AE request and claiming that the motion was being used "in an absurd way" in the filing of enforcement requests: "I have not made any edits that a sane person would consider automation."

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information.

Views/Day	Title	Tagged with…
50	Rocker-bogie (talk)	Add sources
285	Galileo (spacecraft) (talk)	Add sources
90	Helsinki Stock Exchange (talk)	Add sources
37	Mars program (talk)	Add sources
23	54 Below (talk)	Add sources
902	Little Rock Nine (talk)	Add sources
12	Hayabusa Mk2 (talk)	Cleanup
58	Exploration Mission 1 (talk)	Cleanup
1,297	Chhanchhan (talk)	Cleanup
1,461	Mole (animal) (talk)	Expand
1,023	Tooth fairy (talk)	Expand
966	Spacecraft (talk)	Expand
26	Agrarian land reform in Mexico (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
931	Space exploration (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
29	Spacecraft design (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
65	Mars sample return mission (talk)	Merge
136	High-gain antenna (talk)	Merge
14	Low-gain antenna (talk)	Merge
1,802	Kickstarter (talk)	Wikify
4	Court bailiff (Poland) (talk)	Wikify
13	OpenLuna (talk)	Wikify
1	Sean Cahill (talk)	Orphan
4	Eugene F. Lally (talk)	Orphan
3	American Indians into Psychology (talk)	Orphan
7	XESDD-AM (talk)	Stub
7	The Legendary Demos (talk)	Stub
38	MELOS (talk)	Stub
10	Halley Armada (talk)	Stub
13	Maestro (software) (talk)	Stub
10	Coriolis (satellite) (talk)	Stub

Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions

We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:

Views/Day: Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.
Quality: Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.

The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:

Content: Is more content needed?
Headings: Does this article have an appropriate section structure?
Images: Is the number of illustrative images about right?
Links: Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?
Sources: For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:29, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]