User talk:Richwales/Archives/2012-04
 | 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. |
GOCE March drive wrap-up
Guild of Copy Editors March 2012 backlog elimination drive
  Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors March 2012 Backlog elimination drive! This is the most successful drive we have had for quite a while. Here is your end-of-drive wrap-up newsletter. Participation Of the 70 people who signed up for this drive, 40 copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Special acknowledgement goes out to Lfstevens, who did over 200 articles, most of them in the last third of the drive, and topped all three leaderboard categories. You're a superstar! Stfg and others have been pre-checking the articles for quality and conformance to Wikipedia guidelines; some have been nominated for deletion or had some preliminary clean-up done to help make the copy-edit process more fun and appealing. Thanks to all who helped get those nasty last few articles out of the target months. Progress report During this drive we were successful in eliminating our target months—October, November, and December 2010—from the queue, and have now eliminated all the 2010 articles from our list. We were able to complete 500 articles this month! End-of-drive results and barnstar information can be found here. When working on the backlog, please keep in mind that there are options other than copy-editing available; some articles may be candidates for deletion, or may not be suitable for copy-editing at this time for other reasons. The {{GOCEreviewed}} tag can be placed on any article you find to be totally uneditable, and you can nominate for deletion any that you discover to be copyright violations or completely unintelligible. If you need help deciding what to do, please contact any of the coordinators. Thank you for participating in the March 2012 drive! All contributions are appreciated. Our next copy-edit drive will be in May. Your drive coordinators – Dianna (Talk), Stfg (Talk), and Dank (talk)To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. EdwardsBot (talk) 22:18, 4 April 2012 (UTC) |
Dispute resolution survey
 Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite Hello Richwales/Archives. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released. Please click HERE to participate. You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 23:52, 5 April 2012 (UTC) |
Please comment on Talk:Sri Lanka
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Sri Lanka. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 11:15, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. 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 in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low 
to High 
.
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
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) 12:05, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
Your comment on Talk:Vietnam Service Medal page
Please see my response on the Talk:Vietnam Service Medal page about your concerns. I agree that it needs some work. Cuprum17 (talk) 19:02, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
TUSC token 177d8eaecb2abd9f4c09fc38f24bdd20
I am now proud owner of a TUSC account! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richwales (talk • contribs) 04:42, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
GOCE May copy edit drive
| Invitation from the Guild of Copy Editors
The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in their May 2012 Backlog elimination drive, a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on May 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on May 31 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goal for the drive will be to eliminate January, February, and March 2011 from the queue. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits more than 4,000 words, and special awards will be given to the top 5 in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", and "Number of articles of over 5,000 words". We hope to see you there! – Your drive coordinators: Dank, Diannaa, and Stfg. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. EdwardsBot (talk) 18:49, 22 April 2012 (UTC) |
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. 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 in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High .
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
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) 13:20, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Content dispute resolution at GOC nearing conclusion
Hi RichWales,
I write to inform you that it is looking as though a conclusion is on the horizon in regards to the minor content dispute surrounding a paragraph written on Georgian Orthodox Church which argues the term of "independence" between GOC and AAC. Both Aregakn and GeorgianJorjadze have provided their own interpretations of what reliable sources have published, and in a civil manner too. Also User:Meowy (an uninvolved editor) has provided his interpretation too. Looking at what everyone has written, it seems that they are all in some form of agreement in connection to the subject. However, the confusion lies with the personal interpretations of the definition of one word "autocephalous". I have written an extensive report on what information I managed to find on the internet, and explained about this word definition mix-up. All that remains now is to bring together both users to understand the correct definition that should be used, and not the confused version. Once that has been established, then I see no objection in finalising the discussion, and drawing it to a peaceful closure. I would like to take this opportunity to thank you personally, for allowing me to assist in the resolution of all this dispute. Many regards - Wesley☀Mouse 22:47, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
- Hi Rich,
- Quick update on the dispute case. I did all I could in dealing with the matter in question. I invited both editors to write down their own interpretation of what they thought the Encyclopaedia Britannica was meaning in regards to GOC and AAC. A third uninvited editor also took part; and I also wrote down how I understood the sources, plus included in my writings information that I found from other sources concerning the same topic. On review of all the written statements from editors, 3 of them resemble details very closely; while 1 written statement appears to be copyedit text from the sources. Meowy (talk · contribs) and GeorgianJorjadze (talk · contribs) both seem to agree that the disputed paragraph is correct in some way, although one word comes across as misleading; and therefore distorting the entirety of the true facts. Throughout the dispute, I have remained as civil as possible, and even asked another admin to review what had been written, just in case I had done something wrong and had missed it. Drmies (talk · contribs) reviewed the dispute, and confirmed that I had done well, but raised a concern over an editor using the "you're Armenian/you're Georgian" tactic. The advice from Drmies was that has 3 out of 4 people seem to agree on what the sources are actually stating; that a consensus has been reached, and the disputed paragraph rephrased appropriately. However, it looks like Aregakn (talk · contribs) is still in disagreement, despite a majority decision on sourced facts; and has resorted to sly insults towards myself; all of which I have taken with a pinch of salt, and don't intend to take action against the user. As of that, I have now closed the dispute discussion down, listing the points Drmies mentioned. What happens in regards to Aregakn is in your hands (so to speak). Again, thanks for the opportunity to deal with this matter. Kindest regards - Wesley☀Mouse 00:51, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for letting me know. Please understand that I don't claim any particular expertise on this topic, and I'm not claiming any sort of supervisory or editorial authority over the content of this article (except possibly to step in if needed to stop an edit war — something which, per WP:INVOLVED, I can only do if I stay as neutral as possible). This is a very large amount of material, but I will try to read and absorb it over the next few days so I'll be aware of what is going on. — Richwales 05:57, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Edit chase
I encountered two edit conflicts when we were both working on the Katrina Swett article at about the same time today. You may wish to check that I didn't damage any of your changes.
--AndersW 23:01, 29 April 2012 (UTC)