2nd Annual GA Cup - Round 4Edit

WikiProject Good Articles's 2015 GA Cup - Round 4
 

GA Cup competitors and observers: Happy Fall! Get ready, we're about to move into the finals of the second-ever GA Cup!

Monday saw the end of Round 3. Out of the 8 contestants in the semi-finals, 5 have moved to the finals. The semi-finals were competitive. Our semi-finalists reviewed a total of 61 articles, or a grand total of 1,151 points. If you were to lump the top winners from each of the three pools together, it'd be a close horse race; they were within 35 points of each other, which can only mean that the finals will be an exciting race. Tomandjerry211, our top scorer in Round 2, again earned the most points in the semi-finals, with 288 points and 16 articles reviewed. Johanna came in second overall, with 251 points and 13 articles reviewed; Sturmvogel 66 came in third overall, with 221 points and 16 articles. Rounding out our wildcard slots are Zwerg Nase and The Rambling Man. These contestants were very strategic in how they reviewed articles. Like every other round in the history of the GA Cup, success depended upon reviewing oldest-nominated articles. For example, Johanna reviewed 5 articles that were worth the highest possible points. Congrats to all our finalists, and good luck!

Stay tuned to this space for more information about the 2nd GA Cup, including overall statistics and how this competition has affected Wikipedia. We regret to inform you that Dom497, one of our original judges and co-creator of the GA Cup, has stepped down as a judge. Dom, a longtime member of WP:WikiProject Good articles, is responsible for the look of the GA Cup and has been instrumental in its upkeep. We wish him the best as he starts his university education, and are certain that he'll make an impact there as he has in Wikipedia.

The finals started on October 1 at 0:00:01 UTC and will end on Ocober 29 at 23:59:59 UTC with a winner being crowned. Information about the Final can be found here.

Cheers from Figureskatingfan, 3family6 and Jaguar, and MrWooHoo.

To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletter, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant still competing, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.

2015 GA Cup Wrap-UpEdit

WikiProject Good Articles's 2015 GA Cup - Finals/Wrap-Up

 



The second-ever GA Cup is now over! The competition officially ended Thursday. Congrats to everyone who participated, and especially to our finalists.

The winner of the 2nd GA Cup is Zwerg Nase! He earned 408 points, over 100 points more than he earned in all previous rounds. He tied with our second-place winner, Sturmvogel 66 with 367 points, in number of articles reviewed (24), and they earned almost the same points for reviewing articles that were in the queue the longest (Zwerg with 322, Sturmvogel with 326). Basically, they tied in points, but what made the different for Zwerg was the advantage he had in reviewing longer articles. It seems that the rule change of earning more realistic points for longer articles made a difference. All of our contestants should be proud of the work they were able to accomplish through the GA Cup. Congrats to these worthy opponents!

Our third and fourth place winners, Johanna and Tomandjerry211, also ran a close race, with 167 points and 147 points respectfully. We had one withdrawal; we found it interesting that competitors dropped out in Round 2 and 3 as well. One of the original judges and co-creator of this competition, User:Dom497 stepped down as judge during Round 3; as stated previously, we will miss his input and wish him the best.

The judges were pleased with our results, even though fewer users competed this time compared to our inaugural competition. We recognize that this might be due to holding the competition during the summer months. We intend on looking more closely when we should conduct this contest, as well as other aspects of the GA Cup. We've set up a feedback page for everyone's input about how we should conduct the contest and what rule changes should be made. If you have any ideas about how we can improve things, please visit it and give us your input.

Again, thanks to all and congratulations to our winners! Please stay tuned for the start of GA Cup #3.

Cheers from 3family6, Figureskatingfan, Jaguar and MrWooHoo.

A page you started (Speak Life) has been reviewed!Edit

Thanks for creating Speak Life, 3family6!

Wikipedia editor Garagepunk66 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

I enjoyed reading the new article your created, Speak Life. Well-done.

To reply, leave a comment on Garagepunk66's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

WikiLoveEdit

You've got mail!Edit

 
Hello, 3family6. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

You've got mail!Edit

 
Hello, 3family6. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Happy New Year!Edit

You've got mail!Edit

 
Hello, 3family6. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

4th GA Cup - Wrap UpEdit

WikiProject Good Articles's 2016 GA Cup - Wrap Up
 

Hello, GA Cup competitors!

Saturday, April 1 concluded the 2016-2017 GA Cup. 64 reviews were completed by our finalists. Although the backlog increased by 42 over the reviewing period instead of declining, the increase suggests that the contest is encouraging editors to nominate articles for review.

Congratulations to Shearonink, who is the winner of the Cup, finishing with 672 points! Once again, just as in last round, this is more than the point totals for all the other competitors combined! It was a close race for second place between Krishna Chaitanya Velaga, who achieved 164 points, and Sturmvogel_66, who earned 150. Though Sturmvogel_66 reviewed one more article than Krishna Chaitanya Velaga, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga managed to earn 14 points more due to reviewing older articles. Our two wildcard competitors, Kees08 and Chris troutman, came in fourth and fifth, respectively.

There were some bumps in the competition this time: The sign-up deadline and the first round were both extended due to fewer competitors signing up then was planned for. And there were delays in tallying points and getting out the newsletter. The judges apologize for this latter difficulty. Lastly, mid-way through the competition we bid farewell to Zwerg Nase, who stepped down from their position as judge due to other commitments. Information about the Final can be found here.

Thank you to all of our competitors, and congrats to our winners!

Cheers from Figureskatingfan, 3family6, Jaguar, and MrWooHoo.

To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletters, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant still competing, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.

The Signpost: 29 March 2020Edit

DYK for Wande (rapper)Edit

 On 4 April 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Wande (rapper), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Nigerian-American Christian hip hop artist Wande became interested in rapping after her biology teacher allowed her to compose a rap about cellular transport? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Wande (rapper). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Wande (rapper)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

ExtractedEdit

On Commons, you should add {{extracted from|File:"I'm Lecrae".webm}} to screenshots from videos. The original video should also have {{licensereview}} to request a license review. (File:"I'm Lecrae".webm already does) If the source video hasn't been uploaded on Commons, the screenshot should have {{licensereview}}. Thanks for helping btw.   - Alexis Jazz 16:05, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Okay, will do.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 17:01, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Citation Barnstar
For your great work at Gospel Music Association! Toa Nidhiki05 15:48, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

New list articleEdit

You can make a new list article at List of National Socialist black metal artists, to replace the deprecated section at the genre article. Binksternet (talk) 16:52, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, I was planning to do so soon, anyway.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:57, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
I think an exception can be made in this case for bands that don't have an article - most of the genre is very underground, and most publications won't review these bands or devote a lot of coverage to them because they don't want to promote them. I also think it's very important to highlight which bands perform this style, if they are mentioned in reliable sources.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 17:00, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
The guideline WP:LISTPEOPLE applies. Every entry on the list should be demonstratably notable. In any case, explicitly declare your inclusion criteria in the introductory prose of the list article. Binksternet (talk) 17:16, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
Since all the entries are supported by independent reliable secondary sources, I believe this is within the standard of WP:LISTPEOPLE.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 17:26, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Editing news 2020 #1 – Discussion toolsEdit

Read this in another languageSubscription list

 
This early version of the Reply tool automatically signs and indents comments.

The Editing team has been working on the talk pages project. The goal of the talk pages project is to help contributors communicate on wiki more easily. This project is the result of the Talk pages consultation 2019.

 
In a future update, the team plans to test a tool for easily linking to another user's name, a rich-text editing option, and other tools.

The team is building a new tool for replying to comments now. This early version can sign and indent comments automatically. Please test the new Reply tool.

  • On 31 March 2020, the new reply tool was offered as a Beta Feature editors at four Wikipedias: Arabic, Dutch, French, and Hungarian. If your community also wants early access to the new tool, contact User:Whatamidoing (WMF).
  • The team is planning some upcoming changes. Please review the proposed design and share your thoughts on the talk page. The team will test features such as:
    • an easy way to mention another editor ("pinging"),
    • a rich-text visual editing option, and
    • other features identified through user testing or recommended by editors.

To hear more about Editing Team updates, please add your name to the "Get involved" section of the project page. You can also watch   these pages: the main project page, Updates, Replying, and User testing.

PPelberg (WMF) (talk) & Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 15:45, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Category:Black metal demos has been nominated for discussionEdit

 

Category:Black metal demos, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 01:39, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Constant Reverting of the editions made by other editors, complaintEdit

Dear User:3family6,

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussionEdit

  Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Unfortunately, due to your constant Reverting of the editions made by other editors, except your own, despite the big dose of argumentations, references, proves, correction and suggestions offered. Thus,I have to post a complaint to the Administration Board for them to look this issue through. As till the recent moment you, in my humble opinion, and for some reason, act as an Editor head of the magazine, but not as ONE among thousands editor of Wikipedia to keep it Neutral position instead of tabloid-like issue. All the issues discussed in the complaint reflected from the discussion in Talks that was held. This, of course, doesn’t mean that any other corrections won’t be communicated in future / Violeance (talk) 17:10, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello 3family6. Please see my recent comment in the complaint about your edits filed by Violeance at WP:AN3. It appears you have been engaged in a wide-scale edit war about the Category:National Socialist black metal since 7 April. You have made possibly two dozen reverts across a number of articles. I recommend you promise to wait for consensus before you continue these edits. In fact, it is best if you *propose* a workable strategy for finding a negotiated solution. For instance, a WP:Request for comment at a suitable place. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 19:02, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
I have opened an RfC.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 21:45, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
Hello 3family6. You've been warned for edit warring per the result of the complaint at WP:AN3. Thanks for the RfC at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music/Music genres task force#Consensus needed regarding National Socialist black metal artists, but the system is going to truncate it unless you can come up with a shorter statement. 500 words is way too long. See what the other RfCs look like at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Media, the arts, and architecture. You might find another experienced editor who could help you focus the RfC question properly. You should separate your arguments in support of your position from the RfC itself. There is a better example of an RfC already on that page: Should this article describe One America News Network with a political bias descriptor, and secondly, is "far-right" the appropriate descriptor to use if one is appropriate? That RfC question is 27 words, not 500. EdJohnston (talk) 01:21, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

BarlowGirl: stop defending paid edits!Edit

Hey Kenneth. The excuse you use to defend Beka Hardt's vandalism of BarlowGirl's Wikipedia page is pathetic. The band paid Hardt hundreds of thousands of dollars over many years, so she is a paid editor, and her contributions on the article should be null and void. The fact is, my edit was left intact from 3 February 2020‎ to 21 April 2020‎. Once Hardt jumps in and undoes my edit, you side with her. I don't care for your excuses. People deserve to know the truth. This band is morally corrupt. Here is proof that they spent all of 2013 e-begging to sell merch. Here is proof in 2016 and in 2017 that they side with the perverted Lady Gaga. I could find you plenty of other examples. The fact is, the road manager's comments on purity this year are relevant, and I will continue to defend my edit that includes them on the Wikipedia page. If Hardt doesn't want these comments on Wikipedia, she should have kept her mouth shut. Please stop defending her vandalism. --LABcrabs (talk) 13:11, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

If you suspect Hardt is engaging in paid editing, you should 1) mention this on the talk page of the suspected user, and, after you do that, 2) present your case at the conflict of interest noticeboard. As to the content that was removed, the activities and statements by BarlowGirl's road manager aren't particularly relevant to the band, unless those statements are about the band itself. Hardt isn't a band member, thus her personal beliefs aren't really pertinent to coverage of BarlowGirl.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 14:03, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 April 2020Edit

Hunan201p escapes edit warringEdit

Are you sure there is no accidental mistake with Hunan201p ? Do I need to go to the noticeboard? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?titl0e=Genghis_Khan&action=history

Looking at the revision history. You said on 02:36, 29 April 2020 " I'm restoring this to the last uncontested version. ", than Hunan201p reverted the 1st time, 2nd time, he clearly knows it was you but still ignored it (like 3rd edit). I didn't do anything to revert.

You than send this to my talk page " You are edit warring with Hunan201p. You both are risking being blocked. " but Hunan201p recieved not even a warning on his talk page.

You than said this on Genghis Khan talkpage to Hunan201p " that still does not justify edit warring..... ". 21:52, 29 April 2020, Well he still did anyway 08:09, 1 May 2020‎ , he reverted your edit and din't wait for me, but still no block, no warning. I didn't even have the time to come back and make these replies.

Ymblanter, already said " I do not think I supported anybody on this page. I just said that admins do not resolve content disputes. "16:04, 1 May 2020

Hunan201p every exaggerations about admins helping him. Why is he allowed to have his edit ? He hasn't even provided a date verification, English translation for Georgian Royal Annals, and nothing about the authenicity of Genghis Khan is mentioned only Khazars, Turks.

And his 14th century quotes came from. Hunan uses this journal study from 2016 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5023095/.

The quote itself says " Although the factual nature of the statement is controversial, Persian historian Rashid-al-Din reported in his “Jami’s al-tawarikh” written at the start of the 14th century that most Borjigin ancestors of Genghis Khan were tall, long-bearded, red-haired, and bluish green-eyed, suggesting that the Genghis Khan’s male lineage had some Caucasoid-specific genetic features [44]."

I checked the reference [44] and the only that showed up was this Blair S. A compendium of chronicles: Rashid al-Din's illustrated history of the world. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2005. [Google Scholar] [Ref list]I clicked here but nothing came out https://scholar.google.com/scholar_...e+world&author=S+Blair&publication_year=2005& NOTHING WAS FOUND so I googled it and the only work I found was this Academic work from Shelia Blair on Rashid_al-Din_and_his_Compendium_of_Chronicles (nothing about red hair on Genghis Khan) https://www.academia.edu/32365632/Illustrating_History_Rashid_al-Din_and_his_Compendium_of_Chronicle

The only thing I could find from Compendiums of Chronicles (Jami’s al-tawarikh) is this "gaze fell upon him he said, "Our sons are all of a ruddy complexion, but this boy is swarthy, just like his maternal uncles. Tell Sorqaghtani Beki to give him to a good nurse to be brought up by." He was given to Moga's mother, Saruq by name. He hasn't provided a verification link for that extrodinary quote that doesn't exist even Hunan201p could not find it when I asked him about on the previous talk page discussion. Queenplz (talk) 19:48, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hunan201p was warned on the article talk page. You both were edit warring, so it won't be good for you either at the edit warring noticeboard. There are numerous sources which mention that Rashid al-Din said Genghis Khan had red hair, and the article specifically states that the veracity of Rashid's claim is debated. That's relevant to that section.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 20:38, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Issue 38, January – April 2020Edit

  The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 38, January – April 2020

  • New partnership
  • Global roundup

Read the full newsletter

On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --15:57, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Group Therapy (Sivion album)Edit

 On 2 May 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Group Therapy (Sivion album), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the 2013 album Group Therapy by Sivion features 26 guest artists? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Group Therapy (Sivion album). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Group Therapy (Sivion album)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 00:03, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Hunan201p edits in the blond and red hair sectionEdit

3family, I think I need your help. I find it really strange that he is adding unconfirmed mythical figures as real live living people with blonde hair. On the blonde wikipedia page Asia section. Hunan201p insist of editing the mythical figure Huangdi as blond and Indo-European and claiming Bodonchar Munkhag as blonde hair, but he was born from mother Alan Gua which is a mythical mother and his text are based on rashid al-din controversial 14th century text.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blond#Asia

In the red hair of the Asia section. He basically adds the same thing about Rashid al-Din text from the of 14th century 'Compendium of Chronicles', authored by Rashid al-Din under the auspice of Ghazan Khan claiming Genghis Khan have red hair and just like the Genghis Khan wikipedia section, it doesn't mention "the factual of these natural arec controversial". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_hair#Asia_(all_regions)

Is there anything you can do about this. To me strange that he only add the Asia section like that. In the Europe, Africa, Oceanic section there's nothing about these types of claims on any historical figure or ancient/medieval ethnic groups.Queenplz (talk) 21:31, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Bring it up on the respective talk pages. Or start a Request for Comment on WP:WikiProject Genetics or WP:WikiProject History.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 22:35, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for interest in my WikiProject proposalEdit

Thank you for saying at Wikipedia: WikiProject Council that you would be interested in a WikiProject Mysticism. I see this proposal has now had support from three Wikipedians (myself included). If we can get another three or four Wikipedians interested, it might not be too long before we can get this WikiProject off the ground. Vorbee (talk) 16:28, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Adding a questionable category to Khors (band)Edit

Hello 3family6. You have re-added Khors (band) to the Category:National Socialist black metal musical groups here, on May 9. As you know there was an edit warring case about this on 20 April, where it appeared you were adding this category to lots of articles. I warned: "They [you] are risking a block if they mark any article as National Socialist black metal unless they have first obtained a talk page consensus in their favor." If you believe you received consensus for this change on a talk page, can you point to where you received it? Are you aware of any other editors agreeing with this classification for Khors? If you don't have a good answer, I recommend you undo your change. EdJohnston (talk) 22:33, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

I believed that the RFC I opened supported the change. In particular, my discussion with Mungo Kitsch, who introduced a compromise on the Drudkh article, which I tried to replicate at Khors, and also expressed their opinion about the List of National Socialist black metal bands. Regarding the latter, they objected to a band being listed, but that band was not Khors (which was also listed). The consensus seemed to me to be that labeling needs to be very clearly justified by clear statements in reliable sources, and less clear labeling deserves more nuance. In addition to that, if it's a list entry, the list entry must be supported by reliable sources that are explicit about that label. At least one outside editor reviewed the list article in light of the discussion, and did not object to Khors specifically whereas they did for other bands. In light of all that, I thought this edit was appropriate, because if a list entry is appropriate then a category entry would be as well. Because apparently this is still a contested issue, I've reverted back to this version. I also earlier today asked Mungo Kitsch if they are willing to take a look, since they were helpful regarding other articles.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 22:49, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
I looked back at the edit history for the List of National Socialist black metal bands, and I realize that Mungo Kitsch made their edits and commentary after Khors was removed. So I was mistaken. I've already reverted my changes to the Khors article, I now did the same for the list.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 22:55, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
Because the consensus from the RfC is disputed, and the RfC was about an NSBM labeling more generally rather than specific to Khors, I've opened up a new discussion at Talk:Khors (band)#Labeling as NSBM.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 23:18, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

I am so confused.

Dear User:3family6, What. Are. You. Doing? ([1])

Did you really attack the Khors page with multiple editions just recently again, while one more topic was just opened by you to find a final Consensus??

You even didn’t let most of the other Editors to speak, though you personally nominated some of them and asked to participate in this Consensus (second round).

Are you aware of how much and badly you violate Wikipedia rules, rule by rule, over and over, and show disrespect to other Editors? Do we read it differently again, as Administration Board, and namely User:EdJohnston, among other Editors, kindly asked you to search for the Consensus first, before falling in your editing wars again and again? User_talk:3family6#Adding_a_questionable_category_to_Khors_(band); User_talk:3family6#Notice_of_edit_warring_noticeboard_discussion. Violeance (talk) 13:09, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

I added quotes by the band from an interview in which they talk about and support Ukrainian nationalism. That's outside what the dispute that I was warned for, which specifically is tagging bands as NSBM.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 13:18, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

My apologies, but I don't beleive it as you mix them up. Thus, I assess this as an intentional harm. Violeance (talk) 13:48, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

What have I mixed up?--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 14:17, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Oh… and now I am speechless, confused to the greatest degree with Vandalism_on_Wikipedia and reckless behavior of User:3family6. Dear User:3family6, did you just again made a damage of AT LEAST five (might be more) editors work through a month ([2]), because of? Your bad mood? Or did you try to attack me personally through involving me in Edit Warring? What would be a reason? To get an evidence and report my action of WP:BLP protection as edit warring? To spoil the Wikipedia page many Editors were working on? What WP:TW might mean in your vandal action of a month work of many editors reverting?

Many editors just has suffered from your reckless actions, as you erased all their efforts on the Wikipedia pages in one click. This looks even more crazy, as you also killed your own work, some editing was a valuable corrections too, but apparently that wasn’t your purpose.. Or? Have no clue how else it might be called, and what would be the reason behind. I reverted it back as I value contribution of wiki editors and their time. For the sake of mutual Consensus dozens of disscusions were held and are still open. Many editors devoted their efforts and time to solve this issue with a consensus and respect WP:BLP Talk:Khors_(band)#Labeling_as_NSBM and another Consensus page Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Music/Music_genres_task_force#Consensus_needed_regarding_National_Socialist_black_metal_artists.

Dear User:EdJohnston, may I call for your piece of advice as, apparently, you are very experienced in similar Wikipedia issues? Since I have no clue, how to deal with such Editor’s behavior. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Violeance (talkcontribs) 17:59, 13 May 2020 (UTC) Violeance (talk) 18:01, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Violeance I reverted back to just before I made my first edit to Khors, which was to include a mention of National Socialist black metal. Since that initial edit is the source of the dispute, I wanted to restore the article to prior any conflict.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 18:13, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
Almost all of the work that you mention was actually done by me originally. There is little substantial difference between the version I reverted to and what stands now without my edits.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 18:19, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Dear User:3family6, you are a very experienced Editor, I am sure, you did notice that many editors were providing their contribution to this page. As that's the aim of Wikipedia to reflect the recent changes and provide brief information on the subject to its readers. So, it does not explain this situation. Violeance (talk) 18:24, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

My edit summary explained exactly why I reverted: I was reverting to prior any contested versions. Because of your concerns about me having reverted other's work, I did a more careful revision where I removed anything that originated from my edits specifically--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 18:32, 13 May 2020 (UTC).

User:3family6, all actions have consequences. This is not a funny game you play, this is a very serious issue to paint anybody with such terms that might affect someone's lives. For this reason policy such as WP:BLP exists. You have to realise it. Violeance (talk) 19:38, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 11Edit

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Battle of Asakai (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Massively
List of National Socialist black metal bands (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Abingdon

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 12:09, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Ole Børud discographyEdit

 On 17 May 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ole Børud discography, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Ole Børud is featured on a song by a choir project that involved recordings from around the world because of the COVID-19 pandemic? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ole Børud discography. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Ole Børud discography), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Vardøger (band)Edit

 On 18 May 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Vardøger (band), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Norwegian band Vardøger formed, recorded music, disbanded, re-formed to release Whitefrozen, disbanded again, re-formed to release Ghost Notes, and then disbanded yet again? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Vardøger (band)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

DYK for WhitefrozenEdit

 On 18 May 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Whitefrozen, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Norwegian band Vardøger formed, recorded music, disbanded, re-formed to release Whitefrozen, disbanded again, re-formed to release Ghost Notes, and then disbanded yet again? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Whitefrozen), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Ghost Notes (Vardøger album)Edit

 On 18 May 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ghost Notes (Vardøger album), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Norwegian band Vardøger formed, recorded music, disbanded, re-formed to release Whitefrozen, disbanded again, re-formed to release Ghost Notes, and then disbanded yet again? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Ghost Notes (Vardøger album)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

DYK for SchaliachEdit

 On 28 May 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Schaliach, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Ole Børud's guitar music on the album Sonrise, by the band Schaliach, was likened to a "metal symphony"? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Schaliach), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

DYK for SonriseEdit

 On 28 May 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Sonrise, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Ole Børud's guitar music on the album Sonrise, by the band Schaliach, was likened to a "metal symphony"? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Sonrise), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Starting a new WikiProjectEdit

Thank you for your interest in my proposal for WikiProject Mysticism at Wikipedia: WikiProject Council. There are currently three Wikipedians (including you and I) who have said they would join this WikiProject at Wikipedia: WikiProject Council. I see on the talk page of Wikipedia: WikiProject Council, it is said that a new WikiProject needs about six to eight Wikipedians to stay active. I wonder whether you would be interested in publicising this WikiProject proposal on the talk page of articles related to mysticism? Thank you in advance for your co-operation - I think we just need another three or four Wikipedians to get this WikiProject started. Vorbee (talk) 07:58, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 May 2020Edit

DYK for Osmia calaminthaeEdit

 On 2 June 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Osmia calaminthae, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that scientists were unsure whether the blue calamintha bee (pictured) still existed until it was observed again in March 2020? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Osmia calaminthae. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Osmia calaminthae), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:01, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Mongol conquest of Eastern XiaEdit

 On 3 June 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Mongol conquest of Eastern Xia, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that though formerly a vassal to the Mongol Empire, Eastern Xia was later destroyed by the Mongols because it rebelled against them? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mongol conquest of Eastern Xia. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Mongol conquest of Eastern Xia), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:03, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Battle of AsakaiEdit

  Hello! Your submission of Battle of Asakai at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! --evrik (talk) 04:25, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 39, May – June 2020Edit

  The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 39, May – June 2020

  • Library Card Platform
  • New partnerships
    • ProQuest
    • Springer Nature
    • BioOne
    • CEEOL
    • IWA Publishing
    • ICE Publishing
  • Bytes in brief

Read the full newsletter

On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:12, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Battle of AsakaiEdit

  Hello! Your submission of Battle of Asakai at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 17:44, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Editing news 2020 #2 – Quick updatesEdit

Read this in another languageSubscription list

 
The new features include a toolbar. What do you think should be in the toolbar?

This edition of the Editing newsletter includes information the Wikipedia:Talk pages project, an effort to help contributors communicate on wiki more easily. The central project page is on MediaWiki.org.

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:11, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject MysticismEdit

Dear User: 3family6, thank you for saying you would join WikiProject Mysticism, especially with relation to articles on the Shakers, at Wikipedia: WikiProject Council. We have four Wikipedians who say they would join there, so I wonder whether you feel we can start the WikiProject? The number of Wikipedians at Wikipedia: WikiProject Council who have expressed an interest appears to have stagnated at four, but if we start the WikiProject, we may be able to attract new members. Vorbee (talk) 19:40, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

That seems a bit small for a WikiProject to me, but I'm game.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 15:42, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

I have started Wikipedia: WikiProject Mysticism, so you may like to join. After starting this WikiProject, some one moved it to the namespace, and it now looks like a proposal for a new WikiProject, but you may like to modify it. Thank you User: 3family6 for your support in getting this WikiProject established - it is appreciated. Vorbee (talk) 07:47, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Battle of AsakaiEdit

 On 23 June 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Asakai, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in Eve Online, the Battle of Asakai became one of the largest online battles after a single player made an accidental move that escalated the conflict to include more than 3,000 players? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Asakai. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Battle of Asakai), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Wug·a·po·des 23:03, 20 June 2020 (UTC) 00:02, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 June 2020Edit

Editing news 2020 #3Edit

 
On 16 March 2020, the 50 millionth edit was made using the visual editor on desktop.

Seven years ago this week, the Editing team made the visual editor available by default to all logged-in editors using the desktop site at the English Wikipedia. Here's what happened since its introduction:

  • The 50 millionth edit using the visual editor on desktop was made this year. More than 10 million edits have been made here at the English Wikipedia.
  • More than 2 million new articles have been created in the visual editor. More than 600,000 of these new articles were created during 2019.
  • Almost 5 million edits on the mobile site have been made with the visual editor. Most of these edits have been made since the Editing team started improving the mobile visual editor in 2018.
  • The proportion of all edits made using the visual editor has been increasing every year.
  • Editors have made more than 7 million edits in the 2017 wikitext editor, including starting 600,000 new articles in it. The 2017 wikitext editor is VisualEditor's built-in wikitext mode. You can enable it in your preferences.
  • On 17 November 2019, the first edit from outer space was made in the mobile visual editor.
  • In 2019, 35% of the edits by newcomers, and half of their first edits, were made using the visual editor. This percentage has been increasing every year since the tool became available.

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 02:05, 3 July 2020 (UTC)