|This is a Wikipedia user page.|
This is not an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original page is located at
|3family6 is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Wikipedia after writing their thesis. They WILL STILL RESPOND to messages.|
2nd Annual GA Cup - Round 4Edit
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, and , and .
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
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, , and .
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.
You've got mail!Edit
You've got mail!Edit
Happy New Year!Edit
You've got mail!Edit
4th GA Cup - Wrap UpEdit
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, , , and .
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: 30 April 2019Edit
- News and notes: An Action Packed April
- In the media: Is Wikipedia just another social media site?
- Discussion report: English Wikipedia community's conclusions on talk pages
- Featured content: Anguish, accolades, animals, and art
- Arbitration report: An Active Arbitration Committee
- Traffic report: Mötley Crüe, Notre-Dame, a black hole, and Bonnie and Clyde
- Technology report: A new special page, and other news
- Gallery: Notre-Dame de Paris burns
- News from the WMF: Can machine learning uncover Wikipedia’s missing “citation needed” tags?
- Recent research: Female scholars underrepresented; whitepaper on Wikidata and libraries; undo patterns reveal editor hierarchy
- From the archives: Portals revisited
Books & Bytes, Issue 33Edit
The Signpost: 31 May 2019Edit
- From the editors: Picture that
- News and notes: Wikimania and trustee elections
- In the media: Politics, lawsuits and baseball
- Discussion report: Admin abuse leads to mass-desysop proposal on Azerbaijani Wikipedia
- Arbitration report: ArbCom forges ahead
- News from the WMF: Wikimedia Foundation petitions the European Court of Human Rights to lift the block of Wikipedia in Turkey
- Technology report: Lots of Bots
- Essay: Paid editing
The June 2019 Signpost is out!Edit
- Discussion report: A constitutional crisis hits English Wikipedia
- News and notes: Mysterious ban, admin resignations, Wikimedia Thailand rising
- In the media: The disinformation age
- On the bright side: What's making you happy this month?
- Traffic report: Juneteenth, Beauty Revealed, and more nuclear disasters
- Technology report: Actors and Bots
- Recent research: What do editors do after being blocked?; the top mathematicians, universities and cancers according to Wikipedia
- From the archives: Women and Wikipedia: the world is watching
- In focus: WikiJournals: A sister project proposal
- Community view: A CEO biography, paid for with taxes
Your draft article, User:3family6/Amelia IshmaelEdit
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Books & Bytes Issue 34, May – June 2019Edit
Editing News #1—July 2019Edit
Welcome back to the Editing newsletter.
Since the last newsletter, the team has released two new features for the mobile visual editor and has started developing three more. All of this work is part of the team's goal to make editing on mobile web simpler.
Before talking about the team's recent releases, we have a question for you:
Are you willing to try a new way to add and change links?
If you are interested, we would value your input! You can try this new link tool in the mobile visual editor on a separate wiki.
Follow these instructions and share your experience:
The mobile visual editor is a simpler editing tool, for smartphones and tablets using the mobile site. The Editing team has recently launched two new features to improve the mobile visual editor:
- Section editing
- The purpose is to help contributors focus on their edits.
- The team studied this with an A/B test. This test showed that contributors who could use section editing were 1% more likely to publish the edits they started than people with only full-page editing.
- Loading overlay
- The purpose is to smooth the transition between reading and editing.
Section editing and the new loading overlay are now available to everyone using the mobile visual editor.
New and active projectsEdit
This is a list of our most active projects. Watch these pages to learn about project updates and to share your input on new designs, prototypes and research findings.
- Edit cards: This is a clearer way to add and edit links, citations, images, templates, etc. in articles. You can try this feature now. Go here to see how: 📲Try Edit Cards.
- Mobile toolbar refresh: This project will learn if contributors are more successful when the editing tools are easier to recognize.
- Mobile visual editor availability: This A/B test asks: Are newer contributors more successful if they use the mobile visual editor? We are collaborating with 20 Wikipedias to answer this question.
- Usability improvements: This project will make the mobile visual editor easier to use. The goal is to let contributors stay focused on editing and to feel more confident in the editing tools.
- Wikimania: Several members of the Editing Team will be attending Wikimania in August 2019. They will lead a session about mobile editing in the Community Growth space. Talk to them about how editing can be improved.
- Talk Pages: In the coming months, the Editing Team will begin improving talk pages and communication on the wikis.
The VisualEditor on mobile is a good place to learn more about the projects we are working on. The team wants to talk with you about anything related to editing. If you have something to say or ask, please leave a message at Talk:VisualEditor on mobile.
The Signpost: 31 July 2019Edit
- In the media: Politics starts getting rough
- Discussion report: New proposals in aftermath of Fram ban
- Arbitration report: A month of reintegration
- On the bright side: What's making you happy this month?
- Community view: Video based summaries of Wikipedia articles. How and why?
- News from the WMF: Designing ethically with AI: How Wikimedia can harness machine learning in a responsible and human-centered way
- Recent research: Most influential medical journals; detecting pages to protect
- Special report: Administrator cadre continues to contract
- Traffic report: World cups, presidential candidates, and stranger things
Thanks for your contribution to The SignpostEdit
Thanks for the story suggestions to ITM. We need lots more so please keep on adding to it as you have the time. I've been writing ITM for 5 months now and am just getting into the rhythm. It seems to work best this way: in the first half of the month, stories that grab me (or anybody else) are collected. A bit later, they seem to sort themselves out into 2-3 themes and I'll go looking for more stories that fit those themes. A week before publication (the end of the month) is the main time for writing and editing, but writing the stories up when first noticed works pretty well too. I will be editing ITM (as I need to do for all articles), but don't be afraid of tackling as much as you want. There are also other areas at The Signpost that need help, e.g. Featured content which hasn't been written for a couple of months. Feel free to ask me for any help or suggestions.