User talk:Abductive/Archive 6
 | 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. |
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.
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. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
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) 12:48, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
Welcome to the 2014 WikiCup!
Hello Abductive, and welcome to the 2014 WikiCup! Your submission page can be found here. The competition began on 1 January. There have been a few small changes from last year; the rules can be read in full at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring, and the page also includes a summary of changes. One important rule to remember is that only content on which you have completed significant work, and nominated, in 2014 is eligible for points in the competition- the judges will be checking! As ever, this year's competition includes some younger editors. If you are a younger editor, you are certainly welcome, but we have written an advice page at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Advice for younger editors for you. Please do take a look. Any questions should be directed to one of the judges, or left on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will make it to round 2. Good luck! J Milburn (talk · contribs), The ed17 (talk · contribs) and Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 18:17, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
January 2014
Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Yemen. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Dl2000 (talk) 04:24, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
- Please do not WP:Template the regulars. Abductive (reasoning) 04:30, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
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. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
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) 14:01, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
Primeval Era
Hey there! In the Gotland article, could you please specify "primeval era"? Martin Rundkvist (talk) 12:40, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
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. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
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) 13:18, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
WikiCup 2014 January newsletter
The 2014 WikiCup is off to a flying start, with, at time of writing, 138 participants. The is the largest number of participants we have seen since 2010. If you are yet to join the competition, don't worry- the judges have agreed to keep the signups open for a few more days. By a wide margin, our current leader is newcomer 
Godot13 (submissions), whose set of 14 featured pictures, the first FPs of the competition, was worth 490 points. Here are some more noteworthy scorers:
12george1 (submissions) and 
TropicalAnalystwx13 (submissions) were the first people to score, for the good article Tropical Storm Bret (1981) and its good article review respectively. 12george1 was also the first person to score in 2012 and 2013.
Sven Manguard (submissions) scored the first ITN points for 2014 North American polar vortex.
WonderBoy1998 (submissions) scored points for an early good topic, finishing off Wikipedia:Featured topics/She Wolf.
TheAustinMan (submissions) scored the first bonus points of the competition, for his work on Typhoon Vera.
Igordebraga (submissions) has scored the highest number of bonus points for a single article, for the high-importance Jurassic Park (film).
Featured articles, featured lists, featured topics and featured portals are yet to play a part in the competition. The judges have removed a number of submissions which were deemed ineligible. Typically, we aim to see work on a project, followed by a nomination, followed by promotion, this year. We apologise for any disappointment caused by our strict enforcement this year; we're aiming to keep the competition as fair as possible.
Wikipedians interested in friendly competition may be interested to take part in The Core Contest; unlike the WikiCup, The Core Contest is not about audited content, but, like the WikiCup, it is about article improvement; specifically, The Core Contest is about contribution to some of Wikipedia's most important article. Of course, any work done for The Core Contest, if it leads to a DYK, GA or FA, can earn WikiCup points.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email), The ed17 (talk • email) and Miyagawa (talk • email) 19:54, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
Your message regarding Abortion in the United Kingdom
Hello. WP:NPS has no application as the article does not reproduce the full text of any source. It only quotes brief excerpts from sources, and only where these are necessary. It would be impossible for any reader to understand this subject without reading sections 58 and 59 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861 and section 1(1) of the Abortion Act 1967, nor can these provisions be described as "lengthy". Every (secondary and tertiary) book on this subject reproduces those provisions more or less verbatim, and then explains them in detail, and we should as well. There is nothing in the text that you blanked that cannot be referenced to a secondary source, which isn't an absolute requirementanyway. WP:WITS is only and essay, so I am not particularly interested in what it says because there are far too many essays for me to read them all. WP:JARGON and WP:MTAU don't forbid "jargon" in absolute terms. All they say is that we should avoid obscure terms of art where possible ("minimize"). In this case it is not obviously possible. And that isn't a reason for section blanking either. The article does require expansion because it is, at present, in a fairly skeletal form. James500 (talk) 08:22, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
Re your latest message: I do not agree that the article is difficult for the layperson to parse. I could have understood this article at the age of eight. Compared to, for example, Mathematics of general relativity, or possibly certain parts of land law, the material in this article is not heavy reading. I do agree that the material in this article is incomplete.James500 (talk) 10:55, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
Joy of template "current"
Perhaps the present conversation at the talk pages of {{current}} may interest you.
Template_talk:Current#Reworking_this_template
--Yellowdesk (talk) 06:47, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
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. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
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) 14:17, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
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. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
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) 12:46, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
WikiCup 2014 February newsletter
And so ends the most competitive first round we have ever seen, with 38 points required to qualify for round 2. Last year, 19 points secured a place; before that, 11 (2012) or 8 (2011) were enough. This is both a blessing and a curse. While it shows the vigourous good health of the competition, it also means that we have already lost many worthy competitors. Our top three scorers were:
Godot13 (submissions), a WikiCup newcomer whose high-quality scans of rare banknotes represent an unusual, interesting and valuable contribution to Wikipedia. Most of Godot's points this round have come from a large set of pictures used in Treasury Note (1890–91).
Adam Cuerden (submissions), a WikiCup veteran and a finalist last year, Adam is also a featured picture specialist, focusing on the restoration of historical images. This month's promotions have included a carefully restored set of artist William Russell Flint's work.
WikiRedactor (submissions), another WikiCup newcomer. WikiRedactor has claimed points for good article reviews and good articles relating to pop music, many of which were awarded bonus points. Articles include Sky Ferreira, Hannah Montana 2: Meet Miley Cyrus and "Wrecking Ball" (Miley Cyrus song).
Other competitors of note include:
Hahc21 (submissions), who helped take Thirty Flights of Loving through good article candidates and featured article candidates, claiming the first first featured article of the competition.
Prism (submissions), who claimed the first featured list of the competition with Natalia Kills discography.
Cwmhiraeth (submissions), who takes the title of the contributor awarded the highest bonus point multiplier (resulting in the highest scoring article) of the competition so far. Her high-importance salamander, now a good article, scored 108 points.
After such a competitive first round, expect the second round to also be fiercely fought. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 1 but before the start of round 2 can be claimed in round 2, but please do not update your submission page until March (UTC). Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email), The ed17 (talk • email) and Miyagawa (talk • email) 00:01, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Niagara Falls
Google Maps shows that new coord as on Goat Island :-) This showed as on the border in the river half way between the US and Canadian Falls: 43.083433,-79.074018 Cheers... Saffron Blaze (talk) 04:58, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
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. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
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) 00:33, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
School of the Art Institute of Chicago
Hi. Why are you threatening a block for me in this edit from over a month ago? The "alumni" section was mostly unsourced so I blanked it completely. That I did wrong, and I will add them all back once I get a reference for each one of them.
Additionally, administrators can block editors for repeated blanking, but rarely on the first offense. (Threatening me with a block in the edit summary is inappropriate to begin with, considering that this is your first revert of my edits on that page.) Epicgenius (talk) 13:19, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
Name disruption
Please do not remove nicknames for fossils, and remove the word "dubbed" for no apparent reason. FunkMonk (talk) 19:35, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
- You are Wikistalking me. Changing a word from "dubbed" to "called" or "named" is not disruptive, it's being more accurate. Abductive (reasoning) 19:37, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
- You began this quest simply because I brought up precedents (Nigersaurus is an obvious case in point). So please, quit the lame accusations. And yes, it is ok top replace "dubbed" with other words, but merely removing it makes the meaning of a sentence less clear. FunkMonk (talk) 19:41, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
- In your opinion. You are not even listening to yourself, when you admitted that Sereno used silly hyperbole. Passing FAC is not some sort of imprimatur that means everything is perfect. Abductive (reasoning) 19:43, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
- But it means that a little more argumentation than "I don't like it" is needed for stuff to be removed. And my opinion is based on multiple precedent in FAs (I.E. other opinions), yours is based on, well, nothing. This is Wikipedia, not your personal website. FunkMonk (talk) 19:47, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
- In your opinion. You are not even listening to yourself, when you admitted that Sereno used silly hyperbole. Passing FAC is not some sort of imprimatur that means everything is perfect. Abductive (reasoning) 19:43, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
- You began this quest simply because I brought up precedents (Nigersaurus is an obvious case in point). So please, quit the lame accusations. And yes, it is ok top replace "dubbed" with other words, but merely removing it makes the meaning of a sentence less clear. FunkMonk (talk) 19:41, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
March 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Pinus taeda may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s and 2 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
- List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
- {{Category:Plants with sequenced genomes]]
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:53, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
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. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
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) 00:00, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
WikiCup 2014 March newsletter
A quick update as we are half way through round two of this year's competition. WikiCup newcomer Godot13 (submissions) (Pool E) leads, having produced a massive set of featured pictures for Silver certificate (United States), an article also brought to featured list status. Former finalist 
Adam Cuerden (submissions) (Pool G) is in second, which he owes mostly to his work with historical images, including a number of images from Urania's Mirror, an article also brought to good status. 2010 champion (Pool C) is third overall, thanks to contributions relating to naval history, including the newly featured Japanese battleship Nagato. 
Cliftonian (submissions), who currently leads Pool A and is sixth overall, takes the title for the highest scoring individual article of the competition so far, with the top importance featured article Ian Smith.
With 26 people having already scored over 100 points, it is likely that well over 100 points will be needed to secure a place in round 3. Recent years have required 123 (2013), 65 (2012), 41 (2011) and 100 (2010). Remember that only 64 will progress to round 3 at the end of April. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page; if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email), The ed17 (talk • email) and Miyagawa (talk • email) 22:54, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
2014 Iquique earthquake merge
Hey, Abductive. I wanted to ask if you would revert your edit to restore the template to the page since the history of the two articles have not been merged. --Super Goku V (talk) 02:00, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
- No need, the sparse information in the stub is not copyrightable. Merging the history is not called for in such cases. Abductive (reasoning)
- Huh? I was under the belief that this would fall under WP:HISTMERGE. Am I incorrect due to the length of time being to short? I feel that the users on both articles should be credited equally due to the situation. --Super Goku V (talk) 02:12, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
- In my experience WP:HISTMERGE is for preserving the work of many users who labored for many moons, and when some of their text survives. In this case, the younger article did not have sufficient length of text to be copyrightable, mostly just proper names and some numbers (similar to the way Wikipedia can boldly create articles such as Forbes list of Indian billionaires without fear of being sued). I personally put my tiny contribution into the older article, so I see no reason to fret. Also note that WP:HISTMERGE is not Policy or even Guideline. Abductive (reasoning) 02:19, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
- Alright, I guess if that is the case, then it does not matter. I guess I thought it was a guideline somehow. In any case, thanks for explaining. :) --Super Goku V (talk) 02:49, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
- In my experience WP:HISTMERGE is for preserving the work of many users who labored for many moons, and when some of their text survives. In this case, the younger article did not have sufficient length of text to be copyrightable, mostly just proper names and some numbers (similar to the way Wikipedia can boldly create articles such as Forbes list of Indian billionaires without fear of being sued). I personally put my tiny contribution into the older article, so I see no reason to fret. Also note that WP:HISTMERGE is not Policy or even Guideline. Abductive (reasoning) 02:19, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
- Huh? I was under the belief that this would fall under WP:HISTMERGE. Am I incorrect due to the length of time being to short? I feel that the users on both articles should be credited equally due to the situation. --Super Goku V (talk) 02:12, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
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. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
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) 01:42, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
Edit warring at autonomous sensory meridian response
Please remember that disputes are (usually) best solved by discussion and consensus. Every editor has their own opinion, and patience when dealing with fellow editors is part of the job description.
From an outside perspective, your initial edit to autonomous sensory meridian response was reasonable, but your subsequent behaviour is edit warring. WP:OWN applies to both sides of an edit war and should never be justification for continuing it. User:Huntster is justified in contesting the change, and the correct response is to either forget about the change (if it's trivial) or bring the matter to the talk page if you feel it's worth pursuing. —WOFall (talk) 19:32, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
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. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
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) 01:06, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
Doggerland
"It was abandoned by Mesolithic tribes about 8,000 years ago, which is when the Storegga slide happened," said Dr Jon Hill from Imperial College London. I don't see that my wording implies anything different. It doesn't say it was abandoned before the tsunami - it says it was abandoned at about the same time - which is all we know. Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:02, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
WikiCup 2014 April newsletter
Round 3 of the 2014 WikiCup has just begun; 32 competitors remain. Pool G's Adam Cuerden (submissions) was Round 2's highest scorer, with a large number of featured picture credits. In March/April, he restored star charts from Urania's Mirror, lithographs of various warships (such as SMS Gefion) and assorted other historical media. Second overall was Pool E's Godot13 (submissions), whose featured list Silver certificate (United States) contains dozens of scans of banknotes recently promoted to featured picture status. Third was Pool G's 
ChrisGualtieri (submissions) who has produced a large number of good articles, many, including Falkner Island, on Connecticut-related topics. Other successful participants included Cliftonian (submissions), who saw three articles (including the top-importance Ian Smith) through featured article candidacies, and 
Caponer (submissions), who saw three lists (including the beautifully-illustrated list of plantations in West Virginia) through featured list candidacies. High-importance good articles promoted this round include narwhal from 
Reid,iain james (submissions), tiger from 
Cwmhiraeth (submissions) and The Lion King from 
Igordebraga (submissions). We also saw our first featured topic points of the competition, awarded to 
Czar (submissions) and 
Red Phoenix (submissions) for their work on the Sega Genesis topic. No points have been claimed so far for good topics or featured portals.
192 was our lowest qualifying score, again showing that this WikiCup is the most competitive ever. In previous years, 123 (2013), 65 (2012), 41 (2011) or 100 (2010) secured a place in Round 3. Pool H was the strongest performer, with all but one of its members advancing, while only the two highest scorers in Pools G and F advanced. At the end of June, 16 users will advance into the semi-finals. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email), The ed17 (talk • email) and Miyagawa (talk • email) 17:56, 4 May 2014 (UTC)