Open main menu
User talk:
Purplebackpack89
Archive
Archives
Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar.png The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar may be awarded to those that show a pattern of going the extra mile to be nice, without being asked.

This barnstar is awarded to Purplebackpack89, for his dedication to comprimise and his ability to work with other editors to come up with amicable solutions which satisfy everyone.

Purplebackpack89, thank you for your valiant efforts in building this project. Ikip (talk) 07:48, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Socratic Barnstar.png The Socratic Barnstar
Though I doubt you're going to get anywhere in this debate due to the highly charged nature of the subject matter, your viewpoint on the issue and your line of reasoning shows you are thinker. Keep it up! And don't despair. The service of truth is the hardest service. NickCT (talk) 03:32, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
Peace Barnstar Hires.png The Barnstar of Diplomacy
Thanks for putting forward the suggestion on ANI that we block, rather than ban, User:LiteralKa. It may or may not pass, but at the end of the day, you did the right thing by suggesting it. The Cavalry (Message me) 21:15, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
Special Barnstar Hires.png The Special Barnstar
For your battling abusive administrators and their sycophants. They do more destruction to Wikipedia than Joe can ever do and they know it. ...William 16:54, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
Barnstar of Diligence Hires.png The Barnstar of Diligence
For all your hard work organizing and maintaining Wikipedia:Vital articles. You are an asset to the project; keep up the great work! GabeMc (talk|contribs) 19:16, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
The WikiProject Merge Barnstar The Merging Barnstar
Thanks for your recent work on multiple merge & redirects re: Yoko Tsuno. Much appreciated. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 13:25, 15 April 2014 (UTC)


Contents

ProblemEdit

You made political campaign a VA but forgot to close the discussion at WT:VAE. Just a heads up. J947 (contribs · mail) 03:27, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

  Done pbp 14:46, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. J947 (contribs · mail) 07:29, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

WikiCup 2018 March newsletterEdit

And so ends the first round of the competition, with 4 points required to qualify for round 2. With 53 contestants qualifying, the groups for round 2 are slightly smaller than usual, with the two leaders from each group due to qualify for round 3 as well as the top sixteen remaining users.

Our top scorers in round 1 were:

  •   Aoba47 led the field with a featured article, 8 good articles and 42 GARs, giving a total of 666 points.
  •   FrB.TG , a WikiCup newcomer, came next with 600 points, gained from a featured article and masses of bonus points.
  •   Ssven2, another WikiCup newcomer, was in third place with 403 points, garnered from a featured article, a featured list, a good article and twelve GARs.
  •   Ceranthor,   Numerounovedant,   Carbrera,   Farang Rak Tham and   Cartoon network freak all had over 200 points, but like all the other contestants, now have to start again from scratch. A good achievement was the 193 GARs performed by WikiCup contestants, comparing very favourably with the 54 GAs they achieved.

Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 1 but before the start of round 2 can be claimed in round 2. 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. 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. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Cwmhiraeth (talk) and Vanamonde (talk) 15:27, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia Day LA, March 31Edit

Wikipedia Day LA 2018

Please join us from 10:00 am - 5:00 pm on Saturday, March 31st for Wikipedia Day LA 2018 at the Ace Hotel in downtown Los Angeles. There will be speakers, panel discussions, a presentation on Wikidata, flash sessions, and a discussion about the formation of an LA User Group. There could be dramatic readings of LA-related talk pages, and there will be truly excellent cake. Please RSVP on the event page if you're thinking of joining us.

We hope to see you there! JSFarman (talk) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:19, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Join our Facebook group here, and follow us on Twitter .

To opt out of future mailings about LA meetups, please remove your name from this list.

Arts Datathon!Edit

LA County Civic Arts Datathon!
Please join us for the LA County Arts Commission Civic Art Wikipedia Edit-a-thon. Beginners are welcome! We'll provide training for new editors.
(See the meetup page for more details.)
Friday, April 27, 2018, 9:00-5:00
Bob Hope Patriotic Hall, 1816 S. Figueroa St., Los Angeles, CA 90015.
We hope to see you there! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:09, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
Join our Facebook group here, and follow us on Twitter .
To opt out of future mailings about LA meetups, please remove your name from this list.

WikiCup 2018 May newsletterEdit

The second round of the 2018 WikiCup has now finished. Most contestants who advanced to the next round scored upwards of 100 points, but two with just 10 points managed to scrape through into round 3. Our top scorers in the last round were:

  •   Cas Liber, our winner in 2016, with three featured articles
  •   Iazyges, with nine good articles and lots of bonus points
  •   Yashthepunisher, a first time contestant, with two featured lists
  •   SounderBruce, a finalist last year, with seventeen good topic articles
  •   Usernameunique, a first time contestant, with fourteen DYKs
  •   Muboshgu, a seasoned competitor, with three ITNs and
  •   Courcelles, another first time contestant, with twenty-seven GARs

So far contestants have achieved twelve featured articles between them and a splendid 124 good articles. Commendably, 326 GARs have been completed during the course of the 2018 WikiCup, so the backlog of articles awaiting GA review has been reduced as a result of contestants' activities. As we enter the third round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met; most of the GARs are fine, but a few have been a bit skimpy.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). 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 your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:10, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

WikiCup 2018 July newsletterEdit

The third round of the 2018 WikiCup has now come to an end. The 16 users who made it to the fourth round had at least 227 points. Our top scorers in round 3 were:

  •   Courcelles, a first time contestant, with 1756 points, a tally built largely on 27 GAs related to the Olympics
  •   Cas Liber, our winner in 2016, with two featured articles and three GAs on natural history and astronomy topics
  •   SounderBruce, a finalist last year, with a variety of submissions related to transport in the state of Washington

Contestants managed 7 featured articles, 4 featured lists, 120 good articles, 1 good topic, 124 DYK entries, 15 ITN entries, and 132 good article reviews. Over the course of the competition, contestants have completed 458 GA reviews, in comparison to 244 good articles submitted for review and promoted. As we enter the fourth round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met. Please also remember that all submissions must meet core Wikipedia policies, regardless of the review process; several submissions, particularly in abstruse or technical areas, have needed additional work to make them completely verifiable.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). 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 your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Cwmhiraeth (talk), Vanamonde (talk) 04:55, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Retitle the L.A. Task ForceEdit

Your attention is called to the discussion here, suggesting retitling Los Angeles Task Force to Los Angeles County Task Force. Sincerely, BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 22:02, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of List of Crayola colored pencil colors for deletionEdit

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Crayola colored pencil colors is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Crayola colored pencil colors until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Lojbanist remove cattle from stage 22:05, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Edit warringEdit

You tagged me with an edit warring warning, so you certainly are aware that making the same identical edit a fourth time in less than 6 hours, as you just did, violates WP:3RR.

You got this off on the wrong foot by, rather than starting a discussion, you went straight to a vote, which you then yourself closed without ever justifying your text. Why won't you Talk about it? Agricolae (talk) 19:04, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Haven't I made how I want the article worded clear and why? Didn't I justify my rationale for closing in the comment that began "enacted"? Also, how can you possibly believe that there's any consensus at all for your position? Your problem isn't that I'm not talking, it's that you want no mention of the number of wives at all, you've made a rather weird and specious claim that mentioning a person's wives in the lede is "trivial", and you insist on having your way even though nobody agrees with you. pbp 19:39, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
How you want it worded, yes. You want it the way you want it. That much is crystal clear. Why you want it worded that way, not in the slightest. You have never said anything other than that you were upset about being reverted. Didn't you justify your rationale? No. Not when you initiated the discussion - you just said you put your text in and someone had the temerity to revert you. Not in your 'enacted' comment, when all you saiis is that you 'won' so you were putting it in. None of that addresses why. And as to what I want, you haven't the slightest idea because you refuse to engage. WHat I want is that, if we are going to mention wives in the lead, it should be a meaningful mention and not a trivial one. WHY WON'T YOU DISCUSS THIS??? Agricolae (talk) 20:24, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

If, as you said elsewhere, you are "pretty much at the end of the rope with Agricolae too...they keep claiming I 'didn't participate' in a discussion...I started!", then maybe you should quit pretending you participated in the discussion. Did you explain your position? No. Did you give your rationale? No. Did you try to find compromise? No. Did you say anything more than,'I got reverted, so let's vote', and then 'I won so I get to have it my way'? No, you didn't. If you don't want people to fault you for failing to discuss an issue, then it is really incumbent on you to DISCUSS THE ISSUE - not just start a vote without any prior discussion whatsoever, provide as your only rationale that you got reverted, and then not say another word until you come back to declare victory when you deem it to be over. That is not discussion. Agricolae (talk) 05:05, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

@Agricolae: Other people told you why you were wrong, so why do I in particular have to also explain it? Who your wife or husband is has pretty clearly been established, through a ton of precedent, that your wife or husband is a defining characteristic. Hundreds, thousands of articles mention wives or husbands in their leads, so saying Phil's shouldn't is really coming out of left. We wouldn't remove the wives from the lead of Phil's father-in law, so why would we remove it from Phil? An admin told you you were wrong and you're still at it. And now I got TRM trolling me. So, yeah, I'm pretty pissed off at you. pbp 05:12, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
And yet again, the same cognitive dissonance - if who someone's spouse is is so vitally important, WHY DO YOU KEEP INSISTING ON TEST THAT DOES NOT PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION! Wikipedia is by nature collaborative and time after time in this interaction, you haven't shown the least interest in collaborating, just in getting your text into the article, so I really don't care in the slightest if you are pissed off by the consequences of your behavior. Agricolae (talk) 05:30, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
I'm not seeing you provide any alternative text, just removing text outright, which nobody but you and he who's under ArbCom sanctions supports. All you've done for the past day is say that I don't collaborate about 5,000 times. When you say "collaborate", what you really mean is, "let YOU have YOUR way". pbp 05:33, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
No, I said that you didn't discuss the issue, which is entirely accurate. You, on the other hand, have made a vital contribution to this interaction, given that the sum total of your input today amounts to nothing more than 'you lost', 'you lost', 'you lost'. When I say collaborate, I mean collaborate, to each explain our positions on the Talk page and see if we can't come up with something that both of us find satisfactory, but that is never going to happen if your immediate reaction on being reverted is to call for a vote, and then you never participate in the slightest in the consequent discussion. And now you have begun yet another vote, again without any attempt at discussing the issue ahead of time. Here is a thought, though - it may come as a surprise to you, but is possible, sometimes more productive and usually less acrimonious to use the Talk page to talk, to just have a discussion, present viewpoints and hammer out a mutually acceptable solution that renders any need for a vote superfluous. Try it sometime. Agricolae (talk) 06:00, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
Again, you refuse to count anything as discussion unless you get your way. At the top of the RfC, I laid out my fundamental questions. In my "vote", I also laid out my rationale for supporting the position I did. What you want me to say in discussion is "Well, Agricolae's right." And I'm not going to say that, because your position that number of wives is trivial is patently ridiculous. I've DISCUSSED that with you already. You're equating discussion and consensus with "everybody gets what they want". That doesn't always happen. pbp 13:31, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

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. Agricolae (talk) 19:38, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

TalkEdit

Would you mind leaving your comment intact at least for a while? Thanks. Sca (talk) 15:36, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

@Sca: It's your talk page, so I defer to you. But I will note this: The Rambling Man has threatened to take me to ANI today, but hasn't yet. I hope conflict between me and the many-times-blocked-and-sanctioned editor has died down. But if you start a discussion about TRM's behavior on ANI or somewhere like that, it's my belief that he will respond by demanding that I be indeffed. Not you, me. Now, his case for such an action is exceedingly weak, but he might just get lucky. You can still do it if you want to, but I want you to be made aware of that possibility. pbp 15:41, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted per yr request. Sca (talk) 16:22, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
Thank you. pbp 16:29, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Note to talk-page stalkers: this discussion held here and at User talk:Sca due to The Rambling Man's failure to engage in productive discussion at User talk:The Rambling Man

  • @Sca: You know what? Do whatever you want. TRM said he was going to take me to ANI, but he hasn't (probably because he knows it'd blow up in his face). pbp 16:25, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
Water under the bridge. Sca (talk) 20:53, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
His barb is worse than his byte.   Sca (talk) 12:56, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Regarding your wiki email to meEdit

Hey there, it appears i have a notification that you have sent me a wiki email. I have lost access to the email i had signed up with over 6 years ago so i have changed my listed email to my current one, if you would like; you can send it again - but if it was related to me sending you the excel sheets i have; i'd have to consider it, i was going to release them when i had finished organizing them to fit specifically the vital lists (i cover more) but after my recent retirement i am not so sure if i should and should keep them for my own independent project. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GuzzyG (talkcontribs) 07:06, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

TRM and VAEdit

When did he start getting interested at VA all of a sudden? Near as I can figure, he was disappointed that, in his ITN fiefdom, people used VA as a rationale to express an opinion counter to his. His reaction? Demand that VA be destroyed. He may have been particularly disappointed that I was one of them (he has a history of buttinskying on me trying to BAIT me into the indef block of me that's one of his side quests). What do we do? I welcome comments on this from everybody other than TRM. Particularly @Doug Weller: pbp 13:45, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

I have no idea. As you know, I'm not happy with the way VA is set out inconsistently and even its faq ignored in practice. Doug Weller talk 15:19, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
The fundamental problem about VA is that there's a significant contingent who wants to hold off on removing articles until the project is full or nearly full. Perhaps a contingent large enough to block any reforms of the inclusion process. An additional problem is that TRM wants to judge the project now when it's still under construction. Any talk of deletion of VA5 should be postponed until we either a) complete the project, or b) conclude that it cannot be completed. pbp 15:27, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
BTW, @Doug Weller:, did you see the proposal I made for VA inclusion challenges? Are you going to weigh in? pbp 23:34, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
It's annoying that people are ignoring the faq, but hard to do anything about it if there is such a contingent other than try an RfC. I saw the inclusion thing, just wish it was not challenging but followed the faq about discussion needed to include. Doug Weller talk 14:31, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
@Doug Weller: You can go ahead and launch an alternate proposal to apply it to additions. However, my read of the regulars right now is that requiring consensus to add when there is so much empty space on the list is going to be a dead letter. pbp 14:47, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
  • @The Rambling Man: Saying stuff like "PBP honeypot bullshit" in an edit summary is a personal attack, and it is a clear violation of your civility restriction. If you're going to start an ANI discussion, start an ANI discussion (where I will make as damn sure as possible you get hit with a boomerang) and start it now. Otherwise, all you're doing is just raising vitriol and yelling a bunch of empty threats into the aether. That doesn't build the Wiki and it doesn't help your credibility pbp 14:42, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
  • @Doug Weller: I am seriously considering requesting you interact a two-way no-fault interaction ban between TRM and myself. TRM doesn't want me interacting with me on his talk page, and I don't want to interact with him anywhere else. pbp 14:42, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
  • @Doug Weller: Assess this for me. What would happen if...
a) I reported TRM to ANI or ArbCom?
b) TRM reported me to ANI or ArbCom?
c) A third party reported both of us to ANI or ArbCom?
Because, right now, I am fed up with TRM HOUNDing me, BAITing me and making comments about me in edit summaries. And I gather I'm not the only one who's pissed...wasn't there a Crisco something who left the project, blocked himself, and credited his displeasure to TRM? I'm almost to the point of welcoming a two-week block if it was followed by an indef IBAN. pbp 16:44, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
We only take cases where the community has shown it can't handle the situation. If you want an interaction ban, the best bet is ANI. I don't think there's any cause to block you if you go to ANI. Of course I can't guarantee anything will happen. Doug Weller talk 16:49, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

I just don't get itEdit

@Cullen328:@Doug Weller: Why is everybody against me on the ANI thread? Everybody KNOWS that TRM is crass to all who disagree with him. You and others know that interaction between me and TRM is unproductive. Yet you don't seem to care that I'm approaching the point of leaving the project rather than have to continue dealing with him. And your solution seems to be to let him do whatever the hell he wants, even if that's refer to me as "honeypot bullshit" and reopen closed 3RR threads and the like. What gives here? Do people not really care if I leave? Really, the only thing I have any interest in at the moment is the VA project, but it's looking more and more like that's heading for the ashheap. I used to be interested in making FLs and FAs, but I gave up on it when I figured out that meant dealing with TRM.

I'm sorry, but I just need to let off some steam. It's not you I'm mad at, it's the system. pbp 00:04, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

I do not see it as people being against you. Instead, it looks to me that people are unpersuaded by the evidence and how you have presented it. That 13 month old talk page template thing was worthless as evidence, and you led off with that. Nobody wants you to leave the project but rather people want you to voluntarily avoid interaction with TRM unless essential. This is a volunteer project and any editor in good standing can stop editing at any time, and then start again at any time. You must know that ANI is not a place to come to if you are looking for sympathy. Almost everyone wishes that TRM would not be so combative but there is no consensus that such behavior alone requires community restrictions. Of course I too wish he would change but that is highly unlikely. As for "honeypot bullshit", please note that "bullshit" is not a word commonly applied to people, but rather to behavior and the quality of an argument. So, it is not a personal attack. It is a criticism of your edits. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:26, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
@Cullen328: I have withdrawn the proposal to avoid any BOOMerang. But some, Swarm in particular, seem to go even farther than you...they acted like if TRM reverts me (presumably anywhere, as they did not qualify where), I should just roll over and take it. And that's not fair. I shouldn't be forced to be a doormat just because TRM can't get along with anyone, nor should I be forced to be a doormat because of TRM's supposed contribution record. I'm disappointed that there's no consensus to ask TRM to avoid me unless essential. And, I'm sorry, the edits I've made to the VA project are not honeypot bullshit. Not even the ones where I say that TRM is at VA in bad faith. If your first edit is to throw around the possibility that VA be deleted or restructured, it's hard to think of yourself as being there is the spirit of cooperation. And if VA is MfDed, I will participate, regardless of who starts the discussion. pbp 01:37, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
Cullen's basically right. I've never seen an enforceable non-avoidance decision, so I'm not surprised that didn't happen. Doug Weller talk 18:26, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

WikiCup 2018 September newsletterEdit

The fourth round of the 2018 WikiCup has now come to an end. The eight users who made it to the final round had to score a minimum of 422 points to qualify, with the top score in the round being 4869 points. The leaders in round 4 were:

  •   Courcelles scored a magnificent 4869 points, with 92 good articles on Olympics-related themes. Courcelles' bonus points alone exceeded the total score of any of the other contestants!
  •   Kees08 was second with 1155 points, including a high-scoring featured article for Neil Armstrong, two good topics and some Olympics-related good articles.
  •   Cas Liber, with 1066 points, was in third place this round, with two featured articles and a good article, all on natural history topics.
  • Other contestants who qualified for the final round were   Nova Crystallis,   Iazyges,   SounderBruce,   Kosack and   Ceranthor.

During round four, 6 featured articles and 164 good articles were promoted by WikiCup contestants, 13 articles were included in good topics and 143 good article reviews were performed. There were also 10 "in the news" contributions on the main page and 53 "did you knows". Congratulations to all who participated! It was a generally high-scoring and productive round and I think we can expect a highly competitive finish to the competition.

Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to 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, and let the best editor win! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66, Vanamonde and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:31, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Vital articles "new metapage"Edit

I though about creating the new metapage, for example titdled as::Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Level/5/to do... In this way wew could (for example) found all of orphans on our list. I do not think that just wikidata entires is good metric for vitality. For example Polandball has much more wikidata entires than Penny Arcade but fewer what links here and fewer google results and is fewer vital. Easter basket has fewer wikidata entires than święconka but is more vital than święconka etc. Cheers. Dawid2009 (talk) 04:57, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Do it! And I may have additional suggestions for what I want a bot to find out. pbp 14:12, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
I do not have any bot. So it is impossible task to me. @power~enwiki has PowerBOT (talk · contribs) so maybe he could do it? List with articles under 10 link from the level 5 would be interesing and valuable to analyse. Which additional suggestion do you have? Dawid2009 (talk) 19:12, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
For biographies, IDK if a bot can get birth and death date, but that would be useful. pbp 19:20, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
For biographes, I think that bot can get pictogram for gender (based on wikidaata) but I am not sure bot can get birth and death date. Dawid2009 (talk) 19:38, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
In my opinion resonable would be if bot include only links from main space with omnission of links from disambiguation/list pages. And with omnission of links from templates. Sometimes articles have a lot of links because of the articles have templates each other. Dawid2009 (talk) 19:50, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure what is wanted, but I could generate a page with some metadata about articles fairly easily. There shouldn't be any orphan-pages on the list; if there are any I'd likely propose removing them. power~enwiki (π, ν) 20:50, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

The orophans are articles with 0 links from any space. I am interested in articles with fewer than 10 links from main space (=articles), not necesiarilly with 0 links. Some controversial people on Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Level/5 have several links. Interesing would be comprasion these articles with other articles which have few links (in sense: what links here) and not only among biographies. @power~enwiki What are you quite not sure? Dawid2009 (talk) 21:04, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
@ power~enwiki, @pbp , @Gizza When I have told: with omnision of templates I meant with omnision of templates. For example easter basket has a lot of what links here due tue to a lot of articles links in Template:Easter each other. When I told with omnission of disambiguation and lists I also meant with mnision of disambiguations and lists. For example (it is not listed but good example) Paper soccer has only links from disambiguations and lists, practicarly it is orophan in main space. Based on what links here (with omnision of lists, disambiguation pages, and bonus from templates) we could check vitality. It is quite good metric and eventually we could found not listed parents topics for these articles. I suggest to create the new page Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Level/5/articles with the fewest links Dawid2009 (talk) 17:47, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

I don't know of any easy way to exclude template links when calculating backlinks. From a quick run, there are a few orphans or near-orphans (Vincenzo Pipino has only one mainspace link to it) but most pages have over 100 links, often due to templates. power~enwiki (π, ν) 21:44, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

voting on the level 5Edit

Do you can add information to introducion, that nominator should try add source if it is possible? Level 5 has a lot of various topic. Nominator should give sources to couraged other users to discuss. What do you think? Dawid2009 (talk) 20:22, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

I think you should open up that for further discussion. pbp 21:02, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
What do you think about change process of voting? I have pretared suggestion here if you do not mind you can change something and copyedit my English. Cheers. Dawid2009 (talk) 19:36, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

7th Annual Los Angeles WiknicEdit

It's the 7th Annual Los Angeles Wiknic!

Sunday, September 30, 11:00-4:00 PM
Pan Pacific Park, 7600 Beverly Blvd, Los Angeles, CA 90036
Hang out. Consume crowd-sourced BBQ! Bask in the glory of late September in Los Angeles (and the glory
of our new user group, Wikimedians of Los Angeles).
RSVP (and volunteer) here.
We hope to see you there! JSFarman (talk) 02:50, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
Join our Facebook group, or follow us on Twitter!

To opt out of future mailings about LA meetups, please remove your name from this list.

Disambiguation link notification for September 12Edit

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited MAX Blue Line, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Interstate 84 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:27, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 6Edit

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Arthur (season 10), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Law and Order (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:35, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

WikiCup 2018 November newsletterEdit

The WikiCup is over for another year! Our Champion this year is   Courcelles (submissions), who over the course of the competition has amassed 147 GAs, 111 GARs, 9 DYKs, 4 FLs and 1 ITN. Our finalists were as follows:

  1.   Courcelles (submissions)
  2.   Kosack (submissions)
  3.   Kees08 (submissions)
  4.   SounderBruce (submissions)
  5.   Cas Liber (submissions)
  6.   Nova Crystallis (submissions)
  7.   Iazyges (submissions)
  8.   Ceranthor (submissions)


All those who reached the final win awards, and awards will also be going to the following participants:

Awards will be handed out in the coming weeks. Please be patient!

Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have achieved much this year. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition.

Next year's competition begins on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; it is open to all Wikipedians, new and old. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2019 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Godot13 (talk · contribs · email), Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email) and Vanamonde93 (talk · contribs · email).

Nomination of A-G requirements for deletionEdit

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article A-G requirements is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A-G requirements until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 06:08, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

My ArbCom votesEdit

Courcelles-YES, DGG-YES, Drmies-HELLZ YES, Fred-NO (Cuz of the hot water he's in), Gorilla-YES, Lourdes-NO (I'd like to see her be a successful admin for another year), Mkdw-YES, Robert-YES, The rest-BLANK

ArbCom 2018 election voter messageEdit

 Hello, Purplebackpack89. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Liberty BowlEdit

Hi - a quick note about your addition to the Liberty Bowl article on November 18, when you added a table of appearances by conference. Wanted to see if you had a source for that, or perhaps notes from when you built the table. I ask because the total appearances don't add up; through last year's game there have been 59 editions of the bowl, thus there should be 118 total appearances. The table currently sums to 114, so there are 4 appearances still to be accounted for. Thanks. Dmoore5556 (talk) 00:46, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

I was able to find my notes from that and I'll double-check my math pbp 04:51, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
Awesome, thanks! If by chance you might have any notes on the Sugar Bowl... the W/L balance is off by a game there, which I'm trying to sort out. Thanks. Dmoore5556 (talk) 06:56, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
I'll try to get to it by the end of the week. pbp 15:01, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2019 WikiCup!Edit

Hello and Happy New Year!

Welcome to the 2019 WikiCup, the competition begins today. If you have already joined, your submission page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and we will set up your submissions page. One important rule to remember is that only content on which you have completed significant work during 2019, and which you have nominated this year, is eligible for points in the competition, the judges will be checking! 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! The judges for the WikiCup are Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Godot13 (talk · contribs · email), Vanamonde93 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:14, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail!Edit

 
Hello, Purplebackpack89. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 20:52, 15 January 2019 (UTC). 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.

DannyS712 (talk) 20:52, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 4Edit

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

Los Angeles Township, California (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to East Los Angeles
San Pedro, Los Angeles (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to South Bay
Wilmington, Los Angeles (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to South Bay

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:29, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Invitation to attend a Southern California Regional mini UnconferenceEdit

Who: All Wikipedians & Wikimedians

What: Southern California Regional mini Unconference.

When: Sunday 3 March 2019, 2:00PM PST / 1400 until 4:10PM PST / 1610

Where: Philippe's at Chinatown, Los Angeles

Sponsor: San Diego Wikimedians User Group ( US-SAN )

Your host: RightCowLeftCoast (talk · contribs)

Please add your username to our attendees list so we know how many will be attending, due to the limited size of the cafe.

(Delivered: 00:38, 10 February 2019 (UTC) You can unsubscribe from future invitations to San Diego Wikimedians User Group events by removing your name from the WikiProject San Diego mass mailing list & the Los Angeles mass mailing list.)

Wikipedia Day LA, February 24, 2019Edit

Wikipedia Day LA 2019
Consider the Source

Please join the LA User Group, Wikimedians of Los Angeles, for an afternoon of panels, presentations and conversations on the subject of sources, and cake (locally sourced), in celebration of Wikipedia's 18th birthday.

Sunday, February 24, 1:00 PM-5:00 PM

The Ace Hotel (DTLA)

929 S Broadway, Los Angeles, CA 90015

For more details or to sign up, see Wikipedia Day LA, or RSVP via Eventbrite.

Everyone is welcome! We hope to see you there. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:00, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Join our Facebook group here, and follow us on Twitter .
To opt out of future mailings about LA meetups, please remove your name from this list.

Nomination for deletion of Template:Bk-iconEdit

 Template:Bk-icon has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:40, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

WikiCup 2019 March newsletterEdit

And so ends the first round of the competition. Everyone with a positive score moves on to Round 2. With 56 contestants qualifying, each group in Round 2 contains seven contestants, with the two leaders from each group due to qualify for Round 3 as well as the top sixteen remaining contestants.

Our top scorers in Round 1 were:

  •   L293D, a WikiCup newcomer, led the field with ten good articles on submarines for a total of 357 points.
  •   Adam Cuerden, a WikiCup veteran, came next with 274 points, mostly from eight featured pictures, restorations of artwork.
  •   MPJ-DK, a wrestling enthusiast, was in third place with 263 points, garnered from a featured list, five good articles, two DYKs and four GARs.
  •   Usernameunique came next at 243, with a featured article and a good article, both on ancient helmets.
  •   Squeamish Ossifrage was in joint fifth place with 224 points, mostly garnered from bringing the 1937 Fox vault fire to featured article status.
  •   Ed! was also on 224, with an amazing number of good article reviews (56 actually).

These contestants, like all the others, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. Between them, contestants completed reviews on 143 good articles, one hundred more than the number of good articles they claimed for, thus making a substantial dent in the review backlog. Well done all!

Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. 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. 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 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. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk).

Art + Feminism 2019Edit

Art+Feminism 2019 Los Angeles Events!

Dear fellow Wikipedian,

You are invited to join Art+Feminism's annual worldwide Wikipedia edit-a-thon and help close Wikipedia's gender gap at one of these Los Angeles–area museums this March! RSVP/Details here.

  • Sunday, March 3: The Institute of Contemporary Art, Los Angeles (DTLA), Noon–5p. Focus: Women+Comedy.
  • Saturday, March 9: Vincent Price Art Museum at East Los Angeles College (Monterey Park), Noon–4p. Focus: Latinx+Non-Binary Artists.
  • Sunday, March 10: Hammer Museum (Westwood), Noon–5p. Focus: Women+Film+Media
  • Sunday, March 17: LACMA (Miracle Mile), Noon–5p. Focus: Women+Design+Craft
  • Sunday, March 31: California African American Museum (Exposition Park/USC), 1–4p. Focus: Women of CAAM.

These Los Angeles events are co-hosted by online magazine East of Borneo and include step-by-step Wikipedia instruction for beginners. Bring your laptop or tablet computer and any reference materials you'd like to work from or share. People of all gender expressions and identities are encouraged to attend.

I hope to see you there! StaceyEOB (talk) - MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:06, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom enforcementEdit

  • @Joefromrandb: You're probably already aware of this, but I believe your recent edits to be in violation of your ArbCom sanctions and have opened an ArbCom enforcement request against you. pbp 16:10, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
  • @Floquenbeam:: I know he's pretending he isn't, but Joe is talking about me to you. As such, it seems reasonable to comment about the you-him-me conversation without any fear of retribution. And @Joefromrandb: I have two questions for you: 1) Where was your "bright line" the zillions of times you called me a troll or on a soapbox or any other of the myriad bad-faith interactions you've had with me and pretty much anybody else who disagrees with you in the slightest? 2) Why do you care so much about the "me" bright line and so little about the bright line that ArbCom instituted about you edit-warring? pbp 21:30, 25 March 2019 (UTC). pbp 21:30, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
  • @Drmies: So it's "not cool" to ask that arbitration be enforced? Can you give me any evidence that the problems that got Joe a six-month block are gone for good? He was blocked for six months for edit-warring and incivility. In this Big Time Rush flap, he's edit-warred, accused the person of edit-warring of being a meat-puppet, and claimed that warnings other editors (not me) placed on his page were trolling. I don't get it. It seems like some editors (Joe, The Rambling Man) are allowed to treat a whole lot of other editors very poorly (often in contravention to Wikipedia's rules), and yet when I ask that they stop, somehow I'm the bad guy. THAT's not cool. And, as for having grudges, mind you, I've been on the receiving end of a lot of other people's grudges, including Joe's grudges and TRM's grudges. pbp 03:29, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
    • Don't know why you're bringing TRM up--I have nothing to do with him. This conflict didn't involve you, and when you volunteer to bring someone with whom you've had years of conflict up for arbitration, you shouldn't be surprised if someone calls sour grapes. Drmies (talk) 03:33, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
      • @Drmies: You didn't really answer my question about why Joe deserves a free pass on this one, or deserved many of the free passes he'd gotten. FWIW, the reason I brought up TRM is that a) TRM has years of conflict with me and a habit of inserting himself into my business in the manner you and Floq are accusing me of doing to Joe, and b) Like Joe, TRM has gotten away with behaviors that would've gotten most editors indeffed. I don't really feel remorse for disliking either of those men because they have well-documented histories of rule-breaking and incivility. And they are incivil to also everybody, you included. pbp 03:39, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
        • I don't think these two editors are very similar. Good luck, Drmies (talk) 03:41, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
          • @Drmies: a) Why do you think they are dissimilar? b) Why do I need luck? pbp 03:44, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
            • Because they are. In my opinion. I am not going to elaborate on it, certainly not here. And everybody needs luck. Also, it functions as a goodbye, like "goodbye". Drmies (talk) 03:57, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

300-metre tower listed at Redirects for discussionEdit

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 300-metre tower. Since you had some involvement with the 300-metre tower redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Senator2029 “Talk” 10:20, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

WikiCup 2019 May newsletterEdit

The second round of the 2019 WikiCup has now finished. Contestants needed to scored 32 points to advance into round 3. Our top four scorers in round 2 all scored over 400 points and were:

  •   Cas Liber (1210), our winner in 2016, with two featured articles and three DYKs. He also made good use of the bonus points available, more than doubling his score by choosing appropriate articles to work on.
  •   Kosack (750), last year's runner up, with an FA, a GA, two FLs, and five DYKs.
  •   Adam Cuerden (480), a WikiCup veteran, with 16 featured pictures, mostly restorations.
  •   Zwerg Nase (461), a seasoned competitor, with a FA, a GA and an ITN item.

Other notable performances were put in by   Barkeep49 with six GAs,   Ceranthor,   Lee Vilenski, and   Canada Hky, each with seven GARs, and   MPJ-DK with a seven item GT.

So far contestants have achieved nine featured articles between them and a splendid 80 good articles. Commendably, 227 GARs have been completed during the course of the 2019 WikiCup, so the backlog of articles awaiting GA review has been reduced as a result of contestants' activities. The judges are pleased with the thorough GARs that are being performed, and have hardly had to reject any. As we enter the third round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). 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 your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:46, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

About your proposal to remove three Naruto characters in VA5Edit

You said that Hatake Kakashi, Hatake Kakashi and Sakura Haruno should be removed, but I bet that the second one which you want to remove is actually Sasuke Uchiha, because it is duplicate with the first one.--RekishiEJ (talk) 08:42, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

@RekishiEJ: What I was going for is to remove all Naruto characters except Naruto. You can amend my proposal to reflect that. pbp 20:01, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

UC Irvine edit-a-thon on May 17, 2019Edit

UC Irvine edit-a-thon on May 17, 2019

Dear fellow Wikipedian,

You are cordially invited to an edit-a-thon this Friday in Orange County, focused on gender equity. The event is a collaboration between UCI and Women in Red.

Friday, May 17, 2019
10:00 am – 4:00 pm PDT (UTC-7)

Langson Library, Room 228, at University of California, Irvine

Points of contact:

For more details, including the registration link, please see the meetup page. Everyone is welcome! We hope to see you there.

--Rosiestep (talk) 00:36, 14 May 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

WikiCup 2019 July newsletterEdit

The third round of the 2019 WikiCup has now come to an end. The 16 users who made it to the fourth round needed to score at least 68 points, which is substantially lower than last year's 227 points. Our top scorers in round 3 were:

  •   Cas Liber, our winner in 2016, with 500 points derived mainly from a featured article and two GAs on natural history topics
  •   Adam Cuerden, with 480 points, a tally built on 16 featured pictures, the result of meticulous restoration work
  •   SounderBruce, a finalist in the last two years, with 306 points from a variety of submissions, mostly related to sport or the State of Washington
  •   Usernameunique, with 305 points derived from a featured article and two GAs on archaeology and related topics

Contestants managed 4 (5) featured articles, 4 featured lists, 18 featured pictures, 29 good articles, 50 DYK entries, 9 ITN entries, and 39 good article reviews. As we enter the fourth round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them, and it is imperative to claim them in the correct round; one FA claim had to be rejected because it was incorrectly submitted (claimed in Round 3 when it qualified for Round 2), so be warned! When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). 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 your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:12, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 15Edit

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Soo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Soo Line (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:41, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

@DPL bot:: Yes, that was intentional. It's a link on a DAB page linking to a more specific DAB page. pbp 13:50, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Merge tagEdit

Hi, I see that you added a merge tag to a disambiguation page (Scott Walker). Did you mean to add it to Scott Walker (politician) instead? Marquardtika (talk) 21:18, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Yes, that's correct pbp 21:32, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

C00;">b]]p 20:00, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Catherine great listed at Redirects for discussionEdit

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Catherine great. Since you had some involvement with the Catherine great redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. — the Man in Question (in question) 04:30, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

A Dobos torte for you!Edit

  7&6=thirteen () has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it.


To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

7&6=thirteen () 14:04, 19 July 2019 (UTC)


Speedy deletion nomination of Skåneland national football teamEdit

 

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Skåneland national football team requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Benedetto xviii (talk) 12:52, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Southern California Wiknic & Bonfire invitationEdit

270° panorama overlooking La Jolla Shores Beach as seen from the Martin Johnson House, Scripps Institute of Oceanography, during a late August sunset. Photo by Gregg M. Erickson

Who: All members of the public

What: Southern California Wiknic & Bonfire.

When: Sunday 1 September 2019, 2:00PM PDT / 1400 until 10:00PM PDT / 2200

Where: La Jolla Shores

Sponsor: San Diego Wikimedians User Group ( US-SAN )

Your host: RightCowLeftCoast (talk · contribs)

Please add your username to our attendees list so we know how many will be attending, and please add your intended potluck contribution to the list.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject San Diego at 18:27, 1 August 2019 (UTC). You can unsubscribe from future invitations to San Diego Wikimedians User Group events by removing your name from the WikiProject San Diego mass mailing list, and from the Southern California meet-up group by removing your name from the LA meet-ups mailing list.

Bureaucratic and ridiculousEdit

Apparently, I'm not allowed to edit Template:Vital article, even though I have a thousand template edits and I've been using the template for six years. And there's no real reason for it to stay protected, yet the admin who protected it is stonewalling. Wikipedia bureaucracy at its finest! pbp 23:43, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

@Purplebackpack89: I understand your frustration, but the template has a valid reason for protection - it has over 34k transclusions. I'm happy to help you if you want - I left a note on your TE request DannyS712 (talk) 23:51, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
@DannyS712: There is a protected edit request at Template talk:Vital article right now. (It's a continuation of an edit another editor wanted but didn't tag). I have also proposed an organizational change to a VA subpage that would necessitate changes to the template (The proposal is 2-0 right now). pbp 00:02, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
@Purplebackpack89: im currently in the middle of trying to deal with a serial global ban evader, but I'll take a look. --DannyS712 (talk) 00:03, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
@DannyS712: It waited a year lol. It can wait a few more hours. pbp 00:06, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Battles in NebraskaEdit

 

A tag has been placed on Category:Battles in Nebraska requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. UnitedStatesian (talk) 01:26, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

WikiCup 2019 September newsletterEdit

The fourth round of the competition has finished in a flurry of last minute activity, with 454 points being required to qualify for the final round. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants with over 400 points being eliminated, and all but two of the finalists having achieved an FA during the round. Casliber, our 2016 winner, was the highest point-scorer, followed by Enwebb and Lee Vilenski, who are both new to the competition. In fourth place was SounderBruce, a finalist last year. But all those points are swept away as we start afresh for the final round.

Round 4 saw the achievement of 11 featured articles. In addition, Adam Cuerden scored with 18 FPs, Lee Vilenski led the GA score with 8 GAs while Kosack performed 15 GA reviews. There were around 40 DYKs, 40 GARs and 31 GAs overall during round 4. Even though contestants performed more GARs than they achieved GAs, there was still some frustration at the length of time taken to get articles reviewed.

As we start round 5, we say goodbye to the eight competitors who didn't quite make it; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia, and we hope you will join us again next year. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them (some people have fallen foul of this rule and the points have been removed).

If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). 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. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66, Vanamonde and Cwmhiraeth MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:44, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Canada Squad 2018 FIBA Women's Basketball World CupEdit

Return to the user page of "Purplebackpack89".