|This user is a student editor in Valdosta_State_University/Mixture_and_Miscegenation_(Fall_2019) .|
|Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34|
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).
April editathons at Women in RedEdit
October Events from Women in RedEdit
Just a question...Edit
Hi! I have a question about the article Spider Grandmother. I saw that user Ghostygoo did a lot of work in the article this spring, but Ghostygoo seems to not be editing now. This work was done as a student editor in University of Hawaii at Manoa/Introduction to World Mythology to 1500 CE, and led by you (as Shalor (Wiki Ed)).
I find the arricle interesting, and would like to suggest it as a candidate to the meta project Translation of the week. But the ref #27 is perhaps not a reliable source, and may cause people woting "Oppose". Do you know a source to replace the old one? Or do you know any user who might know?
- Hi Zquid! I've replaced it with some better sources. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 14:12, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
Just so you know, if you got a notification of me reverting a perfectly good user talk page post of yours, it was a misclick which I have self-reverted. Sorry to be so clumsy. --bonadea contributions talk 10:57, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
What you will.Edit
Hi, ReaderofthePack. Here are a few fairly random thoughts which have followed one another, all started by an incident a little while ago when I came across a message on a talk page which at first appeared to be from some upstart administrator I had never heard of, called "ReaderofthePack". Then I noticed a bit of small print in her signature which not only put me straight on the issue of never having heard of her, but also hit me in the face as being astonishingly similar to a recent change in my signature. "Wow!" I thought, "Two of us doing the same thing!" Perhaps not significant, but interesting. Looking further, I found that the change happened way back in February of last year, and I thought "How can I possibly have not noticed?" I suppose it's a measure of how much less active on Wikipedia I am now than I was: years ago it is almost inconceivable that I wouldn't have noticed much sooner, but my average editing rate this year so far has been about 11% of what it was when I was at my most active. I also see that you say you are not from Tokyo, which I think I had known for quite a while, but for a very long time I assumed you were. That set me wondering "If the Tokyo bit isn't to be trusted, is the Girl bit to be trusted?" so I did some more searching. (Yes, I know, you are wondering if I have nothing better to do with my time.) I found that Shalor (Wiki Ed) has her preferences set to show her as female, but ReaderofthePack doesn't. Perhaps she would like to? No doubt most people will never notice, but I really prefer to be able to refer to other editors as "he" or as "she", rather than something more awkward, such as "she or he", or singular "they", and if they have their sex set in their preferences I can see it right away, rather than searching for the information, or worse still spending time searching for it and not finding it. (I have some script or other which tells me. If you don't have it and would like it, let me know, and I'll check and find out what it is.) (Oh, yes, and I absolutely do not wish to be one of those who see no problem with knowing how to refer to other editors, because you just call them all "he", and that makes life easy.)
- JBW - I've had more people express surprise over my changed username than I can remember! As far as gender goes, I do identify as female but I have to admit that I did change my gender preference setting on my main account when I did the name change. It was kind of an experiment of sorts, to see if I'd get a different reaction with a gender neutral name, so I figured I'd change the gender preference setting just so it didn't give away any hints other than the staff account. It was interesting, as I did see some change in how people responded to me. It's kind of interesting. I did experience some of the obvious things that occur when someone switches from a female username to a neutral gender one, but one thing I did see was that some of the advice I gave wasn't responded to in the same way. People weren't rude or anything in general, but it seemed like people saw the female gendered username as more approachable, possibly due to the sociocultural image of women as nurturers? I'm probably just navel gazing, but it was interesting! In any case, I've switched back to the female gender setting - admittedly I kind of forgot about it over time. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 17:56, 8 October 2019 (UTC)