|Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11|
Island of stabilityEdit
Hi RockMagnetist, you'll probably notice (if you have not already) that I requested a peer review for Island of stability in hopes of eventually bringing it to FA, which I invite you to participate in once it gets underway. In addition, I would also greatly appreciate any suggestions you may have, seeing as you did a considerable reworking of the introduction section and highlighted several important points while we were prepping for GAN. Thanks, ComplexRational (talk) 02:59, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:SupernovaEdit
hi RockM, hmmm i'm new to this wiki worldEdit
seems like all my additions that are recorded and documented as True Facts are deleted by you "censorship types". The OPEN to ALL liberty and freedom here is impeded,sadly a sick style of editing. I am seriously considering to join the.... Millions.... who claim Wiki as being Nonsense and absurd to even view!! Very sad — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 19:20, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:CloudflareEdit
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)
Please comment on Talk:DuodecimalEdit
Please comment on Talk:Feynman Prize in NanotechnologyEdit
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Feynman Prize in Nanotechnology. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 15 October 2019 (UTC)