User talk:Thebiguglyalien/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

WikiCup 2024 February newsletter

The 2024 WikiCup is off to a flying start, with 135 participants. This is the largest number of participants we have seen since 2017.

Our current leader is newcomer Generalissima (submissions), who has one FA on John Littlejohn (preacher) and 10 GAs and 12 DYKs mostly on New Zealand coinage and Inuit figures. Here are some more noteworthy scorers:

• AirshipJungleman29 (submissions), with one FA on Hö'elün, two GAs on Mongolia-related articles, and two DYKs;
• Vami_IV (submissions), with one FA on Doom (2016 video game), one GA on Boundary Fire (2017), and 11 reviews;
• MaranoFan (submissions), with one FA on Holidays (Meghan Trainor song), a nine-article FT on 30 (album), and two DYKs;
• Skyshifter (submissions), with one FA on OneShot and one DYK;
• Sammi Brie (submissions), with five GAs and five DYKs on television and radio stations;
• voorts (submissions) and Elli (submissions), both with one FA and one DYK each.

As a reminder, competitors may submit work for the first round until 23:59 (UTC) on 27 February, and the second round starts 1 March. Remember that only the top 64 scoring competitors will make it through to the second round; currently, competitors need at least 15 points to progress. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAN, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges (Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), Epicgenius (talk · contribs), and Frostly (talk · contribs)) are reachable on their talk pages. 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. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:58, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

One year!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:33, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Undefined sfn reference in Edith Roosevelt

Hi, in this edit to Edith Roosevelt you added {{Sfn|Morris|2013|p=437}}, {{Sfn|Morris|2013|p=445}}, and {{Sfn|Morris|2013|pp=447–448}}. Unfortunately no such work "Morris 2013" is listed. This means that nobody can look the references up, and the article is added to Category:Harv and Sfn no-target errors. If you could supply the missing source that would be appreciated. DuncanHill (talk) 22:50, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Catherine Samba-Panza

The article Catherine Samba-Panza you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Catherine Samba-Panza and Talk:Catherine Samba-Panza/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Grnrchst -- Grnrchst (talk) 19:21, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Catherine Samba-Panza

The article Catherine Samba-Panza you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Catherine Samba-Panza for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Grnrchst -- Grnrchst (talk) 23:03, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Anna Harrison

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Anna Harrison you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Dugan Murphy -- Dugan Murphy (talk) 00:04, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Don't Be a Sucker

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Don't Be a Sucker you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Kusma -- Kusma (talk) 21:43, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Huh?

I was by Ray May this morning putting up a portrait and I saw you laid a "no significant coverage (sports)" template up for him last May. The guy played in 118 NFL games with 88 starts — that strikes me as a pretty inappropriate template for such a subject, no matter how terrible the stub is currently. Please find a better "sources needed" template for NFL players if you feel you must template rather than going the far preferred SOFIXIT route. Thanks, —tim //// Carrite (talk) 17:54, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Carrite, WP:SPORTCRIT is clear: Sports biographies must include at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage of the subject. Template:No significant coverage (sports) is specifically made for articles like Ray May where the only listed source is a database entry. This is the better sources needed template. Please find significant coverage before removing the no significant coverage maintenance template. If significant coverage is not available, then the article should be merged or deleted. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 18:12, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

WikiCup 2024 March newsletter

The first round of the 2024 WikiCup ended at 23:59 (UTC) on 27 February. Everyone with at least 30 points moved on to Round 2, the highest number of points required to advance to the second round since 2014. Due to a six-way tie for the 64th-place spot, 67 contestants have qualified for Round 2.

The following scorers in Round 1 all scored more than 300 points:

• Generalissima (submissions), who has 916 points mostly from one FA on John Littlejohn (preacher), 15 GAs, and 16 DYKs on a variety of topics including New Zealand coinage and Inuit figures, in addition to seven reviews
• Vami_IV (submissions), who has 790 points from two FAs on Felix M. Warburg House and Doom (2016 video game), two GAs, one DYK, and 11 reviews
• AirshipJungleman29 (submissions), who has 580 points from one FA on Hö'elün, two GAs on Mongolia-related articles, two DYKs, and five reviews
• Sammi Brie (submissions), who has 420 points mostly from nine GAs and seven DYKs on television and radio stations
• MaranoFan (submissions), who has 351 points from one FA on Holidays (Meghan Trainor song), a nine-article FT on 30 (album), and three DYKs
• Skyshifter (submissions), who has 345 points from one FA on OneShot, one DYK and two reviews

In this newsletter, the judges would like to pay a special tribute to Vami_IV (submissions), who unfortunately passed away this February. At the time of his death, he was the second-highest-scoring competitor. Outside the WikiCup, he had eight other featured articles, five A-class articles, eight other good articles, and two Four Awards. Vami also wrote an essay on completionism, a philosophy in which he deeply believed. If you can, please join us in honoring his memory by improving one of the articles on his to-do list.

Remember that any content promoted after 27 February 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 Needed. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, feel free to review one of the nominations listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. 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. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:41, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted

Hi Thebiguglyalien. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group. Please check back at the permissions page in case your user right is time-limited or probationary. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encyclopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page or ask via the NPP Discord. In addition, please remember:

• Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging pages for maintenance so that they are aware.
• You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
• If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
• Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page, including checking for copyright violations using Earwig's copyright violation detector, checking for duplicate articles, and evaluating sources (both in the article, and if needed, via a Google search) for compliance with the general notability guideline.
• Please review some of our flowcharts (1, 2) to help ensure you don't forget any steps.
• Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. If you can read any languages other than English, please add yourself to the list of new page reviewers with language proficiencies. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:25, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Politics of Botswana

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Politics of Botswana you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Youprayteas -- Youprayteas (talk) 16:25, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Copyright issues on Scott Conger

Hi. Thanks for spotting the copyright issues on Scott Conger. I've declined the G12 as that applies only if all versions of the article are copyright violations. Earlier versions did not have any of teh copyrighted material that I could see. In such cases, you should revert to the latest clean version and use {{copyvio-revdel}}. On a related note, when you tag for G12, it's helpful for the reviewing admin if you do not blank the page. The G12 template includes a link to the copyvio tool which assumes the copyvio is in the current version. When the page is blanked, I have to manually set up the correct version to use the tool. Additionally, stuffing multiple URLs into one URL parameter also requires me to manually separate out the URLs and set up the copyvio tool. WP:Twinkle makes it easy to tag and supports multiple URLs for G12. Cheers. -- Whpq (talk) 04:07, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of War Machine

The article War Machine you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:War Machine for comments about the article, and Talk:War Machine/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Sammi Brie -- Sammi Brie (talk) 12:17, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Editor experience invitation

Hi Thebiguglyalien :) I'm looking for people to interview here. Feel free to pass if you're not interested. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 02:01, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 11

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hugo's House of Horrors, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Haunted mansion.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Beg to Differ with Articles for deletion/Henry Sullivan (composer)

I corrected the references for Henry Sullivan (composer).

I wanted to add that Sullivan wrote the script for the Broadway show Murray Anderson's Almanac (1929), of which some of the sketches were written by Noel Coward. From that show, he wrote the song I May Be Wrong (but I Think You're Wonderful) which has had its own Wikipedia page since 2006. It was sung by Doris Day as well by other notable singers. Starlighsky (talk) 01:56, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Starlighsky, it's entirely possible I was wrong. Right now it's in an Articles for Deletion discussion, which is a chance for anyone to come forward with sources to prove that it meets Wikipedia's notability requirements. If it can be shown that he meets any of the listed items at WP:MUSICBIO, then I'll gladly withdraw the deletion nomination. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 02:10, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

His song I May Be Wrong (but I Think You're Wonderful) clearly meets the WP:MUSICBIO criteria:

• Judy Garland - performed the song on Command Performance #134, August 19, 1944.
• Dinah Shore - a single release for Columbia Records, catalog No. 37140. (1946)
• Frankie Laine released a version in 1946, backed by Milton Delugg and the Swing Wing for Mercury Records, catalog No. 1205A.
• Doris Day with Harry James - included in the album Young Man with a Horn. Released on Columbia CL-6106 in 1950.
• Frank Rosolino released a version in 1956, on his I Play Trombone album.
• The Four Freshmen - for their album Four Freshmen and Five Saxes (1957).
• Bing Crosby and Rosemary Clooney recorded the song in 1958 for use on their radio show and it was subsequently included in the CD Bing & Rosie - The Crosby-Clooney Radio Sessions released in 2010.
• Perry Como - included in his album Saturday Night with Mr. C (1958)
• The Mills Brothers - included in the album Count Basie & The Mills Brothers – The Board Of Directors (1967).
• Ray Charles recorded a version for his album Volcanic Action of My Soul (1971)
• June Christy - A Friendly Session, Vol. 2 (1999)
• Ella Fitzgerald and Joe Pass recorded it on their album Speak Love.

Starlighsky (talk) 03:33, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

The Keeps are clearly the majority and it clearly meets the criteria the music notability. Is it okay if I delete the Articles for Deletion banner? Starlighsky (talk) 10:48, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

The articles for deletion banner will be removed by an administrator when the process ends. I'm not sure what you mean by "the keeps are clearly the majority", as no one has commented on it besides you. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 18:01, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

No one is responding but me. Because of this, keeps are in the majority.

His music is clearly notable. However, the Article for Deletion is for a notable part of 20th century contemporary music. Starlighsky (talk) 19:45, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Everyone who voted voted Keep. Can I remove the Article for Deletion banner? Starlighsky (talk) 02:03, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

This is brilliant.

Thehighestd (talk) 22:22, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

RFA2024 update: no longer accepting new proposals in phase I

Hey there! This is to let you know that phase I of the 2024 requests for adminship (RfA) review is now no longer accepting new proposals. Lots of proposals remain open for discussion, and the current round of review looks to be on a good track towards making significant progress towards improving RfA's structure and environment. I'd like to give my heartfelt thanks to everyone who has given us their idea for change to make RfA better, and the same to everyone who has given the necessary feedback to improve those ideas. The following proposals remain open for discussion:

• Proposal 2, initiated by HouseBlaster, provides for the addition of a text box at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship reminding all editors of our policies and enforcement mechanisms around decorum.
• Proposals 3 and 3b, initiated by Barkeep49 and Usedtobecool, respectively, provide for trials of discussion-only periods at RfA. The first would add three extra discussion-only days to the beginning, while the second would convert the first two days to discussion-only.
• Proposal 5, initiated by SilkTork, provides for a trial of RfAs without threaded discussion in the voting sections.
• Proposals 6c and 6d, initiated by BilledMammal, provide for allowing users to be selected as provisional admins for a limited time through various concrete selection criteria and smaller-scale vetting.
• Proposal 7, initiated by Lee Vilenski, provides for the "General discussion" section being broken up with section headings.
• Proposal 9b, initiated by Reaper Eternal, provides for the requirement that allegations of policy violation be substantiated with appropriate links to where the alleged misconduct occured.
• Proposals 12c, 21, and 21b, initiated by City of Silver, Ritchie333, and HouseBlaster, respectively, provide for reducing the discretionary zone, which currently extends from 65% to 75%. The first would reduce it 65%–70%, the second would reduce it to 50%–66%, and the third would reduce it to 60%–70%.
• Proposal 13, initiated by Novem Lingaue, provides for periodic, privately balloted admin elections.
• Proposal 14, initiated by Kusma, provides for the creation of some minimum suffrage requirements to cast a vote.
• Proposals 16 and 16c, initiated by Thebiguglyalien and Soni, respectively, provide for community-based admin desysop procedures. 16 would desysop where consensus is established in favor at the administrators' noticeboard; 16c would allow a petition to force reconfirmation.
• Proposal 16e, initiated by BilledMammal, would extend the recall procedures of 16 to bureaucrats.
• Proposal 17, initiated by SchroCat, provides for "on-call" admins and 'crats to monitor RfAs for decorum.
• Proposal 18, initiated by theleekycauldron, provides for lowering the RfB target from 85% to 75%.
• Proposal 24, initiated by SportingFlyer, provides for a more robust alternate version of the optional candidate poll.
• Proposal 25, initiated by Femke, provides for the requirement that nominees be extended-confirmed in addition to their nominators.
• Proposal 27, initiated by WereSpielChequers, provides for the creation of a training course for admin hopefuls, as well as periodic retraining to keep admins from drifting out of sync with community norms.
• Proposal 28, initiated by HouseBlaster, tightens restrictions on multi-part questions.

To read proposals that were closed as unsuccessful, please see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I/Closed proposals. You are cordially invited once again to participate in the open discussions; when phase I ends, phase II will review the outcomes of trial proposals and refine the implementation details of other proposals. Another notification will be sent out when this phase begins, likely with the first successful close of a major proposal. Happy editing! theleekycauldron (talk • she/her), via:

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:53, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Psi-Ops: The Mindgate Conspiracy

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Psi-Ops: The Mindgate Conspiracy you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Vrxces -- Vrxces (talk) 02:23, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Hugo's House of Horrors

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Hugo's House of Horrors you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Vrxces -- Vrxces (talk) 09:23, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Promotion of Leucippus

Congratulations, Thebiguglyalien! The article you nominated, Leucippus, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:05, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

AC/DC PR request

Hey dude! Since you made the review for the first failed FAC for AC/DC (archive3), are you able to review the rest of the article? — VAUGHAN J. (t · c) 00:40, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Iron Man-related

Hi. I have noticed that you have been very protective of the Iron Man article including the decreasing of the alternate version bios like the Tony Stark of Earth-818 who operates as Ant-Man. Would you have a problem if I was to sort the "Other characters named Iron Man" from the "Alternative versions" section considering that the former details the Iron Men of Earth-616? I'm just asking here. --Rtkat3 (talk) 04:07, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Rtkat3, I moved up the other characters who used the name to "Allies", so now "Alternate versions" is just alternate realities, not alternate identities. Does that look good? I'm currently trying to remove all of the low quality sources like ScreenRant and CBR (and obviously primary source usage of the comics themselves). If you know of any higher quality sources that cover the different interpretations of Iron Man, that would be really helpful. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 04:19, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

The relocation edit has been seen, but do you think there should be a separate heading for the other characters named Iron Man as there have been similar sections for other comics characters like Cobra and Hulk to name some examples? Rtkat3 (talk) 17:01, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

It wouldn't be unreasonable to have that be its own section, but it also seems a little unnecessary to me since it's only two sentences (both of which need to be changed anyway because their current sourcing isn't helpful for encyclopedic coverage). Thebiguglyalien (talk) 18:05, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

If you add in the brief information of James Rhodes, Arno Stark (the Earth-616 version), and Victor von Doom's first appearance as their versions of Iron Man with a reference to the first comic book appearance, it would suffice. Right? There was also an Iron Man imposter named Clarence Ward who killed Rumiko Fujikawa. As for his different A.I. versions of Tony Stark, perhaps something can be figured out. Sonny Frisco and Andros Stark are the known Marvel 2099 inhabitants that took up the name of Iron Man in different versions of Marvel 2099 even though we haven't seen the Earth-2099 version of either one yet. As Iron Maniac currently redirects to Iron Man, either a brief information will have to be added your way or his history will have to be transferred to List of Marvel Comics characters: I with a mentioning in the comments section on the transferring and importing that most other editors on this website do. Rtkat3 (talk) 19:12, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

It sounds like you're trying to write the article backward and then use primary sources to justify inclusion. The standard for what should be included depends entirely on what aspects are covered by reliable secondary/tertiary sources, and ideally high quality ones at that. If you'd like, I can take another look through the Marvel handbooks to see if any alternate versions are considered significant—still not ideal since they're not independent sources, but it's better than content farm sources like CBR and way better than using existence as justification for inclusion. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 19:39, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

If you want to go through the handbooks, go right ahead. Any one of them can contain the information that we're looking for. Rtkat3 (talk) 23:46, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

I've looked through a few handbooks today, including Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe: Alternate Universes. As far as I can tell, there are only two alternate universe Iron Man characters that have significant coverage in them: Iron Man (Ultimate Marvel character) and Iron Man 2020. These also happen to be the two alternate Iron Men that have articles on Wikipedia. I think the best way to go about this would be to have those two mentioned on the main Iron Man article because they seem to be the most important, and then give the other ones some dedicated space of their own on the "List of Marvel Comics characters" pages. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 05:30, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

While Iron Maniac can be redirected to List of Marvel Comics characters: I if that is alright with you, the section should still have a brief mention of the Tony Stark of Earth-818 who operated as Ant-Man and the Tony Stark from Earth-6160 who currently operates as Iron Lad because the Howard Stark of Earth-6160 operated as Iron Man. Perhaps Google can help you find the right sources that aren't the websites that you mentioned. Right? Rtkat3 (talk) 02:05, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

What's the justification for including these other than you personally thinking they're important? Thebiguglyalien (talk) 02:11, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

I was just stating some facts while reiterating that Iron Maniac still redirects to Iron Man as well as the fact that Ant-Man of Earth-818 was a main character in the second Avengers: Forever series. The rest of the already mentioned alternate versions that are already listed can have proper sources found on Google and/or with collaborations with editors who are experts at finding sources. Rtkat3 (talk) 02:30, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

My congratulations on adding the sentient Iron Man armor to the part with the other characters that went by the name of Iron Man. That sentient armor was responsible for killing Whiplash. I can look for how it sacrificed itself to protect Tony Stark to elaborate on that part if you like. If brief information on the tenure of James Rhodes and Doctor Doom can be added, it can be it's own section like how some comic book character pages have an "Other characters named [insert character name here]" section. Right? --Rtkat3 (talk) 01:34, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 18

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Iron Man, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vanity Fair.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:09, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of I Am Not Going to Get Up Today!

The article I Am Not Going to Get Up Today! you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:I Am Not Going to Get Up Today! for comments about the article, and Talk:I Am Not Going to Get Up Today!/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Premeditated Chaos -- Premeditated Chaos (talk) 20:41, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Reconstruction Amendments

13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments are all good articles so if you manage to get this page to GA quality, you can make a good topic. Okmrman (talk) 21:42, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Leucippus scheduled for TFA

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 11 May 2024. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 2024, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/May 2024. Please keep an eye on that page, as comments regarding the draft blurb may be left there by user:dying, who assists the coordinators by making suggestions on the blurbs, or by others. I also suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from two days before it appears on the Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work! Gog the Mild (talk) 16:38, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Signups open for The Core Contest 2024

The Core Contest—Wikipedia's most exciting contest—returns again this year from April 15 to May 31. The goal: to improve vital or other core articles, with a focus on those in the worst state of disrepair. Editing can be done individually, but in the past groups have also successfully competed. There is £300 of prize money divided among editors who provide the "best additive encyclopedic value". Signups are open now. Cheers from the judges, Femke, Casliber, Aza24. – Aza24 (talk) 02:20, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

If you wish to start or stop receiving news about The Core Contest, please add or remove yourself from the delivery list.