WikiCup 2021 November newsletterEdit

The WikiCup is over for another year and the finalists can relax! Our Champion this year is   The Rambling Man (submissions), who amassed over 5000 points in the final round, achieving 8 featured articles and almost 500 reviews. It was a very competitive round; seven of the finalists achieved over 1000 points in the round (enough to win the 2019 contest), and three scored over 3000 (enough to win the 2020 event). Our 2021 finalists and their scores were:

  1.   The Rambling Man (submissions) with 5072 points
  2.   Lee Vilenski (submissions) with 3276 points
  3.   Amakuru (submissions) with 3197 points
  4.   Epicgenius (submissions) with 1611 points
  5.   Gog the Mild (submissions) with 1571 points
  6.   BennyOnTheLoose (submissions) with 1420 points
  7.   Hog Farm (submissions) with 1043 points
  8.   Bloom6132 (submissions) with 528 points

All those who reached the final round will win awards. The following special awards will be made based on high performance in particular areas of content creation and review. Awards will be handed out in the next few days.

Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether they made it to the final round or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup, some of whom did very well. Wikipedia has benefitted greatly from the quality creations, expansions and improvements made, and the numerous reviews performed. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition, not forgetting User:Jarry1250, who runs the scoring bot.

If you have views on whether the rules or scoring need adjustment for next year's contest, please comment on the WikiCup talk page. Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2022 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 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:56, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Alexander HardcastleEdit

This is an interesting read, [1]. We appear not to have anything beyond Valle dei Templi. Perhaps one for a to-do list? All the best. KJP1 (talk) 09:20, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

p.s. - I've done you a little Start for Benwell Dene. I hate a redlink! KJP1 (talk) 12:01, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
Interesting read indeed, KJP1. I'm largely working on bringing up previous articles to GA/FA status at the moment, but I'll keep that one in mind for the next project. Nice article on Benwell Dene! You're right, red links tend to be some combination of tantalizing and irritating; it's always nice to see them transformed into something solid. --Usernameunique (talk) 22:35, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
But don’t stay in the hotel. The Tripadvisor reviews are shocking! KJP1 (talk) 22:41, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
KJP1, I saw that! Those photos really take the cake, don't they. --Usernameunique (talk) 22:45, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter messageEdit

 Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:43, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Gilbert ReaneyEdit

Hey Usernameunique, I hope all is well. I've been inspired by your work on academics to pursue a GA for the musicologist Gilbert Reaney (and hopefully others in the future). I used your Colin Robert Chase article as something of a model. Since this is my first attempt at an academic's article, could you take a glance at it to see if it looks like I'm on the right path? I think after adding a complete publications list I'll be relatively good to go, but thought you might have some insight. Aza24 (talk) 16:43, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Hey Aza24, sorry for the delay on getting back to you on this. I've been meaning to take a look, and will do so this week. --Usernameunique (talk) 00:07, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
Okay, no worries! It doesn't have to be anything comprehensive of course, this is just a new type of bio for me so I want to get it right the first time before I do more like them. Sorry if my revert was passive aggressive—I just didn't want to bother you if you were uninterested. Aza24 (talk) 00:49, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Promotion of Colin Robert ChaseEdit

 Congratulations, Usernameunique! The article you nominated, Colin Robert Chase, 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, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

William B. JordanEdit

Hello Usernameunique. How are things at your end? After our previous interaction, I got a copy of Hall's translation of Beowulf and it was fascinating. Tolkien's Beowulf: A Translation and Commentary is also another fine translation, if the topic interests you.

I recently finished working on William B. Jordan — a lot of expanding and then pruning. I am used to writing medical research papers and case studies because of my profession, and perhaps that is why I found writing an encyclopediac biography an uphill climb. I did use quite a few of your featured articles as reference points when I was unsure about the article structure and referencing, and they have been immensely helpful. I have never nominated an article for FAC though, and I have this nagging feeling that I am missing something obvious or that the prose is not yet up to the mark. I want to move forward with Jordan's FAC nomination in the near future, but I wished to hear your thoughts on the article before I do that. If you would be so kind as to go through the article and let me know if there are things that could be improved, I would greatly appreciate your feedback.

I believe that I can work on issues once I have been made aware of them (I did away with a lot of fawning language and overdetail after this was pointed out to me). I admire the work you have done on Wikipedia, especially the biographies you have edited, which is why I thought of asking you for advice. Regards. — The Most Comfortable Chair 11:18, 30 November 2021 (UTC)