Archive #1

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).

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).

German empireEdit

Greetings, I just wanted to inform you the territories I displayed were actually conquered by Germany after the Russian empire collapsed, thus it makes it appropriate for the page. Thank you for reading WilhelmsCamel (talk) 10:40, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

@WilhelmsCamel: Which can easily be added further down the article when WW1 is dealt with. The infobox should show the borders of the actual state. The territories were never officially annexed and therefore do not constitute a part of the German Empire at any given time. Zwerg Nase (talk) 12:23, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

There’s a similar map of the French empire showing its client states as well. The German empire sent military forces into these territories and secured them. Since historical nations are often displayed in their height, it seems appropriate to use my map for the German Empire WilhelmsCamel (talk) 12:50, 8 July 2020 (UTC)


  Hey, Zwerg Nase. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee!
Have a great day!
CommanderWaterford (talk) 06:52, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
@CommanderWaterford: Thank you very much! Zwerg Nase (talk) 07:55, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!Edit

@CAPTAIN RAJU: Thank you!! Zwerg Nase (talk) 08:35, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

I'm being attacked by editor Kevin mce is there anything i can do???Edit

The editor KevinMce is going through all of my contributions and deleting all of them is there anything I can do about this? Raleigh80Z90Faema69 (talk) 15:25, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

@Raleigh80Z90Faema69: The best course of action is to discuss the matter directly with Kevin McE first. He seems to make some fair points, which I have pointed out to you in the past as well, concerning your writing style. It also does not appear like he is erasing everything, but taking out bits that are not written in an encyclopedic way. Zwerg Nase (talk) 17:30, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

He went through my page and erased pretty much every edit I made in the past two months.... Edits that are valid contributions, that are relevant and either are cited directly, or are cited in the links to other articles I'm mentioning and it seems to be a very petty thing to do to go seek vengeance because he's mad about something. Raleigh80Z90Faema69 (talk) 17:34, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

And I understand what you're saying Zwerg.... If there's something that is questionable or is not relevant to the topic being discussed in the article then ok.... Sometimes mistakes get made but to just go delete the biography of Georg Totschnig when there was nothing there before or to mention how Davis Phinney was the only American to ever come close to the Green Jersey or to erase all of the career placing's of Henry Anglade these are all relevant things that I had to research and work hard on and he's just going through every contribution and deleting them.... All because he's mad about something and wants revenge it's like the mindset of an irresponsible twelve year old Raleigh80Z90Faema69 (talk) 17:51, 15 July 2020 (UTC)