User talk:Philroc

Are you here because I've made a mistake of some sort while editing? If so, don't hesitate to notify me using the link below.

Thanks for thanking me :)

Hi Philroc... Thanks for "thanking me" for my update on the Draft Saildrone page... I've been having a hard time getting this page approved (and out of draft). I would appreciate any help/additions you want to make that could get us there or any tips on what I might change to get it approved. I feel like I've done everything I can... Here's the link to the draft, in case: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Saildrone Appreciate it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jennvirskus (talk • contribs) 16:08, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

@Jennvirkkus: From what I can see, the draft's overall tone appears to be encyclopedic, though there are still some instances of vague language such as "A saildrone is a sailboat-like vehicle equipped with science-grade sensors..." (what does "science-grade" mean in this case?) and "The Greenbird is extremely lightweight..." (how lightweight?) Apart from my mini-analysis, my best advice to you would be to talk with the user who declined your draft (Tol), who has surely reviewed it more than I have. Philroc (talk) 02:40, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello @Philroc; thanks for the ping. @Jennvirskus: It's mainly because of things like "science-grade sensors" that don't give much actual information, and which I believe are just there to promote the product. There are also many quotes which seem distinctly unencyclopedic. There's additional vagueness with "The mission showed that a combination of ship, satellite, and autonomous in situ measurements are necessary to address observing challenges" — how did it show this, and who has said so? (It's surely an opinion, so whose is it?) Phrases like "battling 50-foot waves" also don't sound neutral. I don't think you need to add anything; I think you need to copy edit the draft for tone and remove vague but positive wording and the positive quotations that don't provide much information. Tol (talk | contribs) @ 15:42, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@Philroc and @Tol Thank you both for your feedback. This makes a lot of sense. I've made significant copyedits and resubmitted. My goal is really to create the basic structure of the page and let the great wiki community have at it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jennvirskus (talk • contribs) 20:06, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Celtic Orthodox Church

I am not very efficient at editing Wikipedia. I'm unsure how to add sources. However, everything I put (or restored) in the revision you have twice removed is correct and I can provide sources if you can help me add them. Most importantly the page at present is completely WRONG. The Celtic Orthodox Church was instituted in 1866 under Bp Julius (Jules Ferette). Tugdual/Danyel didn't become involved with the COC beyond leaving his hermitage, at his death, to a bishop who then gave it to a group of monks received into the Ancient British Church (as the COC was then known). Tugdual for a while headed the short lived local Holy Catholic Church, but that is nothing to do with the Ancient British Church or the Celtic Orthodox Church, albeit that much of Tugduals teaching was adopted by the COC. The information given by Pearson is inaccurate in the extreme, so the COC article as it currently stands is incorrect and totally misleading. [Orthoinveritas] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orthodxinveritas (talk • contribs) 16:37, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

@Orthodxinveritas: If you believe the article is entirely inaccurate in its current state, try gaining consensus to change it by making a post on its talk page and responding to other editors' comments until you find a resolution. Don't forget to utilize reliable sources when building your case. Philroc (talk) 02:40, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

WikiCup 2021 November newsletter

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.

• The Rambling Man (submissions) wins the featured article prize, for 8 FAs in round 5.
• Lee Vilenski (submissions) wins the featured list prize, for 3 FLs in round 5.
• Gog the Mild (submissions) wins the featured topic prize, for 13 articles in a featured topic in round 5.
• Epicgenius (submissions) wins the good article prize, for 63 GAs in round 4.
• The Rambling Man (submissions) wins the good topic prize, for 86 articles in good topics in round 5.
• The Rambling Man (submissions) wins the reviewer prize, for 68 FAC reviews and 213 GAN reviews, both in round 5.
• Epicgenius (submissions) wins the DYK prize, for 30 did you know articles in round 3 and 105 overall.
• Bloom6132 (submissions) wins the ITN prize, for 71 in the news articles in round 1 and 284 overall.

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) 19:55, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Madonna Inn

Hi Philroc, thank you for your input. I'm new at editing, and still learning, so thank you for your input. I appologize for adding multiple times, I kept finding spelling errors and wanted to fix those. I will look for an appropriate source and get back to you.