Jump to content

User talk:TrickyH: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Tag: MassMessage delivery
No edit summary
Line 53: Line 53:


If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may '''contest the nomination''' by [[:Noha Khalef|visiting the page]] and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with [[Wikipedia:List of policies|Wikipedia's policies and guidelines]]. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the {{Querylink|Special:Log|qs=type=delete&page=Noha+Khalef|deleting administrator}}. <!-- Template:Db-notability-notice --><!-- Template:Db-csd-notice-custom --> [[User:power~enwiki|power~enwiki]] ([[User talk:Power~enwiki|<span style="color:#FA0;font-family:courier">π</span>]], [[Special:Contributions/Power~enwiki|<span style="font-family:courier">ν</span>]]) 03:15, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may '''contest the nomination''' by [[:Noha Khalef|visiting the page]] and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with [[Wikipedia:List of policies|Wikipedia's policies and guidelines]]. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the {{Querylink|Special:Log|qs=type=delete&page=Noha+Khalef|deleting administrator}}. <!-- Template:Db-notability-notice --><!-- Template:Db-csd-notice-custom --> [[User:power~enwiki|power~enwiki]] ([[User talk:Power~enwiki|<span style="color:#FA0;font-family:courier">π</span>]], [[Special:Contributions/Power~enwiki|<span style="font-family:courier">ν</span>]]) 03:15, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
/Newsletter/Send&oldid=997607437 -->
/Newsletter/Send&oldid=9976074

== WikiCup 2021 March newsletter ==

Round 1 of the competition has finished; it was a high-scoring round with 21 contestants scoring more than 100 points. Everyone with a positive score moves on to Round 2, with 55 contestants qualifying. You will need to finish among the top thirty-two contestants in Round 2 if you are to qualify for Round 3. Our top scorers in Round 1 were:

*{{flagicon|New York (state)}} [[User:Epicgenius|Epicgenius]] led the field with a featured article, nine good articles and an assortment of other submissions, specialising on buildings and locations in New York, for a total of 945 points.
*{{flagicon|Republic of Venice|wartime}} [[User:Bloom6132|Bloom6132]] was close behind with 896 points, largely gained from 71 "In the news" items, mostly recent deaths.
*{{flagicon|Scotland}} [[User:ImaginesTigers|ImaginesTigers]], who has been editing Wikipedia for less than a year, was in third place with 711 points, much helped by bringing [[League of Legends]] to featured article status, exemplifying how bonus points can boost a contestant's score.
*{{flagicon|Rwanda}} [[User:Amakuru|Amakuru]] came next with 708 points, [[Kigali]] being another featured article that scored maximum bonus points.
*[[File:Flag of the United Nations.svg|22px]] [[User:Ktin|Ktin]], new to the WikiCup, was in fifth place with 523 points, garnered from 15 DYKs and 34 "In the news" items.
*{{flagicon|Botswana}} [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] scored 511 points, many from featured article candidate reviews and from football related DYKs.
*[[File:Standard of Oliver Cromwell (1653–1659).svg|22px]] [[User:Gog the Mild|Gog the Mild]], last year's runner-up, came next with 498 points, from a featured article and numerous featured article candidate reviews.
*[[File:Bennington Flag.svg|22px]] [[User:Hog Farm|Hog Farm]], at 452, scored for a featured article, four good articles and a number of reviews.
*{{flagicon|United States}} [[User:Le Panini|Le Panini]], another newcomer to the WikiCup, scored 438 for a featured article and three good articles.
*{{flagicon|England}} [[User:Lee Vilenski|Lee Vilenski]], last year's champion, scored 332 points, from a featured article and various other sport-related topics.

These contestants, like all the others, now have to start again from scratch. In Round 1, contestants achieved eight featured articles, three featured lists and one featured picture, as well as around two hundred DYKs and twenty-seven ITNs. They completed 97 good article reviews, nearly double the 52 good articles they claimed. Contestants also claimed for 135 featured article and featured list candidate reviews. There is no longer a requirement to mention your WikiCup participation when undertaking these reviews.

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 a good article candidate, a featured process, or something 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! <small>If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from [[Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send]].</small> [[User:Sturmvogel 66|Sturmvogel 66]] ([[User talk:Sturmvogel 66|talk]]) and [[User:Cwmhiraeth|Cwmhiraeth]] ([[User talk:Cwmhiraeth|talk]]). [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 20:27, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Cwmhiraeth@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send&oldid=1009682077 -->

== WikiCup 2021 May newsletter ==

The second round of the 2021 WikiCup has now finished; it was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 61 points to advance to Round 3. There were some impressive efforts in the round, with the top eight contestants all scoring more than 400 points. A large number of the points came from the 12 featured articles and the 110 good articles achieved in total by contestants, as well as the 216 good article reviews they performed; the GAN backlog drive and the stay-at-home imperative during the COVID-19 pandemic may have been partially responsible for these impressive figures.

Our top scorers in Round 2 were:

*{{flagicon|BWA}} [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]], with 2963 points from three featured articles, 20 featured article reviews, 37 good articles, 73 good article reviews, as well as 22 DYKs.
*{{flagicon|New York (state)}} [[User:Epicgenius|Epicgenius]], with 1718 points from one featured article, 29 good articles, 16 DYKs and plenty of bonus points.
*{{flagicon|Republic of Venice|wartime}} [[User:Bloom6132|Bloom6132]], with 990 points from 13 DYKs and 64 "In the news" items, mostly recent deaths.
*[[File:Bennington Flag.svg|22px]] [[User:Hog Farm|Hog Farm]], with 834 points from two featured articles, five good articles, 14 featured article reviews and 15 good article reviews.
*[[File:Standard of Oliver Cromwell (1653–1659).svg|22px|England]] [[User:Gog the Mild|Gog the Mild]], with 524 points from two featured articles and four featured article reviews.
*{{flagicon|ENG}} [[User:Lee Vilenski|Lee Vilenski]], with 501 points from one featured article, three good articles, six featured article reviews and 25 good article reviews.
*[[File:Transgender Pride flag.svg|22px]] [[User:Sammi Brie|Sammi Brie]], with 485 points from four good articles, eight good article reviews and 27 DYKs, on US radio and television stations.
*[[File:Flag of the United Nations.svg|22px]] [[User:Ktin|Ktin]], with 436 points from four good articles, seven DYKs and 11 "In the news" items.

Please remember that DYKs cannot be claimed until they have appeared on the main page. As we enter the third round, any content promoted after the end of Round 2 but before the start of Round 3 can be claimed now, and anything you forgot to claim in Round 2 cannot! Remember too, that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them (except for at the end of each round, when you must claim them before the cut-off date/time). When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, 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). 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]]. Judges: [[User:Sturmvogel 66|Sturmvogel 66]] ([[User talk:Sturmvogel 66|talk]]) and [[User:Cwmhiraeth|Cwmhiraeth]] [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 10:28, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Cwmhiraeth@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send&oldid=1020757877 -->

== WikiCup 2021 July newsletter ==

The third round of the 2021 WikiCup has now come to an end. Each of the sixteen contestants who made it into the fourth round had at least 294 points, and our top six scorers all had over 600 points. They were:

*{{flagicon|BWA}} [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]], with 1825 points from 3 featured articles, 44 featured article reviews, 14 good articles, 30 good article reviews and 10 DYKs. In addition, he completed a 34-article good topic on the [[EFL Championship play-offs]].
*{{flagicon|New York (state)}} [[User:Epicgenius|Epicgenius]], a New York specialist, with 1083 points from 2 featured article reviews, 18 good articles, 30 DYKs and plenty of bonus points.
*{{flagicon|Republic of Venice|wartime}} [[User:Bloom6132|Bloom6132]], with 869 points from 11 DYKs, all with bonus points, and 54 "In the news" items, mostly covering people who had recently died.
*[[File:Standard of Oliver Cromwell (1653–1659).svg|22px|England]] [[User:Gog the Mild|Gog the Mild]], with 817 points from 3 featured articles on historic battles in Europe, 5 featured article reviews and 3 good articles.
*[[File:Bennington Flag.svg|22px]] [[User:Hog Farm|Hog Farm]], with 659 points from 2 featured articles and 2 good articles on American Civil War battles, 18 featured article reviews, 2 good articles, 6 good article reviews and 4 DYKs.
*[[File:ICS Zulu.svg|20px|Zulu (International Code of Signals)]] [[User:BennyOnTheLoose|BennyOnTheLoose]], a snooker specialist and new to the Cup, with 647 points from a featured article, 2 featured article reviews, 6 good articles, 6 good article reviews and 3 DYKs.

In round three, contestants achieved 19 featured articles, 7 featured lists, 106 featured article reviews, 72 good articles, 1 good topic, 62 good article reviews, 165 DYKs and 96 ITN items. We enter the fourth round with scores reset to zero; any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them (one contestant in round 3 lost out because of this). When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, 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). 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]]. Judges: [[User:Sturmvogel 66|Sturmvogel 66]] ([[User talk:Sturmvogel 66|talk]]) and [[User:Cwmhiraeth|Cwmhiraeth]] [[User:Cwmhiraeth|Cwmhiraeth]] ([[User talk:Cwmhiraeth|talk]]) [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 09:30, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Cwmhiraeth@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send&oldid=1030693157 -->

== Wikipedia Wars and the Israel-Palestine conflict...please fill out my survey? ==

Hello :)
I am writing my MA dissertation on Wikipedia Wars and the Israel-Palestine conflict, and I noticed that you have contributed to those pages. My dissertation will look at the process of collaborative knowledge production on the Israel-Palestine conflict, and the effect it has on bias in the articles. This will involve understanding the profiles and motivations of editors, contention/controversy and dispute resolution in the talk pages, and bias in the final article.
For more information, you can check out my [https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Wikipedia_Wars_and_the_Israel-Palestine_Conflict meta-wiki research page] or my [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sarabnas user page], where I will be posting my findings when I am done.
I would greatly appreciate if you could take 5 minutes to fill out [https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdriEAkTQCq5Us26lxEqbjfw4jh3ktqTLaE8FN7fYY7Eph1Fw/viewform?usp=sf_link this quick survey] ''before 8 August 2021.''

Participation in this survey is entirely voluntary and anonymous. There are no foreseeable risks nor benefits to you associated with this project.
Thanks so much,

Sarah Sanbar

[[User:Sarabnas|Sarabnas]] <sup>[[User:Sarabnas|I'm researching Wikipedia]]</sup> <sub>[[User_talk:Sarabnas|Questions?]]</sub> 10:57, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

== WikiCup 2021 September newsletter ==

The fourth round of the competition has finished with over 500 points being required to qualify for the final round. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants, {{flagicon|BWA}} [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] and {{flagicon|New York (state)}} [[User:Epicgenius|Epicgenius]], each scoring over 3000 points, and six contestants scoring over 1000. All but one of the finalists achieved one or more FAs during the round, the exception being {{flagicon|Republic of Venice|wartime}} [[User: Bloom6132|Bloom6132]] who demonstrated that 61 "in the news" items produces an impressive number of points. Other contestants who made it to the final are [[File:Standard of Oliver Cromwell (1653–1659).svg|22px]] [[User:Gog the Mild|Gog the Mild]], {{flagicon|ENG}} [[User:Lee Vilenski|Lee Vilenski]], [[File:ICS Zulu.svg|20px|Zulu (International Code of Signals)]] [[User:BennyOnTheLoose|BennyOnTheLoose]], {{flagicon|Rwanda}} [[User:Amakuru|Amakuru]] and [[File:Bennington Flag.svg|22px]] [[User:Hog Farm|Hog Farm]]. However, all their points are now swept away and everyone starts afresh in the final round.

Round 4 saw the achievement of 18 featured articles and 157 good articles. [[File:Wandbild Portrait George Floyd von Eme Street Art im Mauerpark (Berlin).jpg|22px|George Floyd mural]] [[User:Bilorv|Bilorv]] scored for a 25-article good topic on [[Black Mirror]] but narrowly missed out on qualifying for the final round. There was enthusiasm for FARs, with 89 being performed, and there were 63 GARs and around 100 DYKs during the round. As we start round 5, we say goodbye to the eight competitors who didn't quite make it to the final round; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia, and we hope you will join us again next year. For other contestants, 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.

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. <small>If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from [[Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send]].</small> [[User:Sturmvogel 66|Sturmvogel 66]] and [[User:Cwmhiraeth|Cwmhiraeth]]. [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 13:02, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Cwmhiraeth@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send&oldid=1041467308 -->

== WikiCup 2021 November newsletter ==

The WikiCup is over for another year and the finalists can relax! Our '''Champion''' this year is {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant12|The Rambling Man}}, 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:

#{{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant12|The Rambling Man}} with 5072 points
#{{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant12|Lee Vilenski}} with 3276 points
#{{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant12|Amakuru}} with 3197 points
#{{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant12|Epicgenius}} with 1611 points
#{{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant12|Gog the Mild}} with 1571 points
#{{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant12|BennyOnTheLoose}} with 1420 points
#{{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant12|Hog Farm}} with 1043 points
#{{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant12|Bloom6132}} 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.

*{{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant12|The Rambling Man}} wins the featured article prize, for 8 FAs in round 5.
*{{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant12|Lee Vilenski}} wins the featured list prize, for 3 FLs in round 5.
*{{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant12|Gog the Mild}} wins the featured topic prize, for 13 articles in a featured topic in round 5.
*{{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant12|Epicgenius}} wins the good article prize, for 63 GAs in round 4.
*{{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant12|The Rambling Man}} wins the good topic prize, for 86 articles in good topics in round 5.
*{{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant12|The Rambling Man}} wins the reviewer prize, for 68 FAC reviews and 213 GAN reviews, both in round 5.
*{{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant12|Epicgenius}} wins the DYK prize, for 30 did you know articles in round 3 and 105 overall.
*{{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant12|Bloom6132}} 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 [[Wikipedia talk:WikiCup|WikiCup talk page]]. Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to '''[[Wikipedia:WikiCup/2022 signups|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! <small>If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from [[Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send]].</small> [[User:Sturmvogel 66|Sturmvogel 66]] and [[User:Cwmhiraeth|Cwmhiraeth]]. [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 19:56, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Cwmhiraeth@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send&oldid=1051155860 -->

== ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message ==

<table class="messagebox " style="border: 1px solid #AAA; background: ivory; padding: 0.5em; width: 100%;">
<tr><td style="vertical-align:middle; padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">[[File:Scale of justice 2.svg|40px]]</td><td>Hello! Voting in the '''[[WP:ACE2021|2021 Arbitration Committee elections]]''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2021|end}}-1 day}}. All '''[[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2021#Election timeline|eligible users]]''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The [[WP:ARBCOM|Arbitration Committee]] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the [[Wikipedia:Arbitration|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 [[WP:BAN|site bans]], [[WP:TBAN|topic bans]], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Policy|arbitration policy]] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2021/Candidates|the candidates]] and submit your choices on the '''[[Special:SecurePoll/vote/{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2021|poll}}|voting page]]'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>[[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 00:12, 23 November 2021 (UTC)</small>
</td></tr>
</table>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2021/Coordination/MM/02&oldid=1056563129 -->

== Welcome to the 2022 WikiCup! ==

Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2022 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found '''[[Wikipedia:WikiCup|here]]'''. If you have not yet signed up, you can '''[[Wikipedia:WikiCup/2022 signups|add your name here]]''' and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the [[Wikipedia talk:WikiCup|WikiCup talk page]]. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: {{User4|Sturmvogel 66}} and {{User4|Cwmhiraeth}}. Good luck! [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 14:37, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Cwmhiraeth@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send&oldid=1063882272 -->

== Welcome to the 2022 WikiCup! ==

Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2022 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found '''[[Wikipedia:WikiCup|here]]'''. If you have not yet signed up, you can '''[[Wikipedia:WikiCup/2022 signups|add your name here]]''' and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the [[Wikipedia talk:WikiCup|WikiCup talk page]]. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: {{User4|Sturmvogel 66}} and {{User4|Cwmhiraeth}}. Good luck! [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 15:02, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Cwmhiraeth@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send&oldid=1063904801 -->

== WikiCup 2022 March newsletter ==

And so ends the first round of the [[Wikipedia:WikiCup|WikiCup]]. Last year anyone who scored more than zero points moved on to Round 2, but this was not the case this year, and a score of 13 or more was required to proceed. The top scorers in Round 1 were:

*{{flagicon|New York (state)}} [[User:Epicgenius|Epicgenius]], a finalist last year, who led the field with 1906 points, gained from 32 GAs and 19 DYKs, all on the topic of New York buildings.
*{{flagicon|Christmas Island}} [[User:AryKun|AryKun]], new to the contest, was second with 1588 points, having achieved 2 FAs, 11 GAs and various other submissions, mostly on the subject of birds.
*{{flagicon|Kingdom of Scotland|old}} [[User:Bloom6132|Bloom6132]], a WikiCup veteran, was in third place with 682 points, garnered from 51 In the news items and several DYKs.
*{{flagicon|Philadelphia}} [[User:GhostRiver|GhostRiver]] was close behind with 679 points, gained from achieving 12 GAs, mostly on ice hockey players, and 35 GARs.
*{{flagicon|United Nations}} [[User:Kavyansh.Singh|Kavyansh.Singh]] was in fifth place with 551 points, with an FA, a FL, and many reviews.
*[[File:Flag of Provo, Utah (1989–2015).svg|23px|link=Flag of Provo, Utah]] [[User:SounderBruce|SounderBruce]] was next with 454 points, gained from an FA and various other submissions, mostly on United States highways.
*{{flagicon|United Nations}} [[User:Ktin|Ktin]], another WikiCup veteran, was in seventh place with 412 points, mostly gained from In the news items.

These contestants, like all the others who qualified for Round 2, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. Between them, contestants completed reviews of a large number of good articles as the contest ran concurrently with a GAN backlog drive. Well done all! To qualify for Round 3, contestants will need to finish Round 2 among the top thirty-two participants.

Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Anything that should have been claimed for in Round 1 is no longer eligible for points. 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]].

Questions are welcome on [[Wikipedia talk:WikiCup]], and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! <small>If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from [[Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send]].</small> [[User:Sturmvogel 66|Sturmvogel 66]] ([[User talk:Sturmvogel 66|talk]]) and [[User:Cwmhiraeth|Cwmhiraeth]] ([[User talk:Cwmhiraeth|talk]]) [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 12:07, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Cwmhiraeth@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send&oldid=1075012939 -->

== WikiCup 2022 March newsletter ==

And so ends the first round of the [[Wikipedia:WikiCup|WikiCup]]. Last year anyone who scored more than zero points moved on to Round 2, but this was not the case this year, and a score of 13 or more was required to proceed. The top scorers in Round 1 were:

*{{flagicon|New York (state)}} [[User:Epicgenius|Epicgenius]], a finalist last year, who led the field with 1906 points, gained from 32 GAs and 19 DYKs, all on the topic of New York buildings.
*{{flagicon|Christmas Island}} [[User:AryKun|AryKun]], new to the contest, was second with 1588 points, having achieved 2 FAs, 11 GAs and various other submissions, mostly on the subject of birds.
*{{flagicon|Kingdom of Scotland|old}} [[User:Bloom6132|Bloom6132]], a WikiCup veteran, was in third place with 682 points, garnered from 51 In the news items and several DYKs.
*{{flagicon|Philadelphia}} [[User:GhostRiver|GhostRiver]] was close behind with 679 points, gained from achieving 12 GAs, mostly on ice hockey players, and 35 GARs.
*{{flagicon|United Nations}} [[User:Kavyansh.Singh|Kavyansh.Singh]] was in fifth place with 551 points, with an FA, a FL, and many reviews.
*[[File:Flag of Provo, Utah (1989–2015).svg|23px|link=Flag of Provo, Utah]] [[User:SounderBruce|SounderBruce]] was next with 454 points, gained from an FA and various other submissions, mostly on United States highways.
*{{flagicon|United Nations}} [[User:Ktin|Ktin]], another WikiCup veteran, was in seventh place with 412 points, mostly gained from In the news items.

These contestants, like all the others who qualified for Round 2, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. Between them, contestants completed reviews of a large number of good articles as the contest ran concurrently with a GAN backlog drive. Well done all! To qualify for Round 3, contestants will need to finish Round 2 among the top thirty-two participants.

Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Anything that should have been claimed for in Round 1 is no longer eligible for points. 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]].

Questions are welcome on [[Wikipedia talk:WikiCup]], and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! <small>If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from [[Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send]].</small> [[User:Sturmvogel 66|Sturmvogel 66]] ([[User talk:Sturmvogel 66|talk]]) and [[User:Cwmhiraeth|Cwmhiraeth]] ([[User talk:Cwmhiraeth|talk]]) [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 13:55, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Cwmhiraeth@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send&oldid=1075012939 -->

== WikiCup 2022 May newsletter ==

The second round of the 2022 WikiCup has now finished. It was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 115 points to advance to round 3. There were some very impressive efforts in round 2, with the top seven contestants all scoring more than 500 points. A large number of the points came from the 11 featured articles and the 79 good articles achieved in total by contestants.

Our top scorers in round 2 were:

#{{flagicon|New York (state)}} [[User:Epicgenius|Epicgenius]], with 1264 points from 2 featured article, 4 good articles and 18 DYKs. Epicgenius was a finalist last year but has now withdrawn from the contest as he pursues a new career path.
#{{flagicon|Christmas Island}} [[User:AryKun|AryKun]], with 1172 points from two featured articles, one good article and a substantial number of featured article and good article reviews.
#{{flagicon|Kingdom of Scotland|old}} [[User:Bloom6132|Bloom6132]], with 605 points from 44 in the news items and 4 DYKs.
#[[File:Transgender Pride flag.svg|23px]] [[User:Sammi Brie|Sammi Brie]], with 573 points from 8 GAs and 21 DYKs.
#[[File:Vexilloid of the Roman Empire.svg|20px|link=SPQR]] [[User:Ealdgyth|Ealdgyth]], with 567 points from 11 GAs and 34 good and featured article reviews.
#{{flagicon|United States of America}} [[User:Panini!|Panini!]], with 549 points from 1 FA, 4 GAs and several other sources.
#{{flagicon|ENG}} [[User:Lee Vilenski|Lee Vilenski]], with 545 points from 1 FA, 4 GAs and a number of reviews.

The rules for featured and good article reviews require the review to be of sufficient length; brief quick fails and very short reviews will generally not be awarded points. Remember also that DYKs cannot be claimed until they have appeared on the main page. As we enter the third round, any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed now, and anything you forgot to claim in round 2 cannot! Remember too, that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, 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). 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 your name from [[Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send]]. [[User:Sturmvogel 66|Sturmvogel 66]] ([[User talk:Sturmvogel 66|talk]]) and [[User:Cwmhiraeth|Cwmhiraeth]] [[User:Cwmhiraeth|Cwmhiraeth]] ([[User talk:Cwmhiraeth|talk]]) 10:39, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Cwmhiraeth@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send&oldid=1085830215 -->

Revision as of 08:49, 13 June 2022

Hey TrickyH, you recently edited Highway 60 (Israel). Your edit leaves out an important fact. You say "...between Israeli settlements and the city of Hebron...". In fact, (unlike Highway 443 which was closed for many years to green license plates) Highway 60 is shared by both Israeli yellow license plates and Palestinian green license plates (usually courteously). So the road connects both Israeli settlements and Palestinian towns.

Moreover, you placed your edit in a paragraph describing the road's physicalities. There is an entire section where I think your point would better fit and even be expanded upon. The section "Bypass roads" (and this section's name could be changed) would be a place to discuss political issues. For example, further north, in the Samarian Mountains, there are frequent road closures. Closures do occur in the southern Judean Mountain section of the highway, but considerably less by far. (I think by a ratio of about 10:1) (need refs)

I am considering rewriting your edit and placing it in the paragraph dealing with political issues, unless you beat me to it. (I'm kind of busy for a while.) I look forward to discussing this option further with you. --@Efrat (talk) 08:46, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Efrat, I have revised my edit to make it clear that the highway services Palestinian communities such as Hebron as well as the Israeli settlements of the southern West Bank. I feel that this sentence should remain in the current section, as it describes the highway's route through the southern West Bank via Israeli settlements and the cities of Hebron and Bethlehem. You are correct in stating that the road is open to Palestinian vehicles; however, there are other issues such as the placement and access to junctions that restrict the movement of green-plated vehicles which could be expanded in the Bypass roads section. --@TrickyH (talk)
Your edit gives true information, but to be consistant, all the information must be given. Now, the following 2 sentences after your edit need to be reworked. ie. Once entering J'lem, the road only serves yellow plates. Then, north of J'lem, the situation reverts to that of the south (as, shown by your edit) until Jenin where the route is restricted to only green plates (and is not even officialy Route 60 pending final status agreements as detailed in the "Junctions" list), and finally at its northern limits to only yellow plates. Further more, all along the route, access at various junctions with Palestinian towns and Israeli settlements involve various restrictions and permissions.
I'm sure you will see, that at some point in the future, this entire discussion will grow to become a seperate paragraph immedately following a purely geographical discription of the route. Now that I think of it, why has no one ever written an entire article about Bypass Roads in the West Bank? And while we are at it, maybe something should be said about the economic cooperation between many Settlers and Palestinians in the West Bank (which in part is facilitated by the existance of shared bypass roads). It will be interesting to see how this develops. It seems that a simple article about a simple stretch of pavement may lead to discussions about many other issues! --@Efrat (talk) 06:49, 19 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

1RR

Please be aware that all articles related to the Arab-Israeli conflict 'broadly construed' (WP:ARBPIA) are covered by editing restrictions. The restrictions are described in the 'WARNING: ACTIVE ARBITRATION REMEDIES' section on article talk pages such as Talk:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions and include WP:1RR. You should be aware of WP:BRD too if you aren't already familiar with it. It is easy to trigger edit warring in the ARBPIA topic area because there are many advocates and nationalists. Sean.hoyland - talk 08:51, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Resistance (socialist youth organisation)

Hi TrickyH. Regarding your edits at Resistance (socialist youth organisation), firstly you added some sources from the official Resistance website. As you can see from the reference list in the article, 18 of the 22 references in the article currently come from either the Resistance official website, or Green Left Weekly and their youtube channel. Please read WP:PRIMARY. "Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published secondary sources..." The fact that this article has to rely so heavily on sources from it's own official publications gives the impression to the reader that Resistance cannot get much support or news coverage from outside its own sources; it's certainly not helping the article in any way. It would be a great benefit to the article if at least some, if not most, of those primary sources could be replaced with secondary ones.

The second problem I immediately see at this articles is all the references are bare URLs. Please read Template:Cite web and start formatting references using that template. As well as looking a lot tidier, formatting references this way helps to prevent link rot, as when a date, article title and author are specified it is considerable easier to search for where the url has moved to, or to find a mirror of it. If you are unsure of how to do this, here is an example: [1]. Freikorp (talk) 13:44, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, I'll look into secondary sources to further expand the article and reformat the references!

Self revert your edits or be reported.

I have created a new section for Extrajudicial killings. Self revert your edits which violate revert rules. If not, I will report you. If there's an objection from two users on your sources, you should bring it to the talk page and not revert their edits. Among the things I removed, were things that are not in the right location of the article, suggestion unsourced claims, like for example that the death of alldged Palestinian assailent in 22 September was followed by an esculation but acually, the esculation occured in 1 October and sources in the article agree with that. So self revert your edits or be reported for breaking rules.

If you did not know, articles related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict have a revert protection, users are restricted to 1 revert per 24 hours in those articles.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 21:25, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Even if Bolter were my twin brother and did say exactly what I thought (not the case), if someone takes such a tone (and violates the English language with such stubborn persistence), better ignore.Arminden (talk) 23:36, 5 January 2016 (UTC)ArmindenArminden (talk) 23:36, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Geography of the State of Palestine

It's a bit funny to write about an as yet non-existent state, but I do appreciate your effort and joined in a bit. If only it would lead to a few users & editors taking a less one-sided stance... But I'm afraid it won't. Anyhow, I'm quite sure that the temperature tables need fixing. It is factually wrong to state that Jerusalem (7-800 metres above sea level) has higher average temp. in July-August than Jericho (some -400 m) and Gaza (Med coast, 0 m). Either the source is flawed, or maybe you combined several sources? Don't believe me, just check for instance similar data from Israeli sources on, say, West Jlm, En Boqeq and Tel Aviv. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 23:36, 5 January 2016 (UTC)ArmindenArminden (talk) 23:36, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, didn't notice that Jlm is the only one to have an additional line, "record high" or alike. I was comparing pears with apples. It still might happen to others, too, and the sources are indeed mixed, but there's nothing factually wrong there, sorry.Arminden (talk) 23:42, 5 January 2016 (UTC)ArmindenArminden (talk) 23:42, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No worries! I didn't add the data for Gaza, but Jericho and Jerusalem were copy+paste jobs. I welcome further contributions, there's lots more to add and I just wanted to get the page started with some substance. TrickyH (talk) 07:46, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

FYI and WP:BRD

FYI, I opened a discussion about the importance of Palestinian wine for the Palestine project at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Palestine#Palestinian_wine. In addition, I would like to refer you to WP:BRD, which says, in simple words, that when reverted you should discuss first, and not simply repeat your edit. Debresser (talk) 16:53, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Slow down and read articles before assessing them

Your ratings of both Nuaman and Muhammad Najati Sidqi are quite unfocused. There is no way in the wide world that the grading criteria 'Start' can be applied to either article. You are sequentially downgrading their quality. Get a third opinion when in doubt. Nishidani (talk) 21:23, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nishidani, I didn't rate either article on the quality scale. I'm working my way through the "Start" class articles with no "Importance" rating and focusing almost entirely on that, for the moment. You're right - I thought Nuaman was probably more of a C class as I read it over, but I didn't want to take too much initiative...TrickyH (talk) 21:28, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Fine. But look at format uniformity, design, sourcing quality, links, etc, I never drive any article I mainly write towards some grading like GA, but if I do articles like those two, you can be assured I scraped the barrel of what is available concerning those topics, and the sourcing will be exhaustive, linked and of high quality throughout. By this, I don't mean to get you to alter your opinion. But the grading, if one clicks to the relevant information about what 'start' class means, is wildly off the mark. Regards. Nishidani (talk) 21:37, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, I'll have a re-read and work on the quality too! TrickyH (talk) 21:46, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Noha Khalef requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. power~enwiki (π, ν) 03:15, 4 December 2017 (UTC) /Newsletter/Send&oldid=9976074[reply]