Jump to content

User talk:Courcelles/Archive 112

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Courcelles (talk | contribs) at 19:37, 8 December 2015 (OneClickArchiver adding 1 discussion). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archive 105Archive 110Archive 111Archive 112Archive 113Archive 114Archive 115

Wikidata weekly summary #184

The Signpost: 11 November 2015

17:18, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #183

WikiCup 2015: The results

WikiCup 2015 is now in the books! Congrats to our finalists and winners, and to everyone who took part in this year's competition.

This year's results were an exact replica of last year's competition. For the second year in a row, the 2015 WikiCup champion is Smithsonian Institution Godot13 (submissions) (FP bonus points). All of his points were earned for an impressive 253 featured pictures and their associated bonus points (5060 and 1695, respectively). His entries constituted scans of currency from all over the world and scans of medallions awarded to participants of the U.S. Space program. Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions) came in second place; she earned by far the most bonus points (4082), for 4 featured articles, 15 good articles, and 147 DYKs, mostly about in her field of expertise, natural science. Belarus Cas Liber (submissions), a finalist every year since 2010, came in third, with 2379 points.

Our newcomer award, presented to the best-performing new competitor in the WikiCup, goes to United States Rationalobserver (submissions). Everyone should be very proud of the work they accomplished. We will announce our other award winners soon.

A full list of our award winners are:

We warmly invite all of you to sign up for next year's competition. Discussions and polls concerning potential rules changes are also open, and all are welcome to participate. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2016 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.

Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · logs), Miyagawa (talk · contribs · logs) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · logs) 18:39, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 November 2015

A cup of coffee for you!

Thanks for your work in relisting AfD discussions, which helps to keep matters in order. North America1000 07:18, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Graciano Rocchigiani / declined RfPP

Greetings. I recently tried to get the article for Graciano Rocchigiani protected, since an old "friend" of mine (under yet another IP) has made a beeline for it by reverting my cleanup edits. In fact, you recently had to PP two articles to ward them off: 1, 2. My RfPP for Rocchigiani was declined on the basis that the IP had not been given a warning. However, this is what tends to happen whenever anyone interacts with them: 3, 4, 5, etc. etc. It's always the same old diatribe—falsely labelling my edits as vandalism (when they themselves are not averse to a bit of actual vandalism: 6), not adhering to basic MOS, insisting on one format without consensus, etc. A generic message on their talk page is highly unlikely to achieve anything, so I'd like to take you up on that offer you made about the "liberal use" of SPP. Would be much appreciated. Or, since their edit pattern is so predictable, would it not be advisable for me to open up an SPI each time? Mac Dreamstate (talk) 04:03, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

It got PP'ed in the end, but it won't be the last time. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 18:35, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

16:43, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #182

The Signpost: 28 October 2015

5 Million: We celebrate your contribution

We couldn't have done it without you
Well, maybe. But the encyclopedia would not be as good.

Celebrate

Smallbones(smalltalk) 13:48, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Two options for this Sunday: Soviet Jewry Edit-a-thon & Women In Science Edit-a-thon

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for one of two edit-a-thons this Sunday, just bring your laptop and an interest in participating!

No special knowledge of the subject or Wikipedia knowledge is required, and there will be Wikipedia training workshops for new folks.


Soviet Jewry Edit-a-thon @ Center for Jewish History

  • 15 West 16th Street, New York, NY
  • 11:00 am - 4:00 pm, Sun Nov 22

Join at the Center for Jewish History (drop-in any time!), during which we will create, update, and improve Wikipedia articles pertaining to the American Soviet Jewry movement.


Women In Science Edit-a-thon @ NY Academy of Sciences

  • 7 World Trade Center - 40th Floor
  • 1:00 pm - 5:00 pm, Sun Nov 22

Join at the NY Academy of Sciences, during which we will create, update, and improve Wikipedia articles pertaining to the lives and works of women scientists. Note that seating is limited for the Women in Science event, as well as signing up on-wiki, please RSVP by email.


Bonus event:

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:32, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Parole II

Inspired by the topic: I am so far pleased with the progress of my parole, suggesting infoboxes on the article talk. Most were taken by no objection, some after discussions. The only exception is Joseph (opera), infamous by having "ruined" my friend's RfA (but - as I was consoled - if that discussion had not existed people would have found another reason). Do you see a consensus? In other words, how important is the peace of an editor? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:34, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

In case you get to it, compare Il ritorno d'Ulisse in patria, TFA, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:38, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Forget that, we have bigger problems now. I was reminded by your simple accept statement to the request that I have "mess" on my user page (2012, well before the infobox revert case) and "amnesty" on my talk. The thought crossed my mind that a general amnesty for all victims of the GGTF case might solve a few problems, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:10, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

  • Interesting idea, the GGTF case was just a utter mess all around, but I think mass-reverting the entire thing would be a bigger mess than we have right now. (And in all candor, I'm not sure there are any elegant solutions now, and if there are, my 2 AM brain isn't going to be finding them...) Courcelles (talk) 06:02, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
What would be difficult in unbanning the banned and lift the (utterly absurd in my eyes) restrictions? - I had a dream (and will write a template): fight/close/fill the gender gap by writing articles on women. One is pictured on the Main page now, hook idea by me;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:31, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
Template for the dream --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:09, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
Next radical dream: I noticed with a feeling of almost horror, that a candidate for featured article was deleted, reasoning that it was created by an alleged sock who was blocked. It's restored, and the block is on AN, because appeals to arbcom ("not a sock") were not answered. I met the author in question as an excellent content contributor, and am concerned about the deletion of valuable content (only one article was restored, to my knowledge) and the block of someone who could create more. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:29, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
I see (in the navbox, - what an elegant way!) that a few more articles have been restored, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:38, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Redirect of Space exploration technologies toSpaceX and protection of redirect

Hi Courcelles, I'm overawed by what you have done for Wikipedia however I think this redirect is wrong :) I agreed there is a need to protect the redirect (as you have done) due to the persistent edit changes by an editor who wishes to overemphasis skyhook technology. Nevertheless, I'm troubled that the subject Space exploration technologies redirects to one company, albeit I very important company in this field and at the cutting edge of this field. I believe the term Space exploration technologies does warrant a stand alone article but not being an experienced editor and not having time to write (sorry about that) I feel it could be more appropriately redirected to Outline of space technology instead. Thanks for your time. Johnscotaus (talk) 04:15, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

I see why it was done, the SpaceX article begins "Space Exploration Technologies Corporation (SpaceX)", which makes the redirect at least justifiable. If you'd like to send it to WP:RFD, I'd happily tag the page. Courcelles (talk) 22:39, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

VampireProject23

Hi, just thought I would give you the heads up that the user VampireProject23 has copied your user page and thus falsely claiming to be an admin etc. I'm sure there is a policy for such false representation, but I cant find it and have to go to work now so thought I'd just let you know. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 14:37, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

16:16, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #186

The Signpost: 25 November 2015

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:16, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

20:26, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:45, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #185

Wikidata weekly summary #114

The Signpost: 18 November 2015

The Signpost: 02 December 2015

17:52, 7 December 2015 (UTC)